Pubdate: Thu, 23 Aug 2012
Source: New Times (San Luis Obispo, CA)
Copyright: 2012 New Times
Contact:  http://www.newtimesslo.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1277
Author: Dustin Hyman

COUNTY RESPONDS TO GRAND JURY MARIJUANA RECOMMENDATIONS

San Luis Obispo County officials have called grand jury
recommendations pertaining to medical marijuana delivery services
"unwarranted" and "unreasonable."

In June, the San Luis Obispo County grand jury published a report
detailing concerns over a lack of safe and reliable access for
qualified patients of legal medicinal marijuana countywide.

In its 15-page report, Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Medical Marijuana
in San Luis Obispo County, the grand jury raised concerns over the
alleged proliferation of delivery services they claim operate in an
unregulated "gray market." Currently, the report says, no local
government regulates the roughly 40 or so services in the county-with
the exception of Atascadero, which specifically prohibits such
services from operating within city limits.

Grand jury reports are not legally binding, but are intended to inform
local governments and perhaps inspire changes in public policy.

The report recommends not only allowing at least one brick-and-mortar
storefront to provide access to medical marijuana, but also
establishing a committee comprised of the county sheriff and other
stakeholders to develop a "fair and viable" local ordinance to
regulate such facilities. In addition, the jury recommended that each
local government establish its own specific ordinance and keep track
of how many collectives are delivering to patients.

Now the responses are starting to trickle in. On Aug. 21, the county
Health Agency and Board of Supervisors responded that while county
officials agree there are problems regulating such services in SLO
County, a changing legal landscape has made medical marijuana risky
territory.

"This is an inopportune time to develop local regulations given the
fact the California Supreme Court is expected to issue rulings in the
next few years related to how local jurisdictions regulate medical
marijuana," county supervisors wrote in their response.

Supervisors particularly took issue with the jury's finding that
there's currently no oversight on these seemingly legal services. They
pointed out the permitting process of the State Board of Equalization,
and operating guidelines set forth by the state attorney general, but
said that no collective has filed for a business license with the
county treasurer-tax collector and officials don't know how many
services operate locally.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt