Decision 2008:

VOTERS HEAVILY SUPPORT PROPOSAL 1, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS ARE SKEPTICAL

Downriver voters mirrored the state as a whole in overwhelmingly
approving the use of medicinal marijuana.

While the passage of Proposal 1 raised eyebrows from opponents, 12
other states have medical marijuana laws, indicating growing support
nationwide. South Dakota is the only state that failed to OK a ballot attempt.

In Michigan, 63 percent of voters approved it. Perhaps what is even
more telling is that unofficial results show all 83 counties voted in
favor of medical marijuana.

The major criticisms of the proposal are that it could increase crime
and juvenile drug use, and will be nearly impossible to monitor.

However, those who support the change in state law say that similar
medical marijuana laws are working in other states that have them.

What voters approved in Michigan is a legislative initiative
permitting the use and cultivation of marijuana for specified medical
conditions. The proposal sets out to:

. Permit physician-approved use of marijuana by registered patients
with debilitating medical conditions, including cancer, glaucoma,
HIV, AIDS, hepatitis C, multiple sclerosis and other conditions that
could be approved by the state Department of Community Health.

. Permit registered people to grow limited amounts of marijuana for
qualifying patients in an enclosed, locked facility.

. Require the Department of Community Health to establish an
identification card system for patients qualified to use marijuana
and people qualified to grow it.

. Permit registered and unregistered patients and primary caregivers
to assert medical reasons for using marijuana as a defense to any
prosecution involving marijuana.

Tom Hendrickson, executive director of the Michigan Association of
Chiefs of Police, said that to his knowledge all law enforcement
agencies in the state were against this proposal.

"The statutory language gives numerous loopholes that are open to
interpretation," he said.

Hendrickson said the initiative language is six pages, and it's a
document law enforcement officials are studying very carefully. In
early February, the association plans to hold a two-hour
instructional session to educate its members.

In closely scrutinizing the new law, Hendrickson said he is troubled
by some ambiguities such as his interpretation that the law fails to
mention anything about the unlawfulness of driving a motorcycle, as
opposed to an automobile, under the influence of marijuana.

He added that while it still will be illegal even for a permitted
registered user to smoke marijuana in public, law enforcement
officials need to know what constitutes a public place.

"Does that mean you can't use marijuana inside a car or on your front
lawn?" Hendrickson asked. "These are the things law enforcement will
have to answer."

Another problem, as Hendrickson sees it, is that there is no legal
source for marijuana.

"We're sympathetic to those with health issues, but (marijuana) is
not approved by the (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) and you can't
go to a pharmacy to get it," Hendrickson said. "It's also still a
violation of federal law."

For those who choose not to grow their own marijuana, a provision
allows caregivers to grow it for them. Hendrickson said the law
allows a caregiver to serve up to five patients and to grow up to 60
plants, which he called "a pretty big operation."

As an example, Hendrickson said a patient who chooses not to grow his
own marijuana could look to a friend down the street who is willing
to do it. He said language in the law mentions that caregivers can be
compensated. That same caregiver could legally provide marijuana for
up to five patients, and it's difficult to keep track of where all
the marijuana is going.

He said law enforcement officers are concerned about issues such as
false arrest and what would happen if police destroy marijuana that
is later found to be legal.

The Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, formerly Proposal 1, will be
written into law 10 days after the Board of Canvassers approves the
election results. The Michigan Department of Community Health will
then have 120 days to design the program, which includes
identification cards and state oversight.

Hendrickson said that means the earliest possible implementation date
would be in late February, but in the meantime, there's much to sort out.

When asked if Michigan police could learn from those in other states
that have similar laws, Hendrickson said his members already have
been in touch with those in California, a state that he called the
"wild west" when it comes to marijuana policy.

"They have 128 store-fronts (selling marijuana) in San Francisco,"
Hendrickson said. "Other states are not quite that way. California
has the most lax law. They have no mandatory ID system, but people
have learned from prior experience."

Bruce Mirken, a spokesman with the Marijuana Policy Project, a
national group that sponsored the Michigan campaign by way of the
Michigan Coalition for Compassionate Care, naturally takes a
different viewpoint than Hendrickson, although the two agree on one thing.

Mirken, who said his organization has headquarters in Washington,
D.C., is based at an office in San Francisco. He disputed the number
of storefronts Hendrickson said the city has, but he did say that
California has had problems with its medical marijuana law.

Like Hendrickson, Mirken said other states have learned from
California's mistakes. He said the other 11 states with medical
marijuana laws are pleased with the implementation of their laws.

"A law was passed by the Rhode Island Legislature in 2006 with a
one-year sunset clause," Mirken said. "It then passed by more than 4
to 1 by both (state) houses. These laws are not a problem.
California was the first one, and the law was pretty loose."

According to Mirken, several states with medical marijuana laws were
polled in 2006, and it turned out that the laws were just as popular,
or more popular, than at the time they were approved.

Mirken said he doesn't see any problems with the way the Michigan law
is written. He said it allows patients to grow marijuana for
themselves or designate someone to grow it for them. That caregiver
must be registered with the state, he said, eliminating the need to
resort to illegal street dealers.

The problem, as Hendrickson sees it, is that there probably will be
greater access to marijuana, and police departments don't have the
resources to monitor caregivers who grow and dispense it.

Mirken said law enforcement officers in Michigan simply need to look
at the other dozen states, perhaps with the exception of California,
to see that these laws work and that abuse is overstated.

"Law enforcement needs to get over it," Mirken said.

Keith Standish, a Brownstown Township resident, was pleased with the
overwhelming support of Proposal 1.

"I've been smoking for 25 years, mostly recreationally, but for the
last 10 years it's been for my diabetes," Standish said.

He said he finds it helps to reduce nausea from fluctuating sugar
levels and keeps his appetite going so he can eat on a fairly regular schedule.

Standish is a proponent of legalizing marijuana, although he prefers
to use the term "relegalize" because before 1937, it was legal in the
United States. He said there are many industrial uses for hemp, but
criminalizing marijuana ended those uses.

In regard to complaints from those against the medical marijuana law
who warn of potential abuses, Standish said any abuses in the system
do not outweigh the need for medical marijuana.

"You have those things happening with prescription medication," he said.