Pubdate: Sat, 22 Dec 2007
Source: Sacramento Bee (CA)
Copyright: 2007 The Sacramento Bee
Note: Does not publish letters from outside its circulation area.
Author: Greer Beahm


Re "DEA alerts pot-store landlords," Dec. 15: Landlords are 
responsive to and dependent upon government agencies for policing 
authority. Landlords have no policing authority.

In a recent call to the Sheriff's Department, we were advised that 
eviction for selling drugs was an option only if the resident went to 
jail. So, if the sheriff doesn't take action, we can't. The person we 
talked to also indicated it would be considered "vigilante" behavior 
for which the sheriff would take action against the landlord. The DEA 
says we could lose our property for failure to act; the sheriff 
penalizes if we act. The result is we are governed by two authorities 
with diametrically opposed views. If this went to court, landlords 
would expend private funds for defense in what appears to be an 
interagency dispute.

The task of stopping the illegal marijuana distributors is the job of 
DEA and/or police, not the landlord. Perhaps what needs to be done is 
set up an interagency team with representatives of each group and a 
landlord association to work together to accomplish the task.

This, however, doesn't address another central problem: the 
difference between legal jurisdictions governing the use of medical 
marijuana - including the question: Is medical marijuana a valid 
medicine and how should it be governed?

- - Greer Beahm, Sacramento
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom