By: Eugene Davidovich, San Diego Americans for Safe Access
Patients and Advocates concerned ordinance headed towards ban rather than reasonable regulation.
On January 20th the City of San Diego’s Planning Commission will be discussing and voting on a recommendation to the City Council to approve an ordinance limiting medical marijuana dispensaries in the City of San Diego to certain industrial and limited commercial zones.
Out of almost one hundred possible zoning categories in the city’s municipal code if the ordinance passes unchanged, the current limitations would allow dispensaries only in five specific zones within the city’s limits; IL-1-3, IS-1-1, CC-2-1, CC-2-2, and CC-2-3.
Facilities lucky enough to find friendly landlords in those five zones, would be faced with another challenge; finding friendly landlords whose properties are located at least 1,000 feet away from schools, playgrounds, libraries, child care facilities, youth facilities, churches, parks, as well as other dispensaries.
According to the proposed ordinance all dispensaries currently open in the city would be required to shut down, as the ordinance considers everyone open prior to its passage, out of compliance by default. Those who want to continue to provide safe access to patients in their current locations would have to apply for a process 4 conditional use permit (CUP). Process 4 is one of the most restrictive and expensive licensing processes the city can force an organization to go through. Under a process four, each application would have to be heard by the planning commission as well as the city council on appeal.
Under Process 4, not only would safe access be unduly restricted for patients in the city, but every dispensary application would turn into a political battle that would require city council’s vote on each application. While the political wrangling goes on in City Hall, those patients who need this medicine most would have to go without.
Even on the surface this proposal does not appear to be a compromise, nor is it a regulation addressing patients’ needs. The proposed ordinance is nothing but a ban attempting to be passed off as a regulation.
There is still a chance to turn this around. The roadmap to a reasonable compromise is already spelled out in the report presented by city staff to the planning commission. Aside from the overly restrictive ordinance, the report includes numerous alternatives and recommendations from The Medical Marijuana Task Force, the Code Monitoring Team, as well as the Community Planners Committee all of whom prior to making their recommendations heard testimony from hundreds of patients and community members on the issue.
The San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force (MMTF) recommended a process 2 CUP for dispensaries with less than 100 members and a process 3 CUP for those with more than 100. The sensitivity buffer of 1,000 feet in the MMTF’s recommendations only applied to schools, playgrounds, libraries, child care facilities and youth facilities, not churches and parks. Also, the separation requirement from other dispensaries recommended by the MMTF was only 500 feet.
The Code Monitoring Team (CMT) also recommended a much more reasonable approach. They suggested that distances from sensitive uses be down to 300 feet, making the restrictions the same as those currently in place for off-site sales of alcohol.
The CMT also recommended that dispensaries be allowed in all commercial zones including those with residential uses, as well as industrial zones that allow retail uses such as pharmacies. With regards to the permitting process, the CMT recommended a process 3.
The Community Planners Committee (CPC) recommendations also included a less restrictive approach. Majority of members of the CPC were extremely concerned that the proposed ordinance bans access in their communities. They actually demanded that every Community Planning Group (CPG) be allowed to grant variances allowing locations in their communities if the overly restrictive ordinance ends up banning or making their neighborhoods “too sensitive” for medical marijuana.
The CPC also recommended that collectives currently open be allowed to continue operating for at least one year following the passage of the ordinance while they are coming into compliance with the new requirements.
The consensus of the San Diego Community is clear. Citizens want safe access to medical marijuana for patients in their communities. They do not want a ban nor do they want to see only a handful of facilities allowed to be open through an overly restrictive and expensive process.
The regulation adopted should allow patients to sort out the number of locations allowed to exist in the city through their patronage or lack thereof, rather than through a zoning cap or de facto ban.
San Diegans see that an ordinance so restrictive that it eradicates reasonable access in our communities would not only create many lawsuits and legal costs for the already cash strapped city, but it would also go directly against the will of California voters and the needs of the many sick and dying patients who rely on this medicine every day.
At the January 20th planning commission meeting, patients, advocates, and concerned citizens will speak out in hopes of convincing the commissioners to listen to the recommendations of the community, the MMTF, the CMT, and the CPC, to help regulate rather than ban safe access in the City of San Diego.
Further Information:
Planning commission’s Agenda for the January 20th Meeting:
http://www.sandiego.gov/planning-commission/agenda/110120.pdf
Staff Report for the January 20th meeting:
http://www.sandiego.gov/planning-commission/pcreports/2011/pdf/11011.pdf
San Diego ASA News Brief about the Planning Commission Meeting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJID6QaJNjc
Planning Commission Meeting Information:
MMJ Ordinance is Agenda Item 10 - January 20th 9am
12th Floor of City Hall – 202 C St. San Diego CA
Showing posts with label San DIego Americans for Safe Access. Show all posts
Showing posts with label San DIego Americans for Safe Access. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Friday, January 14, 2011
Local Medical Marijuana Advocacy Group Training Public Defenders
San Diego Chapter of Americans for Safe Access conducts certified continuing legal education training for the San Diego County Public Defender’s Office.
SAN DIEGO - Successfully defending medical marijuana patients in court was the focus of Thursday’s certified continuing legal education (MCLE) training for the San Diego County Public Defenders.
About sixty public defenders, court-appointed attorneys, and private attorneys were on hand at the main San Diego training facility with over sixty others joining through an internet broadcast courtesy of the Public Defender’s Office.
“This was our most well attended training”, said Gary Gibson, Training Coordinator for the San Diego County Public Defender’s Office and local Law Professor.
Proposition 215, known as the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, established the legal right of patients to use, possess and grow marijuana with a doctor’s authorization in California. In January 2004, SB 420, a bill passed by the California legislature and signed by the governor, gave patients, collectives, and cooperative dispensaries additional rights and directing counties to afford better protection to patients and caregivers.
Since SB 420 in 2004 the appellate courts have issued many decisions directly affecting medical marijuana patients and caregivers in California including County of Butte v. Superior Court, a landmark appellate court ruling that protects the right of medical marijuana patients and their primary caregivers to collectively cultivate.
“No California medical marijuana patient or caregiver should ever have to go to jail or accept a plea bargain again,” said Steph Sherer, ASA executive director. “Once defense attorneys understand the changes in the law and the defenses available to them, they’ll be able to fight every prosecution to acquittal.”
The training sessions will count for continuing legal education credit (MCLE) for the participating attorneys and were provided to the Public Defenders Office at no cost. The training was taught by two trial lawyers, Bahar Ansari San Diego ASA board member and Lance Rogers, both of whom successfully defended medical marijuana patients at trial in San Diego and are experts in the field.
“This training helped arm the Public Defenders in San Diego who typically represent the most vulnerable in our community, those who cannot afford private counsel, with the knowledge and resources to successfully defend legitimate patients at trial”, said Eugene Davidovich San Diego Area Liaison for Americans for Safe Access who introduced the two instructors at today’s training. “It is our hope that programs like this one will help reduce the amount of cases where patients accept plea deals when they are in fact compliant with State law”.
Americans for Safe Access is the nation’s largest organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists and concerned citizens promoting safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic use and research.
Further Information:
Watch the News Brief about the training: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4tujH3mvkI
San Diego ASA: www.safeaccesssd.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
SAN DIEGO - Successfully defending medical marijuana patients in court was the focus of Thursday’s certified continuing legal education (MCLE) training for the San Diego County Public Defenders.
About sixty public defenders, court-appointed attorneys, and private attorneys were on hand at the main San Diego training facility with over sixty others joining through an internet broadcast courtesy of the Public Defender’s Office.
“This was our most well attended training”, said Gary Gibson, Training Coordinator for the San Diego County Public Defender’s Office and local Law Professor.
Proposition 215, known as the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, established the legal right of patients to use, possess and grow marijuana with a doctor’s authorization in California. In January 2004, SB 420, a bill passed by the California legislature and signed by the governor, gave patients, collectives, and cooperative dispensaries additional rights and directing counties to afford better protection to patients and caregivers.
Since SB 420 in 2004 the appellate courts have issued many decisions directly affecting medical marijuana patients and caregivers in California including County of Butte v. Superior Court, a landmark appellate court ruling that protects the right of medical marijuana patients and their primary caregivers to collectively cultivate.
“No California medical marijuana patient or caregiver should ever have to go to jail or accept a plea bargain again,” said Steph Sherer, ASA executive director. “Once defense attorneys understand the changes in the law and the defenses available to them, they’ll be able to fight every prosecution to acquittal.”
The training sessions will count for continuing legal education credit (MCLE) for the participating attorneys and were provided to the Public Defenders Office at no cost. The training was taught by two trial lawyers, Bahar Ansari San Diego ASA board member and Lance Rogers, both of whom successfully defended medical marijuana patients at trial in San Diego and are experts in the field.
“This training helped arm the Public Defenders in San Diego who typically represent the most vulnerable in our community, those who cannot afford private counsel, with the knowledge and resources to successfully defend legitimate patients at trial”, said Eugene Davidovich San Diego Area Liaison for Americans for Safe Access who introduced the two instructors at today’s training. “It is our hope that programs like this one will help reduce the amount of cases where patients accept plea deals when they are in fact compliant with State law”.
Americans for Safe Access is the nation’s largest organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists and concerned citizens promoting safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic use and research.
Further Information:
Watch the News Brief about the training: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4tujH3mvkI
San Diego ASA: www.safeaccesssd.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Thursday, December 9, 2010
SD ASA Holiday Party Dec 15 Portugalia Restaurant
San Diego ASA has teamed up with a number of amazing organizations in town to bring you this year’s Holiday Party!
The party will be held on Wednesday December 15th 2010 form 6:30pm -9:30pm at the Portugalia Restaurant located in Ocean Beach, CA (4839 Newport Avenue San Diego, CA)
The night will be filled with Karaoke Caroling, Food, Laughter and Cheer!
WHAT: San Diego ASA Annual Holiday Party
WHEN: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 – 6:30pm-9:30pm
WHERE: Portugalia Restaurant 4839 Newport Ave SD, CA
Please bring a toy you wish you had gotten as a child for our community toy drive. This year we have teamed up with The Green Door Collective who will be bringing out the Toys for Tots Marines at 6:30pm to the restaurant to collect toys. The Green Door conducted a toy drive last year at their collective which was able to collect hundreds of toys and helped bring a positive light to our community.
$10 at the door / For more information please visit http://www.safeaccesssd.org/p/events.html
This event is proudly brought to you by: San Diego ASA, Legal Cannabis Institute, The Green Door Collective, Law Offices of Kimberly R. Simms, Association of Clinical Dispensaries, KUSH Magazine, NUG Magazine, Proteus 420, The Women of Marijuana, and The Law Offices of Melissa Bobrow, and many others!
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Join us on Facebook www.facebook.com/SanDiegoASA
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Judge Grants Emergency Injunction against St. Bernard’s Provisions San Marcos Medical Marijuana Collective
By: Eugene Davidovich
SAN MARCOS – On Friday of this week, San Diego Superior Court Judge Robert Dahlquist granted an emergency injunction against St. Bernard’s Provisions medical marijuana collective located in the City of San Marcos in San Diego County forcing the collective to close its doors.
Despite numerous demands by patients, advocates, and concerned citizens, the City of San Marcos has refused to accept Proposition 215 as law and is engaged in a medical marijuana eradication campaign.
In 2006 the San Marcos City Council adopted an ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana dispensaries in all zones within the city’s jurisdictional limits and specifically instructed the city’s business tax office not issue permits conditional or otherwise for such use.
Advocates, patients, and concerned citizens alike have called the San Marcos Ban unconstitutional and a slap in the face of California voters who overwhelmingly passed Proposition 215 in 1996. Since 1996 support for medical marijuana across California has continued to grow with the most recent polls showing over 70% of Californian’s in support of medical use.
To date this patient eradication campaign has cost the city millions of dollars and has included criminal and civil action against legitimate patients. The latest example in the city’s spending furry is the filing of this restraining order and demand for an “Emergency Injunction” against St. Bernard’s Provisions.
Just in the last couple months the City of San Marcos has spent several hundred thousand dollars on this effort with the cases against MMSC, Inc., and now St. Bernard’s Provisions.
On Friday December 3, members of St. Bernard’s collective were in court for a hearing on the City’s emergency injunction. The courtroom was full with over a dozen supporters, patients, and members of Americans for Safe Access, who took time on a weekday afternoon to show up in support of St. Bernards and against the injunction and illegal ban.
The hearing was scheduled to begin at 2:30 but got underway an hour late. Jeffery Lake of Lake APC, a local medical marijuana law firm which specializes in assisting patients in navigating the state’s medical marijuana laws represented St. Bernard’s Provisions that day.
The hearing began with the Judge going over the city’s complaint. The city was claiming that because St. Bernard’s business license application stated the collective provided “medical provision” rather than “medical marijuana” it was violation of the city’s code. The Judge failed to recognize or even discuss the fact that the city specifically instructed its business license office to deny all applications for medical marijuana dispensaries.
Mr. Lake explained to the Judge that the collective was truthful in their application and in fact was providing medical provisions including medical cannabis to patients and that there was already a hearing set for December 9 with the city to determine if medical provisions could include medical marijuana according to the city’s definition.
Lake also argued that the city had failed to prove that this was an emergency. There had not been a single complaint about the facility, there was no detriment or harm caused to anyone from the collective’s existence, and in fact the city’s action in itself was a detriment. Lake argued the injunction would cause harm to patients, the landlord, and others in the community who directly benefit from safe and reliable access that St. Bernard’s Provisions brought to San Marcos.
The City Attorney hardly spoke at all as she could tell that Judge Dahlquist had made up his mind about the hearing long before it began.
Judge Dahlquist concluded that the collective should have applied for the license as a medical marijuana dispensary and after being denied, should have sued the city for denying it the license intern challenging the city’s ban, rather than “not being truthful in the application”.
In the end after Lake presented countless arguments, facts, and evidence clearly proving there was no justification for the emergency injunction, and that the collective was in fact truthful, Judge Dahlquist still sided with the bias and granted the city’s request forcing the collective to close.
Patients, concerned citizens, and members of the collective alike were disappointed at the decision and vowed to continue the fight for safe access and a reasonable ordinance regulating dispensaries in San Marcos rather than a ban.
SAN MARCOS – On Friday of this week, San Diego Superior Court Judge Robert Dahlquist granted an emergency injunction against St. Bernard’s Provisions medical marijuana collective located in the City of San Marcos in San Diego County forcing the collective to close its doors.
Despite numerous demands by patients, advocates, and concerned citizens, the City of San Marcos has refused to accept Proposition 215 as law and is engaged in a medical marijuana eradication campaign.
In 2006 the San Marcos City Council adopted an ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana dispensaries in all zones within the city’s jurisdictional limits and specifically instructed the city’s business tax office not issue permits conditional or otherwise for such use.
Advocates, patients, and concerned citizens alike have called the San Marcos Ban unconstitutional and a slap in the face of California voters who overwhelmingly passed Proposition 215 in 1996. Since 1996 support for medical marijuana across California has continued to grow with the most recent polls showing over 70% of Californian’s in support of medical use.
To date this patient eradication campaign has cost the city millions of dollars and has included criminal and civil action against legitimate patients. The latest example in the city’s spending furry is the filing of this restraining order and demand for an “Emergency Injunction” against St. Bernard’s Provisions.
Just in the last couple months the City of San Marcos has spent several hundred thousand dollars on this effort with the cases against MMSC, Inc., and now St. Bernard’s Provisions.
On Friday December 3, members of St. Bernard’s collective were in court for a hearing on the City’s emergency injunction. The courtroom was full with over a dozen supporters, patients, and members of Americans for Safe Access, who took time on a weekday afternoon to show up in support of St. Bernards and against the injunction and illegal ban.
The hearing was scheduled to begin at 2:30 but got underway an hour late. Jeffery Lake of Lake APC, a local medical marijuana law firm which specializes in assisting patients in navigating the state’s medical marijuana laws represented St. Bernard’s Provisions that day.
The hearing began with the Judge going over the city’s complaint. The city was claiming that because St. Bernard’s business license application stated the collective provided “medical provision” rather than “medical marijuana” it was violation of the city’s code. The Judge failed to recognize or even discuss the fact that the city specifically instructed its business license office to deny all applications for medical marijuana dispensaries.
Mr. Lake explained to the Judge that the collective was truthful in their application and in fact was providing medical provisions including medical cannabis to patients and that there was already a hearing set for December 9 with the city to determine if medical provisions could include medical marijuana according to the city’s definition.
Lake also argued that the city had failed to prove that this was an emergency. There had not been a single complaint about the facility, there was no detriment or harm caused to anyone from the collective’s existence, and in fact the city’s action in itself was a detriment. Lake argued the injunction would cause harm to patients, the landlord, and others in the community who directly benefit from safe and reliable access that St. Bernard’s Provisions brought to San Marcos.
The City Attorney hardly spoke at all as she could tell that Judge Dahlquist had made up his mind about the hearing long before it began.
Judge Dahlquist concluded that the collective should have applied for the license as a medical marijuana dispensary and after being denied, should have sued the city for denying it the license intern challenging the city’s ban, rather than “not being truthful in the application”.
In the end after Lake presented countless arguments, facts, and evidence clearly proving there was no justification for the emergency injunction, and that the collective was in fact truthful, Judge Dahlquist still sided with the bias and granted the city’s request forcing the collective to close.
Patients, concerned citizens, and members of the collective alike were disappointed at the decision and vowed to continue the fight for safe access and a reasonable ordinance regulating dispensaries in San Marcos rather than a ban.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
NUG Travel Writer In Custody with No Bail - Write Scotty in Jail
A message from Dion Markgraaff, Editor of Nug Magazine and former San Diego ASA Chapter Coordinator to San Diego Americans for Safe Access Members:
Another member of NUG Magazine has had problems with our local law enforcement. Our travel writer Brian "Scotty B." Whytsell ends up in jail with no bail.
While in the Vons parking lot in Carlsbad, law enforcement contacted Scotty and a friend of his.
The officer asked if either were on probation or parole. Scotty was, as a result of a marijuana conviction in 2009.
Despite Scotty possessing a physician’s medical cannabis recommendation, the cops searched his parked car based on his Fourth Amendment waiver, found his medicine, and arrested Scotty. The cops in Scotty’s car a half pound of different strains of cannabis and twelve clones, all of which is half the amount his recommendation allows him to posess.
Initially his bail was set at $50,000 which he posted, but when Scotty went to his court hearing the following week, the Judge bucketed him on a “probation hold” from a previous cannabis conviction and Scotty has been in custody going on 2 months now.
Well over 2/3’s of NUG writers have been arrested by local police for our medicine.
Scotty would love it if you would write him in jail while he sits through the court process.
How to email Scotty:
1. Click on the following link: http://apps.sdsheriff.net/wij/wijDetail.aspx?BookNum=10771181
2. When webpage loads, look for the “Email this inmate” link, and click on it.
3. You will be asked to validate your email address, and then you will be able to send an email to Scotty.
4. He will be delivered ALL emails sent to him, but will not be able to respond.
Remember, he has no right to privacy in these messages. Your words will be read by the Sheriff. Send Scotty your love, support, and appreciation for standing up and fighting against the unjust system.
Another member of NUG Magazine has had problems with our local law enforcement. Our travel writer Brian "Scotty B." Whytsell ends up in jail with no bail.
While in the Vons parking lot in Carlsbad, law enforcement contacted Scotty and a friend of his.
The officer asked if either were on probation or parole. Scotty was, as a result of a marijuana conviction in 2009.
Despite Scotty possessing a physician’s medical cannabis recommendation, the cops searched his parked car based on his Fourth Amendment waiver, found his medicine, and arrested Scotty. The cops in Scotty’s car a half pound of different strains of cannabis and twelve clones, all of which is half the amount his recommendation allows him to posess.
Initially his bail was set at $50,000 which he posted, but when Scotty went to his court hearing the following week, the Judge bucketed him on a “probation hold” from a previous cannabis conviction and Scotty has been in custody going on 2 months now.
Well over 2/3’s of NUG writers have been arrested by local police for our medicine.
Scotty would love it if you would write him in jail while he sits through the court process.
How to email Scotty:
1. Click on the following link: http://apps.sdsheriff.net/wij/wijDetail.aspx?BookNum=10771181
2. When webpage loads, look for the “Email this inmate” link, and click on it.
3. You will be asked to validate your email address, and then you will be able to send an email to Scotty.
4. He will be delivered ALL emails sent to him, but will not be able to respond.
Remember, he has no right to privacy in these messages. Your words will be read by the Sheriff. Send Scotty your love, support, and appreciation for standing up and fighting against the unjust system.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Jovan Jackson Second Trial - DAY 3 - Court Support Alert
Please come out tomorrow morning at 9am on Wednesday, September 22, 2010 for Jovan Jackson’s second Medical Marijuana Trial, Day 3.
The prosecution is close to being finished presenting their case in chief, and the Jury needs to see now more than ever the community supporting Jovan in the courtroom. The trial is held in Department 15 and is open to the public at 9am.
Please come out and show your support for Jovan and against this injustice and unfair trial!
WHAT: COURT SUPPORT
WHEN: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 – 9am-4:30pm
WHERE: San Diego Superior Court, 220 W Broadway
Eugene Davidovich
T: 619-621-8446
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
SD County attempts to pass De Facto Ban on Medical Marijuana Facilities
SAN DIEGO - Wednesday, June 23, 2010, at 9am the San Diego County Board of Supervisors will meet to discuss and vote on a proposed ordinance regulating medical marijuana facilities in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County.
The proposed ordinance severely limits patients’ access to medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County. Certain provisions in the proposed regulatory ordinance would not only seriously violate patient confidentiality in these facilities, but also would effectively ban all dispensaries in the unincorporated areas of the county.
The proposed ordinance severely limits patients’ access to medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County. Certain provisions in the proposed regulatory ordinance would not only seriously violate patient confidentiality in these facilities, but also would effectively ban all dispensaries in the unincorporated areas of the county.
Monday, June 14, 2010
COURT SUPPORT TODAY FOR JAMES STACY
Join Steph Sherer, Executive Director and Don Duncan the California Director of Americans for Safe Access in Federal Court today to support James Stacy in his federal Medical Marijuana Trial.
What: Federal hearing on whether dispensary operator James Stacy can use medical marijuana and state law as a defense at trial
When: MONDAY, June 14, 2010 at 2:00pm
Where: Courtroom 15, U.S. District Court, 940 Front Street, San Diego, CA
James Stacy will be in court today for a final hearing to determine what type of defense he will be allowed to present in Federal Court. Stacy’s dispensary was raided on September 9, 2009, by a multi-agency narcotics task force, and will be the first such case to go to trial after the Justice Department issued its enforcement policy in October 2009, a month after the raid. Stacy's trial date will be scheduled Monday June 14th during a hearing at which Stacy will argue he's entitled to admit evidence of state law compliance, something routinely denied federal defendants.
Stacy's dispensary, Movement in Action, was raided along with more than a dozen other San Diego County dispensaries as part of local-federal enforcement actions called, "Operation Green Rx," which resulted in more than 30 arrests. Only Stacy, and one other medical marijuana dispensary operator Joseph Nunes, were charged federally as a result of the raids. Nunes has since pleaded guilty and was recently sentenced to a year in prison.
Because of the government's continued efforts to prosecute medical marijuana patients despite a new Justice department enforcement policy, advocates are urging Members of Congress to pass HR 3939, the Truth in Trials Act, which would allow defendants to use a medical or state law defense in federal court. The Truth in Trials Act currently has more than 30 Congressional cosponsors.
Further Information:
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's recent statements before Congress: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMCHmU-nFAM
Truth in Trials Act: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/downloads/TruthinTrials.pdf
Join ASA – www.safeaccessnow.org
Visit San Diego Chapter of ASA – www.safeaccesssd.org
What: Federal hearing on whether dispensary operator James Stacy can use medical marijuana and state law as a defense at trial
When: MONDAY, June 14, 2010 at 2:00pm
Where: Courtroom 15, U.S. District Court, 940 Front Street, San Diego, CA
James Stacy will be in court today for a final hearing to determine what type of defense he will be allowed to present in Federal Court. Stacy’s dispensary was raided on September 9, 2009, by a multi-agency narcotics task force, and will be the first such case to go to trial after the Justice Department issued its enforcement policy in October 2009, a month after the raid. Stacy's trial date will be scheduled Monday June 14th during a hearing at which Stacy will argue he's entitled to admit evidence of state law compliance, something routinely denied federal defendants.
Stacy's dispensary, Movement in Action, was raided along with more than a dozen other San Diego County dispensaries as part of local-federal enforcement actions called, "Operation Green Rx," which resulted in more than 30 arrests. Only Stacy, and one other medical marijuana dispensary operator Joseph Nunes, were charged federally as a result of the raids. Nunes has since pleaded guilty and was recently sentenced to a year in prison.
Because of the government's continued efforts to prosecute medical marijuana patients despite a new Justice department enforcement policy, advocates are urging Members of Congress to pass HR 3939, the Truth in Trials Act, which would allow defendants to use a medical or state law defense in federal court. The Truth in Trials Act currently has more than 30 Congressional cosponsors.
Further Information:
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's recent statements before Congress: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMCHmU-nFAM
Truth in Trials Act: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/downloads/TruthinTrials.pdf
Join ASA – www.safeaccessnow.org
Visit San Diego Chapter of ASA – www.safeaccesssd.org
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
ASA Meeting Tonight at 6pm - Pt. Loma Library
Today at 6pm we are holding the monthly San Diego ASA meeting at the Pt. Loma Library (3701 Voltaire Street San Diego, CA 92107)
This is a time in San Diego when you should be most involved and on top of what is happening in the county and the city with regulations and laws.
Alex Kreit the chair of the San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force and Professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, will be there tonight to talk about what the city of San Diego is doing with regards to regulations of medical marijuana dispensaries. We also have a very special guest, Gretchen Bergman of A New Path who will be there to talk about the new campaign she has launched “Moms Unite to end the War on Drugs”.
You will also hear about the latest news across the nation and the state with regards to medical marijuana!
I look forward to seeing everyone there.
Eugene Davidovich
T: 619-621-8446
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
This is a time in San Diego when you should be most involved and on top of what is happening in the county and the city with regulations and laws.
Alex Kreit the chair of the San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force and Professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, will be there tonight to talk about what the city of San Diego is doing with regards to regulations of medical marijuana dispensaries. We also have a very special guest, Gretchen Bergman of A New Path who will be there to talk about the new campaign she has launched “Moms Unite to end the War on Drugs”.
You will also hear about the latest news across the nation and the state with regards to medical marijuana!
I look forward to seeing everyone there.
Eugene Davidovich
T: 619-621-8446
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Thursday, May 6, 2010
On Level Four Permitting in San Diego
By: Larry Sweet, San Diego MMTF / San Diego ASA
As the author of the two-tier permitting recommendation from the Medical Marijuana Task Force (MMTF), I have often been asked “why don’t you support level four permitting for dispensaries?” It is a reasonable question and one that deserves a considered opinion. I hope the following helps clarify this question and helps people get behind reasonable permitting.
The first thing to understand is that a level four permit is the same permit that is required for an airport for example or botanical gardens for another. It is necessary for the complex nature of these enterprises and allows for extensive conditional use, public review and exhaustive inspection. One would expect that level of permitting for control of pollution. Dispensaries are not that complicated.
The City IBA reported to the MMTF that the initial, non-refundable fee for a level four permit was $8,000. In addition to that; all agree that the costs of inspection and permitting should be recovered from the applicant. According to the documentation from other Counties reviewed by the MMTF these permits can cost applicants $35,000 to $50,000 in fees for the permitting process alone.
A hidden cost to the start up cost is the investment beyond the permitting fees themselves. Any business that applies for a fee will have to demonstrate they have a location which means a lease agreement entailing deposits and a financial commitment for typically more than a year. In addition there are the costs associated with remodeling, furniture, security equipment, medicine and myriad other necessities. These costs mount up extremely fast considering you can easily spend $30,000 on the lease alone.
A conservative estimate based on the above show that if your collective wishes to open a dispensary they will need somewhere north of $100,000 for start-up capitol.
There are two extremely important points relative to that number:
1. This effectively closes every legitimate collective in town, except a couple of very large operations.
2. The City is asking only people with that much money to provide medicine for the patients who need access.
I believe that San Diegans, due to their proximity to the border, must be extremely careful who they invite to this dance. Unfortunately, we have people that are that well organized with those resources engaged in a blood bath south of the border.
I am not certain that the City Council itself fully understands the implications of passing a level four permit. Do they really want to have their name and office associated with every dispensary that exists in San Diego from this point forward? Do they really have the time, energy and political capitol to revisit this issue every time someone wants to provide safe access in San Diego? I prefer the permitting process to be codified and clear, not subject to the political aspirations of the current or any other City Council.
I do not intend to make the case for the two-tier approach again; I believe that the protection it affords smaller collectives is self evident. My concern is that the City Council is about to throw the baby out with the bath water if they support level four permitting. The current strength found in the responsible and respectable collectives in town will be decimated and patients will be forced into WeedMart corrals for access to their medicine. It is my hope that the level heads on the City Council are aware of these issues and will provide, somehow, for the continuing existence of the current collectives, regardless of their size or financial resources.
San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force Website
As the author of the two-tier permitting recommendation from the Medical Marijuana Task Force (MMTF), I have often been asked “why don’t you support level four permitting for dispensaries?” It is a reasonable question and one that deserves a considered opinion. I hope the following helps clarify this question and helps people get behind reasonable permitting.
The first thing to understand is that a level four permit is the same permit that is required for an airport for example or botanical gardens for another. It is necessary for the complex nature of these enterprises and allows for extensive conditional use, public review and exhaustive inspection. One would expect that level of permitting for control of pollution. Dispensaries are not that complicated.
The City IBA reported to the MMTF that the initial, non-refundable fee for a level four permit was $8,000. In addition to that; all agree that the costs of inspection and permitting should be recovered from the applicant. According to the documentation from other Counties reviewed by the MMTF these permits can cost applicants $35,000 to $50,000 in fees for the permitting process alone.
A hidden cost to the start up cost is the investment beyond the permitting fees themselves. Any business that applies for a fee will have to demonstrate they have a location which means a lease agreement entailing deposits and a financial commitment for typically more than a year. In addition there are the costs associated with remodeling, furniture, security equipment, medicine and myriad other necessities. These costs mount up extremely fast considering you can easily spend $30,000 on the lease alone.
A conservative estimate based on the above show that if your collective wishes to open a dispensary they will need somewhere north of $100,000 for start-up capitol.
There are two extremely important points relative to that number:
1. This effectively closes every legitimate collective in town, except a couple of very large operations.
2. The City is asking only people with that much money to provide medicine for the patients who need access.
I believe that San Diegans, due to their proximity to the border, must be extremely careful who they invite to this dance. Unfortunately, we have people that are that well organized with those resources engaged in a blood bath south of the border.
I am not certain that the City Council itself fully understands the implications of passing a level four permit. Do they really want to have their name and office associated with every dispensary that exists in San Diego from this point forward? Do they really have the time, energy and political capitol to revisit this issue every time someone wants to provide safe access in San Diego? I prefer the permitting process to be codified and clear, not subject to the political aspirations of the current or any other City Council.
I do not intend to make the case for the two-tier approach again; I believe that the protection it affords smaller collectives is self evident. My concern is that the City Council is about to throw the baby out with the bath water if they support level four permitting. The current strength found in the responsible and respectable collectives in town will be decimated and patients will be forced into WeedMart corrals for access to their medicine. It is my hope that the level heads on the City Council are aware of these issues and will provide, somehow, for the continuing existence of the current collectives, regardless of their size or financial resources.
San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force Website
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Imperial Beach Medical Marijuana Ordinance Update
The Imperial Beach City Council heard the 2nd Status Report on Interim Ordinance No. 2009-1091 at the IB city council meeting on Wednesday evening April 21st, 2010. Ordinance No. 2009-1091 is/was the anxiously awaited medical marijuana zoning ordinance for the City of Imperial Beach requested by local citizens concerned about the lack of safe access in South San Diego, National City, Chula Vista, Nester, San Ysidro, Bonita... well you know the issue... it's all of San Diego County! (video links of the meeting are below)
Similar to all other San Diego County municipalities, the Imperial Beach MMJ ordinance process has been plagued with material inconsistencies provided to and presented by the city staff to the city council in an obvious attempt to confuse the local governing body into a "deer in the headlights" position. Nevertheless, diligent activism and legislative efforts in Imperial Beach appeared to have real promise in yielding the first ordinance offering safe and legal access to medical marijuana in San Diego County.
However, despite a letter sent to the officials of the City of Imperial Beach requesting the Imperial Beach city council to; "set the example in San Diego County in moving earnestly toward an ordinance that would aim to provide the seriously ill with safe and legal access to marijuana for therapeutic use as intended by the Compassionate Use Act (Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11362.5) and Medical Marijuana Program Act (Cal. Health & Safety. Code § 11362.7 etseq.; People v. Urziceanu (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 747, 785.)", the all but one of the council members have changed their minds and are now allowing the city to move forward with stonewalling the ordinance for another year in August.
The Imperial Beach city council meeting video has been divided into three parts and can be viewed here;
1 of 3
2 of 3
3 of 3
If you would like to be CC'ed on the recent letters that were sent to the Imperial Beach city council please respond to this email and we would be happy to forward them to you. They're really juicy!
San Diego Chapter of Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Saturday, May 1, 2010
San Diego Man Getting His Weed Back From The Cops
By Steve Elliot, Toke of the Town
A judge Friday morning ordered the San Diego Police Department to return all property seized from medical marijuana patient and provider Eugene Davidovich, including the dried marijuana and concentrated cannabis seized more than a year ago, in February 2009.
A judge Friday morning ordered the San Diego Police Department to return all property seized from medical marijuana patient and provider Eugene Davidovich, including the dried marijuana and concentrated cannabis seized more than a year ago, in February 2009.
"Although I don't agree with this, I have no choice but to return the property of Mr. Davidovich," said Judge David Szumowski.
"After receiving a refusal from the District Attorney's office to comply with our letter of demand for the return of all my property, today we were forced to spend more of our resources as well as the taxpayers' resources on frivolous litigation caused by San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis's bias and hate towards medical marijuana," Davidovich said.
"Will Ms. Dumanis ever stop going after medical marijuana patients and begin respecting state law?" Davidovich asked.
Davidovich, the former defendant in a San Diego medical marijuana trial, said the office of the District Attorney was wrongfully holding his belongings, despite his acquittal by a jury.
Eugene became a spokesman for local medical marijuana patients when his home was raided and four charges brought against him. According to Davidovich, the reason he had to go back to court to get his belongings is likely political.
Davidovich was one of 37 people charged with criminal offenses during Operation Endless Summer in 2008. He was unanimously founded not guilty by a jury on March 25.
Attorney Michael McCabe had already contacted Deputy District Attorney Theresa Pham at least five times to obtain Davidovich's belongings, to no avail. McCabe was eventually forced to send a letter (PDF) to Pham on April 7 with the formal request.
"Since Mr. Davidovich was acquitted of all charges by the jury's verdict on March 25, 2010, your office has no legitimate reason to continue to maintain possession of these items," McCabe wrote in his letter. "Thus, under the express power conferred upon the Court by Penal Code 15365, these items must be returned to Mr. Davidovich."
The letter said that the D.A. is required, under California law, to return "34.1 grams of marijuana contained within 11 separate plastic bags, as well as 14.59 grams of concentrated cannabis (hashish) contained within three plastic bags."
According to Davidovich, the D.A. will also be required to return his backpack, passport, scale and papers, and other non-drug items.
Davidovich said that when he initially called D.A. Dumanis's office to request the return of his property, a staff person accused him of being a "stoner."
The D.A.'s office denies this accusation.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
La Jolla Comedy Store - Comedy Show TONIGHT!
TODAY on 4/20 COME SEE the Medical Marijuana ExtravaGANJA –at the La Jolla Comedy Store Doors Open 8:30pm – Show starts at 9pm!
La Jolla Comedy Store
916 Pearl St. La Jolla, CA 92037
Howard Dover, The Comedy Store, San Diego Americans for Safe Access and NUG Magazine presents a night of comedy!
This is a 21+ Event.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The show starts at 9 pm and doors open at 8:30. Get there early as you definitely want to be part of this Medical Marijuana Comedy EXTRAVAGANJA brought to you by San Diego ASA, NUG Magazine, and Howard Dover.
La Jolla Comedy Store is located at 916 Pearl St., 92037. - (858) 454-9176.
The show will feature the Star Comedian Howard Dover as well as others!
Check out Howard Dover's site at http://www.howarddover.com
THE LINE UP:
from "Weeds" Comedian lil G www.myspace.com/comedianlilg
From the tonight show and the jimmy kimmel show Jason Gillearn www.irishcomic.com
Tony Hinchcliffe (nbc's hit show "Heroes", and opens for Sam Tripoli around the world.)
Jayson Thibaux, Dan Murphy and much more!!
Tickets are only $10, cash only at the door or for more info contact Eugene at (619) 446-9786.
Our thanks to San Diego ASA and NUG Magazine for their support.
Proceeds benefit San Diego ASA.
Doors open at 8:30 pm. See you there!
San Diego Americans for Safe Accesswww.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
La Jolla Comedy Store
916 Pearl St. La Jolla, CA 92037
Howard Dover, The Comedy Store, San Diego Americans for Safe Access and NUG Magazine presents a night of comedy!
This is a 21+ Event.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The show starts at 9 pm and doors open at 8:30. Get there early as you definitely want to be part of this Medical Marijuana Comedy EXTRAVAGANJA brought to you by San Diego ASA, NUG Magazine, and Howard Dover.
La Jolla Comedy Store is located at 916 Pearl St., 92037. - (858) 454-9176.
The show will feature the Star Comedian Howard Dover as well as others!
Check out Howard Dover's site at http://www.howarddover.com
THE LINE UP:
from "Weeds" Comedian lil G www.myspace.com/comedianlilg
From the tonight show and the jimmy kimmel show Jason Gillearn www.irishcomic.com
Tony Hinchcliffe (nbc's hit show "Heroes", and opens for Sam Tripoli around the world.)
Jayson Thibaux, Dan Murphy and much more!!
Tickets are only $10, cash only at the door or for more info contact Eugene at (619) 446-9786.
Our thanks to San Diego ASA and NUG Magazine for their support.
Proceeds benefit San Diego ASA.
Doors open at 8:30 pm. See you there!
San Diego Americans for Safe Accesswww.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Thursday, April 15, 2010
James Stacy Federal San Diego Medical MarijuanaTrial Update
Last year an undercover detective came in to the collective pretending to be a legitimate patient. The detective presented a current and authentic medical marijuana letter of recommendation as well as a CA drivers license. After completing all the required membership agreements and going through the member screening process, he joined the collective and purchased a small amount of medicine.
According to the police reports, while in the collective, the detective asked whether he could contribute to the effort in other ways besides financially reimbursing the collective for the medicine. James explained to him that he could work at the collective, help out, and contribute in other ways.
In a recent San Diego City Beat Article, Dave Maas wrote that “Stacy says he did the due diligence: He researched the prosecutorial policies articulated by Holder, hired a lawyer to walk him through the process and corresponded with the California Secretary of State’s (SOS) office on how to file for “public benefit” status, the technical term for a California nonprofit. The SOS even provided him with a copy of the state Attorney General’s guidelines for running a collective. Unlike many of the other collectives where the San Diego Regional Narcotics Task Force ran stings, Stacy opted for a low-profile model because, he says, “I didn’t want people who didn’t need to know to have it in their face.”
Less than 2 months later on 9/9/9, the San Diego NTF, raided James’ collective, arrested him, and charged him with sales, cultivation, and manufacturing of cannabis, during the raid, at the collective the NTF detectives found a registered firearm and have charged James with possession of the firearm in connection with running an “illegal operation”.
The collective was operating in full compliance with state law, and the US Attorney office has suggested that they agree with that fact. Kasha Kastillo the federal public defender representing James in this case, has filed numerous motions attempting to get the case dismissed or at the least sent to state court, with no prevail.
Although James suffers from daily chronic pain, he has complied with all requirements of his federal indictment including not using medical cannabis, which has taken a negative toll on his life. In a recent hearing James’ attorney asked the court to allow James to medicate. San Diego ASA was at the hearing to hear the prosecution's demand that as a result of this request James be drug tested weekly.
The Judge explained to both sides that he could not give authorization for James to medicate as this was Federal Court and marijuana was still considered an illegal substance but at the same time refused to implement the drug testing requirements.
James next hearing is April 21, 2010 at 3:00pm in Courtroom 15. Come out to the San Diego Federal Courthouse at 940 Front St. San Diego CA, 92101 to support James Stacy in court.
This hearing is critical to the case as it is when the Judge will decide whether to allow James to use his medical marijuana defense at trial.
James Stacy’s trial is currently scheduled to begin on April 26, 2010 in San Diego Federal Court, 940 Front St San Diego CA 92101. Today James told San Diego ASA that his attorney tells him the trial might be postponed till August. We will continue to keep a close eye on James’ case and update the community if the dates change.
How you can help James Stacy Today:
1. Help HR 3939 Pass! This is new Federal Legislation known as the “Truth in Trials” act, which would allow Federal defendants to present the medical marijuana defense in federal court. One in four Americans now lives in a state with laws governing medical marijuana. Unfortunately, law-abiding citizens can still be prosecuted on federal marijuana-related charges as Mr. Stacy is being prosecuted in San Diego. Even with the Obama Administration’s new guidelines, federal prosecutors can still block defendants from showing that they were in compliance with state law.
The “Truth in Trials” Act, H.R. 3939, would end this injustice by ensuring that federal defendants could present evidence showing that they were following state law. Introduced by US Representative Sam Farr, this important legislation would give law-abiding citizens the ability to defend themselves in federal court. Urge your Member of Congress to cosponsor "Truth in Trials" today by completing and submitting the following online form CLICK HERE TO URGE CONGRESS TO PASS HR 3939
2. Send James an email of support letting him know that the community is behind him 100% in this difficult time, that we will be there in court to support him throughout the trial, that his fight is our fight and that we admire, appreciate, and support James standing up for our rights against this injustice! James can be reached at movementinaction@gmail.com
3. Donate to James, to help him and his family get through this nightmare. Visit his website and click on the DONATE link! http://movementinaction.org/donte/
To find out more about James’ case please visit www.movementinaction.org
Eugene Davidovich
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
San Diego ASA Meeting Update
By: Eugene Davidovich, 4/14/2010
SAN DIEGO – On April 13th the San Diego Chapter of Americans for Safe Access held their monthly meeting at the Pt. Loma Public Library. The location was great! A state of the art conference room that fits over 120 people, with comfy modern chairs, and perfect lighting. The problem was getting into the actual room on time.
Although the meeting was supposed to start at 6:00pm, when we got to the location, we were told that another group was still using the room and might be running a little late. When we inquired further, we found out it was the Citizens Review Board, a police oversight committee that was meeting in the room.
Closer to 6pm, as there was already a small crowd gathered in the Library lobby outside the Community Room where out meeting was to be held, a gentleman dressed in civilian clothes, wearing a badge and a gun came out of the room and explained that they were running late and were in the middle of discussing a very important case. He and another lady from the group profusely apologized for the delay they were causing us. At 6:30 we were finally able to get into the room.
With the help of pretty much everyone who came, we rearranged all the chairs and desks in the room in a matter of minutes to accommodate our meeting and kicked the meeting off!
We began with a brief discussion of the National ASA News Letter. After the newsletter discussion we cut the cake, provided courtesy of Rich and Carol in celebration of the recent victory in my case (People v Davidovich).
We went on to discuss AB 2650 and the bill’s defeat at the California Assembly Committee on Public Health. This was a bill that would have effectively banned medical marijuana dispensaries in California requiring buffer zones between collective and a laundry list of “sensitive uses” such as churches, schools, youth center, etc. The bill did not pass the committee in part thanks to the lobbying efforts of Don Duncan from Americans for Safe Access.
Following the newsletter discussion and AB 2650, Lance Rogers, Attorney at Law, and council for Jovan Jackson, a medical marijuana patient recently acquitted of all charges by a jury of 12 peers, spoke about recent Code Compliance visits to collectives and patients’ homes. He mentioned there has been reports of both collective facilities as well as personal homes of patients, being targeted for Code Compliance visits and inspections. Mr. Rogers suggested that without a subpoena, court order, or search warrant, these inspectors did not have to be allowed in and urged that any such visits be handled very carefully and preferably in the presence of an attorney. Mr. Rogers can be reached at 619-232-2311
The next speaker was Stephen Whitburn, an active member of the San Diego (City) Medical Marijuana Task Force and former candidate for San Diego City Council. Mr. Whitburn provided an update on the work the task force has done in the last few months as well as the recommendations they provided to the San Diego City Council. All the Task Force meeting notes, agedas, and recommendations are available on the Task Force’s website: http://www.sandiego.gov/medicalmarijuana/meetings/
Mr. Whitburn also shared with us the recent start of his campaign for San Diego County Board of Supervisors, District 4. He explained his views on the issues that need to be addressed in San Diego County and that the County should be governed with transparency, debate, and the involvement of the community, all of which are currently lacking or missing with the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Whitburn’s positions and campaign details can be found at his website: http://www.stephenwhitburn.com/
Following Mr. Whitburn, we heard from Dan Murphy, a patient, advocate, and Americans for Safe Access member who came up and shared his views on the movement and urged people to stand up, get involved, and be counted.
The proposed San Diego County Ordinance and the community’s response was the next topic of discussion. We went over in detail the points which are illegal and unnecessary in the ordinance that were taken from the ASA, ACLU, and DPA reactions to the proposed ordinance:
• Police Department / Sheriff should not regulate collectives.
• Unreasonable buffer zones are not necessary.
• Patient Privacy Must Be protected.
• Ban on cannabis infused foods (edibles)
• Narrows and changes definition of qualified patient
Finally, we heard from Attorney at Law Bahar Ansari, who discussed the Jury instruction used in my case (People v. Davidovich) as well as a few highlights from the trial. Ms. Ansari can be contacted at: 619-787-0604
Here are some events coming up in the next couple week:
• 4/16 – North County ASA Meeting
- 950 E. Vista Way Ste. A2 - Vista, Ca 92084
• 4/19 - DAY OF ACTION
- 9:30am Joseph Nunes Sentencing – Federal Courthouse 940 Front St.
- 12-2pm – Protest against DEA Raids – Federal Courthouse 940 Front St.
• 4/20 - ExtravaGanja MMJ Comedy Show
- La Jolla Comedy Store – 916 Pearl St 92037
- $10 tickets, 21+, 2 drink min.
• 4/26 – James Stacy Federal Medical Marijuana Trial
- 9:00am 940 Front St.
Thank you to everyone for coming to the meeting and for being patient. Next Month San Diego ASA meeting will be held on May 11, location to be announced soon!
San Diego Americans for Safe Accesswww.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
SAN DIEGO – On April 13th the San Diego Chapter of Americans for Safe Access held their monthly meeting at the Pt. Loma Public Library. The location was great! A state of the art conference room that fits over 120 people, with comfy modern chairs, and perfect lighting. The problem was getting into the actual room on time.
Although the meeting was supposed to start at 6:00pm, when we got to the location, we were told that another group was still using the room and might be running a little late. When we inquired further, we found out it was the Citizens Review Board, a police oversight committee that was meeting in the room.
Closer to 6pm, as there was already a small crowd gathered in the Library lobby outside the Community Room where out meeting was to be held, a gentleman dressed in civilian clothes, wearing a badge and a gun came out of the room and explained that they were running late and were in the middle of discussing a very important case. He and another lady from the group profusely apologized for the delay they were causing us. At 6:30 we were finally able to get into the room.
With the help of pretty much everyone who came, we rearranged all the chairs and desks in the room in a matter of minutes to accommodate our meeting and kicked the meeting off!
We began with a brief discussion of the National ASA News Letter. After the newsletter discussion we cut the cake, provided courtesy of Rich and Carol in celebration of the recent victory in my case (People v Davidovich).
We went on to discuss AB 2650 and the bill’s defeat at the California Assembly Committee on Public Health. This was a bill that would have effectively banned medical marijuana dispensaries in California requiring buffer zones between collective and a laundry list of “sensitive uses” such as churches, schools, youth center, etc. The bill did not pass the committee in part thanks to the lobbying efforts of Don Duncan from Americans for Safe Access.
Following the newsletter discussion and AB 2650, Lance Rogers, Attorney at Law, and council for Jovan Jackson, a medical marijuana patient recently acquitted of all charges by a jury of 12 peers, spoke about recent Code Compliance visits to collectives and patients’ homes. He mentioned there has been reports of both collective facilities as well as personal homes of patients, being targeted for Code Compliance visits and inspections. Mr. Rogers suggested that without a subpoena, court order, or search warrant, these inspectors did not have to be allowed in and urged that any such visits be handled very carefully and preferably in the presence of an attorney. Mr. Rogers can be reached at 619-232-2311
The next speaker was Stephen Whitburn, an active member of the San Diego (City) Medical Marijuana Task Force and former candidate for San Diego City Council. Mr. Whitburn provided an update on the work the task force has done in the last few months as well as the recommendations they provided to the San Diego City Council. All the Task Force meeting notes, agedas, and recommendations are available on the Task Force’s website: http://www.sandiego.gov/medicalmarijuana/meetings/
Mr. Whitburn also shared with us the recent start of his campaign for San Diego County Board of Supervisors, District 4. He explained his views on the issues that need to be addressed in San Diego County and that the County should be governed with transparency, debate, and the involvement of the community, all of which are currently lacking or missing with the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Whitburn’s positions and campaign details can be found at his website: http://www.stephenwhitburn.com/
Following Mr. Whitburn, we heard from Dan Murphy, a patient, advocate, and Americans for Safe Access member who came up and shared his views on the movement and urged people to stand up, get involved, and be counted.
The proposed San Diego County Ordinance and the community’s response was the next topic of discussion. We went over in detail the points which are illegal and unnecessary in the ordinance that were taken from the ASA, ACLU, and DPA reactions to the proposed ordinance:
• Police Department / Sheriff should not regulate collectives.
• Unreasonable buffer zones are not necessary.
• Patient Privacy Must Be protected.
• Ban on cannabis infused foods (edibles)
• Narrows and changes definition of qualified patient
Finally, we heard from Attorney at Law Bahar Ansari, who discussed the Jury instruction used in my case (People v. Davidovich) as well as a few highlights from the trial. Ms. Ansari can be contacted at: 619-787-0604
Here are some events coming up in the next couple week:
• 4/16 – North County ASA Meeting
- 950 E. Vista Way Ste. A2 - Vista, Ca 92084
• 4/19 - DAY OF ACTION
- 9:30am Joseph Nunes Sentencing – Federal Courthouse 940 Front St.
- 12-2pm – Protest against DEA Raids – Federal Courthouse 940 Front St.
• 4/20 - ExtravaGanja MMJ Comedy Show
- La Jolla Comedy Store – 916 Pearl St 92037
- $10 tickets, 21+, 2 drink min.
• 4/26 – James Stacy Federal Medical Marijuana Trial
- 9:00am 940 Front St.
Thank you to everyone for coming to the meeting and for being patient. Next Month San Diego ASA meeting will be held on May 11, location to be announced soon!
San Diego Americans for Safe Accesswww.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
San Diego ASA Meeting TONIGHT - 4/13 - 6pm Pt. Loma Library
Our monthly meeting will be held TODAY from 6:00PM-7:30pm - 4/13/2010 at the Pt. Loma Public Library located on 3701 Voltaire Street San Diego, CA 92107
WHAT: Monthly San Diego ASA Meeting
WHEN: April 13, 2010 – 6pm – 7:30pm
WHERE: Pt. Loma Public Library - 3701 Voltaire Street San Diego, CA 92107
What to expect:
See you there!
Eugene Davidovich
T: 619-621-8446
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
WHAT: Monthly San Diego ASA Meeting
WHEN: April 13, 2010 – 6pm – 7:30pm
WHERE: Pt. Loma Public Library - 3701 Voltaire Street San Diego, CA 92107
What to expect:
- Latest National News on Medical Marijuana
- San Diego County Ordinance Update
- San Diego City Ordinance / Medical Marijuana Task Force Update
- Attorney Lance Rogers discusses “Code Compliance Visits”
- Attorney Bahar Ansari Discusses People V. Davidovich Trial
- Opportunity to get involved!
- Special Guests
See you there!
Eugene Davidovich
T: 619-621-8446
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Oppose AB 2650 – Protect patients’ access statewide!
April 10th, 2010, Posted by Don Duncan
On Tuesday (April 13, 2010) , the California Assembly Committee on Public Health will discuss AB 2650, bill that would require that medical cannabis collectives, cooperatives, and growers be located at least 1,000 feet away from a laundry list of “sensitive uses” everywhere in the state. The bill was introduced unexpectedly this week by Assembly Member Joan Buchanan (D-Alamo). AB 2650 is sponsored by the Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORCA), a law enforcement lobby organization that opposes medical cannabis, and mirrors a controversial ordinance recently adopted in the City of Los Angeles.
ASA opposes AB 2650, and we are calling on our members in California to tell their Assembly representatives on the committee to vote no. Find out if your Assembly representative is on the Public Health Committee, and tell him or her to oppose AB 2650!
AB 2650 requires legal collectives and cooperatives to be located more than 1,000 feet from schools, parks, libraries, places of worship, child care facilities, youth centers, drug treatment centers, and other collectives or cooperatives. This is unnecessary to protect public welfare, and will make finding a location for a legal collective or cooperative unduly burdensome in most jurisdictions. It also serves to usurp the authority of city and county government to make ordinary land use decisions based on the local circumstances.
ASA is the nation’s largest organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists and concerned citizens promoting safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic use and research. We work in partnership with state, local and national legislators to overcome barriers and create policies that improve access to cannabis for patients and researchers. Crime statistics and the accounts of local officials surveyed by ASA indicate that crime is actually reduced by the presence of a collective; and complaints from citizens and surrounding businesses are either negligible or are significantly reduced with the implementation of local regulations.
In Oakland, where collectives have been licensed since 2004, City Administrator Barbara Killey, notes that “The areas around the dispensaries may be some of the safest areas of Oakland now because of the level of security, surveillance, etc…since the ordinance passed.” In the City of Los Angeles, Police Chief Charlie Beck told reporters and the City Council that the claim that patients’ associations attract crime “doesn’t really bear out.” In fact, the overall crime rate in Los Angeles dropped during the proliferation of collectives and cooperatives in that city. Given that effective local regulations address public safety concerns, there is no public safety rationale for a statewide policy keeping collectives and cooperatives away from sensitive uses.
This is not just an issue of public safety. Most of California’s legal medical cannabis patients rely on dispensing collectives or cooperatives to obtain the doctor-recommended medicine they need to treat the symptoms of HIV/AIDS, cancer, Multiple Sclerosis, chronic pain, and other serious illnesses. These patients’ associations are legal under California law, and California Attorney General Jerry Brown published guidelines in August 2008 that state “a properly organized and operated collective of cooperative that dispenses medical marijuana through a storefront may be lawful under California law,” provided the facility substantially complies with the guidelines. It is already hard enough to find a location for a legally organized and operated medical cannabis association. AB 2650 will make this task even more difficult – thus diminishing safe and legal access to medicine in communities statewide.
A restriction like that imposed by AB 2650 may be motivated by a misunderstanding about the state law concerning patients’ associations or by ambivalence about medical cannabis use in general. ASA calls on members of the Public Safety Committee to look past the stigma that sometimes underlies the debate about medical cannabis regulations, and to vote no on AB 2650 – a bill that is unnecessary for public welfare, interferes in local regulation, and is harmful to legal medical cannabis patients.
Find out if your Assembly representative is on the Public Safety Committee and what you can do to help.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Davidovich: My Medical Marijuana Case Continues Post-Trial
Davidovich: My Medical Marijuana Case Continues Post-Trial
SDNN - 4/9/2010
In a resounding defeat of San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, a jury of 12 on March 25 found me not guilty on all counts, after less than four hours of deliberation. The jurors unanimously determined that I acted lawfully and in accordance with state law when it came to all the charges against me; sales, possession, transportation and possession of concentrated cannabis.
They also had a thing or two to say about the D.A.’s investigation and prosecution in this case.
After the verdict was read, two jurors met me outside the courtroom and said, “Eugene, we all believed in you, you are a good man.” Days after the trial, I received an e-mail from another juror in my case, a part of which reads, “This was the most ridiculous thing that I have ever seen! Shame on the SDPD! The reason that we decided in your favor was because the prosecutor just didn’t prove her case (she was so annoying), and the police work on your case was nothing but shoddy. I just want to let you know that I am so sorry that you had to go through this nightmare.”
Read more: http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-04-09/blog/a-more-perfect-union/davidovich-my-medical-marijuana-case-continues-post-trial#ixzz0ke50VHi1
SDNN - 4/9/2010
In a resounding defeat of San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, a jury of 12 on March 25 found me not guilty on all counts, after less than four hours of deliberation. The jurors unanimously determined that I acted lawfully and in accordance with state law when it came to all the charges against me; sales, possession, transportation and possession of concentrated cannabis.
They also had a thing or two to say about the D.A.’s investigation and prosecution in this case.
After the verdict was read, two jurors met me outside the courtroom and said, “Eugene, we all believed in you, you are a good man.” Days after the trial, I received an e-mail from another juror in my case, a part of which reads, “This was the most ridiculous thing that I have ever seen! Shame on the SDPD! The reason that we decided in your favor was because the prosecutor just didn’t prove her case (she was so annoying), and the police work on your case was nothing but shoddy. I just want to let you know that I am so sorry that you had to go through this nightmare.”
Read more: http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-04-09/blog/a-more-perfect-union/davidovich-my-medical-marijuana-case-continues-post-trial#ixzz0ke50VHi1
Tiffani Kjeldergaard’s “RETURN OF PROPERTY MOTION”
By: Tiffani Kjeldergaard
Medical Marijuana patient and “Pot Farmer” (as the San Diego sheriffs office stated in their press release June 20, 2009), Potrero resident Tiffani Kjeldergaard went to court, April 2, 2010 to request her medical marijuana medicine be returned from San Diego’s District Attorney.
Kjeldergaard was arrested on June 20, 2009 for growing and using her medical marijuana while on probation. During a probation check at her residence, Kjeldergaard was awakened from her Saturday afternoon nap by 7 sheriff officers and 2 probation officers entering the bedroom. She was instantly handcuffed and the home was searched. Officers saw Kjeldergaard’s smoking utensils and some marijuana and a small garden of 7 plants under 2 inches tall. Several clone cuttings were also present but law enforcement does not consider them plants unless they have a root ball.
Kjeldergaard has had her physician Dr. Sterner’s and his verbal and written recommendations dating back to 2005. She has been a patient of his since then and her disease would never decrease in the painful stages, it is aprogressive disease resulting in physical disabilities.
Kjeldergaard was taken to Las Colinas women’s facility in Santee where she remained on a “No Bail Hold” which means her duration was unknown. After several court appearances, a lockdown of Swine Flu that cancelled court dates 30 days, represented by a public defender named Michael Berberich, Kjeldergaard was coerced to plead guilty by her attorney.
San Diego East County court has a strange way of doing things, you are to plead guilty first and they will tell you your consequence after. No knowledge of your fate is given prior to your plea. That seems wrong and illegal.
Mr. Berberich convinced Kjeldergaard to comply. She pled guilty. She was then disclosed that the San Diego probation department was recommending 3 years in a state correctional facility…that meant prison!
Kjeldergaard suffers from several injuries that are horse related, she has an auto immune disease called Rheumatoid arthritis and she has a shoulder replacement that troubles her daily. Kjeldergaard is also on Methotrexate (a chemotherapy drug for the disease) and suffers digestion and appetite issues.
Kjeldergaard suffered in the jail for 132 days. She was not given her Marinol, vicodin and trazadone as prescribed by her physician Dr. Peter Hein of Kaiser- Bostonia, nor was she given her Methotrexate or Plaquenil as prescribed by her physician Dr. Motomedi of Kaiser- Baker Hill. Her health deteriorated in the cold and damp cells and she had pain every minute of every day.
After several weeks of court dates and continuances Kjeldergaard had been spending her time in the law library at the jail. She discovered enough legal support of innocence to provide her attorney Michael Berberich, at that time she requested to withdraw her plea of guilty and requested that the judge be able to review her new findings, and possibly release her dropping all charges. Berberich refused.
Kjeldergaard fired Mr. Michael Berberich and retained James Pasto Esq. He presented the information to the judge yet, the judge ordered Kjeldergaard’s release date is October 29, 2009 as a sentence.
Upon release Kjeldergaard went to all her doctors for continued pain she started having in the jail. Excruciating body aches like she is bruised all over and she loses the use of her arms for periods of time because the pain to lift them is excruciating. Kjeldergaard’s physician Dr. Motomedi is a rheumatologist for Kaiser and she diagnosed Kjeldergaard with Fibromyalgia which is a terribly painful chronic problem that will never go away. Kjeldergaard requested a motion to the San Diego Superior Court for a probation modification that would allow her the use and possession of medical marijuana, pursuant to the People v Tilehkooh case. Kjeldergaard was granted the right to have medical marijuana with the condition that San Diego probation department finds the recommendation valid.
Upon meeting with probation immediately after court, Kjeldergaard was told by her probation officer Jo Lane that the recommendation was not considered valid. Lane explained that if Kjeldergaard has any prescription medication without a prescription, it is illegal. Lane stated that the recommendation was only considered valid if Kjeldergaard had a county MMJ card. Although the card is a voluntary program, Kjeldergaard was forced to have to retain one in order to be able to use her healthiest pain medicine.
Kjeldergaard was suffering and continuously getting sick from only having opiates as a pain relief. She does not like the effects that the opiates have on her thoughts and concentration, her concern that the drugs are causing damage to her kidneys, stomach and liver or enlarging her heart are all valid. Her worries about an increasing need for more and more pills to help her pain and how it would become too much on her low immune system and she’d become very ill and die. Medical Marijuana did for her what all the vicodin could do and without the damage to organs in her body or risks to her life.
Kjeldergaard received her county card and brought it to San Diego probation department and was instructed by Jo Lane the she was now allowed to have her medical marijuana possession and medicate once again. Yet she was legal and within her rights on the day of her arrest. Kjeldergaard requested her bongs, pipes, and marijuana be returned at which point the probation department scheduled a day and handed over her bongs and pipes. Probation said the marijuana was not available to hand over and I would need a court order to get it back from the DEA.
Kjeldergaard has enjoyed her victory of getting her bongs and pipes back. She is still terrified to own or grow any medical marijuana for fear of another arrest. Kjeldergaard stated, “People tell me, Tiff you should grow a big garden and smoke all you want you are legal now you got your card!” I tell them, “Hell I was legal the day they took me away for 4 months! I don’t fricken believe them”
Kjeldergaard’s home and ranch have been raided 3 times since her release and she has not been taken into custody. Kjeldergaard believes, “It is a violation of our 8th Amendment Bill of Rights that myself and other patients are being subjected to “cruel and unusual punishment” in that we are forced to suffer without our medical marijuana. Forced to take opiates, use alcohol, maybe other drugs, that in a not so far off future will kill us or destroy our lives.”
On April 2, 2010, Kjeldergaard return of property motion was granted for all items with the exception of the marijuana. Kjeldergaard received her grow equip, books, medical recommendation, and other Proposition 215 and SB420 papers and guidelines all of which were seized. No plants or dried product was returned. Kjeldergaard’s attorney Mike Dealy is filing a writ, to appeal the return of cannabis plants and dried cannabis.
On another note, Judge Deddeh did not feel comfortable determining if it was a violation of Kjeldergaard’s civil rights when probation added the "Not to use marijuana with or without a recommendation". The Judge supported that it was not lawful just in the fact he would not rule that it was legal.
Kjeldergaard’s attorney was pleased and felt there is enough on the record to be reviewed.
Visit http://www.flyingpaintranch.com/FREE_2_FARM_420_Medical_Marijuana.htm for more information about Tiffany’s case!
Medical Marijuana patient and “Pot Farmer” (as the San Diego sheriffs office stated in their press release June 20, 2009), Potrero resident Tiffani Kjeldergaard went to court, April 2, 2010 to request her medical marijuana medicine be returned from San Diego’s District Attorney.
Kjeldergaard was arrested on June 20, 2009 for growing and using her medical marijuana while on probation. During a probation check at her residence, Kjeldergaard was awakened from her Saturday afternoon nap by 7 sheriff officers and 2 probation officers entering the bedroom. She was instantly handcuffed and the home was searched. Officers saw Kjeldergaard’s smoking utensils and some marijuana and a small garden of 7 plants under 2 inches tall. Several clone cuttings were also present but law enforcement does not consider them plants unless they have a root ball.
Kjeldergaard has had her physician Dr. Sterner’s and his verbal and written recommendations dating back to 2005. She has been a patient of his since then and her disease would never decrease in the painful stages, it is a
Kjeldergaard was taken to Las Colinas women’s facility in Santee where she remained on a “No Bail Hold” which means her duration was unknown. After several court appearances, a lockdown of Swine Flu that cancelled court dates 30 days, represented by a public defender named Michael Berberich, Kjeldergaard was coerced to plead guilty by her attorney.
San Diego East County court has a strange way of doing things, you are to plead guilty first and they will tell you your consequence after. No knowledge of your fate is given prior to your plea. That seems wrong and illegal.
Mr. Berberich convinced Kjeldergaard to comply. She pled guilty. She was then disclosed that the San Diego probation department was recommending 3 years in a state correctional facility…that meant prison!
Kjeldergaard suffers from several injuries that are horse related, she has an auto immune disease called Rheumatoid arthritis and she has a shoulder replacement that troubles her daily. Kjeldergaard is also on Methotrexate (a chemotherapy drug for the disease) and suffers digestion and appetite issues.
Kjeldergaard suffered in the jail for 132 days. She was not given her Marinol, vicodin and trazadone as prescribed by her physician Dr. Peter Hein of Kaiser- Bostonia, nor was she given her Methotrexate or Plaquenil as prescribed by her physician Dr. Motomedi of Kaiser- Baker Hill. Her health deteriorated in the cold and damp cells and she had pain every minute of every day.
After several weeks of court dates and continuances Kjeldergaard had been spending her time in the law library at the jail. She discovered enough legal support of innocence to provide her attorney Michael Berberich, at that time she requested to withdraw her plea of guilty and requested that the judge be able to review her new findings, and possibly release her dropping all charges. Berberich refused.
Kjeldergaard fired Mr. Michael Berberich and retained James Pasto Esq. He presented the information to the judge yet, the judge ordered Kjeldergaard’s release date is October 29, 2009 as a sentence.
Upon release Kjeldergaard went to all her doctors for continued pain she started having in the jail. Excruciating body aches like she is bruised all over and she loses the use of her arms for periods of time because the pain to lift them is excruciating. Kjeldergaard’s physician Dr. Motomedi is a rheumatologist for Kaiser and she diagnosed Kjeldergaard with Fibromyalgia which is a terribly painful chronic problem that will never go away. Kjeldergaard requested a motion to the San Diego Superior Court for a probation modification that would allow her the use and possession of medical marijuana, pursuant to the People v Tilehkooh case. Kjeldergaard was granted the right to have medical marijuana with the condition that San Diego probation department finds the recommendation valid.
Upon meeting with probation immediately after court, Kjeldergaard was told by her probation officer Jo Lane that the recommendation was not considered valid. Lane explained that if Kjeldergaard has any prescription medication without a prescription, it is illegal. Lane stated that the recommendation was only considered valid if Kjeldergaard had a county MMJ card. Although the card is a voluntary program, Kjeldergaard was forced to have to retain one in order to be able to use her healthiest pain medicine.
Kjeldergaard was suffering and continuously getting sick from only having opiates as a pain relief. She does not like the effects that the opiates have on her thoughts and concentration, her concern that the drugs are causing damage to her kidneys, stomach and liver or enlarging her heart are all valid. Her worries about an increasing need for more and more pills to help her pain and how it would become too much on her low immune system and she’d become very ill and die. Medical Marijuana did for her what all the vicodin could do and without the damage to organs in her body or risks to her life.
Kjeldergaard received her county card and brought it to San Diego probation department and was instructed by Jo Lane the she was now allowed to have her medical marijuana possession and medicate once again. Yet she was legal and within her rights on the day of her arrest. Kjeldergaard requested her bongs, pipes, and marijuana be returned at which point the probation department scheduled a day and handed over her bongs and pipes. Probation said the marijuana was not available to hand over and I would need a court order to get it back from the DEA.
Kjeldergaard has enjoyed her victory of getting her bongs and pipes back. She is still terrified to own or grow any medical marijuana for fear of another arrest. Kjeldergaard stated, “People tell me, Tiff you should grow a big garden and smoke all you want you are legal now you got your card!” I tell them, “Hell I was legal the day they took me away for 4 months! I don’t fricken believe them”
Kjeldergaard’s home and ranch have been raided 3 times since her release and she has not been taken into custody. Kjeldergaard believes, “It is a violation of our 8th Amendment Bill of Rights that myself and other patients are being subjected to “cruel and unusual punishment” in that we are forced to suffer without our medical marijuana. Forced to take opiates, use alcohol, maybe other drugs, that in a not so far off future will kill us or destroy our lives.”
On April 2, 2010, Kjeldergaard return of property motion was granted for all items with the exception of the marijuana. Kjeldergaard received her grow equip, books, medical recommendation, and other Proposition 215 and SB420 papers and guidelines all of which were seized. No plants or dried product was returned. Kjeldergaard’s attorney Mike Dealy is filing a writ, to appeal the return of cannabis plants and dried cannabis.
On another note, Judge Deddeh did not feel comfortable determining if it was a violation of Kjeldergaard’s civil rights when probation added the "Not to use marijuana with or without a recommendation". The Judge supported that it was not lawful just in the fact he would not rule that it was legal.
Kjeldergaard’s attorney was pleased and felt there is enough on the record to be reviewed.
Visit http://www.flyingpaintranch.com/FREE_2_FARM_420_Medical_Marijuana.htm for more information about Tiffany’s case!
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Take Action Today! Send San Diego County a Letter RE Proposed MMJ Ordinance
TODAY, we need everyone to email the below letter to all of the following email addresses:
joseph.farace@sdcounty.ca.gov
dplu@sdcounty.ca.gov
Greg.cox@sdcounty.ca.gov
dianne.jacob@sdcounty.ca.gov
Pam.slater@sdcounty.ca.gov
ron-roberts@sdcounty.ca.gov
bill.horn@sdcounty.ca.gov
Although the official Public Input deadline has passed, we still have time to let the Supervisors and those responsible for developing medical marijuana regulations in the county know that the community wants to see a legal, constitutional ordinance, that keeps patients interest at forefront, not local law enforcement.
Write your own letter, use the letter below as a template, or ask a friend to help you write one, but don’t just idly sit by while the County of San Diego attempts to subvert the will of the people. The City of San Diego is on the right track to sensible regulations as they have created a Task Force that has patients and members of the community on it, all of whom have weighed and came up with recommendations for the San Diego City Council.
Why has the County of San Diego refused to adopt their own task force or to follow the recommendations of the San Diego City task force? I believe the answer is, they want to quickly adopt an ordinance which will influence all the other small cities in the county to follow suit which intern may weigh heavily on the Ordinance the City of San Diego is developing. The official excuse is they are trying to hurry in time for the moratorium currently enacted in the unincorporated areas of the county to expire.
We need to stay involved and on top of both the San Diego County regulation development process, as well as the development of such ordinances in every city within the county. Take 10 minutes today to send the below letter to the supervisors. If you have already sent them a letter, send them a follow up to see what they are doing to change the proposed ordinance.
Thanks,
Eugene Davidovich
www.safeaccesssd.org
_______________________________________
April 5, 2010
Eric Gibson
Director, Department of Planning and Land Use
County Administration Center
1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335
San Diego, CA 92101
dplu@sdcounty.ca.gov
RE: MEDICAL MARIJUANA COLLECTIVES COUNTY CODE AND ZONING ORDINANCE (POD 09-007), REQUEST TO EXTEND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD TO APRIL 30, 2010
To Mr. Gibson:
As a resident of San Diego County, I am writing to request an extension of the 30-day public comment period regarding the Department of Planning and Land Use’s Medical Marijuana Collectives County Code and Zoning Ordinance (POD 09-007) until April 30, 2010.
Although the plan may have technically been available to the public on March 3, 2010 – the date of the memo – medical marijuana patients and advocates only became aware of it upon being contacted by a North County Times reporter Monday, March 29, 2010.
It is hard to imagine that this very limited level of exposure to the public would satisfy the Department that it had allowed for 30 days of public comment.
Moreover, the Department’s draft ordinance clearly suffers from a lack of input. The excessively strict nature of the ordinance suggests that the county failed to consult with any patients or caregivers at all. Patients would most certainly have pointed out the following concerns:
The ordinance is a de facto ban. A rule that would restrict dispensaries from existing within 1,000 feet from a laundry list of so-called “sensitive uses,” including any residence, makes this ordinance a de facto ban. This would relegate facilities to remote, outlying areas, making it difficult for patients to access their medicine, especially those with mobility issues.
The ordinance puts the wrong agency in charge. The licensing authority should not be the Sheriff's Department, but the County Department of Health or other more appropriate agency.
The ordinance fails to protect patient privacy. Draft provisions would allow the Sheriff’s Department unfettered access (without subpoena) to private patient records, financial transaction records, and records indicating the source of supply of medical marijuana. Such provisions place both patients and providers at risk of unnecessary local and, more significantly, federal interference.
The ordinance unnecessarily restricts patient choice. Many patients have trouble smoking marijuana or simply prefer not to smoke it. The restriction against edible forms of marijuana is unnecessary. It directly conflicts with patient needs without any demonstrable benefit to the community.
The ordinance discriminates against people with a prior conviction. A past felony conviction does not prevent illness, nor should it be a barrier to medical care – or be used to restrict a person’s lawful, collective participation with other medical marijuana patients. This is not least because many patients have a past conviction for activity that has been deemed lawful since 1996 under the Compassionate Use Act.
Only clear regulations developed with the input of all concerned parties can balance the needs of the whole community – to both ensure safe access to medical marijuana and address public order concerns.
In conclusion, I strongly urge the Department of Planning and Land Use to extend the public comment period on the Medical Marijuana Collectives County Code and Zoning Ordinance (POD 09-007) until April 30, 2010.
Respectfully,
[YOUR NAME
AND ADDRESS]
Cc: Supervisors, San Diego County Board
Greg.cox@sdcounty.ca.gov
dianne.jacob@sdcounty.ca.gov
Pam.slater@sdcounty.ca.gov
ron-roberts@sdcounty.ca.gov
bill.horn@sdcounty.ca.gov
Jonathan Farace
joseph.farace@sdcounty.ca.gov
joseph.farace@sdcounty.ca.gov
dplu@sdcounty.ca.gov
Greg.cox@sdcounty.ca.gov
dianne.jacob@sdcounty.ca.gov
Pam.slater@sdcounty.ca.gov
ron-roberts@sdcounty.ca.gov
bill.horn@sdcounty.ca.gov
Although the official Public Input deadline has passed, we still have time to let the Supervisors and those responsible for developing medical marijuana regulations in the county know that the community wants to see a legal, constitutional ordinance, that keeps patients interest at forefront, not local law enforcement.
Write your own letter, use the letter below as a template, or ask a friend to help you write one, but don’t just idly sit by while the County of San Diego attempts to subvert the will of the people. The City of San Diego is on the right track to sensible regulations as they have created a Task Force that has patients and members of the community on it, all of whom have weighed and came up with recommendations for the San Diego City Council.
Why has the County of San Diego refused to adopt their own task force or to follow the recommendations of the San Diego City task force? I believe the answer is, they want to quickly adopt an ordinance which will influence all the other small cities in the county to follow suit which intern may weigh heavily on the Ordinance the City of San Diego is developing. The official excuse is they are trying to hurry in time for the moratorium currently enacted in the unincorporated areas of the county to expire.
We need to stay involved and on top of both the San Diego County regulation development process, as well as the development of such ordinances in every city within the county. Take 10 minutes today to send the below letter to the supervisors. If you have already sent them a letter, send them a follow up to see what they are doing to change the proposed ordinance.
Thanks,
Eugene Davidovich
www.safeaccesssd.org
_______________________________________
April 5, 2010
Eric Gibson
Director, Department of Planning and Land Use
County Administration Center
1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335
San Diego, CA 92101
dplu@sdcounty.ca.gov
RE: MEDICAL MARIJUANA COLLECTIVES COUNTY CODE AND ZONING ORDINANCE (POD 09-007), REQUEST TO EXTEND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD TO APRIL 30, 2010
To Mr. Gibson:
As a resident of San Diego County, I am writing to request an extension of the 30-day public comment period regarding the Department of Planning and Land Use’s Medical Marijuana Collectives County Code and Zoning Ordinance (POD 09-007) until April 30, 2010.
Although the plan may have technically been available to the public on March 3, 2010 – the date of the memo – medical marijuana patients and advocates only became aware of it upon being contacted by a North County Times reporter Monday, March 29, 2010.
It is hard to imagine that this very limited level of exposure to the public would satisfy the Department that it had allowed for 30 days of public comment.
Moreover, the Department’s draft ordinance clearly suffers from a lack of input. The excessively strict nature of the ordinance suggests that the county failed to consult with any patients or caregivers at all. Patients would most certainly have pointed out the following concerns:
The ordinance is a de facto ban. A rule that would restrict dispensaries from existing within 1,000 feet from a laundry list of so-called “sensitive uses,” including any residence, makes this ordinance a de facto ban. This would relegate facilities to remote, outlying areas, making it difficult for patients to access their medicine, especially those with mobility issues.
The ordinance puts the wrong agency in charge. The licensing authority should not be the Sheriff's Department, but the County Department of Health or other more appropriate agency.
The ordinance fails to protect patient privacy. Draft provisions would allow the Sheriff’s Department unfettered access (without subpoena) to private patient records, financial transaction records, and records indicating the source of supply of medical marijuana. Such provisions place both patients and providers at risk of unnecessary local and, more significantly, federal interference.
The ordinance unnecessarily restricts patient choice. Many patients have trouble smoking marijuana or simply prefer not to smoke it. The restriction against edible forms of marijuana is unnecessary. It directly conflicts with patient needs without any demonstrable benefit to the community.
The ordinance discriminates against people with a prior conviction. A past felony conviction does not prevent illness, nor should it be a barrier to medical care – or be used to restrict a person’s lawful, collective participation with other medical marijuana patients. This is not least because many patients have a past conviction for activity that has been deemed lawful since 1996 under the Compassionate Use Act.
Only clear regulations developed with the input of all concerned parties can balance the needs of the whole community – to both ensure safe access to medical marijuana and address public order concerns.
In conclusion, I strongly urge the Department of Planning and Land Use to extend the public comment period on the Medical Marijuana Collectives County Code and Zoning Ordinance (POD 09-007) until April 30, 2010.
Respectfully,
[YOUR NAME
AND ADDRESS]
Cc: Supervisors, San Diego County Board
Greg.cox@sdcounty.ca.gov
dianne.jacob@sdcounty.ca.gov
Pam.slater@sdcounty.ca.gov
ron-roberts@sdcounty.ca.gov
bill.horn@sdcounty.ca.gov
Jonathan Farace
joseph.farace@sdcounty.ca.gov
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)