DENVER â€" Last year, Dorian Beth Wenzel, a Manitou Springs, Colo.,
writer and arthritis sufferer, penned a letter to a local newspaper that
disclosed her status as a medical-marijuana patient.
The paper printed the letter, and soon afterward Wenzel found herself
face-to-face with the human-resources director of the nonprofit
organization she works for. Wenzel’s office, her HR director told
her, is a drug-free workplace.
“It is kind of scary when your HR department is telling you that
you could be fired,†Wenzel said. “And it’s like,
‘Why?’ â€
To Colorado’s already-vexing cannabis conundrum, add yet another
riddle: Are medical-marijuana patients protected from discipline under
their employers’ anti-drug policies?
In the past week, two other stories that pose such a question have
emerged:
-- In the first, an Idaho Springs high school teacher and football coach
resigned from the school after being charged with smoking marijuana on
school grounds, even though he said he was a legal patient.
-- The second involves a Denver city employee who failed a routine drug
test taken after an on-duty car accident. The employee said
medical-marijuana use accounted for the positive test.
Can an employer punish someone for doing something that is
constitutionally protected?
“This issue is up in the air right now,†said Vance Knapp,
a Denver lawyer with Sherman & Howard who deals in employment law.
“It hasn’t been litigated through the courts.â€
In other words, nobody really knows yet.
The constitutional amendment that authorizes medical marijuana in
Colorado has this to say on the matter: “Nothing in this section
shall require any employer to accommodate the medical use of marijuana
in any work place.â€
That provision makes on-the-job use or impairment a clear violation at a
drug-free workplace, but the outer boundaries of the provision are
subject to greater debate.
Advocacy organizations contend that employers have interpreted the
language broadly, using it to punish even patients who use medical
marijuana in off-the-clock hours and never show up to work impaired, as
Wenzel said she doesn’t.
“It’s been deciphered to mean that employers can fire a
medical-marijuana patient for just about anything,†said Brian
Vicente, the executive director of the medical-marijuana patient-rights
group Sensible Colorado. “Basically, it’s a form of
legalized discrimination against sick people who choose to use medical
marijuana.â€
Courts ruling on similar questions in two other states â€"
California and Montana â€" have sided with employers in giving them
authority to fire medical-marijuana patients who fail company drug
tests. But there are two key ways in which Colorado’s laws differ
from those states:
- Colorado’s medical-marijuana law is embedded in the
state’s constitution rather than just statutes.
- Colorado has something called the Lawful Off-Duty Activities Statute,
which prevents employers from punishing employees for doing something
off-duty that is legal.
Boulder lawyer Jeff Gard, who represents medical-marijuana patients and
said he gets several calls per week from patients worried about keeping
their jobs, said state and federal anti-disability-discrimination laws
also would protect patients.
“You’re not going to tell a diabetic, ‘We’re
going to fire you for using insulin,’ †Gard said.
Knapp, the Denver lawyer, said marijuana’s status under federal
law as an illegal drug â€" no matter how it’s used â€"
could nullify all those laws’ protections. But he quickly noted
that an Arapahoe County judge’s recent ruling â€" in which
the judge said a city couldn’t cite federal law to shut down a
medical-marijuana dispensary â€" might counter that argument.
For now, Knapp said he is advising the employers who ask him about the
issue to update their anti-drug policies to specify that they include
drugs that are illegal according to federal law as well as locally.
“Employers need to be very cautious in addressing this situation
because there are a lot of land mines out there,†Knapp said.
Showing posts with label legalization of marijuana. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legalization of marijuana. Show all posts
Monday, January 25, 2010
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Are there any medical facts for marijuana?
Charlene DeGidio never smoked marijuana in the 1960s, or afterward. But
a year ago, after medications failed to relieve the pain in her legs and
feet, a doctor suggested that the Adna, Wash., retiree try the drug.
Ms. DeGidio, 69 years old, bought candy with marijuana mixed in. It
worked in easing her neuropathic pain, for which doctors haven't been
able to pinpoint a cause, she says. Now, Ms. DeGidio, who had previously
tried without success other drugs including Neurontin and lidocaine
patches, nibbles marijuana-laced peppermint bars before sleep, and keeps
a bag in her refrigerator that she's warned her grandchildren to avoid.
"It's not like you're out smoking pot for enjoyment or to get high,"
says the former social worker, who won't take the drug during the day
because she doesn't want to feel disoriented. "It's a medicine."
For many patients like Ms. DeGidio, it's getting easier to access
marijuana for medical use. The U.S. Department of Justice has said it
will not generally prosecute ill people under doctors' care whose use of
the drug complies with state rules. New Jersey will become the 14th
state to allow therapeutic use of marijuana, and the number is likely to
grow. Illinois and New York, among others, are considering new laws.
As the legal landscape for patients clears somewhat, the medical one
remains confusing, largely because of limited scientific studies. A
recent American Medical Association review found fewer than 20
randomized, controlled clinical trials of smoked marijuana for all
possible uses. These involved around 300 people in all—well short of
the evidence typically required for a pharmaceutical to be marketed in
the U.S.
Doctors say the studies that have been done suggest marijuana can
benefit patients in the areas of managing neuropathic pain, which is
caused by certain types of nerve injury, and in bolstering appetite and
treating nausea, for instance in cancer patients undergoing
chemotherapy. "The evidence is mounting" for those uses, says Igor
Grant, director of the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research at the
University of California, San Diego.
But in a range of other conditions for which marijuana has been
considered, such as epilepsy and immune diseases like lupus, there's
scant and inconclusive research to show the drug's effectiveness.
Marijuana also has been tied to side effects including a racing heart
and short-term memory loss and, in at least a few cases, anxiety and
psychotic experiences such as hallucinations. The Food and Drug
Administration doesn't regulate marijuana, so the quality and potency of
the product available in medical-marijuana dispensaries can vary.
Though states have been legalizing medical use of marijuana since 1996,
when California passed a ballot initiative, the idea remains
controversial. Opponents say such laws can open a door to wider
cultivation and use of the drug by people without serious medical
conditions. That concern is heightened, they say, when broadly written
statutes, such as California's, allow wide leeway for doctors to decide
when to write marijuana recommendations.
But advocates of medical-marijuana laws say certain seriously ill
patients can benefit from the drug and should be able to access it with
a doctor's permission. They argue that some patients may get better
results from marijuana than from available prescription drugs.
Glenn Osaki, 51, a technology consultant from Pleasanton, Calif., says
he smokes marijuana to counter nausea and pain. Diagnosed in 2005 with
advanced colon cancer, he has had his entire colon removed, creating
digestive problems, and suffers neuropathic pain in his hands and feet
from a chemotherapy drug. He says smoking marijuana was more effective
and faster than prescription drugs he tried, including one that is a
synthetic version of marijuana's most active ingredient, known as THC.
The relatively limited research supporting medical marijuana poses
practical challenges for doctors and patients who want to consider it as
a therapeutic option. It's often unclear when, or whether, it might work
better than traditional drugs for particular people. Unlike prescription
drugs it comes with no established dosing regimen.
"I don't know what to recommend to patients about what to use, how much
to use, where to get it," says Scott Fishman, chief of pain medicine at
the University of California, Davis medical school, who says he rarely
writes marijuana recommendations, typically only at a patient's request.
Researchers say it's difficult to get funding and federal approval for
marijuana research. In November, the AMA urged the federal government to
review marijuana's position in the most-restricted category of drugs, so
it could be studied more easily.
Gregory T. Carter, a University of Washington professor of
rehabilitation medicine, says he's developed his own procedures for
recommending marijuana, which he does for some patients with serious
neuromuscular conditions such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou
Gehrig's disease, to treat pain and other symptoms. He typically urges
those who haven't tried it before to start with a few puffs using a
vaporizer, which heats the marijuana to release its active chemicals,
then wait 10 minutes. He warns them to have family nearby and to avoid
driving, and he checks back with them after a few days. Many are
"surprised at how mild" the drug's psychotropic effects are, he says.
States' rules on growing and dispensing medical marijuana vary. Some
states license specialized dispensaries. These can range from small
storefronts to bigger operations that feel more like pharmacies.
Typically, they have security procedures to limit walk-in visitors.
At least a few dispensaries say they inspect their suppliers and use
labs to check the potency of their product, though states don't
generally require such measures. "It's difficult to understand how we
can call it medicine if we don't know what's in it," says Stephen
DeAngelo, executive director of the Harborside Health Center, a
medical-marijuana dispensary in Oakland, Calif.
Some of the strongest research results support the idea of using
marijuana to relieve neuropathic pain. For example, a trial of 50 AIDS
patients published in the journal Neurology in 2007 found that 52% of
those who smoked marijuana reported a 30% or greater reduction in pain.
Just 24% of those who got placebo cigarettes reported the same lessening
of pain.
Marijuana has also been shown to affect nausea and appetite. The AMA
review said three controlled studies with 43 total participants showed a
"modest" anti-nausea effect of smoked marijuana in cancer patients
undergoing chemotherapy. Studies of HIV-positive patients have suggested
that smoked marijuana can improve appetite and trigger weight gain.
Donald Abrams, a doctor and professor at the University of California,
San Francisco who has studied marijuana, says he recommends it to some
cancer patients, including those who haven't found standard anti-nausea
drugs effective and some with loss of appetite.
Side effects can be a problem for some people. Thea Sagen, 62, an
advanced neuroendocrine cancer patient in Seaside, Calif., says she
expected something like a pharmacy when she went to a marijuana
dispensary mentioned by her oncologist. She says she was disappointed to
find that the staffers couldn't say which of the products, with names
like Pot 'o Gold and Blockbuster, might boost her flagging appetite or
soothe her anxiety. "They said, 'it's trial and error,' "she says. "I
was in there flying blind, looking at all this stuff."
Ms. Sagen says she bought several items and tried one-eighth teaspoon of
marijuana-infused honey. After a few hours, she was hallucinating , too
dizzy and confused to dress herself for a doctor's appointment. Then
came vomiting far worse than her stomach upset before she took the drug.
When she reported the side effects to her oncologist's nurse and her
primary-care physician, she got no guidance. She doesn't take the drug
now. But with advice from a nutritionist, her appetite and food intake
have improved, she says.
Other marijuana users may experience the well-known reduction in ability
to concentrate. At least a few users suffer troubling short-term
psychiatric side effects, which can include anxiety and panic. More
controversially, an analysis published in the journal Lancet in 2007
tied marijuana use to a higher rate of psychotic conditions such as
schizophrenia. But the analysis noted that such a link doesn't
necessarily show marijuana is a cause of the conditions.
Long-term marijuana use can lead to physical dependence, though it is
not as addictive as nicotine or alcohol, says Margaret Haney, a
professor at Columbia University's medical school. Smoked marijuana may
also risk lung irritation, but a large 2006 study, published in Cancer
Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, found no tie to lung cancer.
a year ago, after medications failed to relieve the pain in her legs and
feet, a doctor suggested that the Adna, Wash., retiree try the drug.
Ms. DeGidio, 69 years old, bought candy with marijuana mixed in. It
worked in easing her neuropathic pain, for which doctors haven't been
able to pinpoint a cause, she says. Now, Ms. DeGidio, who had previously
tried without success other drugs including Neurontin and lidocaine
patches, nibbles marijuana-laced peppermint bars before sleep, and keeps
a bag in her refrigerator that she's warned her grandchildren to avoid.
"It's not like you're out smoking pot for enjoyment or to get high,"
says the former social worker, who won't take the drug during the day
because she doesn't want to feel disoriented. "It's a medicine."
For many patients like Ms. DeGidio, it's getting easier to access
marijuana for medical use. The U.S. Department of Justice has said it
will not generally prosecute ill people under doctors' care whose use of
the drug complies with state rules. New Jersey will become the 14th
state to allow therapeutic use of marijuana, and the number is likely to
grow. Illinois and New York, among others, are considering new laws.
As the legal landscape for patients clears somewhat, the medical one
remains confusing, largely because of limited scientific studies. A
recent American Medical Association review found fewer than 20
randomized, controlled clinical trials of smoked marijuana for all
possible uses. These involved around 300 people in all—well short of
the evidence typically required for a pharmaceutical to be marketed in
the U.S.
Doctors say the studies that have been done suggest marijuana can
benefit patients in the areas of managing neuropathic pain, which is
caused by certain types of nerve injury, and in bolstering appetite and
treating nausea, for instance in cancer patients undergoing
chemotherapy. "The evidence is mounting" for those uses, says Igor
Grant, director of the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research at the
University of California, San Diego.
But in a range of other conditions for which marijuana has been
considered, such as epilepsy and immune diseases like lupus, there's
scant and inconclusive research to show the drug's effectiveness.
Marijuana also has been tied to side effects including a racing heart
and short-term memory loss and, in at least a few cases, anxiety and
psychotic experiences such as hallucinations. The Food and Drug
Administration doesn't regulate marijuana, so the quality and potency of
the product available in medical-marijuana dispensaries can vary.
Though states have been legalizing medical use of marijuana since 1996,
when California passed a ballot initiative, the idea remains
controversial. Opponents say such laws can open a door to wider
cultivation and use of the drug by people without serious medical
conditions. That concern is heightened, they say, when broadly written
statutes, such as California's, allow wide leeway for doctors to decide
when to write marijuana recommendations.
But advocates of medical-marijuana laws say certain seriously ill
patients can benefit from the drug and should be able to access it with
a doctor's permission. They argue that some patients may get better
results from marijuana than from available prescription drugs.
Glenn Osaki, 51, a technology consultant from Pleasanton, Calif., says
he smokes marijuana to counter nausea and pain. Diagnosed in 2005 with
advanced colon cancer, he has had his entire colon removed, creating
digestive problems, and suffers neuropathic pain in his hands and feet
from a chemotherapy drug. He says smoking marijuana was more effective
and faster than prescription drugs he tried, including one that is a
synthetic version of marijuana's most active ingredient, known as THC.
The relatively limited research supporting medical marijuana poses
practical challenges for doctors and patients who want to consider it as
a therapeutic option. It's often unclear when, or whether, it might work
better than traditional drugs for particular people. Unlike prescription
drugs it comes with no established dosing regimen.
"I don't know what to recommend to patients about what to use, how much
to use, where to get it," says Scott Fishman, chief of pain medicine at
the University of California, Davis medical school, who says he rarely
writes marijuana recommendations, typically only at a patient's request.
Researchers say it's difficult to get funding and federal approval for
marijuana research. In November, the AMA urged the federal government to
review marijuana's position in the most-restricted category of drugs, so
it could be studied more easily.
Gregory T. Carter, a University of Washington professor of
rehabilitation medicine, says he's developed his own procedures for
recommending marijuana, which he does for some patients with serious
neuromuscular conditions such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou
Gehrig's disease, to treat pain and other symptoms. He typically urges
those who haven't tried it before to start with a few puffs using a
vaporizer, which heats the marijuana to release its active chemicals,
then wait 10 minutes. He warns them to have family nearby and to avoid
driving, and he checks back with them after a few days. Many are
"surprised at how mild" the drug's psychotropic effects are, he says.
States' rules on growing and dispensing medical marijuana vary. Some
states license specialized dispensaries. These can range from small
storefronts to bigger operations that feel more like pharmacies.
Typically, they have security procedures to limit walk-in visitors.
At least a few dispensaries say they inspect their suppliers and use
labs to check the potency of their product, though states don't
generally require such measures. "It's difficult to understand how we
can call it medicine if we don't know what's in it," says Stephen
DeAngelo, executive director of the Harborside Health Center, a
medical-marijuana dispensary in Oakland, Calif.
Some of the strongest research results support the idea of using
marijuana to relieve neuropathic pain. For example, a trial of 50 AIDS
patients published in the journal Neurology in 2007 found that 52% of
those who smoked marijuana reported a 30% or greater reduction in pain.
Just 24% of those who got placebo cigarettes reported the same lessening
of pain.
Marijuana has also been shown to affect nausea and appetite. The AMA
review said three controlled studies with 43 total participants showed a
"modest" anti-nausea effect of smoked marijuana in cancer patients
undergoing chemotherapy. Studies of HIV-positive patients have suggested
that smoked marijuana can improve appetite and trigger weight gain.
Donald Abrams, a doctor and professor at the University of California,
San Francisco who has studied marijuana, says he recommends it to some
cancer patients, including those who haven't found standard anti-nausea
drugs effective and some with loss of appetite.
Side effects can be a problem for some people. Thea Sagen, 62, an
advanced neuroendocrine cancer patient in Seaside, Calif., says she
expected something like a pharmacy when she went to a marijuana
dispensary mentioned by her oncologist. She says she was disappointed to
find that the staffers couldn't say which of the products, with names
like Pot 'o Gold and Blockbuster, might boost her flagging appetite or
soothe her anxiety. "They said, 'it's trial and error,' "she says. "I
was in there flying blind, looking at all this stuff."
Ms. Sagen says she bought several items and tried one-eighth teaspoon of
marijuana-infused honey. After a few hours, she was hallucinating , too
dizzy and confused to dress herself for a doctor's appointment. Then
came vomiting far worse than her stomach upset before she took the drug.
When she reported the side effects to her oncologist's nurse and her
primary-care physician, she got no guidance. She doesn't take the drug
now. But with advice from a nutritionist, her appetite and food intake
have improved, she says.
Other marijuana users may experience the well-known reduction in ability
to concentrate. At least a few users suffer troubling short-term
psychiatric side effects, which can include anxiety and panic. More
controversially, an analysis published in the journal Lancet in 2007
tied marijuana use to a higher rate of psychotic conditions such as
schizophrenia. But the analysis noted that such a link doesn't
necessarily show marijuana is a cause of the conditions.
Long-term marijuana use can lead to physical dependence, though it is
not as addictive as nicotine or alcohol, says Margaret Haney, a
professor at Columbia University's medical school. Smoked marijuana may
also risk lung irritation, but a large 2006 study, published in Cancer
Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, found no tie to lung cancer.
school district to weigh in on dispensaries in Grass Valley
High school leaders will consider opposing a medical marijuana
dispensary in Grass Valley during their meeting Wednesday.
Staff for the Nevada Joint Union High School District cited the negative
impact on local youth from the sanctioned sale of medical marijuana in
the resolution that goes before the board of trustees when they meet at
6 p.m. Wednesday at Nevada Union High School, on Ridge Road in Grass
Valley.
The Grass Valley City Council could consider allowing a medical
marijuana dispensary sometime this year, after placing a moratorium on
any such businesses coming into town while an ordinance regulating them
is crafted.
Nevada County similarly put off the issue, and Nevada City banned
dispensaries late last year in a controversial vote. A dispensary
operates in Colfax, in Placer County.
High school district staff is recommending the board oppose the move due
to "the potential impact on the youth of the city of Grass Valley
from the ancillary consequences of the sale of medical marijuana,"
according to the staff report.
Board members requested the resolution because of the effect marijuana
already has on local high school students, said district Superintendent
Ralf Swenson.
"Discipline issues related to marijuana already represent the
majority of the disciplinary actions our district takes," Swenson
said.
"We're concerned the presence of dispensaries in our community sends
the wrong message to students."
The district's concerns will be weighed when council members address the
issue of medical marijuana dispensaries, said Grass Valley Mayor Lisa
Swarthout.
"No one has made up their mind yet," Swarthout said.
The city's ordinance is still in the works, and a date for it to come
before the council isn't set, she added.
dispensary in Grass Valley during their meeting Wednesday.
Staff for the Nevada Joint Union High School District cited the negative
impact on local youth from the sanctioned sale of medical marijuana in
the resolution that goes before the board of trustees when they meet at
6 p.m. Wednesday at Nevada Union High School, on Ridge Road in Grass
Valley.
The Grass Valley City Council could consider allowing a medical
marijuana dispensary sometime this year, after placing a moratorium on
any such businesses coming into town while an ordinance regulating them
is crafted.
Nevada County similarly put off the issue, and Nevada City banned
dispensaries late last year in a controversial vote. A dispensary
operates in Colfax, in Placer County.
High school district staff is recommending the board oppose the move due
to "the potential impact on the youth of the city of Grass Valley
from the ancillary consequences of the sale of medical marijuana,"
according to the staff report.
Board members requested the resolution because of the effect marijuana
already has on local high school students, said district Superintendent
Ralf Swenson.
"Discipline issues related to marijuana already represent the
majority of the disciplinary actions our district takes," Swenson
said.
"We're concerned the presence of dispensaries in our community sends
the wrong message to students."
The district's concerns will be weighed when council members address the
issue of medical marijuana dispensaries, said Grass Valley Mayor Lisa
Swarthout.
"No one has made up their mind yet," Swarthout said.
The city's ordinance is still in the works, and a date for it to come
before the council isn't set, she added.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Washington pushing to legalize Marijuana
SEATTLE (AP) - Five activists filed a ballot initiative Monday that
would legalize all adult marijuana possession, manufacturing and sales
under Washington state law - one of the most sweeping efforts at
marijuana reform playing out around the country this year.
Its sponsors include two Seattle lawyers and the director of Seattle's
annual Hempfest. They call themselves Sensible Washington, and say that
in a time of dire budget woes, the state's government should stop
spending money on police, court and jail costs for people who use or
produce marijuana.
Douglas Hiatt, a lawyer who represents medical marijuana patients, told
The Associated Press the proposal would remove all state criminal
penalties for adults who possess, grow and distribute pot - no matter
how much. Criminal penalties for juveniles who possess marijuana and for
those who provide the drug to juveniles would remain in place.
Driving under the influence of the drug also would still be against the
law. And marijuana would remain illegal under federal law.
"It basically tells the federal government, 'Hey it's your prohibition -
if you want it, you pay for it,"' Hiatt said. "We're tired of screwing
around and wasting all this dough."
Volunteers are lining up to collect the more than 241,000 signatures
required to place the initiative on the November ballot, Hiatt said.
The campaign has competition in Washington. One bill introduced here
would legalize and regulate marijuana, while another would decriminalize
possession of small amounts of pot, making it punishable by a fine
rather than jail time.
Legalization bills have also been introduced in California,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Nevada, and a group campaigning to
place a marijuana legalization measure before California voters said
last month that it has enough signatures to qualify for this year's
ballot.
Alison Holcomb, drug policy director at the American Civil Liberties
Union of Washington, which is lobbying for the decriminalization bill,
said she supports any effort to engage the public in discussing
marijuana law reform, but she couldn't comment specifically on the
initiative without reading it.
"If there were decriminalization of transfers of small amounts of
marijuana not for profit, that might be one way to undermine the
cartels' bottom line," she said. "But I think the push-back would be,
are you just giving the gangsters a get-out-of-jail-free card in
Washington state? Are you setting up incentives for criminal elements to
come here and set up shop?"
Hiatt disputed that notion, saying the drug flourishes on the black
market only because it is illegal. Furthermore, federal agents wouldn't
stand for large-scale marijuana trafficking, he said.
He cited one recent study suggesting Washington could save tens of
millions of dollars a year on law enforcement costs if marijuana was
legal.
Hiatt said he was inspired to file the initiative in part by a recent
conversation with Mason County prosecutor Gary Burleson, who told him to
"put your money where your mouth is" and get an initiative before
voters.
In an interview Monday, Burleson said he doesn't necessarily support
legalizing marijuana - and certainly not in the unlimited, unregulated
way the initiative proposes. But he said he's frustrated with
Washington's complicated medical marijuana law, which authorizes
patients to possess marijuana but is vague about how they can obtain it.
"Wouldn't legalizing this answer a whole lot of questions?" he said.
"Aren't we just beating around the edges with all of these legal
nuances?
"I don't have a problem with marijuana being legal, and I don't have a
problem with it being illegal," Burleson said. "But right now, I have a
big problem understanding what's legal and what's not."
would legalize all adult marijuana possession, manufacturing and sales
under Washington state law - one of the most sweeping efforts at
marijuana reform playing out around the country this year.
Its sponsors include two Seattle lawyers and the director of Seattle's
annual Hempfest. They call themselves Sensible Washington, and say that
in a time of dire budget woes, the state's government should stop
spending money on police, court and jail costs for people who use or
produce marijuana.
Douglas Hiatt, a lawyer who represents medical marijuana patients, told
The Associated Press the proposal would remove all state criminal
penalties for adults who possess, grow and distribute pot - no matter
how much. Criminal penalties for juveniles who possess marijuana and for
those who provide the drug to juveniles would remain in place.
Driving under the influence of the drug also would still be against the
law. And marijuana would remain illegal under federal law.
"It basically tells the federal government, 'Hey it's your prohibition -
if you want it, you pay for it,"' Hiatt said. "We're tired of screwing
around and wasting all this dough."
Volunteers are lining up to collect the more than 241,000 signatures
required to place the initiative on the November ballot, Hiatt said.
The campaign has competition in Washington. One bill introduced here
would legalize and regulate marijuana, while another would decriminalize
possession of small amounts of pot, making it punishable by a fine
rather than jail time.
Legalization bills have also been introduced in California,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Nevada, and a group campaigning to
place a marijuana legalization measure before California voters said
last month that it has enough signatures to qualify for this year's
ballot.
Alison Holcomb, drug policy director at the American Civil Liberties
Union of Washington, which is lobbying for the decriminalization bill,
said she supports any effort to engage the public in discussing
marijuana law reform, but she couldn't comment specifically on the
initiative without reading it.
"If there were decriminalization of transfers of small amounts of
marijuana not for profit, that might be one way to undermine the
cartels' bottom line," she said. "But I think the push-back would be,
are you just giving the gangsters a get-out-of-jail-free card in
Washington state? Are you setting up incentives for criminal elements to
come here and set up shop?"
Hiatt disputed that notion, saying the drug flourishes on the black
market only because it is illegal. Furthermore, federal agents wouldn't
stand for large-scale marijuana trafficking, he said.
He cited one recent study suggesting Washington could save tens of
millions of dollars a year on law enforcement costs if marijuana was
legal.
Hiatt said he was inspired to file the initiative in part by a recent
conversation with Mason County prosecutor Gary Burleson, who told him to
"put your money where your mouth is" and get an initiative before
voters.
In an interview Monday, Burleson said he doesn't necessarily support
legalizing marijuana - and certainly not in the unlimited, unregulated
way the initiative proposes. But he said he's frustrated with
Washington's complicated medical marijuana law, which authorizes
patients to possess marijuana but is vague about how they can obtain it.
"Wouldn't legalizing this answer a whole lot of questions?" he said.
"Aren't we just beating around the edges with all of these legal
nuances?
"I don't have a problem with marijuana being legal, and I don't have a
problem with it being illegal," Burleson said. "But right now, I have a
big problem understanding what's legal and what's not."
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
medical marijuana and the workplace
By JACK KATZANEK
The Press-Enterprise
It could be the classic quandary for a company: They want to hire a new
employee but the person has failed a pre-employment drug test. Then he
or she produces a legally obtained prescription to use marijuana.
Despite the growth of marijuana dispensaries and the willingness of some
physicians to prescribe the drug for medical reasons -- and despite the
tendency for California to side with employees in workplace issues --
the law is not on the side of people who use the drug.
Riverside's first marijuana dispensary opened less than a month ago and
there are about 1,000 such businesses in Los Angeles alone, so the issue
could come up more often.
A 2008 decision by the California Supreme Court found that a company
would be within its right to not hire someone or terminate an employee
whose drug test came up positive for marijuana, even if that use did not
violate state law.
That case was brought by Gary Ross, a U.S. Air Force veteran who was
hired to work as a systems administrator at RagingWire
Telecommunications Inc., a Sacramento company, in 2001. Several days
later, his drug test revealed the active ingredient for
doctor-prescribed marijuana in his system and he was fired.
Ross, who suffered from chronic back pain, sued RagingWire. He claimed
he was being legally treated for a disability, which would entitle him
to protection under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act, which
protects people from being fired because of ailments.
According to court documents, he said neither his back pain nor the
marijuana affected his ability to do his job.
"Just as it would violate the FEHA to fire an employee who uses insulin
or Zoloft, it violates the statute to terminate an employee who uses a
medicine deemed legal by the California electorate," Ross argued in
court documents.
California's workplace rules, in areas including overtime, sexual
harassment and break time, tend to favor workers over employers.
But the court ruled that marijuana, despite the 1996 voter initiative
that allows its medicinal use in California, is still considered an
illegal drug. The laws that cover workplace fairness do not require
employers to accommodate users and the 1996 Compassionate Use Act only
protects users against criminal prosecution.
"The Compassionate Use Act has to do with treatment of medical problems,
but it wasn't intended to change the relationship between employers and
employees," said Nate Kowalski, who practices employment law for the
Cerritos-based firm Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo.
Employers generally support the state court's decision, but many agree
it is an interesting dilemma.
"With our industry it's mandatory," said Valerie Liese, president of
Ontario-based Jack Jones Trucking. "We have the safety of the public in
our hands and I would not be able to have someone in that situation
working for me."
Max Arbolida, vice president for employee relations at San
Bernardino-based Arrrowhead Credit Union, has worked as a human
resources official for 25 years, which includes tenures at an aerospace
company and a nuclear power plant.
Arbolida said that, speaking strictly as a human resources expert, an
employer has a right to expect clear-headed workers.
But Ross, the plaintiff who sued his employer in 2001, told the Supreme
Court that he has continued to work in the telecommunications field and
has performed satisfactorily, court documents show.
That is a point that is often left out of this debate, said Allen St.
Pierre, executive director of the National Organizations for the Reform
of Marijuana Laws, because most of the drug use in question does not
happen on the job, and marijuana can remain in a body's system for a
month or more.
"No one wants to see employees impaired," St. Pierre said. "But a urine
test doesn't measure impairment, it just measures past use."
Lanny Swerdlow, a registered nurse and medical marijuana activist who
last year opened a clinic in Riverside where patients can get
prescriptions, said he's not aware of any legal challenges to the
ruling.
He said the only possible avenue for an appeal would be applying the
federal Americans with Disabilities Act.
"That would probably take years," Swerdlow said.
The Press-Enterprise
It could be the classic quandary for a company: They want to hire a new
employee but the person has failed a pre-employment drug test. Then he
or she produces a legally obtained prescription to use marijuana.
Despite the growth of marijuana dispensaries and the willingness of some
physicians to prescribe the drug for medical reasons -- and despite the
tendency for California to side with employees in workplace issues --
the law is not on the side of people who use the drug.
Riverside's first marijuana dispensary opened less than a month ago and
there are about 1,000 such businesses in Los Angeles alone, so the issue
could come up more often.
A 2008 decision by the California Supreme Court found that a company
would be within its right to not hire someone or terminate an employee
whose drug test came up positive for marijuana, even if that use did not
violate state law.
That case was brought by Gary Ross, a U.S. Air Force veteran who was
hired to work as a systems administrator at RagingWire
Telecommunications Inc., a Sacramento company, in 2001. Several days
later, his drug test revealed the active ingredient for
doctor-prescribed marijuana in his system and he was fired.
Ross, who suffered from chronic back pain, sued RagingWire. He claimed
he was being legally treated for a disability, which would entitle him
to protection under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act, which
protects people from being fired because of ailments.
According to court documents, he said neither his back pain nor the
marijuana affected his ability to do his job.
"Just as it would violate the FEHA to fire an employee who uses insulin
or Zoloft, it violates the statute to terminate an employee who uses a
medicine deemed legal by the California electorate," Ross argued in
court documents.
California's workplace rules, in areas including overtime, sexual
harassment and break time, tend to favor workers over employers.
But the court ruled that marijuana, despite the 1996 voter initiative
that allows its medicinal use in California, is still considered an
illegal drug. The laws that cover workplace fairness do not require
employers to accommodate users and the 1996 Compassionate Use Act only
protects users against criminal prosecution.
"The Compassionate Use Act has to do with treatment of medical problems,
but it wasn't intended to change the relationship between employers and
employees," said Nate Kowalski, who practices employment law for the
Cerritos-based firm Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo.
Employers generally support the state court's decision, but many agree
it is an interesting dilemma.
"With our industry it's mandatory," said Valerie Liese, president of
Ontario-based Jack Jones Trucking. "We have the safety of the public in
our hands and I would not be able to have someone in that situation
working for me."
Max Arbolida, vice president for employee relations at San
Bernardino-based Arrrowhead Credit Union, has worked as a human
resources official for 25 years, which includes tenures at an aerospace
company and a nuclear power plant.
Arbolida said that, speaking strictly as a human resources expert, an
employer has a right to expect clear-headed workers.
But Ross, the plaintiff who sued his employer in 2001, told the Supreme
Court that he has continued to work in the telecommunications field and
has performed satisfactorily, court documents show.
That is a point that is often left out of this debate, said Allen St.
Pierre, executive director of the National Organizations for the Reform
of Marijuana Laws, because most of the drug use in question does not
happen on the job, and marijuana can remain in a body's system for a
month or more.
"No one wants to see employees impaired," St. Pierre said. "But a urine
test doesn't measure impairment, it just measures past use."
Lanny Swerdlow, a registered nurse and medical marijuana activist who
last year opened a clinic in Riverside where patients can get
prescriptions, said he's not aware of any legal challenges to the
ruling.
He said the only possible avenue for an appeal would be applying the
federal Americans with Disabilities Act.
"That would probably take years," Swerdlow said.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Pot town USA
By By Peter Hecht, McClatchy Newspapers
Saturday, December 26, 2009
ARCATA, Calif. — Stephen Gasparas was destined for this fog-chilled,
redwood-shrouded coast — America's most renowned region for
legal cultivation of marijuana.
He started growing skunky-smelling pot as a young man, in the closet of
his mother's suburban Chicago home. Later he visited cannabis fields
in India. Ultimately, he shared spiritual puffs at a gathering of the
famous moveable commune, the Rainbow Family, where a grizzled hippie
told him Humboldt "is the place you ought to be."
Today, Gasparas, 39, is a medical marijuana entrepreneur operating
legally in Humboldt County. He has moved from cultivating pot for
personal use to heading a cannabis growing and buying collective he says
has served 4,000 medical marijuana users.
Humboldt County — and in particular the college town of Arcata —
has become an epicenter for political and legal debate over the
unintended consequences of Proposition 215, California's
"Compassionate Use Act" for marijuana.
Since passage of the act in 1996, medical marijuana users have streamed
into this county, a liberal and libertarian bastion that decades ago
began attracting pot growers.
Their now-legitimate business — aided, legal experts say, by
Proposition 215's vagueness on personal pot-use limits — has
turned a so-called crop of compassion into a lucrative industry.
With the most wide-open cultivation policy in California, Humboldt
County allows individual growers of medical marijuana three annual
indoor harvests of 100 square feet, 99 plants and up to 3 pounds of
dried marijuana at any one time.
In 2003, the state Legislature approved restrictions that limited
medical marijuana users to six mature or 12 immature plants and 8 ounces
of pot at one time. But the law allowed local governments to approve
looser limits.
So in Humboldt, medical pot users converted small town houses into
growing factories — and bountiful earnings from sales to patient
collectives and pot dispensaries across California.
In a North Coast "Kush" rush, local outfitters such as Humboldt
Hydroponics in Arcata stack shelves with growing trays, high-intensity
lights and plant nutrients called "Big Bud," "Bud Candy"
and "Voodoo Juice."
Pot production — from nurseries that provide irrigation and growing
supplies to dispensaries that generate sales tax — is a mainstay of
the local economy.
"I would say that in 99 percent of cases, people growing medical
marijuana are growing it for profit," said Humboldt Sheriff's
Sgt. Wayne Hanson, who specializes in narcotics enforcement.
"It is the source of income for the county of Humboldt. Nobody wants
to say that," he added. "But there is no logging here anymore.
Fishing is sporadic. And people make their living growing
marijuana."
Under California law, anyone with a doctor's recommendation for
medical marijuana can join a patient cooperative and get compensated for
providing the network with pot for its members.
But few envisioned the burgeoning industry that has taken root in
Humboldt, where medical marijuana users are marketing their excess
plants to cannabis cooperatives and dispensaries hundreds of miles away.
"Many growers are exploiting vagueness in the medical marijuana laws
and will continue to do so until the law is clarified," said state
Deputy Attorney General Peter Krause.
State law permits nonprofit cooperatives, such as the Humboldt Patient
Resource Center in Arcata, to grow medicine for members.
In a fragrant room where he tends plants for hundreds of patients,
gardener Kevin Jodrey shows off pot "cultivars" like a winemaker
touting prize-winning varietals.
Hazy laws
California's cultivation laws are hazier when it comes to some of
the other medical marijuana operations sprouting in Humboldt.
Authorities and growers alike report instances in which as many as a
half-dozen medical marijuana users join together to grow hundreds of
plants in a single home. They dry and package exotic marijuana strains
they sell directly to multiple dispensaries and networks in Los Angeles
and other major California cities.
Krause said state law is unclear whether "collectives in urban areas
can have remote members in distant counties whose only job is to grow
the medicine."
Besides legal growing, Sgt. Hanson said, Humboldt authorities confront
illegal operations, including grow houses that vastly exceed plant
limits and have little to do with medical use. He said local growers are
also victimized in pot-seeking home invasions.
Even in Humboldt County, marijuana tolerance has its limits. The city of
Arcata got fed up with stench-filled pot houses disrupting neighborhoods
and creating fire risks with 1,000-watt grow lamps and dangerous wiring.
Last year, it restricted medical pot growers to 50 square feet of
growing space — still more than most everywhere else in California
— and set limits on electricity use. The county is considering a
similar policy.
Randy Mendosa, Arcata's police chief and acting city manager, said
the town is sick of its notoriety. America's Arts & Entertainment
network recently dubbed Arcata "Pot Town, USA," and its cannabis
culture drew coverage from the Sunday Telegraph in London.
"We have been over-saturated with this," Mendosa said.
"It's becoming damaging to the community. We just don't want
to be the national `spokescity' for marijuana."
Even Gasparas was shocked by the pot prevalence when he came to Humboldt
in 2004.
"I didn't know there was a waterfall of weed," he said.
Gasparas' iCenter medical marijuana collective now operates
dispensaries in the Humboldt County towns of Arcata and Mill Creek, as
well as Redding in Shasta County. He says the nonprofit network pays him
a "compassionate" salary of over $100,000 a year.
In Arcata, The Humboldt Cooperative — a nonprofit known locally as
"THC," the medicinal compound in cannabis — pays $3,200 a
pound to its network of up to 150 medical pot growers.
"We're a paradox. We're a legal business in an illegal
world," said THC director Dennis "Tony" Turner, whose
cooperative has provided pot to 8,500 California patients since its
inception in 2003.
Turner figures the collective pays its growers between $35 and $60 an
hour, depending on whether they are "journeyman-level"
cultivators or supervising floricultural technicians who ensure that the
medicine flowers without toxic materials or pesticides.
"Not everyone can grow medical weed," Turner said.
But the pot-grower market may be expanding soon. Last year, a state
appellate court threw out restrictive plant limits for pot patients that
are standard in most California counties. If the state Supreme Court
upholds the ruling in a decision due in February, Humboldt-style medical
cannabis harvests could become more common elsewhere.
Humboldt medical growers watch anxiously as signature gatherers
circulate petitions for four 2010 ballot measures seeking to legalize
marijuana for all adults.
Gasparas fears legalization could replace Humboldt's medical growers
with big agribusiness and low-grade "factory bud" that
diminishes the "spiritual experience."
But Turner is setting up a computerized "virtual grow room" to
organize his Humboldt cultivators to compete in a fully legal pot
market.
"The people who do this legally are good people," he said.
"We don't want to be outlaws. We want to be survivors. ... We
want to avoid seeing our local economy go into the toilet."
Saturday, December 26, 2009
ARCATA, Calif. — Stephen Gasparas was destined for this fog-chilled,
redwood-shrouded coast — America's most renowned region for
legal cultivation of marijuana.
He started growing skunky-smelling pot as a young man, in the closet of
his mother's suburban Chicago home. Later he visited cannabis fields
in India. Ultimately, he shared spiritual puffs at a gathering of the
famous moveable commune, the Rainbow Family, where a grizzled hippie
told him Humboldt "is the place you ought to be."
Today, Gasparas, 39, is a medical marijuana entrepreneur operating
legally in Humboldt County. He has moved from cultivating pot for
personal use to heading a cannabis growing and buying collective he says
has served 4,000 medical marijuana users.
Humboldt County — and in particular the college town of Arcata —
has become an epicenter for political and legal debate over the
unintended consequences of Proposition 215, California's
"Compassionate Use Act" for marijuana.
Since passage of the act in 1996, medical marijuana users have streamed
into this county, a liberal and libertarian bastion that decades ago
began attracting pot growers.
Their now-legitimate business — aided, legal experts say, by
Proposition 215's vagueness on personal pot-use limits — has
turned a so-called crop of compassion into a lucrative industry.
With the most wide-open cultivation policy in California, Humboldt
County allows individual growers of medical marijuana three annual
indoor harvests of 100 square feet, 99 plants and up to 3 pounds of
dried marijuana at any one time.
In 2003, the state Legislature approved restrictions that limited
medical marijuana users to six mature or 12 immature plants and 8 ounces
of pot at one time. But the law allowed local governments to approve
looser limits.
So in Humboldt, medical pot users converted small town houses into
growing factories — and bountiful earnings from sales to patient
collectives and pot dispensaries across California.
In a North Coast "Kush" rush, local outfitters such as Humboldt
Hydroponics in Arcata stack shelves with growing trays, high-intensity
lights and plant nutrients called "Big Bud," "Bud Candy"
and "Voodoo Juice."
Pot production — from nurseries that provide irrigation and growing
supplies to dispensaries that generate sales tax — is a mainstay of
the local economy.
"I would say that in 99 percent of cases, people growing medical
marijuana are growing it for profit," said Humboldt Sheriff's
Sgt. Wayne Hanson, who specializes in narcotics enforcement.
"It is the source of income for the county of Humboldt. Nobody wants
to say that," he added. "But there is no logging here anymore.
Fishing is sporadic. And people make their living growing
marijuana."
Under California law, anyone with a doctor's recommendation for
medical marijuana can join a patient cooperative and get compensated for
providing the network with pot for its members.
But few envisioned the burgeoning industry that has taken root in
Humboldt, where medical marijuana users are marketing their excess
plants to cannabis cooperatives and dispensaries hundreds of miles away.
"Many growers are exploiting vagueness in the medical marijuana laws
and will continue to do so until the law is clarified," said state
Deputy Attorney General Peter Krause.
State law permits nonprofit cooperatives, such as the Humboldt Patient
Resource Center in Arcata, to grow medicine for members.
In a fragrant room where he tends plants for hundreds of patients,
gardener Kevin Jodrey shows off pot "cultivars" like a winemaker
touting prize-winning varietals.
Hazy laws
California's cultivation laws are hazier when it comes to some of
the other medical marijuana operations sprouting in Humboldt.
Authorities and growers alike report instances in which as many as a
half-dozen medical marijuana users join together to grow hundreds of
plants in a single home. They dry and package exotic marijuana strains
they sell directly to multiple dispensaries and networks in Los Angeles
and other major California cities.
Krause said state law is unclear whether "collectives in urban areas
can have remote members in distant counties whose only job is to grow
the medicine."
Besides legal growing, Sgt. Hanson said, Humboldt authorities confront
illegal operations, including grow houses that vastly exceed plant
limits and have little to do with medical use. He said local growers are
also victimized in pot-seeking home invasions.
Even in Humboldt County, marijuana tolerance has its limits. The city of
Arcata got fed up with stench-filled pot houses disrupting neighborhoods
and creating fire risks with 1,000-watt grow lamps and dangerous wiring.
Last year, it restricted medical pot growers to 50 square feet of
growing space — still more than most everywhere else in California
— and set limits on electricity use. The county is considering a
similar policy.
Randy Mendosa, Arcata's police chief and acting city manager, said
the town is sick of its notoriety. America's Arts & Entertainment
network recently dubbed Arcata "Pot Town, USA," and its cannabis
culture drew coverage from the Sunday Telegraph in London.
"We have been over-saturated with this," Mendosa said.
"It's becoming damaging to the community. We just don't want
to be the national `spokescity' for marijuana."
Even Gasparas was shocked by the pot prevalence when he came to Humboldt
in 2004.
"I didn't know there was a waterfall of weed," he said.
Gasparas' iCenter medical marijuana collective now operates
dispensaries in the Humboldt County towns of Arcata and Mill Creek, as
well as Redding in Shasta County. He says the nonprofit network pays him
a "compassionate" salary of over $100,000 a year.
In Arcata, The Humboldt Cooperative — a nonprofit known locally as
"THC," the medicinal compound in cannabis — pays $3,200 a
pound to its network of up to 150 medical pot growers.
"We're a paradox. We're a legal business in an illegal
world," said THC director Dennis "Tony" Turner, whose
cooperative has provided pot to 8,500 California patients since its
inception in 2003.
Turner figures the collective pays its growers between $35 and $60 an
hour, depending on whether they are "journeyman-level"
cultivators or supervising floricultural technicians who ensure that the
medicine flowers without toxic materials or pesticides.
"Not everyone can grow medical weed," Turner said.
But the pot-grower market may be expanding soon. Last year, a state
appellate court threw out restrictive plant limits for pot patients that
are standard in most California counties. If the state Supreme Court
upholds the ruling in a decision due in February, Humboldt-style medical
cannabis harvests could become more common elsewhere.
Humboldt medical growers watch anxiously as signature gatherers
circulate petitions for four 2010 ballot measures seeking to legalize
marijuana for all adults.
Gasparas fears legalization could replace Humboldt's medical growers
with big agribusiness and low-grade "factory bud" that
diminishes the "spiritual experience."
But Turner is setting up a computerized "virtual grow room" to
organize his Humboldt cultivators to compete in a fully legal pot
market.
"The people who do this legally are good people," he said.
"We don't want to be outlaws. We want to be survivors. ... We
want to avoid seeing our local economy go into the toilet."
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Possible legalization of Marijuana in California
Measure to legalize pot may be on California's November ballot
Supporters say they have enough signatures -- about 57% more than the
required 433,971 -- on a petition to qualify for the ballot. Polls have
shown support for legalization among state voters.
By John Hoeffel
December 15, 2009
California voters could decide whether to legalize marijuana in November
after supporters announced Monday that they have more than enough
signatures to ensure that it qualifies for the ballot.
The petition drive has collected more than 680,000 signatures, said
Richard Lee, the measure's main proponent, about 57% more than the
433,971 needed.
"It was so easy to get them," Lee said. "People were so eager to sign."
The initiative would allow cities and counties to adopt laws to allow
marijuana to be grown and sold, and to impose taxes on marijuana
production and sales. It would make it legal for anyone who is at least
21 to possess an ounce of marijuana and grow plants in an area of no
more than 25 square feet for personal use.
Steve Smith, a political consultant who has run many California
initiative campaigns, said that as a rule of thumb, supporters assume
that about 30% of the signatures on petitions will be invalidated.
"I'll be very surprised if they don't qualify," he said.
The measure, the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act, is one of four
initiatives in circulation to legalize marijuana use, but it is the only
one that appears to have the financial support to make the ballot.
Lee's firm, one of the state's most successful marijuana businesses, has
spent at least $1.1 million so far on the measure. Lee owns half a dozen
businesses in Oakland, including Coffeeshop Blue Sky, a medical
marijuana dispensary, and Oaksterdam University, which teaches about
marijuana.
Lee said he expected that the campaign will cost between $7 million and
$20 million, but he hopes to raise the money from across the country.
"We feel like we've done our part," he said.
Lee has hired consultants to run an Internet-based campaign that he said
already has a mailing list of about 30,000.
In a news release, the campaign announced that it had more than 650,000
signatures, but Lee said that the firm he hired to collect signatures
put the number at more than 680,000. Lee said volunteers would continue
to gather signatures until the campaign turns in the petition early next
year.
Polls have shown support among California voters for legalization. A
Field Poll taken in mid-April found that 56% of voters in the state and
60% in Los Angeles County want to make pot legal and tax it. A poll
taken for the initiative's proponents in August found that 51% of likely
voters supported it when read language similar to what will be on the
ballot, but that increased to 54% when they were read a less technical
synopsis.
Smith said those numbers suggest proponents face tough odds.
"Generally, you are at your high point when you start," he said. "The no
side just has to come up with one good reason to vote no."
But Smith said that a lot will depend on how much money is spent by both
sides and whether the electorate tilts toward left or right on election
day.
"I think it'll probably be a very close vote," he said.
Law enforcement organizations are likely to oppose the measure, but
several contacted Monday said they had not yet adopted an official
position.
Some marijuana advocates have criticized Lee for pushing his measure,
arguing that they would have a better chance in 2012, a presidential
election year when the electorate tends to be more liberal.
"I think things have turned our way so much that we have a good chance
of winning," Lee said. "This is the time to bring up the issue and talk
about it. Who knows what will be going on in 2012."
Dale Gieringer, the director of California NORML, was one of the
skeptics, but he said his pro-legalization organization would endorse
the ballot measure.
"I'd like the initiative to pass," he said, "but I'm not holding my
breath necessarily for this to happen."
Lee said he believes that the increasing acceptance of medical marijuana
has changed the dynamic. He said voters are aware that it is easy to
obtain a doctor's recommendation to use marijuana, but he said most
believe that is "a good thing."
"Medical marijuana in California has been accepted as legalization in
some ways by a lot of the population," he said. "To me this is codifying
what it happening."
john.hoeffel@latimes.com
Supporters say they have enough signatures -- about 57% more than the
required 433,971 -- on a petition to qualify for the ballot. Polls have
shown support for legalization among state voters.
By John Hoeffel
December 15, 2009
California voters could decide whether to legalize marijuana in November
after supporters announced Monday that they have more than enough
signatures to ensure that it qualifies for the ballot.
The petition drive has collected more than 680,000 signatures, said
Richard Lee, the measure's main proponent, about 57% more than the
433,971 needed.
"It was so easy to get them," Lee said. "People were so eager to sign."
The initiative would allow cities and counties to adopt laws to allow
marijuana to be grown and sold, and to impose taxes on marijuana
production and sales. It would make it legal for anyone who is at least
21 to possess an ounce of marijuana and grow plants in an area of no
more than 25 square feet for personal use.
Steve Smith, a political consultant who has run many California
initiative campaigns, said that as a rule of thumb, supporters assume
that about 30% of the signatures on petitions will be invalidated.
"I'll be very surprised if they don't qualify," he said.
The measure, the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act, is one of four
initiatives in circulation to legalize marijuana use, but it is the only
one that appears to have the financial support to make the ballot.
Lee's firm, one of the state's most successful marijuana businesses, has
spent at least $1.1 million so far on the measure. Lee owns half a dozen
businesses in Oakland, including Coffeeshop Blue Sky, a medical
marijuana dispensary, and Oaksterdam University, which teaches about
marijuana.
Lee said he expected that the campaign will cost between $7 million and
$20 million, but he hopes to raise the money from across the country.
"We feel like we've done our part," he said.
Lee has hired consultants to run an Internet-based campaign that he said
already has a mailing list of about 30,000.
In a news release, the campaign announced that it had more than 650,000
signatures, but Lee said that the firm he hired to collect signatures
put the number at more than 680,000. Lee said volunteers would continue
to gather signatures until the campaign turns in the petition early next
year.
Polls have shown support among California voters for legalization. A
Field Poll taken in mid-April found that 56% of voters in the state and
60% in Los Angeles County want to make pot legal and tax it. A poll
taken for the initiative's proponents in August found that 51% of likely
voters supported it when read language similar to what will be on the
ballot, but that increased to 54% when they were read a less technical
synopsis.
Smith said those numbers suggest proponents face tough odds.
"Generally, you are at your high point when you start," he said. "The no
side just has to come up with one good reason to vote no."
But Smith said that a lot will depend on how much money is spent by both
sides and whether the electorate tilts toward left or right on election
day.
"I think it'll probably be a very close vote," he said.
Law enforcement organizations are likely to oppose the measure, but
several contacted Monday said they had not yet adopted an official
position.
Some marijuana advocates have criticized Lee for pushing his measure,
arguing that they would have a better chance in 2012, a presidential
election year when the electorate tends to be more liberal.
"I think things have turned our way so much that we have a good chance
of winning," Lee said. "This is the time to bring up the issue and talk
about it. Who knows what will be going on in 2012."
Dale Gieringer, the director of California NORML, was one of the
skeptics, but he said his pro-legalization organization would endorse
the ballot measure.
"I'd like the initiative to pass," he said, "but I'm not holding my
breath necessarily for this to happen."
Lee said he believes that the increasing acceptance of medical marijuana
has changed the dynamic. He said voters are aware that it is easy to
obtain a doctor's recommendation to use marijuana, but he said most
believe that is "a good thing."
"Medical marijuana in California has been accepted as legalization in
some ways by a lot of the population," he said. "To me this is codifying
what it happening."
john.hoeffel@latimes.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
