News (Media Awareness Project) - US CA: Latest Tahoe Medical Pot Vote Strengthens Divide |
Title: | US CA: Latest Tahoe Medical Pot Vote Strengthens Divide |
Published On: | 2010-03-26 |
Source: | Sierra Sun (Truckee, CA) |
Fetched On: | 2010-04-02 02:46:50 |
LATEST TAHOE MEDICAL POT VOTE STRENGTHENS DIVIDE BETWEEN EAST, WEST PLACER
COUNTY
OLYMPIC VALLEY, Calif. -- Thursday's vote from Squaw advisory council
officials to not support a rezoning amendment that would ban medical
marijuana operations throughout unincorporated Placer County has
strengthened what appears to be a growing east/west divide between
Tahoe and Auburn on the issue.
During discussion before the 4-2 vote to not support the zoning text
amendment that would define and disallow medical marijuana
distribution, two Squaw Valley Municipal Advisory Council members
described the argument behind the proposal as "bogus."
"To take away the right of a person to get what they need when
they're sick is just horrible," said MAC member Maureen O'Keefe.
Members also said the ban would create more crime than it would
prevent, forcing licensed medical marijuana patients to seek the drug
through illegal sources.
"This (proposal) has gone to four MACs in district five so far, and
based on feedback received, my expectation is that I will likely
suggest regulation rather than an outright ban," said Jennifer
Montgomery, district five representative to the Board of Supervisors,
who attended Thursday's meeting.
Of the five councils in district five, four have recommended the
Placer County Board of Supervisors not approve the amendment. The
fifth council, Foresthill, will review it April 5 -- a day before the
board of supervisors is scheduled to vote on April 6 in Auburn.
On Feb. 12 in Tahoe City, the North Tahoe Regional Advisory Council
unanimously voted to not support the amendment
Placer County Planner Jennifer Dzakowic, who has presented the
county's stance at all the council meetings, said the district five
councils are representative of a growing trend in Placer County, in
which eastern councils have either decided not to review the proposal
or have voted against it. Conversely, west county councils such as
Rural Lincoln and Ophir/New Castle have voted in support of the ban.
So far, four have voted against the ban, while two have voted in
support.
According to previous reports, the planning commission has cited a
California Police Chief Association report that medicinal marijuana
dispensaries cause crime as its main reason for the ban.
November ballot Thursday's Squaw vote came a day after California's
Secretary of State confirmed an initiative to legalize marijuana and
allow it to be sold and taxed will appear on the November ballot.
Squaw MAC member Edward Heneveld said Placer County, if it approves
the zoning amendment, would be unprepared to deal with the statewide
measure should it pass in November. Heneveld said the county should
also consider taxing medicinal marijuana to boost county revenues.
COUNTY
OLYMPIC VALLEY, Calif. -- Thursday's vote from Squaw advisory council
officials to not support a rezoning amendment that would ban medical
marijuana operations throughout unincorporated Placer County has
strengthened what appears to be a growing east/west divide between
Tahoe and Auburn on the issue.
During discussion before the 4-2 vote to not support the zoning text
amendment that would define and disallow medical marijuana
distribution, two Squaw Valley Municipal Advisory Council members
described the argument behind the proposal as "bogus."
"To take away the right of a person to get what they need when
they're sick is just horrible," said MAC member Maureen O'Keefe.
Members also said the ban would create more crime than it would
prevent, forcing licensed medical marijuana patients to seek the drug
through illegal sources.
"This (proposal) has gone to four MACs in district five so far, and
based on feedback received, my expectation is that I will likely
suggest regulation rather than an outright ban," said Jennifer
Montgomery, district five representative to the Board of Supervisors,
who attended Thursday's meeting.
Of the five councils in district five, four have recommended the
Placer County Board of Supervisors not approve the amendment. The
fifth council, Foresthill, will review it April 5 -- a day before the
board of supervisors is scheduled to vote on April 6 in Auburn.
On Feb. 12 in Tahoe City, the North Tahoe Regional Advisory Council
unanimously voted to not support the amendment
Placer County Planner Jennifer Dzakowic, who has presented the
county's stance at all the council meetings, said the district five
councils are representative of a growing trend in Placer County, in
which eastern councils have either decided not to review the proposal
or have voted against it. Conversely, west county councils such as
Rural Lincoln and Ophir/New Castle have voted in support of the ban.
So far, four have voted against the ban, while two have voted in
support.
According to previous reports, the planning commission has cited a
California Police Chief Association report that medicinal marijuana
dispensaries cause crime as its main reason for the ban.
November ballot Thursday's Squaw vote came a day after California's
Secretary of State confirmed an initiative to legalize marijuana and
allow it to be sold and taxed will appear on the November ballot.
Squaw MAC member Edward Heneveld said Placer County, if it approves
the zoning amendment, would be unprepared to deal with the statewide
measure should it pass in November. Heneveld said the county should
also consider taxing medicinal marijuana to boost county revenues.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...