BCC, VOTERS AND PATIENTS' ACCESS

Medical cannabis patients like myself are simply not feeling too
secure these days. The medical cannabis voter initiative--the
Patients' Access to Medical Cannabis Act (PAMCA)--seems to have
provoked a great deal of critical response judging from articles in
the last two issues of the Daily Planet. I'd like to remind the city
manager, the BCC, and citizens of Berkeley that PAMCA is what I
consider a responsible attempt by informed medical cannabis advocates
to ensure legal, sanctioned, and efficient access for patients to
their medicine. I question the opposition to PAMCA (City Manager
Kamlarz' critical report) as well as the BCC's earlier (April 27)
reasoning in choosing not to consider amending Berkeley's medical
cannabis code. At the April 27 meeting, plant limit concerns consisted
of potential commercial production, ensuing robberies and home
invasion fears.

Neglected were the rights of medical cannabis patients to grow their
own sufficient amount of medicine legally under current Berkeley city
code. Putting it kindly, members of the BCC and Police Chief Roy
Eisner clearly displayed their lack of knowledge about marijuana
cultivation. Larger plants, more area, and many lights are required
for commercial cultivation. Patients' homes are certainly not able to
provide what is needed to produce pounds and pounds of marijuana, and
I doubt there are warehouses available in our city whose owners would
allow the commercial growing of medical cannabis.

PAMCA affords patients the ability to grow the amount of marijuana
according to their personal needs.

Further arguments against the initiative are regarding a "parade of
new pot clubs" that are sure to be opening in Berkeley. I suggest
those who are so worried call every commercial space available in
Berkeley and mention opening a medical cannabis dispensary. One of the
reasons the Cannabis Buyers Cooperative of Berkeley (CBCB) fought so
hard to move their location to Sacramento Street was a simple lack of
locations willing to accept dispensaries. Last week the Daily Planet
correctly reported the "revoking of CBCB's use permit costing the
operation about $10,000." Further opposition mentioned by Don Duncan
("No one thought it was a good idea...") wasn't completely accurate.

At the Alliance of Berkeley Patients meetings (ABP--a proposed "Peer
Review Committee") which I attended there was at least reluctant
support for CBCB's move. Truly unfortunate was the contentious
interaction at later neighborhood meetings that rendered the move
impossible. If the oldest and previously problem-free dispensary in
Berkeley is having difficulty finding a new location, how can it
follow that PAMCA will mean many more new "pot clubs" in Berkeley?

The peer review committee is such a good idea and I believe the
efforts of dispensary owners in Berkeley should be recognized and
sanctioned. Today (Tuesday, July 20) the BCC will have the opportunity
to adopt PAMCA and negotiate changes in the initiative. Councilmember
Dona Spring, more than any other BCC member, gets it--the fact that
medical cannabis is crucial to so many patients' lives.

Her legitimate concerns about zoning could be addressed by BCC action
today and following negotiations. As a 30 year Berkeley resident,
homeowner, and current medical cannabis patient who has studied the
provisions in PAMCA, I feel this measure is necessary to protect
patients' access to medicine.

The strong opposition to PAMCA worries me. I hope compassion, good
sense, and community will receive due consideration if not this
Tuesday then by the voters in November.