ANTI-MEASURE B SUITS DISMISSED

Measure B will remain on the ballot following a ruling by Mendocino
County Superior Court Judge John Behnke Wednesday denying two suits
filed against the marijuana measure.

Measure B, which was placed on the ballot by the Mendocino County
Board of Supervisors in January, would repeal Measure G and set
medical marijuana limits in Mendocino County at the state limits of
six mature or 12 immature plants and eight ounces of dried marijuana.

Measure G, which was passed by Mendocino County voters in 2000,
instructed law enforcement to make the prosecution of marijuana laws
the lowest possible priority and prohibited prosecution of personal
use gardens of 25 plants or fewer.

Separate lawsuits filed by Green Party Member Richard Johnson and
county residents Paula Laguna and George Hanamoto both asked for a
writ of mandate to stop the ballot for the Mendocino County June 3
election from being printed.

County Clerk-Assessor-Recorder Sue Ranochak said the ballots started
printing last week, in advance of Behnke's ruling.

Johnson's suit argued that Measure B violated the single subject rule
which bars ballot initiatives in California from addressing more than
one subject.

Johnson argued that the repeal of Measure G and the setting of
medical marijuana limits needed to be handled by separate measures.

In his ruling, Behnke said Johnson did not prove that the repeal of
Measure G and the enacting of Measure B were separate initiatives and
that the single subject rule was designed to keep legislation on
different subjects from being packaged together in lengthy documents
to confuse voters.

"Measure B is entirely contained on a single page," Behnke wrote in
his ruling. "It contains only two operative sections. The repeal of
Measure G and the adoption of limits on marijuana possession are not
such disparate subjects as to confuse or mislead the voters."

The Laguna suit also said Measure B would violate the single subject
but additionally argued that Measure B would violate the
Compassionate Use Act passed as SB 420.

Attorney David Nick argued that SB 420 gave the county the right to
set medical marijuana limits higher than the state limit but not at
the state limit or lower.

Nick also argued that Measure B would limit medical marijuana use
because it would deny a patient access to more than state limits.

In his ruling Behnke found that this was not true because Measure B
contains the language of Compassionate Use Act which allows a medical
marijuana patient to have as much medical marijuana as is prescribed
as necessary by their doctor.

Yes on B Coalition Spokesman Ross Liberty said he was pleased with
the outcome of the two suits though he said it was predictable.

"They either wanted to deny the voters the opportunity to opine on
our 25 plant limit or they were trying to distract the county's
attention from this issue, either way it's bad for the county," he said.

No on B Spokeswoman Laura Hamburg said No on B supported the two
suits but said neither one was initiated by the organization which is
looking forward to the June election.

"Let the voters decide," she said.

The election is scheduled for June 3.