ID CARD CONCERNS ABOUND

State Law Requires It For Medical Marijuana Users, But Privacy Is A Key Issue

El Dorado County supervisors have directed the Public Health
Department to seek a cost-effective way to implement a medical
marijuana identification card program required by state law.

The card is intended to allow patients with a physician's
recommendation to use marijuana for medical purposes to readily
identify themselves to law enforcement officials.

The program is required under state Senate Bill 420, passed in 2003
to clarify Proposition 215, the 1996 initiative approved by
California voters allowing medical use of marijuana.

Gayle Erbe-Hamlin, county public health director, said the card
program had been stalled by lawsuits brought by some counties that
were concerned about the conflict with federal law.

It was resumed following the state attorney general's advice that
operating an identification card program does not aid and abet
marijuana users in committing a federal crime.

The opinion acknowledged, however, that information provided by
applicants for the cards could be obtained by federal officials and
used to identify cardholders for prosecution.

That prospect, along with an estimated annual cost of $200 per card,
gave supervisors and some medical marijuana advocates pause.

But Supervisor Jack Sweeney said, "Unless the state changes the law,
we are in the unenviable position of having to do something."

Erbe-Hamlin said the county could administer the program, or
outsource it to a vendor or a neighboring county. Amador is the only
nearby county that has implemented the program, and it is not
interested in serving El Dorado County residents, she said.

As of December, 24 counties had programs in place, Erbe-Hamlin said.

The card, she said, would include only the applicant's photo and an
identification number. If the county program were operated as part of
the statewide program, the identification number would be listed in a
state database. Law enforcement officers could quickly determine
whether the card was valid by checking the database.

The county's role would be to collect information from applicants and
to verify their address and that the physician issuing the
recommendation was certified in California. The information would be
submitted to the state, which would send the identification card to
the county to issue to the applicant.

Beginning in March, Erbe-Hamlin said, the state will require a fee of
$142 per card to cover costs of the program. If the county were to
recover its costs as well, Erbe-Hamlin said, the annual cost per card
would run about $200.

Board Chairwoman Helen Baumann said, "My main concern is the cost to
the county."

She also questioned the benefit to cardholders.

Erbe-Hamlin said the card gives patients and caregivers no additional
rights. "They have those rights by law," she said.

Sheriff Jeff Neves also said a card program would not affect the way
members of his department conduct investigations.

State law has left it to counties to determine a threshold amount of
marijuana that may be cultivated for medical purposes, Neves said,
adding that he will be meeting with the county's new district
attorney, Vern Pierson, to review those levels.

"Where (the identification card) would probably be of benefit is to
more readily identify that the recommendation was made by an
authorized physician," Neves said.

Ryan Landers, a medical marijuana advocate, and Dave Bishop,
representing the El Dorado County chapter of the American Alliance
for Medical Cannabis, recommended establishing a county program but
not linking it to the statewide database.

Landers said he had heard of cases in which information provided for
the identification card program may have been sent to the Department
of Motor Vehicles and used as the basis for refusing a driver's license.

He suggested a county-based program would be less prone to abuse.

"We could come up with a very secure program that everyone could feel
comfortable with," Landers said.

Bishop complained that "the state is making money off the backs of
the people who are sick," and argued that a local program could
provide cards at lower cost.

But Aaron Smith, representing the advocacy group Safe Access Now,
urged participation in the state database, arguing that it would give
greater protection to patients who choose to enroll. Card fees are
high now because counties have been slow to implement the program, he
said, adding that fees would drop as more counties shared the costs.

To date, federal authorities have not subpoenaed identification card
records, Smith said, adding that the majority of marijuana-related
arrests occur at a local level.

The board directed Erbe-Hamlin to find out how other counties are
handling the matter and to develop a proposal for providing an
in-house program at the lowest possible cost.

In the meantime, the supervisors said they would work with the
California State Association of Counties and the Regional Council of
Rural Counties to try to come up with a more formal statewide approach.