CANNABIS CAMPAIGN SET TO BEGIN IN AURORA

Voters Are Poised To Decide Future Of Medicinal Marijuana Within City
Limits This Fall

AURORA - Voters will be asked point-blank whether they want to ban
dispensaries within city limits if Aurora City Council members follow
through with a proposal to introduce the item on the November ballot.

Council members agreed May 21 at their spring workshop that voters
should be asked whether the city's doors should be closed to
dispensaries, and they also said the city's current moratorium on
dispensaries should be extended to July 1, 2011. The council still
has to formally vote on the issue.

The Colorado Legislature passed a law this year that allows cities to
ban dispensaries at their own discretion or allow voters to decide
whether they want to ban medical marijuana dispensaries in their
city. Under the measure, a city can only extend a moratorium until
July 1, 2011.

The new law allows for ballot language that can only ask voters
whether they want to prohibit the operation of medical marijuana
centers, grow operations, and manufacturers' licenses for medical
marijuana-infused products. The city won't include language about
location of dispensaries and other restrictions, said the city's
attorney, Charlie Richardson.

"We want to stay as close as possible to the state law," Richardson
said.

He said any action that the city takes on medical marijuana would
likely be wrought with legal issues because of controversies
surrounding medical marijuana, and advocates won't want to wait until
mid-2011 to have dispensaries in the city.

"Under any of these scenarios, some would say there may be the
possibility of litigation or there will be the possibility of
litigation," Richardson said.

Medical marijuana supporters say they have enough evidence to suggest
that voters would approve regulated marijuana dispensaries within
their city.

About 65 percent of people polled throughout the state said they
approve of dispensaries, said Mason Tvert, executive director of the
Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation.

"I think there is going to be a lot of support," Tvert said of the
potential ballot initiative in Aurora. "I think people of Aurora are
sensible and recognize that individuals need a local place to access
their legal medicine."

He said the proliferation of dispensaries in Aurora would be a
revenue generator for the city.

"Right now they are requiring all of their residents to purchase a
product that's in high demand from other cities," he said. "Not only
is it a fiscal mistake to ban dispensaries, but it's really
uncompassionate."

Even if voters in Aurora in November approve dispensaries, the city
may not see its first one open until the moratorium is lifted because
council members suggested they extend the moratorium to the maximum
limit. The city's moratorium on dispensaries has already been in
place for eight months.

"That's a mistake," Tvert said. "They are delaying the inevitable,
and Aurora is putting itself at risk to potentially have to defend
itself in court and spend funds on that."

If dispensaries don't start cropping up in Aurora soon, the city
could face some legal ramifications, said Brian Vicente, a lawyer and
executive director of Sensible Colorado, a medical marijuana advocacy
group.

Vicente calls the moratorium is a 'de facto ban' which doesn't
correlate with the state's laws.

"The state ... allows people to access medical marijuana and allows
the dispensary models to exist at a local level," he said. "I think
there's a good chance of a lawsuit that the city would have to pay
for if they continue to ban dispensaries."

The majority of voters in Aurora approved Amendment 20, which
legalized medical marijuana, according to data introduced at the
spring workshop. Judging by that fact, some council members suggested
that the majority of voters would approve of medical marijuana
dispensaries in Aurora as well.

"My preference would be to ban it in Aurora. But given the fact that
people voted in favor (of Amendment 20), we can talk all day about
whether anything has changed," said Councilman Bob Broom. "I'd say
let's go to the voters to see if they want to ban it or not."

But Mark Ratdke, a policy advocate for the Colorado Municipal League,
says voter sentiment might not be as prone to medical marijuana
dispensaries as marijuana advocates tend to believe.

"Many people I have spoken to did not envision these retail
storefront operations when they voted for (Amendment 20)," said Mark
Ratdke, policy advocate for the Colorado Municipal League. "They
envisioned what we had in the first seven years, where we had
patients who were under the care of caregivers, and it wasn't what
we have today."

Since the bill just passed this month, Radtke said he has not yet
heard of any city other than Aurora that has proposed to leave the
decision of whether to ban dispensaries up to the voters.

"It's awfully early," he said. "Lots of people are scratching their
heads and deciding what to do now."

Before the November ballot item is introduced, the city should
already have some regulations in place regarding dispensaries, said
Councilman Ryan Frazier at the spring workshop.

"We shouldn't wait until the vote is cast to start working on rules
and regulations," Frazier said. "We should have something that we
could have ready to give to the public to digest and give us feedback
on."

Mayor Ed Tauer said the dispensaries should be in industrial areas
only. Under municipal rules, Aurora is allowed to make zoning
regulations for businesses in which ever way they deem
appropriate.

Councilwoman Renie Peterson suggested that the city propose zoning
regulations with the ballot item in November.

"There are people that would vote for it if they knew it was not
going to be next to their school or in their neighborhood," Peterson
said. "There are people that would be in support of it in that case
but would not if they had no idea."

Richardson said that zoning regulations could not be introduced with
the ballot item because the state law precludes the city from doing
that, and because that would mean that future city council members
would have to follow the previous council's regulations, even if
they didn't agree with them.

"It's inconsistent with the question," Richardson said. "In a
question that says 'to prohibit' you wouldn't want to say 'subject to
reasonable regulations.'"

The conversation turned from marijuana dispensaries to caregiver
operations towards the end of the spring workshop discussion.

The bill that was passed earlier this year does not allow cities to
ban "caregivers" within city limits, but councilwoman Sue Sandstrom
said she'd like to see stricter regulations and enforcement of rules
regarding caregiver operations.

"We're probably going to extend the moratorium and go to the ballot,
but none of that effects caregiver operations," Sandstrom said. "I
would like to see something going forward to deal with caregiver
operations."

Caregivers can grow six marijuana plants and serve up to five
patients, and Sandstrom says there is a caregiver operation in her
ward that is causing controversy.

"There is one caregiver operation that is causing havoc," she
said.

Since January 2009, there have been more than 45 grow operations in
homes within the city that the Aurora Police Department has
identified, said Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates.

"We see that it causes anxiety because of electrical issues, walls
being taken out, high intensity heat lamps," Oates said. "We're
seeing that it calls out for some type of regulations."