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and hopes it can be repealed.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."