LAX RULES LET CITY GO TO POT

We've all been there. With the best of intentions, we do something and
then discover our actions were a bad idea. It takes courage, maturity
and humility to admit one's mistakes and try to correct the situation.

That's what Redding faces with its medical-marijuana cooperatives. The
Redding police chief, city attorney and City Council tried to
formulate a strategy that provides people who have legitimate medical
conditions with access to marijuana for their needs, but also
restricts illegal marijuana growth, sale and purchase.

This good-faith effort to address the needs of a few has produced a
monster.

Some background may be helpful. Fifteen years ago, California voters
passed Proposition 215, which allows Californians to cultivate and use
marijuana for medical purposes when a physician recommends use. Since
then, state law and the state attorney general have clarified the
amount of marijuana patients may grow and possess without arrest.
Qualified patients and their primary caregivers can form cooperatives
and collectives to grow marijuana for the patient members' medical
use.

Under federal law, the manufacture, distribution and possession of
marijuana are criminal offenses. In February 2009, the federal
attorney general announced no more federal raids on medical-marijuana
dispensaries. Soon thereafter, medical-marijuana collectives opened in
Redding. The City Council adopted ordinances regarding their
operation, and directed the Redding Police Department to license and
regulate them.

Seventeen licensed medical-marijuana cooperatives or collectives
currently operate in Redding. The city does not license or regulate
those with fewer than 10 members.

In Redding, people with medical problems can get a recommendation from
a physician and then join a cooperative to purchase marijuana. The
system works for them.

Unfortunately, the system is rife with abuse. Anyone can go to
multiple physicians and get a recommendation from each. Under state
law, any cooperative member can grow and sell marijuana to members. So
the more cooperatives a person belongs to, the more product that
person can grow and produce. Compensation can be acquired legally
through the cooperative or illegally outside it.

We as a community created this monster. When the City Council met in
October and November 2009, few people stood up to encourage caution or
voice opposition.

The genie is out of the bottle. Now Redding needs to control the
impact. There are at least two strategies. The city could continue its
current approach but tighten ordinances to limit the number and
location of future cooperatives. City government cannot put existing
organizations out of business, but it can eliminate the possibility
for more.

The City Council could implement a new approach: Reduce the number of
cooperatives, restrict their locations to a specified area, and limit
marijuana growing to nurseries located in specific areas and run by
cooperatives. This means existing cooperatives going out of business
or moving to that specified area, and that would take time.

Regardless of the approach, effective regulation is essential to
minimize illicit activity. There are numerous ways the growth of and
access to marijuana can be abused, so that it is distributed and sold
illegally. But the Redding Police Department does not have the
resources for proper regulation. Officers make periodic cooperative
visits, but there is no comprehensive oversight.

The cooperatives need operating procedures with regular monitoring.
For example, members are to be California residents, at least 18 years
old, and have a doctor's recommendation for a specified amount of
marijuana. The amount of marijuana acquired and distributed among
members should be consistent with the total recommendation amount of
all members. Revenues and expenditures should employ sound accounting
procedures.

Finally, a common database would ensure membership in only one Redding
cooperative.

Regulation and monitoring costs should be borne by the cooperatives
with the city charging an annual fee sufficient to cover those costs.

I find the situation perplexing. Redding voters did not support
legalizing marijuana for medical or recreational use. They voted down
Proposition 215 in 1996 and Proposition 19 in 2010 by 3-to-2 margins.
Yet it appears that voter attitudes were ignored as policy was developed.

If Redding has medical-marijuana cooperatives, they need to operate in
a professional, businesslike manner with proper procedures and
regulation. If that cannot occur, they should not exist here.