DEAL SOUGHT FOR POT LAW

A Compromise Aims At Prosecuting Repeat And Dual Offenders

Although the marijuana ordinance has sparked bitter debate between the
police who want to see it repealed and the voters who passed it, the two
sides may soon reach a compromise on the issue.

Proposition 2, which passed in November's election, has come under attack
by prosecutors and police officers because it allows offenders in
possession of less than 35 grams of marijuana not to be prosecuted.
However, attorneys and police officers said a compromise to the ordinance
has been in the works for the last couple of weeks to limit the law under
certain circumstances.

Under the current version, violators in possession of 35 grams or less of
marijuana cannot be fined more than $250 - the equivalent of a traffic ticket.

The basic idea for a compromise would include prosecuting offenders for
marijuana possession who commit other crimes simultaneously. The compromise
would also address the issue of offenders with a prior criminal history.

"The main issue is treating the appropriate offender appropriately," said
Boone County Prosecutor Kevin Crane.

Columbia Police Officer Sterling Infield, president of the Columbia Police
Officers Association, said his organization supports the compromise as long
as discussions continue.

"This way, we can come to a mutual compromise and resolution for both
parties," Infield said. "But, we haven't come to agreement yet."

The marijuana ordinance was rejected by voters in 2003 but passed last fall.

Infield said a compromise is necessary to resolve the issue.

"Every year it goes back and forth," Infield said. "We don't want to see
that happen."

Attorney Dan Viets, a board member of the National Organization for the
Reform of Marijuana Laws, said although he would like to see the law stay
the way it is, a compromise might be the best idea. Viets is also a member
of the Columbia Alliance for Patients and Education, which sponsored the
passage of Proposition 2.

"Our organization is willing to make some compromises so to avoid another
election," Viets said. "If it did get repealed, we would be back next
election to get this back on the books."

Crane said the main problem with the current law is that county and city
officials are unable to prosecute each case separately.

"Basically, anyone, regardless of their criminal history, are not being
prosecuted for their first offense," Crane said.

Before the ordinance passed, county officials and police officers were
making distinctions between offenders based on the offender's criminal
history, Crane said.

Before a formal revision can be made to the law, Infield said the revised
law would have to go in front of City Council. However, there are only
discussions being made on the law, and there is no timetable for when city
officials would address the issue.

Infield said until then, CPOA will continue its petition drive at
Providence Road and Broadway to repeal the ordinance. Infield said CPOA
needs 2,900 signatures to get it on the ballot. He said he does not know
the exact number of signatures it has at this time.

Infield also said there was no specific date a repeal proposition would go
to the voters, but the earliest election date might be this November or
April 2006.

A portion of this report first aired Thursday during "ABC 17 News at 10."