Cloudy Future

THE CONTENTIOUS REALITY OF MEASURE P

Flying in the face of federal drug laws, nearly 17,000 Santa Barbara
City residents hit the polls last week and voted to make
marijuana-related offenses the "lowest priority" of the Santa Barbara
Police Department. Thanks to this effort, the appropriately named
Measure P passed with a resounding 66 percent of the popular vote.
Strongly opposed by local law enforcement, however, the measure seems
destined for at least one more showdown before it can become a
reality, as the City Council has requested a closed-door meeting with
City Attorney Steve Wiley to discuss the various legal implications
of the pro-pot directive and the possibility of an appeal.

When asked what a Measure P reality will mean for our local cops and
residents who indulge in the occasional toke, Lt. Paul McCaffrey
commented this week, "We don't know how it's going to affect us, and
I'm not sure anyone in Santa Barbara knows either."

But residents of other parts of the country know full well, as
similar measures have been passed in such places as Seattle, Oakland,
and Columbia, Missouri, since 2003. According to Seattle City
Attorney Tom Carr--who is an outspoken critic of the initiative--the
measure has made "very little difference" for city residents, as
adult pot-related infractions were low both before and after
Seattle's Measure I-75 passed.

However, the numbers indicate that pot arrests were reduced by
two-thirds, going from 178 citations in the year before the measure
passed to 59 the year after.

Where Carr feels the measure has left its mark is in the
"administrative headache" involved in monitoring the initiative.

McCaffrey predicts a similar fate for Santa Barbara cops should the
measure stand as it is currently worded; it now requires officers who
cite adult offenders to submit a memo justifying their actions to an
oversight committee.

But of even greater concern to Santa Barbara cops is the worry that
the measure might hamstring their policing duties and prevent them
from fulfilling their obligations to local residents. McCaffrey
pointed to situations in which criminal activity is reported, but the
only incriminating evidence on the scene is marijuana. McCaffrey has
"concerns" about what officers will now be able to do to curb the
reported illegal behavior in these situations, which frequently
involve homeless people in public places.

But San Francisco narcotics Captain Timothy Hettrich had a different
view, testifying recently before his City Council--which is set to
vote on a similar measure this week--"This [lowest-priority
initiative] does not tie our hands at all" since it does not change
any existing laws.

Policing aside, to the folks at City Hall--including Mayor Marty Blum
and City Attorney Wiley--the biggest potential problem with Measure P
is one of "constitutionality," as it directly conflicts with state
and federal law. However, the 2003 initiatives of other cities have
all survived, and on last week's election night similar measures
passed in Santa Cruz; Santa Monica; Missoula, Montana; and Eureka
Springs, Arkansas. "The city has no obligation to enforce federal law
at all. Besides, the measure doesn't say you cannot enforce a
specific law," explained Bruce Mirken, spokesperson for the Marijuana
Policy Project, an Oakland-based nonprofit that provided substantial
funding for our local pro-Measure P movement.

Mirken added that while the initiative does give adult pot smokers a
small amount of protection, it "certainly doesn't provide an absolute
guarantee that you aren't going to be arrested or cited." After all,
no matter what the fate of Measure P may be, smoking ganja is still
against the law in Santa Barbara unless you have a medical prescription.

With city councilmembers and Wiley slated to have their private
meeting in early December, both supporters and opponents of Measure P
seemed resigned to a wait-and-see attitude.

Lara Cassell, one of the chief organizers of the petition drive that
got Measure P on the ballot, said her group has not met with the City
Council since election night but added, "We think the voters of Santa
Barbara sent a pretty clear message, and we look forward to working
with the council [in the future]." For the SBPD's part, McCaffrey
said the issue ultimately is for "the city and their attorney to
decide." Despite the department's concerns, McCaffrey vowed, "We are
going to follow the laws and what we are told to do."