.
.
.
Well, when Paul Lucas is right, Paul Lucas is right! And what has Paul been right about most often?
Mainly, that each time State Senator Lou Correa (now contemplating a run for Santa Ana Mayor, you read it here first) authors and pushes a bill that purports to make progress toward a workable, regulated medical marijuana regime in California, it will INVARIABLY contain provisions that actually make things worse and more restrictive than they are now. Each year we see the same thing:
- 2011’s Brown-vetoed bill overriding local zoning control to require ALL dispensaries in California to be at least 600 feet from any residence;
- Last year’s SB 289, subjecting you to a DUI if you drive with any trace of THC in your blood – THC which, duh, stays there for 30 days without in any way impairing you – this blog helped defeat that;
- And then this year’s earlier version of SB 1262, masquerading as progress but containing a poison pill (now removed) limiting and punishing doctors who give MMJ recommendations.
And yet still MMJ advocates look expectantly to Lou’s ongoing legislation believing that one of these days something good will come of it, much like Charlie Brown was always convinced to kick Lucy’s football. Just last week I heard some (I thought) knowledgeable pot folks chatting about how much SB 1262 had improved, and how old Lou was really getting tired of law enforcement’s demands and was preparing to stick it to them and REALLY give us a workable regulatory system. Hmmm … Lucy… “Lou C” … have we hit on something here?
Cut to the chase. Of course. The NEW poison pill in Lou’s SB 1262 is buried on page 21, lines 33-35, but it’s a BIG one once you’ve found it. In fact, it’s more like a BLACK HOLE, sucking up all the goodness in the rest of the bill:
(6) (A) The bureau shall deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem, [or if issuance would result in or add to an undue concentration of licenses.]
Got that? Local law enforcement doesn’t even have to say HOW the dispensaries or collectives/cooperatives in their jurisdiction create a problem, they can just say “there’s a problem,” and BINGO, no more medical marijuana in that town. And how often do you see law enforcement who embrace that industry, that medicine? I mean, you might see some enlightened sheriffs on TV now and then but that’s because they’re as rare as scientists who deny global warming, who ALSO get on TV. [Not a perfect comparison as those scientists are paid-off liars, but still.]
And it only stands to reason: Any bill the cops-and-prison-guards-loving Lou is going to give us will be one backed by the large law enforcement lobbying groups (and the equally backward California League of Cities) … and those groups have steadfastly refused to acknowledge that cannabis has any legitimate medicinal qualities. So really what can we expect? To expect those groups to back a law that makes it easier for patients to get their medicine without folks getting raided, fined, and going to jail … would be like expecting the fox not to chow down on the flock of hens we put under his care in some crazy lapse of judgement.
Advocates calculate that this bill will actually leave 2/3 of California without medical marijuana, as not only local law enforcement but benighted city councils like Anaheim’s would be able to ban dispensaries at will.
This is a more urgent situation than I may be communicating, as the bill stands a very good chance of passing, that poison pill isn’t going to go anywhere [see update] and state law will trump any enlightened local ordinance. For example, if Santa Ana voters passed either of their competing initiatives this November, and got their dozen collective/co-operatives down in the industrial areas of the southeast and southwest because Santa Ana voters feel that’s reasonable, Police Chief Carlos Rojas could up and say “There’s a problem. A law enforcement problem.” And there’d be no appeal, everything closes down.
Even Nevada or Utah law enforcement can come over and say “hey, we’ve got a law enforcement problem with this pot coming from California,” and – closed down! By yahoos who couldn’t even make it all the way out west!
[The bill’s authors are NOT taking into consideration the concerns of critical stakeholders such as California Cannabis Voice, which has been banned from key meetings in apparent revenge for their identifying the Law Enforcement Loophole; but they retain the illusion of cannabis-industry support by including the California Cannabis Industry Association, which is dominated by two HUGE dispensaries in Oakland and Los Angeles – businesses who know they will have no trouble with THEIR local law enforcement, and that the trouble businesses have in neighboring counties will give them a Hell-of-Sweet Monopoly in the area, as patients are forced to travel a hundred miles to THEM for their medicine.]
Update: This bracketed section may have been unfair to the California Cannabis Industry Association (CCIA), I am currently speaking with them…
*******************************
UPDATE: The California Cannabis Industry Association denies that they are dominated by huge interests in Oakland and LA; the vast majority of their membership consists of small “mom-and-pop” collectives and dispensaries. They are working hard with the Correa team and other stakeholders to get good amendments in, and particularly removing this law-enforcement-veto poison pill (which wasn’t expected to stand up to some legal challenges anyway.) THEY say it’s way too early to give up on SB 1262, or Lou Correa for that matter. We wish them luck, and will keep a close eye on this bill, because as it stands right now it looks like a step backwards! Stay tuned for more updates…
I can’t believe we invited that guy to Grover Cleveland parties.
Hell, I was a Republican for Correa in 2006.
Hey Vern, wish you would have called me first. I will have to write you an email to discuss how you are wrong first about the CCIA. I may not disagree about certain aspects of your article but there are still many amendments in the works.
Well… better late than never? You still up?
Love to know who you talked to from CCV but if they aren’t willing to be be personally quoted in an article it tells me something. It’s a cheap shot that they are taking at CCIA who happened to fly down to Santa Ana and has been helping Kandice Hawes pro bono without asking for a penny. So yeah I’m irritated as pot politics has obviously intruded into this article. And though I am unhappy with many issues in SB1262 many organizations continue to offer amendments that Senator Correa and his staff are accepting. So maybe CCV should send some suggestion rather that just demand that it not pass. We can fix many of the things that you point out but if we don’t when 2016 arrives with no medical regulatory process in place kiss medical marijuana good bye just like in Washington state.
Matt Gray, who was introduced to me by Matt Pappas.
I also tried calling Correa’s office, but they don’t usually return my calls these days like they used to.
It seems a tall order to amend the parts that give both local law enforcement and city authorities veto power on whether a town gets medical marijuana. Is that gonna really be possible, without losing the support of law enforcement and the League of Cities, and all the lawmakers who bask in their shadows? Let me know if you think that can happen.
And I’ll print whatever your defense of CCIA is, when you tell me.
My focus was never CCIA, nor Americans for Safe Access (ASA) who is supporting the legislation. My impression is the article is just stating facts. I’m baffled by the support for 1262, I have on 3 occasions suggested significant changes to the bill in a continued effort to fix it rather than kill it. Ms. Goldstein is welcomed to ask questions seeking clarification, instead of jumping to conclusions. As for the law enforcement poison pill, neither CCIA nor ASA was talking about it until it was brought to their attention. As an attempt at collaboration, we have reached out to them and welcome that dialogue. Sean Donahoe, who I reached out to personally, refused to speak about and address CCIA’s unwillingness to fight against that provision of the bill. It is baffling, and I would argue fails to support the needs of patients, cultivators, producers, and dispensaries.
First of all — we can talk about Correa running for Santa Ana Mayor now? Great!
I would hate to send Lucas into a conniption fit, but: I’d tend to support him over Pulido. Lou is too conservative and too beholden to special interests, but so far as I know he doesn’t have a reputation for being corrupt. Getting anyone in there who can make sure that no one takes anything out of the filing cabinets and then spreads them out for people to see in the sunshine is very important. Lou would have the money to beat him. In fact, I wonder if Pulido would even run.
As for the bill, you raise legitimate concerns, but I think that there are general principles of administrative law that may hold back the worst problems you suggest. (I’d like to see that “shall” changed to a “may,” though.) I find the language a little murky.
What bothers me as much is the language on the following page, lines 16-25, defining “undue concentration”:
Taking subsection (iv)(II) literally, as we’re supposed to be able to do, this says that we have an “undue concentration” if any segment of a county has a higher ratio of licenses to population than the county as a whole — which in effect means “it has a higher than average number of licenses.” The only ways you can prevent any part of the county from having a higher ration of licenses to people than the county as a whole are (1) to convince every jurisdiction in the county to have the exact same licenses to population ratio, which is unlikely given the stress given on local control, or (2) to force every jurisdiction to be equal by having zero licenses per unit of population.
This is the reverse of Garrison Keillor’s statement about Lake Woebegon, a place where “all the children are above average.” You can’t have every jurisdiction in the county below average. As soon as you lower one jurisdiction down to the previous county average, the county average dips again as a result — and the jurisdictions with the highest ratios have to lower them yet again.
The lege needs to have some legislative drafter with a decent grasp on math rethink this. Make it “not more the 20% of the county average,” for example — still draconian, in my opinion — and at least it becomes mathematically possible, even if not compelling.
Medical marijuana is legal in California by state law and it is legal in the city of Santa Ana.
Store front pot shops and banned because they haven’t follow the MMJ law. They have created their own problem and now need the iron fist of state regulations to clean up their act.
Is that the same “iron fist” that financial institutions need when their act needs to be cleaned up?
“..State Senator Lou Correa (now contemplating a run for Santa Ana Mayor..”
Correa is running for SA Mayor – watch Pulido scurry for his rat hole.
My focus was never CCIA, nor Americans for Safe Access (ASA) who is supporting the legislation. My impression is the article is just stating facts. I’m baffled by the support for 1262, I have on 3 occasions suggested significant changes to the bill in a continued effort to fix it rather than kill it. Ms. Goldstein is welcomed to ask questions seeking clarification, instead of jumping to conclusions. As for the law enforcement poison pill, neither CCIA nor ASA was talking about it until it was brought to their attention. As an attempt at collaboration, we have reached out to them and welcome that dialogue. Sean Donahoe, who I reached out to personally, refused to speak about and address CCIA’s unwillingness to fight against that provision of the bill. It is baffling, and I would argue fails to support the needs of patients, cultivators, producers, and dispensaries.
You cannot trust Lou Correa or the League of Cities or the Police Chiefs Association. These three groups have done nothing but try and scuttle any and all real progress in the way of MMJ in CA and every effort they have put forth so far cloaked as progress have been nothing but Trojan horse poison pills. I wish those who look upon this bill with upturned faces would just grow up and stop trying to play footsie with Lou Correa.
What is absolutely critical, is that we all put egos aside and work together for the best interest of patients, cultivators, producers, and dispensaries. This must be a collaborative effort. Will I push for that and push others to? Yes. A certain group’s fingerprints are all over the effort to collude with a staff member to hide the meeting from me and keep me out of it. I am refraining from outing anyone because I am that dedicated to the cause and am focused upon working together. It was a cheap attempt, I’m more skilled and connected than they are (which is why multiple people fed me information about the meeting and pushed for my attendance), and when I showed up after being told not to, I was let in and participated. We can do that dance, but it’s a waste of time and serves no constructive purpose. Onward and upward!
So Matt,
So its interesting that you talk about putting egos aside and than state that you are more skilled and connected than anyone else. Just saying if you want to be inclusive you shouldn’t marginalize folks.
Diane
Diane,
You are skilled at diverting attention away from the issues in the bill that concern patients and cultivators by pushing us into personality conflict. May I suggest you set that strategy aside for a moment and focus on the problem with the bill.
Here is a start, I’d be interested in your answer:
The “Poison Pill” : SB 1262 Page 21, lines 33-36 of the July 2nd version of the bill, gives 100% veto power to any and all law enforcement to force the disapproval of license if they claim marijuana would “tend to create a law enforcement problem,” (whatever that means).
The provision fails to define what a “problem” is, provides no standard of evidence for gauging the legitimacy of an alleged problem, and appears to allow any law enforcement officer (a beat cop, parking enforcement officer, prison guard, chief or even one from a different state or country), to make a claim to the Bureau that marijuana from a location or locations within California are causing a “problem.”
Knowing how law enforcement has vehemently opposed medical marijuana, we reasonably anticipate officers against medical marijuana would obstruct licensing for San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose, Humboldt, Mendocino, and more. There is no way to control their actions.
Tell me how this bill protects us from that inevitability, please! I can’t see how we are protected at all. That is the scary part. Help me understand how law enforcement are not going to crush us out of existence?
This bill shouldn’t be supported if that “poison pill” stays in. I’m told that it’s on its way out though. We should believe that when we see the new bill. But the reason is not that LEO would part with that clause without kicking and screaming, but that it wouldn’t survive a court challenge.
Other things our friends (your rivals?) are trying to fix: the ban against felons working for dispensaries (when it’s been so unfair and easy to be classified that way over the decades) AND the prohibitive $8000 application fee.
Diane, your posts do not say anything about the bill. Please keep your focus on the bill and not the people. People come and go, Laws stay forever.
Hi Terrance,
First I am waiting for the next amendment to see where the legislation stands. I wrote an opposition letter in the beginning and continue to oppose a number of issues in the bill. In fact our letter of opposition is in the legislative record.
Last I heard this language is being removed from the bill based on its unconstitutionality. I am waiting to see if this is in fact true. I have more of a concern with the felony language. I am getting ready to write another letter addressing this issue by comparing it to politicians that can hold office even if if they have a felony conviction.
I just take offense at people who don’t see their hypocrisy. As for supporting patients, consumers, cultivators and others I think that we need to blow up the drug war period and have been working in Sacramento and across the country trying to do so.
One day I hope to see the industry no longer criminalized and that there is a thriving sun grown cannabis industry similar to our great wine or craft beer industry. We have more in common than not. I hope this addresses your concern about not addressing the legislation.
Where are the legal medical marijuana farms?
Give me a legal name so I can look it up to see if they are complying with the law.
Terrance and here is my original article on SB 1262.
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2014/06/california-weed-wars-the-legal-lay-of-the-land/
My concern about 1262 is two fold: the absence of sun-grown (HUGE for Humboldt County) and that this bill is getting great press BECAUSE law enforcement supports it. If the sun-grown provision is not included and the issues discussed herein (poison pill, felons) are not removed, I can’t support this bill at all.