VOTE POSSIBLE ON MARIJUANA FINES

Someone caught smoking marijuana in public would face escalating fines
of between $100 and $300 on top of an existing state fine of $100,
under a measure the City Council could approve tonight.

But a civil liberties lawyer said last week that toughening the
state's new marijuana law is unnecessary and unwanted.

The lawyer also said that a former New Jersey state trooper who
belongs to the group, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, will oppose
the measure in the pre-meeting speakout.

The meeting is scheduled at 7:30 p.m. in City Hall.

Supporters see the measure as a way to plug a hole in a state law that
took effect on Jan. 2 which decriminalized possession of an ounce or
less of marijuana. The law took effect after voters overwhelmingly
approved ballot Question 2 in November.

But left unclear, supporters of the measure say, is the city's
response if people not only have a marijuana cigarette, which would
constitute decriminalized possession under the new law, but also begin
smoking joints on street corners or in parks.

Councilor James J. Ferrera III proposed the additional fines to help
police deal with such cases.

"We're working across the city to enhance the quality of life for all
the residents of the city of Springfield," he said on Friday.

Question 2 allows cities and towns to add such penalties.

Three council approvals, or steps, are required in order to adopt an
ordinance. The first two came on Feb. 2 and March 2, both by voice
vote.

Third approval requires a roll-call vote.

William C. Newman, director of the Western Massachusetts office of the
American Civil Liberties Union, has urged the council to reject the
marijuana measure.

"There's not a problem; Question 2 has been in effect for almost three
months now, and no one has indicated there's any problems in
Springfield," he said.

Police Sgt. John M. Delaney has said that marijuana use is a minor
issue here. But Commissioner William J. Fitchet supports the ordinance
proposal the City Council is considering.

Delaney said the measure would help police deal with marijuana
possession under the new state law, the intent of which is unclear.

Newman said that adding fines to the new law is unnecessary - because
public pot-smoking is hardly rampant and existing laws cover whatever
does arise - and unwanted, because voters approving Question 2 have
declared pot possession a minor concern.

"It's passing a law and increasing a penalty for a problem that
doesn't exist," he said.

Newman said that former New Jersey State Police Detective Jack A.
Cole, of Medford, will urge the council to reject the marijuana measure.

"A tremendous amount of the staff time and funding for law enforcement
is wasted arresting non-violent drug users who hurt no one but
themselves," Cole said.

Cole was with the New Jersey State Police for 26 years, including
undercover narcotics work, according to a biography on the group's Web
site. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition consists of current and
former members of law enforcement who say that drug policies have failed.

More than 66 percent of voters in Springfield approved Question 2,
mirroring the 65-percent statewide passage.