MEDICAL POT REGULATION TALKS CONTINUE

Opinions Mixed Even Among Growers

Talks around changing the county's medical marijuana cultivation code
will continue for at least two more monthly meetings of a committee
before the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors will act on the
committee's suggestions.

The Board of Supervisors assigned its standing Health and Human
Services Committee in the spring to the task of reviewing the
county's medical marijuana cultivation ordinance, codified as
Mendocino County Code 9.31. Speakers expressed uncertainty this week
about reforms on the table, which include allowing collectives and
cooperatives to get a permit from the sheriff to grow up to 99 plants
per parcel. Most speakers were limited to three minutes. Some offered
ideas of their own, but most expressed misgivings about future policy.

The next committee meeting is scheduled for Oct. 19 at 3 p.m. in
Conference Room C of the Mendocino County Administrative building in Ukiah.

Speakers' fears revolved around law enforcement getting involved in
enforcing the county's current 25-plant-per-parcel rule, and
objections centered on the use of the county's nuisance abatement
code to enforce the limit.

"Labeling patients in the same group with habitual offenders for code
enforcement such as illegal residences, substandard housing, dumping,
abandoned vehicles, is incorrect and offensive to the patients,"
speaker Paula Deeter said.

She said the county needed "real teeth" to enforce its code, but
suggested separating 9.31 from the nuisance abatement code so medical
marijuana would not be treated as a nuisance.

Mendocino County Counsel Jeanine Nadel, at Supervisor Kendall Smith's
urging, elaborated on how that could be done. She said she would
simply be "cutting and pasting" enforcement procedures from county
nuisance abatement code into 9.31.

Speaker Beth Bosk called the use of the word nuisance a form of
bigotry against patient growers.

"It's medicine, it's not a crime," Bruce Martin said.

Speaker Mike Sweeney suggested using "non-criminal abatement" and
civil citations instead of arrests to address small growers who
violate county rules.

"I think that it would be much wiser politically and in a lot of
other ways to combine these kinds of reforms with a tax on marijuana
cultivation. I think there's broad support for such a tax here in
this county," Sweeney said. "I think that support would be extended
to people who grow marijuana who realize ... that making a
substantial contribution to the cost of local government is an
important road to acceptance and protection."

Sweeney suggested turning zip ties issued by the Mendocino County
Sheriff's Office - used to mark legally-grown plants - into "tax
tags." He also suggested increasing the number of plants allowed for
larger parcels of land; providing a "safe harbor for people who are
growing reasonable amounts of medical marijuana;" a 100-foot setback;
and a "no-see, no-smell" rule.

"To involve the county in the issuance of use permits for growing up
to 99 plants ... would be a very , very problematic proposition,"
Sweeney said, adding that unforeseen consequences and costs should be
considered.

Marvin Levin told the committee the changes on the table were good
for those who weren't afraid to go public with the fact that they
grow marijuana and wanted to "do it right."

He continued, "There's more people who are patients, who are smaller
at this point, who this would be difficult on without some changes."

Levin said he's trying to found the Mendocino Farmers Collective, and
talks every day with growers about "how we can get them involved in
trying to do this legitimately and put money into the county."

He suggested adding a mediation process in cases where nuisance
abatement fines were applied.

Tom Davenport spoke, telling the committee that eight of its
suggested revisions to 9.31 were "unsupported by objective, empirical
evidence," and included "a great many irrelevancies, from a legal
standpoint." He also said collectives and cooperatives weren't
properly defined, and suggested adding a definition of mature,
flowering females and adding an exception for cuttings, clones and
other immature plants that "don't have any particular value, except
horticulturally."

Davenport began to elaborate, point for point, on a list of suggested
changes. Supervisor McCowen, who sits on the committee, interrupted
him four and a half minutes into his comments, reminding him he had
exceeded his speaking time and asking him to move quickly through his
remaining points. Davenport said he would wait until the next meeting
and would e-mail his suggestions to Mendocino County Counsel Jeanine
Nadel in the meantime.

Patrick Kerr, a disabled Vietnam veteran, said he couldn't grow the
plants his doctor recommended at his apartment and was having trouble
finding someone who would allow him to grow on their property. He
noted that limiting parcels to 25 plants restricted the land to
producing for only four people with doctors' recommendations to use
marijuana, and many property owners he had approached were at that limit.

"You're making it very hard for somebody to get their medication," Kerr said.

Matthew Cohen of Northstone Organics Cooperative said the regulations
would be helpful.

"Prop. 215 didn't really give us all the details," Cohen said.
"That's what these regulations would do, they would sort out those
details, so that law enforcement would understand what's going on,
patient growers would understand what's going on and nothing gets
caught in the crosshairs."

Speaker Paul Clark expressed general resentment for the fact that
growers aren't required to pay taxes or worker's compensation for
people who tend the gardens.

Larry Puterbaugh asked the committee to consider "compassion for the
neighbors of the people who grow."

Diane Pauli of the First Five Commission said parents had told her
they didn't want to live in Mendocino County because of "the drug culture."

She continued, "I believe that marijuana is more than a nuisance;
it's a hazard. It's a hazard to the general climate of this county. I
don't want this county to be friendly to marijuana farmers; I want it
to be family friendly."

Cathy Finnegan spoke, saying she resented the implication by other
speakers that she wasn't a compassionate person.

She continued, "The reality is that medical marijuana is used by most
growers as a ruse to make huge profits. They are simply profiteers
making a ton of money off of our innocent desires to help those who
are ill. Because there is so much money to be made on illegal
marijuana, there will always be a relentless push by these profiteers
to weaken our regulations. Medical marijuana is the vehicle they will
always use, because it works so well."