OFFICIALS FLIP-FLOP OVER AID QUESTION

Federal Law Is Focus Of Prop 1 Debate.

Opponents of Proposition 1 this week are clinging to their argument that
the marijuana initiative would not affect a federal law that cuts financial
aid for students with drug convictions.

Despite public statements to the contrary, and specific language in the
Higher Education Act that says aid is only cut off for violations of state
and federal law, Department of Education officials and a state anti-drug
spokeswoman called the Columbia measure unclear.

Proponents of the April 8 issue said their foes are merely trying to fool
voters.

Anthony Johnson, the MU law student who wrote Proposition 1, has said a key
element of the measure is to stop students from being penalized for minor
drug violations.

Proposition 1 would mandate that persons in possession of 35 grams of
marijuana or less be prosecuted through municipal court and receive a
citation similar to a traffic ticket. The measure would also give seriously
ill residents the right to obtain and use the drug if recommended by a doctor.

"They are totally wrong on that," Johnson said about the financial aid
question. "The law clearly states that only state and federal drug
convictions count. They're trying to win this election with scare tactics
and half-truths."

Last week, Peggy Quigg, executive director of Act Missouri, said "sources
we have with the Department of Education say this doesnit clear up that
problem. It will still be a conviction of a drug offense even if it is a
city offense."

But the following day, Quigg called the Tribune to report that she was
mistaken and that after following up with additional sources, she believed
the claim that students would still lose their aid under Proposition 1
could not be made.

The confusion was compounded when an ad that ran in the Tribune Sunday paid
for by Quigg's organization said: "A $25 fine under Proposition 1 still
counts as a conviction which means no government financial aid, period."

Similar statements were made in several hundred invitations mailed to local
residents by Quigg's group for a luncheon tomorrow on the dangers of marijuana.

While Quigg had tried to delete the line from the ad, she maintains the
issue is unclear.

Education department officials have similarly flip-flopped.

Told about the local measure, education department spokeswoman Jane
Glickman initially said she thought the law was clear in that those who
were convicted on a municipal violation would not lose their aid. However,
she e-mailed a statement this morning suggesting that, in general, "persons
found guilty of violating ordinances similar to the one proposed here would
continue to be deemed disqualified from receiving federal student aid under
the Higher Education Act."

Dan Viets, a local attorney and marijuana activist who helped Johnson write
Proposition 1, called the claims "irrational and counterproductive."

He said the Higher Education Act is clear on the issue. An amendment to the
act passed in 1998 says: "In general, a student who has been convicted of
any offense under any Federal of State law involving the possession or sale
of a controlled substance shall not be eligible to receive any grant, loan
or work assistance O"

"This is about the language of the law and not what some bureaucrat thinks
it means," Viets said.

Local attorney and former city counselor Dave Evans said there is some gray
area in determining whether someone who has been found guilty of a
municipal violation has been legally "convicted."

"The Missouri Supreme Court has said that an ordinance violation is not a
crime," he said.

Evans said that he routinely advises his clients who have a municipal
ordinance violation on their records to check "no" on job applications that
ask if the applicant has ever been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor.

A spokesman for the University of Missouri-Columbia has said that since the
Higher Education Act went into place, 46 students have lost their aid
because of a drug conviction.

Tomorrow, a spokesman from the White House's drug policy office will hold a
news conference at Phoenix Programs to discuss why he believes Proposition
1 is bad public policy.

Also, Columbia Police Chief Randy Boehm yesterday apologized for a column
he wrote in opposition to the marijuana measure in the Neighborhood Watch
newsletter, which is sent to hundreds of local residents. Because the
newsletter is paid for by the city, Boehm said, it was inappropriate use of
public funds to campaign against Proposition 1 in it. State law prohibits
use of public funds for campaigns.

"I did it without really thinking about it thoroughly enough," he said. "I
understand that I made a mistake in this case."