OAKLAND CITY ATTORNEY BACKS PROPOSAL TO LOOSEN POT LAWS

OAKLAND -- Signaling a break from staunch opposition from law
enforcement groups, Oakland City Attorney John Russo on Monday joined
about two dozen officials from across California to show support for
Proposition 19, the measure allowing recreational marijuana that will
appear on November's ballot. Another group gathered in West Hollywood
near Los Angeles with the same message.

Their public stance goes against the majority of law enforcement
agencies in California, which are dead-set against the measure. "It's
very difficult for them to change," Russo said Monday in front of
Oakland City Hall. Standing next to him was a former police officer
and several longtime advocates including Jeff Jones; Harborside
Health Center medicinal cannabis dispensary attorney James Anthony;
and "Yes on 19" campaign director Mauricio Garzon.

Simultaneously, however, a coalition headed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein
and Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca -- "No on Prop. 19" --
condemned the measure in a statement signed by scores of police
chiefs, sheriffs, law enforcement associations and district attorneys.

"Nothing about Proposition 19 is positive," Fontana Police Department
Chief Rodney Jones wrote in the statement. "The initiative has too
many legal loopholes," he continued, "and will cause too much chaos,
and put the public's safety and our communities at risk."

Oakland Police Chief Anthony Batts has not taken a public stance on
the measure, and has said he is responsible for enforcing the laws on
the books.

Since 1976, possession of less than an ounce of nonmedicinal
marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by a $100 fine but no jail
time. And California authorities in 2008 made 61,388 misdemeanor
marijuana arrests -- 127 percent more than in 1990, according to a
report by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice to the
California Legislature.

The measure would allow adults over the age of 21 to possess up to an
ounce for personal consumption, as well as change the laws around
where they can grow and consume it. The state and cities can also
levy new taxes on the substance.

The city attorney, however, said he supported Prop. 19 as a "law and
order" issue.

Current policy, he said, has empowered violent drug cartels who take
in 60 percent of their revenue from marijuana sales in the United States.

"Money is the oxygen of these groups," Russo said.

Instead, he said, giving local governments more autonomy over
marijuana regulation would "take it off street corners."

Right now, unless it is medicinal, the black market controls the
distribution, sale and regulation of marijuana, said Nate Bradley, a
former Wheatland police officer and Sutter County Sheriff's Office
deputy. He is now a speaker for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
and uses medical marijuana to treat post-traumatic stress disorder.
He also is a consultant to medicinal cannabis patients.

Drug dealers "don't care if they're selling a 12-year-old or a
30-year-old." Bradley disputed the claim that youth would have more
access to pot if Prop. 19 passed.

The other argument often cited by opponents is that drivers could
operate vehicles while under the influence.

The group disputed both arguments while predicting that devices for
detecting the presence of marijuana among drivers will quickly catch
up with the technology used to detect alcohol. Drivers currently are
subjected to field sobriety and blood tests. Legalization does not
mean breaking current law is acceptable, Russo said.

California will still have to reconcile federal law if voters pass Prop. 19.

"It will be a conflict in law," Russo said.

The question, he added, is whether the federal government will decide
to prosecute.