BOARD REVIEWS MEDICAL POT LAW IN COUNTY

For a medical marijuana ordinance update described by Planning
Department Director George White as "essentially outlining the same
process that already exists for dispensaries," the level of
opposition among the people crowding the boardroom for the hearing
Tuesday was astounding.

While opposition was universal throughout testimony, the reasons
varied distinctly. From the Sheriff's Office's perspective, the
ordinance did not do enough to restrict a Schedule I controlled
substance. For patients, it did too much to restrict compassionate
sharing of a homegrown medicine that eases the pain for many people
with few other options.

Assistant County Counsel Janis Elliot presented the ordinance, and
said much of the rewording was an attempt to bring the county
ordinance in line with recent state developments. Law surrounding
medical marijuana use is constantly evolving, and Elliot said there
was no case law to draw from yet aside from the Attorney General's
Office guidelines.

The proposed changes would include a prohibition on outdoor growing
operations, requiring all plants to be grown inside a structure with
four walls, a roof and standard locks. Based on other ordinances, the
decision was made to restrict Calaveras to four dispensaries, which
should be adequate based on the number of requests and population of
the area. Elliot said much of the ordinance was drawn from
Stockton-area policies.

The term "dispensary" was also replaced with "collective," as the
attorney general has said there is "no such thing as a dispensary,"
Elliot said.

Patient advocate Tom Liberty of Calaveras Patient Resources said the
ordinance would "muddy the waters terribly" in terms of what
collectives would be able to do.

Liberty said there is a distinct difference between collectives and
dispensaries. A collective is more accurately defined as a
patient-run garden where a few patients might come together to share
medicine, Liberty said, adding that there were at least a dozen
collectives operating in Calaveras County that he knew of.

"If you're not a patient, you probably didn't even know they were
there," he added. "A dispensary is, simply put, a marijuana store."

He also said the cost of indoor growing, which he estimated at close
to $2,500 per year, would be far too steep for the average patient to
continue growing for themselves. Liberty said there was no need to
include anything about individual growing operations in an ordinance
regulating storefronts.

"If the purpose is to cover the county's proverbial buttocks, strike
the section on individual grows."

Liberty concluded that the writers of the ordinance were simply
ignorant of some of the intricacies of medical marijuana cultivation
and laws. He recommended the board convene a multidisciplinary
committee to refine the ordinance in a more accurate and realistic
way for patients.

The lack of distinction in the ordinance between personal growing
operations and for-profit storefronts was an issue throughout most of
the testimony from medical marijuana patients.

"You're going to be hurting thousands of other residents just like
me," said Charles Simms, a combat veteran and liver cancer patient.
"I don't want to grow for anybody else, but at least I don't have to
go out and deal with the criminal element to get my medicine."

The specter of a not-so-distant time in which patients didn't have
safe options for obtaining their medicine hung heavy over much of the
testimony.

Clyde Clapp, a Valley Springs resident who regularly comments at
board meetings, said that while he doesn't smoke or even drink, he
empathizes with medical marijuana patients because when the wives of
two close friends had cancer, the husbands had to "go out on the
street to look for drugs to help."

Gretchen Seagraves, a West Point resident who has worked for years to
open a medical marijuana collective storefront in San Andreas, said
she smoked marijuana as a cancer patient.

"I happen to believe it saved my life," she said. Neighbor-hood teens
suggested the drug to help her through her cancer treatments 20 years
ago, and helped her obtain it. Her son was arrested at one point
while trying to get her drugs.

"Now I'm retired and have nothing to lose - I think everyone should
have a lawful way to get medicine."

Although the staff report indicated that the concerns from the
Sheriff's Office that could lawfully be included had been, Capt. Jim
Macedo reiterated his department's issues with the ordinance to the board.

"We don't support it to begin with, but if we're going to be forced
to live with it, we want our requests incorporated."

Macedo said collectives should receive further environmental review
because their fertilizers were unaccounted for, and byproducts from
hash-oil production could enter the sewer system without the
knowledge of sewer districts.

He also said collectives should have paid, uniformed security, be
restricted from any individual with a felony record and have a ban on firearms.

"A person has a right to possess a firearm in their private
business," Macedo acknowledged, but said many distributors of medical
marijuana might not be aware of enhanced penalties for trafficking
narcotics while armed.

"I think in my opinion, if you're authorizing this, you're
jeopardizing those people. You're giving them a false sense of hope
that they are going to be immune from prosecution; however, that's
only relating to the drug laws."

Macedo also observed that most jurisdictions that have allowed
dispensaries, or commercial collectives, quickly repealed them or
placed a moratorium on their medical marijuana ordinance because of
the associated criminal activity.

"We're not making these recommendations arbitrarily," Macedo said.

Supervisor Tom Tryon was unimpressed by the agricultural concerns
raised by the captain.

"We always talk about marijuana like it's some great thing - it's
just another plant."

Tryon added that a personal grower with a plant or two shouldn't have
to report his fertilizer any more than Tryon should report the
fertilizer used on his rosebushes.

"I don't want to shut down what is currently working," he said. "You
can allow the little guy to take care of their needs and their
families needs. ... It just seems we're making a much bigger deal out
of this than it needs to be."

Supervisor Russ Thomas was brief in his comments, but concurred with
Tryon: "If it's not really broken, let's not fix it."

Supervisor Gary Tofanelli was more understanding of some concerns
raised, acknowledging the temptations of outdoor growing operations for youth.

As a teenager in the '60s, Tofanelli said, "Yes I did smoke pot and
yes I did inhale." He added that if he had come across marijuana
growing out in the open as a youth, he probably would have tried to steal it.

Supervisor Steve Wilensky made by far the most impassioned defense of
patients' rights.

"I, too, am a cancer survivor, and I know what you go through when
you have those kinds of treatments and your life passes before you.
It makes you try different things to see if you can feel just OK."

Wilensky said it seemed the ordinance was "still fighting the culture
wars of the '60s," which was "a terrible distortion."He went on to
indirectly chastise the Sheriff's Office's handling of the ordinance.

"I believe law enforcement should inform policy ... but law
enforcement has a primary responsibility to enforce policy made by
policymakers."

Wilensky said he had reviewed all complaints made around collectives
and dispensaries in Calaveras County since their legalization in
1996, and contrary to Macedo's implication, had found the volume to
be unremarkable.

"When we make policy, I don't want statistics compiled to distort
things. What I want to know is, is there a disproportionate amount of
crime around a certain operations or not?"

As far as storefront regulations, Wilensky called the ordinance
"about 80 percent done," but said regulations on personal cultivation
had a long way to go.

He further called the requirement of indoor growing "the agricultural
equivalent of 'don't ask, don't tell.'"

"Let's jettison Stockton and do things the Calaveras way. We're a
rural county," he said to applause from the audience.

"We've got a drug problem in America. We won't address it through
medical marijuana code," Wilensky said. Methamphetamine drug deals
happen "right out in the open, not under four walls and a roof," he
said, and the focus on marijuana crime seemed skewed compared with
actual drug crime.

Supervisor Merita Callaway was the only supervisor, and perhaps the
only commenter, to avoid the medical marijuana issue entirely,
reiterating that, "This is a land use ordinance.

"We're not talking about the pros and cons of medical marijuana -
that's a given in this state."

The board directed the Planning Department to revise the ordinance
based on feedback from the meeting, and while supervisors opted not
to convene a task force, they encouraged interested parties to submit
their feedback directly to White. He can be reached by phone at
754-6394 or e-mailed via the "E-mail Us" link on the Planning
Department site at co.calaveras.ca.us .