YUCAIPA PASSES URGENCY ORDINANCE BANNING MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES

The Yucaipa City Council passed an urgency ordinance last week that
temporarily bans the establishment of any dispensary in Yucaipa to
distribute marijuana even for medical purposes.

In 1996, California voters approved Proposition 215, known as the
"Compassionate Use Act." The intent of the proposition was to enable
doctors to prescribe marijuana as a treatment for some illnesses,
including glaucoma, cancer and AIDS. In 2002, the California Supreme
Court ruled that Prop. 215 was valid. A year later, the California
Legislature enacted SB 420, which outlined limitations on the
dissemination of marijuana for medical purposes as well as
acknowledged the legality of marijuana possession in limited amounts
provided its use were prescribed by a licensed physician.

Essentially, these actions enabled physicians rather than bureaucrats
to decide the best treatment for specific illnesses.

Although there is far less than unanimous agreement about whether
marijuana is an effective treatment for patients, there is strong
support from both the scientific and medical community generally, at
least with respect to the efficacy of marijuana as a treatment for
certain illnesses.

The California Medical Association and the California Nurses
Association have joined many similar organizations across the
country, including the American Academy of Family Physicians, the
American Nurses Association and even the prestigious New England
Journal of Medicine in recognizing marijuana as an effective method
of treating at least some of the symptoms associated with some forms
of cancer and AIDS.

Both the CMA and the CNA filed amicus briefs with the United States
Supreme Court when the state of California sued the federal
government for arresting California citizens in possession of
marijuana legally under California law.

It was the federal government's position in two relatively recent
cases decided by U. S. Supreme Court that federal law, which
prohibits the possession of marijuana for any purpose, supercedes
California law.

In both cases, the Supreme Court agreed with the federal government.
These decisions have left the status of California law with respect
to marijuana in legal limbo. Moreover, it has left individual cities
within the state in doubt as to what to do next.

Under federal law, marijuana is classified as a Schedule 1 drug, in
the same group with cocaine, methamphetamines and heroin. Drugs in
this category are considered highly addictive as well as dangerous
and without any medicinal value. These kinds of drugs are strictly
outlawed under all circumstances, whereas doctors can prescribe other
highly addictive drugs such as codeine because its therapeutic
benefit is recognized.

One problem with categorizing marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug is that
it is less addictive than alcohol or caffeine and far less addictive
than nicotine, which ranks second only to heroin in its addictive
properties. Moreover, there is not even one recorded incident of
someone dying from an overdose of marijuana, whereas the risk of
dying from binge drinking or chronic alcoholism is generally recognized.

Some have gone so far as to argue that the health and safety risks of
marijuana have been exaggerated precisely because marijuana would
pose a significant threat to the economic health of both the alcohol
and tobacco industries were marijuana legalized to the same extent.

The narrower issue right now, however, is whether the city of Yucaipa
should enact an ordinance that permanently bans the dissemination of
marijuana within city limits even for medical purposes.

The city's director of community development, John McMains,
acknowledged that no one has applied to the city for a permit to do
so. The urgency ordinance passed last week just ensures that no one
can open a dispensary until the city council has had an opportunity
to look at the situation in greater depth.

There are at least two major questions facing the council with
respect to a permanent ban on marijuana in Yucaipa, even for medical
purposes. Assuming that the majority of the council members agreed
with the majority of California voters that the decision whether to
make marijuana available for some medical purposes should be up to
the doctors, these council members would still have to weigh the
legal risks of this position.

A number of California cities, especially in the San Francisco Bay
Area, have passed ordinances that decriminalize the use of marijuana
for medical purposes. Were Yucaipa to do the same, would this kind of
ordinance, which clearly conflicts with federal law, render the city
vulnerable legally as an accomplice in any federal prosecution?
Moreover, should the city choose to do nothing at all with respect to
this issue, could the city's inaction be construed as tacitly
abetting people to violate federal law?

A second and in some respects even more complicated question is
related to how marijuana can be disseminated even under California
law, which does not allow dispensaries to sell marijuana. At least
the original intent of the law was to enable patients with a
prescription to grow a limited amount of marijuana for personal use
only. The law was expanded to enable patients to pool their
resources, so to speak, in cooperatives. The idea was that only
patients with prescriptions could belong to these cooperatives and
that, even if money did change hands in the process, no one could
make a profit from the sale of marijuana.

What has happened is that some of the "cooperatives" appear to be
operating as cash crop businesses. Moreover, some law enforcement
officials and other local government agencies are reporting crime
problems related to these dispensaries.

The Yucaipa City Council passed the urgency ordinance unanimously.
Mayor Dick Riddell voted for the ordinance, however, only after
McMains assured him that doing so did not bind the city to anything
permanently. "No," McMains replied. "This ordinance simply precludes
anyone from opening a dispensary before the city council has had an
opportunity to deliberate on these matters in greater depth and detail."