Pubdate: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 Source: Fort Collins Coloradoan (CO) Copyright: 2010 The Fort Collins Coloradoan Contact: http://www.coloradoan.com/customerservice/contactus.html Website: http://www.coloradoan.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1580 Author: Larry Abrahamson Note: Larry Abrahamson is district attorney for the 8th Judicial District in Larimer and Jackson counties. WEIGH COSTS, BENEFITS TO SET POLICY In 2000, Colorado voters approved an initiative that permitted the use of marijuana as a medical aid in easing the pain and discomfort experienced from specific chronic or debilitating diseases. After all, why shouldn't a doctor be able to authorize marijuana? It seemed to make sense to many -- as long as it was restricted to six or fewer plants and less than 2 ounces of processed marijuana in the user's possession. Since initiatives do not afford the benefit of debate and testimony that the legislative process provides, many did not see the unintended consequences looming on the horizon. Although law enforcement and district attorneys, including now-Attorney General John Suthers, were vocal about the possible adverse impacts, the amendment still passed. In retrospect, they may have been right in nearly every aspect of their prediction. The unintended consequences: A loosely defined "primary caregiver" was interpreted as a person supplying marijuana to another. Doctors were charging up to $500 per authorization without physicals or verification of the severe pain. The six-plant, 2-ounce maximum was being ignored by new establishments called "dispensaries." Dispensaries were protected by confidentiality rules in the Department of Health from revealing the names of their patients, thus thwarting law enforcement efforts to detect violations and abuses. No quality control or testing standards for marijuana strength, dosage or frequency of use "The number of medical marijuana applications the state received on January 12, 2010, was a whopping 1,650 -- an all-time record for one day," says state registrar Ron Hyman, who oversees the applications. Colorado had about 5,000 at the end of 2009. Some of the marijuana was being supplied by cartels out of Mexico in order to keep up with demand. Local police departments reported an increase in violent home invasion crimes, with money or drugs being sought. The "severe pain" condition was not defined, thus 91 percent claim severe pain as their reason for needing marijuana. Municipalities were being flooded with more than 100 requests for sales tax licenses for the new marijuana dispensary business. Under the new law, there is some tightening of the rules, but the dispensary concept -- now called "centers" -- is still alive. Cities will be allowed to opt out of the provision that allows centers to operate within their boundaries. Council members should consider the following: Is there an impact on our children regularly seeing an illegal drug, marijuana, being advertised as a helpful medicine? Are there other valid intrinsic reasons that should be considered? Are there potential abuses by centers as was seen before the latest statute was passed? Is this a business the citizens want to encourage, when it is still a violation of federal law? Does allowing marijuana centers leave visitors with a positive impression of our city? Were "centers" anticipated under the amendment or were voters thinking that the amendment would simply protect a person who, while under a doctor's care, wanted to grow and use marijuana for medicinal purposes? As always, policy discussions have to be made by weighing the benefits against the cost to the citizens. Let your city council representatives know how you want them to handle the commercial distribution of marijuana in our community. Larry Abrahamson is district attorney for the 8th Judicial District in Larimer and Jackson counties. - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D