Harassment of Medical Marijuana Patients in San Diego Continues

Rogue Code Enforcement Officer Peter Bedrosian intimidates, harasses, and questions visibly ill patient in the streets of East San Diego County

By: Eugene Davidovich

SAN DIEGO – For years the county’s sick and dying have been at the brunt of District Attorney Bonnie (DA) Dumanis’ ‘fierce fight’ against medical marijuana patients. Dumanis’ fight has included raids on dispensaries, arrests of wheel-chair bound and terminally-ill patients, and has resulted in courtroom acquittals rather than convictions costing the county thousands and serious embarrassment to law enforcement.

In June of 2010, Dumanis managed to convince the County Board of Supervisors, a governing body historically opposed to medical marijuana, to adopt an ordinance which forced all dispensaries in the unincorporated areas of the county to shut down.

Since then, a few brave safe access pioneers, determined to provide the sick and dying with quality care, remained open and began to challenge the “de-facto” ban in court. With court challenges ramping up, under the direction of Top Cop, Dumanis, the Sheriff and Code Enforcement have launched a harassment campaign against the remaining care facilities.

The latest and most egregious example surfaced last month when Code Enforcement Officer Peter Bedrosian busily harassed and interrogated patients outside a remaining facility in the East County of San Diego and came across Vey Linville, a very active advocate, terminally ill patient, and member of the San Diego Chapter of Americans for Safe Access.

Below is an account of Mr. Linville’s encounter with Bedrosian as well as my attempt to clarify the departmental policy with regards to code enforcement encounters with patients.

After Mr. Linville contacted San Diego ASA and reported the incident, I was assigned to investigation. The goal was to determine the Sheriff Department’s and Code Enforcement policies on their interactions with patients as well as voice San Diego ASA’s concern for the incident.

I first called Mr. Bedrosian. When he answered his phone, I introduced myself and began to express my concern regarding his interaction with Mr. Linville was going to asked him for clarification on the department’s policy. After hearing who I was and why I was calling, a very angry Bedrosian began shouting into the telephone then, finishing his rant, he hung up. Shortly after his episode, Bedrosian called back with another ranting voicemail, this time complete with threats and intimidating statements which appeared designed to scare me into silence.

Following this call I wrote an email and left a voicemail for Assistant Sheriff Prendergast, the official spokesperson for the Sheriff on medical marijuana issues in the hopes of a response. In the email, I inquired about the policy as well as whether a departmental training program was in place for field code enforcement officers in those sensitive interactions. In the email, which I carbon copied Bedrosian on, I included Mr. Linville’s letter.

Around that same time, Mr. Linville personally hand delivered the letter to Assistant Sheriff Prendergast’s office. Mr. Linville’s letter as well as my email and calls, remain unanswered.
Here is the full content of the letter sent by Mr. Linville to Assistant Sheriff Prendergast which Mr. Linville has agreed to share with us for this article:

Assistant Sheriff Prendergast,

My name is Vey Linville. We met recently at the County Board of Supervisors meeting. I am an emphysema patient with an oxygen tank. I legally drink cannabis medicines to keep from suffocating. I thought you might perhaps remember me. I have been in the press and on TV several times recently regarding this issue, and I am an active and vocal member of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the nation’s largest organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists, and concerned citizens promoting safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutics and research.
On Thursday February 17, 2011, I was delivering political event flyers to various facilities in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County. It was approximately 1 p.m., I was dressed in a business suit and tie, and I was encumbered as usual with my oxygen tank.
On exiting XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX on  xxxxx . in xxxxxxxxx, as I approached my vehicle, I was detained, interrogated, and harassed with no cause by a County Code Enforcement team, led by Peter Bedrosian, Code Enforcement Officer, Dept. of Planning and Land Use, (858-694-3047,peter.bedrosian@sdcounty.ca.gov).

Mr. Bedrosian identified himself and asked me in an aggressive and forceful manner who I was and what I was doing there. As a legal patient on life support with an illness considered terminal, I was quite intimidated by his aggressive demeanor, tone, and line of questioning; but I offered my hand and introduced myself and told him that I was there representing the San Diego Chapter of Americans For Safe Access and that I was dropping off brochures. This seemed to greatly agitate Mr. Bedrosian. He said: “Brochures, Eh?”, crossed his arms and proceeded to interrogate me in the parking lot.

He wanted to know if “The Facility” was still “Operating” inside. I explained to him that since I was just dropping off flyers, that I had not been past the front waiting area today; and that I could not say of my own knowledge what activities may or may not be occurring inside. I also explained to him that I had been to this facility before, and that I was not aware of any conduct by this facility not in fullest and strictest compliance with all state laws and local ordinances that I am aware of.

This seemed to cause Mr. Bedrosian great distress, and his level of agitation continued to increase. By this point, the other member of the Code Enforcement Team was trying to tell Mr. Bedrosian privately that he had seen me speak at the Planning Commission, and he seemed to be trying quite hard to get Mr. Bedrosian to calm down and disengage from this encounter.

At this point, Mr. Bedrosian took a couple of deep breaths and tried to put a good face on the above by explaining to me in a calmer tone and a forced smile that they had no problem with this facility continuing to operate, but that the issue was one of location. He told me that there were parcels in Spring Valley that were zoned for this, and that it would be fine for the facility to move to one of them.

I told Mr. Bedrosian calmly that I was a resident of Spring Valley, and that I was quite aware of the two parcels that he was referring to. I explained that my mobility is limited, and that I have many patients as friends who are far more disabled than I, in wheelchairs and on dialysis. I explained to him that a rock quarry and a radiation disposal area, without buildings, utilities, or improvements were not my idea of Safe Access; and that I did not think that was what the voters of California had in mind, or the framers of the Americans With Disabilities Act.
That is when I realized that this was an issue that Mr. Bedrosian is clearly taking very personally. He became even more angry and frustrated, and the other team member was forced to pull him away by the arm; and they left. I was afraid that Mr. Bedrosian’s clear personal bias on this political issue would result in attempted law enforcement action against me, because of my legal patient status, my political activities, and by simply being near that facility at that time.

Apparently this facility has a number of recorded video cameras, including one covering the front outside area; and a member inside had watched this Code Enforcement “Terminal Patient Encounter” unfold. This member came outside to see if I had been harmed, and to assist me with my oxygen tank and offer me water or whatever aid I might need. Before leaving the parking lot, I contacted Eugene Davidovich the San Diego Area Liaison for Americans for Safe Access and notified him of the incident.

It is my understanding that you personally have always treated the medical marijuana community and members of Americans for Safe Access in a fair, balanced and honorable way; and my recent meeting with you bears this out. I know as well that you have served with the highest valor in the field. I must therefore share with you one more item of the gravest concern. Yesterday I was told by members of the community that Mr. Bedrosian has had a number of other highly negative “Patient Encounters” of the worst kind.
It is my understanding that the purview of a Code Enforcement Officer is rather narrow.

It is my sincere hope that in the future, legal patients going about their lawful occasions in San Diego County will not be harassed in the street by County Code Enforcement Officers who may be personally uncomfortable with existing California State Law and political activity by legal patients, and are unable to exercise reasonable discretion thereby.

I must also encourage public policy discussion on this issue. It directly affects patients Quality Of Life, and intimidation of this type can keep the sick and dying from obtaining their life-saving medicine in San Diego County. I encourage you to work with Eugene Davidovich and other members of Americans for Safe Access to implement a policy for the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department that would address these types of interactions with the sick and dying in the County of San Diego.

I understand that your people have a job to do. This just isn’t it.
Thank you Sir, Vey Linville

Why has the county taken such a harsh stance on this issue considering that the latest field polls show 80% of registered voters in the County of San Diego support medical marijuana?

The lack of response from the San Diego Sheriff’s Department and Code Enforcement suggests that there is a serious disconnect between the will and needs of the residents of the county and their elected representatives. This disconnect gravely concerns the community which overwhelmingly supports the Compassionate Use Act and the fair treatment of sick and dying patients.

In Bedrosian’s case, his personal views against medical marijuana patients have clearly influenced his work, he now as a part of his job feels he has a right to target sick people who are exercising their right to free speech, under the guise of code enforcement.

On-the-job Code Enforcement officers like Peter Bedrosian and other law enforcement officials should keep their personal and political beliefs from spilling these views into a vitriol of hatred of patients.

It is time the San Diego Community stood up against this unfair treatment of patients and demanded accountability. I encourage you to contact the San Diego County’s Citizens’ Law Enforcement Review Board and file a complaint urging them to investigate the treatment of patients by Code Enforcement as well as other law enforcement officials in San Diego County.

Our most vulnerable residents deserve respect and a policy that takes into account their needs.

Download Instructions and form to file a complaint with the County’s Citizens’ Law Enforcement Review Board:
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/clerb/docs/Comp-frm.pdf

For questions and tips contact: sandiegoasa@gmail.com

Citizens Unite in Opposition to Proposed Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance

Citizens Unite in Opposition to Proposed Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance

Opposition mounts against proposed medical marijuana dispensary regulation for the City of San Diego. Over twenty local and national organizations join campaign opposing the ordinance and urging changes.

On March 28th the San Diego City Council will be voting on an ordinance that will serve as a de-facto ban on medical cannabis facilities in the City of San Diego. If passed as currently written, this unduly restrictive ordinance would threaten the quality of life for some of the most vulnerable members of our community and would deny safe access for thousands of patients in the city.

In order to oppose the ordinance Canvass for a Cause and the San Diego Chapter of Americans for Safe Access have launched a coalition campaign to educate the public of the impending ban and mobilize grassroots opposition to the ban.

In the last three weeks the campaign has generated over 1,500 letters of opposition from constituents in the City of San Diego and has brought together a coalition of over twenty local and national organizations united in opposition to this ordinance!

                                   

The campaign has mobilized hundreds of patients and concerned citizens by organizing the medical cannabis facilities, employing well trained professional canvassers, and leading a traditional volunteer driven political effort giving the people a unique opportunity to voice their opposition to this ban.

Our campaign is educating the public to generate massive quantities of constituents’ communications to the city council members, urging them to amend the ordinance and approve an ordinance that guarantees safe access and reflects the needs of the community.

The campaign will be holding a rally on the 28th of March! The rally will start at the Federal Courthouse located at 940 Front St. San Diego CA, 92101 at 12noon and will end at the San Diego City Hall at 202 C St. at 1:30pm when everyone will go up to the City Council Meeting to speak against the proposed ordinance at 2pm.

We need your help to make the campaign a success, for volunteer opportunities, please email staff@stopthebansd.org

Visit the official campaign website for more information: www.stopthebansd.org | www.facebook.com/stopthebansd

San Diego Americans for Safe Access

www.SafeAccessSD.org

Get Involved, get active, make a difference!

Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org

San Diego ASA Holds HARM Accountable

By: Terrie Best, SDASA

As a part of San Diego Americans for Safe Access (SDASA) efforts to Stop Operation Green Rx, I recently requested and attended a county meeting along with some prominent drug policy reformists and recovery advocates from the San Diego Community in an effort to ascertain why, year after year, county contracted organizations such as The San Dieguito Alliance, Tri City Prevention , Collaborative, SWACC (Safety Wellness Advocacy Community Coalition) and North City Prevention Coalition are allowed to lobby against safe access for medical cannabis patients under the cover of federally granted drug prevention money.

As a representative of SDASA, I became aware of Health Advocates Rejecting Marijuana (HARM) (the group to which the heads of these organizations all belong) and as a volunteer in San Diego’s recovery community, I took offense to this waste of federal money - earmarked for drug prevention – used to circumvent state law and safe access for patients.


Truly, the concentrated and relentless opposition to clarity of the Compassionate Use Act which these groups force upon the city’s lawmakers time and time again has been at the helm of quite a bit of suffering for San Diego patients.

SDASA’s concerns and efforts culminated in a meeting with Dr. Jennifer Schaffer, Director of Behavioral Health Services; Susan Bower, Director of Alcohol and Drug Services and Linda Bridgeman-Smith, Prevention Services Manager. At the meeting a number of pointed questions were asked about the San Diego County’s process for deciding how prevention’s 20% slice of federal drug services money fits into the County’s overall addiction strategy.

While my concern with this issue was about the county contractors lobbying on the county’s dime to plea for a ban on cannabis collectives and regulations, the overall tone of the meeting was to discover how we might achieve a shift in San Diego County’s philosophy on drug prevention, making it less law enforcement driven - a model called “environmental prevention” - and more about an educational based effort.

The educational approach to prevention is an idea whose time has come, and San Diego County falls very short in using some of the evidenced-based and engaging strategies, that other more progressive counties are using their federal drug prevention funds for.

I first encountered HARM when it came to ASA’s attention that the group had invited a Fullerton attorney, Martin J Meyer www.jones-mayer.com, General Counsel to a number of law enforcement associations, to speak and empower city and county staffers to impose a ban on medical marijuana dispensaries.

When we looked into who heads up this organization and found it to be county contractors, SDASA quickly called a protest and set forth an agenda to investigate and open a dialog to stop this practice. This agenda included providing documentation on HARM to the San Diego County Grand Jury as well as involving the County Board of Supervisors.

Ironically, HARM attended and opposed the Medical Marijuana Task Force which is a panel of people whom the San Diego City Council tasked with helping give San Diego clarity on the safe access issue. The concerns the group griped about would mostly resolve themselves should the task force be allowed to do the work the City Council requests. Yet HARM seems to have a knee jerk reaction at the very idea of marijuana as medicine and continually opposes any action to provide clarity to the Compassionate Use Act.

HARM’s logo and agenda are on the County’s Alcohol and Drug Services webpage as a county initiative and the initiative makes an appearance in the County’s Prevention Plan, which states HARM is tasked with addressing the availability of marijuana, paraphernalia, business practices, and media messaging that encourage, normalize or trivialize marijuana use. Since there is nothing said about medical marijuana in the Prevention Plan, from which this group gets its marching orders it is apparent that over the years HARM has stepped very far astray of the mission they are funded for.

The seminars, investigation of collectives, and passing out of propaganda stickers against safe access at county and city meetings are evidence of the over step.

When pressed for reasons why this is allowed to continue, the Health and Human Services representatives during our meeting, distanced themselves from HARM’s actions, assured us the county did *not* host the Martin Mayer seminar nor do they authorize HARM to use county funds in its medical marijuana eradication endeavors.

They maintain that the Mayer seminar was a project HARM funded not with county funds but some other private funds. Presumably HARM uses the county funds it receives for other services more in keeping with its actual agenda as laid out by the sanctioned Prevention Plan. But, we have yet to see evidence of that and the county representatives did not say what those efforts are.

This all raises the question, how does the county keep HARM accountable in its use of funds to be sure there’s no misuse or seepage into their rouge eradication agenda?

No explanation or processes were set forth by officials in the meeting and I question if they’ve even thought of it.

SDASA will continue to monitor this issue and call for accountability of HARM’s county money. In the meantime, drug policy activists, addiction specialists and recovery advocates will continue to work on a long term strategy for all San Diegans toward a more progressive prevention strategy, one that engages our youth to make good choices on their own, rather than engaging in campaigns to arrest and prosecute. This strategy should include at-risk kids in its mission and provide for a broader use of federal block grant money and should not include opposition to state law.

Let's hope that by the January 5th San Diego City Council Meeting where the Council intends to vote on medical marijuana recommendations provided to them by the Medical Marijuana Task Force, these groups will rethink their approach, and refocus on their original mission, rather than continue to subvert state law.

SDASA sincerely thanks and appreciates the dedication of Dr. Schaffer, Susan Bower and Linda Bridgeman Smith for their time and attention. We are certain they will work toward a prevention plan we can all stand by.

Compassionate Use Act. What are we teaching the children?

Is anybody else tired of hearing the same old worn out argument “but it sends mixed messages to the children” when it comes to the Compassionate Use Act and the business of getting cannabis to the patients who are helped by it? And how about the fact that as soon as some mad mother plays the kid card, it effectively shuts down intelligent conversation about lifting cannabis prohibition, giving parents license to tromp on another’s rights in honor of their own children? I for one don’t temper my adult conversations with kids in mind so why are we doing this in the face of talk about sensible drug policy? These kids will grow up to be adults who will need the skills to view the real world and make real choices. They will need to be respectful of others, compassionate and kind while deciding what is right for them and looking out for number one.

Using children to gain political ground is a low-class and a decidedly harmful tactic that should be called out every time it is engaged in. Why are we allowing it? Let’s man up here. Sorry if, as a woman I’m among the first to suggest it. Having no kids (I never wanted them), it isn’t surprising that I’m sick of this argument. But, am I alone? I’m sure I can rule out the rabid soccer moms I’ve just alienated but you sensible parents, don’t you think your children are intelligent and resilient enough to understand clarifying laws which allow people who are helped by medical cannabis to obtain it safely doesn’t mean your kids are hearing any message other than one of compassion? Especially since it’s the law? Don’t we have a duty to teach our kids to have compassion AND to follow the law even though we may not understand it? A conversation about finding common ground and resolving conflict makes us better humans and better citizens. What it should not do is make us sheep led to the trough of certain drug addiction and ruin and I resent the implication. Can we grow up, please? Treating children as if they can’t reason is a disservice to them and our communities. I don’t believe acting compassionately sends a mixed message that kids will interpret as a green light to use drugs because I think kids are smarter than that. And I don’t even have any to misjudge, mistrust or underestimate.

Seriously, talk to your kids about drugs, the law and compassionate use in the same conversation and I believe we can overcome this stalemate. Compassionate use is not going away, we must iron out policies for its implementation that we can all get behind. Parents, I urge you to see that being part of the solution to implementing state law will allow you a voice to insure your kids get the tools to stay safe whatever that means for you. Trying to use a hammer to pound down the law will only serve to mute the voice of reason. We passed the law, now we must form the message about implementing it so that it rings not only of truth but of safety, compassion and lawfulness. Be the change!

Terrie Best, Stop Operation Green Rx Campaign Manager

8/27/2009

Marijuana is NOT Medicine? Clarification Please!

By: Terrie Best, Campaign Manager

Stop Operation Green Rx

August, 12, 2009

I’m sure the doctors at University of California at San Diego’s (UCSD) Center for Medical Cannabis Studies (CMCS) would be amused to hear San Diego narcotics officers decree that marijuana is not medicine inasmuch as CMCS is paid by federal funds to find new and better ways to treat patients with it. The CMCS, a department of UCSD, perhaps the largest employer in San Diego, is housed near the Hillcrest UCSD Medical Center in the heart of Mission Hills. Its mission is to conduct high quality scientific studies intended to ascertain the general medical safety and efficacy of cannabis and cannabis products and examine alternative forms of cannabis administration. This is accomplished through focused controlled clinical trials, observational studies and randomized trials, which the center publishes and subjects to rigorous peer-review. I checked and the doctors who run this place are no slouches. The review panel alone reads like the Board of Directors at The University Club. They’re all MD’s and all are from prestigious medical schools – certainly weightier than a cop with an outdated opinion. These sorts could review for any medical journal they want to and probably they do. They are writers of textbooks and sworn to do no harm. So, if they say cannabis has medical value why do you suppose law enforcement in our town including the DA, insist that “marijuana is not medicine?” I’m not making this up, that is a direct quote from a training handout supervising narcotics officer, Conrado DeCastro - the so called mastermind of Operation Green Rx (Google it!)- pointed to when asked on the stand recently about his training and qualifications on the subject. Short of a conspiracy theory, I’m baffled why cops take such a hard line, and anybody who voted for the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 should be baffled if not outraged as well.

No matter what side of the issue you’re on, isn’t it time to find the common ground and begin to explore how we can implement the law in ways the pro-compassion voters as well as the DA, law enforcement and our local soccer mom’s can live with? With thriving research centers like the CMCS, isn’t the debate whether cannabis is medicine officially over? Wasn’t it over when we voted that it was appropriate for folks to use cannabis in treatment of medical symptoms? If anybody is still haggling over the issue of medicine, they are part of the problem. Clearly, it is time for San Diego law enforcement to invest in training around the issue of cannabis as medicine. So what keeps them from it? I wish I knew and it seems to be the million dollar question. The alternative, allowing police to use their opinions to decide which laws they will enforce, is far scary to me than any cannabis collective in my neighborhood. Wouldn’t that mean that if my local officer thought my botox injections where unsafe, I could be arrested? How about whether gay men should be protected from hate crimes? How can we pass the Compassionate Use Act and then sit back and let the DA decide for us what is and isn’t medicine and what laws will be enforce? Excuse me … be right back, I gotta go ask my local border patrol agent for advice on my health care policy. Be the change, People!