Pubdate: Thu, 19 Jul 2007
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Copyright: 2007 Los Angeles Times
Contact:  http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/248
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/af.htm (Asset Forfeiture)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Marijuana - Medicinal)

NEW CHALLENGES FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA

The Drug Enforcement Administration Goes After Landlords Who Rent to 
Dispensaries.

THE DRUG ENFORCEMENT Administration has notified more than 150 Los 
Angeles property owners that their fortunes and their sacred honor 
are forfeit to the state. What crime must a landlady commit to 
deserve this punishment? Renting to a tenant who operates a medical 
marijuana dispensary. The DEA sent out letters last week notifying 
owners that they stand to lose their properties and face 20 years in 
prison for allowing their buildings to be used for "unlawfully ... 
distributing or using a controlled substance."

The only good news in this deplorable new bullying tactic by the 
federal drug cops is that if you're a property owner, your least-bad 
option is fairly clear. You can honor the will of California voters, 
allow the dispensary to stay and lose your property, or you can evict 
the tenant and risk a costly lawsuit. You're better off taking your 
chances with the lawsuit, although the DEA will not admit this. A 
representative of the agency's L.A. office uses the Orwellian phrase 
"these letters were merely to educate property owners," but concedes 
that in fact the letters serve to weaken the legal position of landlords.

That's because the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 
specifies that landlords must have provable knowledge of drug 
activities to be subject to asset forfeiture. The DEA's 
letter-writing campaign establishes that paper trail, while coyly 
avoiding giving property owners any advice about what to do. The 
agency confirms, however, that the "long-term goal" is to get 
landlords to evict dispensaries. Nor is this strictly a private 
property matter; public property is at risk, as the city of West 
Hollywood found out a few years ago when the DEA seized $300,000 the 
city had provided to help purchase a building for a dispensary.

As they have for the last several years, Reps. Dana Rohrabacher 
(R-Huntington Beach) and Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.) are sponsoring 
an amendment that would kill funding for federal efforts to preempt 
state medical marijuana initiatives, and although Congress should in 
general avoid this kind of procedural finagling, it would at least 
halt the DEA's efforts to thwart the will of voters and legislatures 
in 12 states. And if the DEA refuses to listen, Congress should 
consider doing away with civil asset forfeiture altogether. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake