SENATE SIDELINES POT DISPENSARY BILL

MONTPELIER -- A legislative effort to provide nearly 200 eligible
Vermonters with safe and legal access to medical marijuana ended
this week when Senate leaders scuttled the bill due to lack of
support in the House.

The Senate legislation would have established up to five so-called
"compassion centers" at which patients suffering from multiple
sclerosis, cancer or other pain-inducing conditions could have
obtained their doctor-approved cannabis.

While the bill got considerable attention this session in a Senate
committee room, it was "ordered to lie" last week and almost
certainly won't see a floor vote this year.

"It became clear to us that the other body wasn't interested in
taking it up this year, so we ordered it to lie," Senate President
Peter Shumlin said Thursday. "With such a tight timeline to get our
work done, I want to focus our attention on bills that both chambers
are going to pass."

Proponents of the bill say Vermont's existing medical-marijuana
legislation does little to help many of the 187 patients on the
statewide registry. The 2004 law permits eligible residents to
possess and grow cannabis plants in limited quantities. But
cultivating the herb is no easy task, especially for seniors
suffering from debilitating pain. And while opiate-based painkillers
are available at any local pharmacy for patients with a doctor
prescription, medical-marijuana users must pay high prices for an
uncertified product on a black market to which many are unable even
to gain access.

"It's inconsistent and illogical to have a state law that allows
people to use medical marijuana and then ask them to go to a drug
dealer to purchase the medicine they need," Shumlin said. "We get
calls in this office from senior citizens who literally ask us what
a drug dealer looks like so they can try to fill their prescription."

But opposition to the bill from virtually every law-enforcement
entity in the state convinced House Speaker Shap Smith that the
legislation isn't ready to become law. While he said he supports the
idea in concept, he would prefer more universal buy-in.

"I don't think this particular effort has gotten all the
stakeholders together to allow them to reach some common ground,"
Smith said. "I think it's a real issue, and I think it does deserve
attention, but we need more time to resolve some of the differences."

Mark Tucci, a Manchester Center resident who has long been in the
forefront of medical-marijuana reform, said the bill's death in the
Statehouse isn't necessarily a bad thing.

"It was a mercy killing," Tucci said Thursday. "It wasn't the right
bill for this state."

Tucci said attention drawn to the issue this year will build
momentum for a 2011 bill that would simplify the dispensation
process and obviate the need for retail storefronts to which so many
public-safety officials objected.

Tucci said a delivery system, supplied by a discreet growing
operation and overseen by law enforcement and health officials,
would suffice for a state with a relatively small client base.

"We don't need five dispensaries. We don't need four. We barely need
two," he said. "What we really need is two spots in the state that
grow, and you don't even really need storefronts at all."

Tucci, who toured California's dispensaries over the winter, said
simple four-question surveys sent to patients on the
medical-marijuana registry would determine how much marijuana -- and
what strains -- would be needed. From there, he said, the state can
craft a system to meet the need.

"You find out what the product is, find out what consumption is
going to be, grow that much and deliver it," he said.

The plan though might not win over opponents to the current
legislation. Sen. Randy Brock, a member of the Senate Committee on
Government Operations, which took witness testimony on the issue
this year, said the concept is fundamentally flawed. He said he
cannot support any state-sanctioned distribution network for
a Schedule 1 narcotic.

"Dispensing marijuana is illegal, and having the state operate
dispensaries doesn't make it any less illegal under federal law,"
Brock said. "You're simply transferring criminality from an
individual to an organization."

Brock said he also worries that a state distribution network would
abet recreational use of the drug by non-sanctioned users. He points
to Colorado, where the number of residents on the state's
medical-marijuana registry jumped from fewer than 2,000 before
dispensaries were established to more than 60,000 after.

"The history of other states where dispensaries were authorized is
very problematic," he said.

Sen. Jeanette White, a Windham County Democrat and chairwoman of the
Senate Committee on Government Operations, said she's disappointed
the bill won't get an up-or-down vote on the floor.

Still, the bill's lead sponsor and biggest legislative cheerleader
said she's optimistic that the issue will gain more traction in the
next biennium.

"I think we had a very tight bill, so I'm disappointed we're not
able to move further with it," she said. "But I still think it's the
right thing to do and will continue to work to make it happen. It's
not a dead issue."