Pubdate: Fri, 26 Oct 2012
Source: San Diego Union Tribune (CA)
Copyright: 2012 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.
Contact:  http://www.utsandiego.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/386
Page: B6

CLEAR THINKING NEEDED ON DOPEY PROPOSITIONS

The five medical marijuana propositions on the ballot in four San
Diego County cities next month are not really about how best to use
California's Compassionate Use Act of 1996 to provide this
psychoactive drug to really sick people who get no relief from
traditional medicines.

They are about community, and what might happen to those four cities Del 
Mar, Imperial Beach, Lemon Grove and Solana Beach  should any of
the five propositions be approved by voters on Nov. 6.

In Del Mar, Proposition H would regulate the location and operation of
marijuana dispensaries, and tax their sales, although the city
attorney's analysis states that the tax is legally questionable. In
Imperial Beach, Proposition S would allow cultivation of marijuana,
regulate dispensary location and operations, even allowing on-site
smoking of marijuana at the dispensaries, but apparently not tax them.
In Solana Beach, Proposition W would allow that city to also regulate
and tax dispensaries, but the city attorney's analysis curiously
states that "it is unresolved" whether the ordinance is pre-empted by
federal law. (Unresolved? Really? Tell that to U.S. Attorney Laura
Duffy, who has a very good fix on the resolution.)

And Lemon Grove has two measures to decide: Proposition Q, which was
placed on the ballot by the City Council as an alternative to a
citizens' initiative, Proposition T. Both would regulate and tax in
different ways.

Voters in those cities need only to look at their big neighbor, San
Diego, to see what the future would hold: parents constantly concerned
about the proximity of marijuana dispensaries to schools and other
places where children gather, even if the dispensaries are within the
designated areas; police and sheriff's deputies concerned about
dispensaries attracting crime, no matter where they're located; the
U.S. Attorney's Office, which, no matter what local law might say, is
mandated to uphold federal law that says growing, selling,
distributing or even using marijuana  for any reason  is illegal.

And at least some of these cities would likely end up in lengthy legal
battles that could cost taxpayers big time.

Think about it, voters.

Did San Diego's adoption several years ago of an ordinance intended to
regulate the location and operation of dispensaries end the political
or legal battles?

Do public health officials or law enforcement officials or anyone else
who knows what they're talking about say that the only people availing
themselves of the San Diego dispensaries were truly sick people who
needed medical marijuana for their ailments? Or were they
overwhelmingly just people who wanted to get high?

And do they say the dispensary operations were all according to Hoyle
and crime-free, nonprofit operations as required?

Did the U.S. Attorney's Office suddenly say, well, OK, the locals
voted for it so we will look the other way?

Think about it some more.

If Barack Obama wins re-election, is he likely to reverse the Justice
Department policy and crackdown that his administration started? Is
Mitt Romney if he wins?

Get real, cities. Vote for your community by voting no on Propositions
H, Q, T, S and W.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt