SMALL TOWN'S LENIENT NEW POT LAW MAY GO UP IN SMOKE

Big Water Councilman Willie Marshall thought it no big deal when he
proposed an ordinance last week that essentially decriminalizes the
possession of small amounts of marijuana.

He concluded it was even less of an issue when the council voted
unanimously to pass the measure.

But Big Water, a town of 400 people 60 miles east of Kanab near the Arizona
border, is now in hot water. Kane County Attorney Eric Lind says the town's
new statute violates state law, and has fired off a warning letter to the
council.

"The ordinance clearly tries to minimize or abolish the penalties
prescribed by the Legislature, and that is obviously a concern," Lind said
Friday.

According to state law, possession of marijuana is a class B misdemeanor,
punishable by a fine and up to 6 months in jail.

But under the new Big Water ordinance, those found in possession of less
than an ounce of marijuana face only a fine of $10, and $5 for drug
paraphernalia. And defendants may make a plea-in-abeyance agreement,
allowing the charge to be dismissed if they abide by the plea conditions.

Marshall, who will become Big Water's mayor in January, calls himself a
libertarian who believes people are responsible for their own actions. He
considers the ordinance a common-sense measure.

"I didn't do this to make the cover of High Times; I did it because it's
the right thing to do," Marshall said. "The way the law is now, you can
lose your driver's license. You can be barred from serving in the military
or receiving student loans. The punishment is ridiculously out of
proportion to the crime. We think this punishment does fit the proportion
of the crime."

But other members of the five-person council are having second thoughts.

Acting Mayor Raymond Rankin, a voting member of the council, said Friday
that the ordinance was presented last week without being properly posted.
He called council approval of the statute a mistake, and hopes it can be
repealed.

"I was unappreciative of the way it was brought to the council because of
the way it was just kind of slipped in," Rankin said. "The council,
including myself, went ahead and passed it. But we didn't have enough time
to consider it and whether it was constitutional. Apparently it is not."

But Marshall maintains he did everything by the book, and is surprised by
the controversy that has erupted.

"It may have come as a surprise to them, but it was posted properly," he
said. "The council could have waited, but we had a vote and it passed
overwhelmingly. If they want to repeal it, they can try. But what they
ought to do is put in on a ballot and let the whole town vote. The town
would vote to keep it."

Lind says the ordinance fails to pass Utah's constitutional muster because
it restricts prosecutorial discretion and it conflicts with existing state law.

"I hope they'll reconsider it," said Lind.

For now, at least, the Utah Attorney General's Office is taking a hands-off
approach.

"They've asked for help in terms of advice and research and we've offered
it to them," said spokesman Paul Murphy. "This is something Kane County has
to deal with right now, but if an elected official asks us to step in and
look at it, we will."

Marshall, who says he sought an attorney's advice in crafting the
ordinance, shrugged off the warnings.

"I don't see any reason to repeal this because there have been no
problems," he said.

"Big Water is not going to hell in a handcart. The world hasn't come to an
end. I haven't seen anybody smoking marijuana out in the streets. It's all
kind of amusing that people are so upset about it."