ASA appeals LA zoning interpretation

Americans for Safe Access (ASA) filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s interpretation of the new medical cannabis ordinance in Los Angeles on Friday. The appeal challenges the Zoning Administrator’s position on parking and nonconforming use status for medical cannabis collectives.

In an interpretation published on May 6, Zoning Administrator Michael Logrande states that collectives “operate in a way that is similar to medical offices and clinics,” and should therefore have one parking space per two hundred square feet of floor space. That is a tough standard for collectives to meet, especially in combination with the other restrictions on where they can be located. ASA argues that the parking requirement should be based on the square footage of the facility used for retail and manufacturing use – a computation that would make finding a new location easier.

ASA’s appeal also challenges the Zoning Administrator’s position that medical cannabis collectives have no status as prior nonconforming uses, vested land use rights that may make it possible to challenge the applicability of the new ordinance. Nonconforming status is a significant component of the lawsuit filed by ASA on March 2 seeking to overturn some portions of the city’s medical cannabis ordinance. It is also expected to be a significant part of litigation filed by other groups.

This appeal is part of an ongoing effort to improve the State’s most severe medical cannabis ordinance. Our research and experience show that sensible regulations reduce crime and complaints around collectives, while preserving access for legal patients. We must not let those who oppose medical cannabis or misguided city staff use the regulatory process to roll back safe access to medicine. That is why ASA remains committed to fighting for reasonable regulations in Los Angeles and other jurisdictions.

View Original Blog post here: http://safeaccessnow.org/blog/?p=775

Medical Marijuana Regulations in San Diego - PS&NS Meeting Today

THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO will be meeting TODAY - May 26, 2010 at 2pm to hear reports from the San Diego City Attorney and the Independent Budget Analyst about the San Diego Medical Marijuana Recommendations.

This morning the San Diego Union Tribune article said “A committee of City Council members will meet today ?to act on a second and final set of recommendations for its ordinance. Council members will be presented new reports showing that it could cost $25,000 to $35,000 for city staffers to process each dispensary permit. Recommendations being considered include requiring dispensaries to pay for permits and fees that cover the full cost of regulating them, and making it mandatory for stores to conduct employee background checks”.

The community needs to be there in FULL FORCE to help educate and continue to monitor what the committee does with the recommendations of the task force.
Here is the AGENDA for the meeting: http://docs.sandiego.gov/ccagenda_psns/p100526.pdf

The San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force recommendations and all other relevant information can be viewed on their website: http://www.sandiego.gov/medicalmarijuana/

WHEN: WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 2010, AT 2:00 P.M.
WHERE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ROOM (12TH FLOOR), 202 C STREET, SAN DIEGO

San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org

Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org

News Brief: UPDATE TO: Keeping Scales in Compliance for Medical Cannabis Trade in San Diego

Marcus Boyd and Eugene Davidovich, San Diego Americans for Safe Access


Hello everyone and welcome back to another San Diego Americans for Safe Access news brief. Today we bring you an update to our last news brief titled “Keeping Scales in Compliance for Medical Cannabis Trade in San Diego”.

After releasing the information last weekend in that news brief, we received a call back from the County’s Agriculture, Weights and Measures Department. The gentleman we spoke to last week, Mr. Ris Burton called and suggested we speak with Mr. Jim Byers, the County’s Deputy Agricultural Commissioner and Sealer of weights and Measures (Deputy Sealer) to get an official statement and additional clarification on the requirements for certifying scales.

Yesterday, we had the opportunity to speak with Mr. Byers directly. He explained that all the information put out over the weekend in the news brief was accurate however there were a few things mentioned in the news brief, for which he wanted to provide additional clarification.

Mr Byers said that for the initial inspection of the scale, it doesn’t have to be an onsite inspection. With an appointment, organizations can bring the scales directly to the Weights and Measures office for inspection. San Diego County has two Agriculture, Weights, and Measures offices. The main San Diego office is located at 5555 Overland Ave, Suite 3101, San Diego, CA 92123 their house of operation are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and the office can be reached at 858-694-2739. The North County office is located at 151 E. Carmel Street San Marcos, CA 92078, they are open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and can be reached at 760-752-4700.

Regarding the onsite inspections; Mr. Byers explained that when the inspectors go out, they are supposed to check the devices annually and they don’t always call to setup an appointment, in fact most inspections are unannounced. He said “If our inspector is driving by and notices a business that has scales, they can just walk in there and ask to inspect the device”.

He further clarified that regardless of whether the organization is non-profit or for profit, prior to using a scale for commercial purposes, the scale must be certified, and that the certification does not have to be done by a county sealer. An independent Registered Service Agency could certify the scales as well. Most grocery stores use third party agencies Mr. Byers explained.

On the California Department of Food and Agriculture website the Division of Measurements and Standards has provided a list of Registered Service Agencies. The list can be downloaded and viewed here: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/dms/programs/rsa/rsalistings/rsaListings.html

However, keep in mind, weather your scale is certified by the county or a third party, the county sealer can still inspect scales on location, at random and prior without notice.

Mr. Byers went on to explain that during the inspection if it is found that the scale is not in compliance, the operator or manager of the business will receive a report of the inspection and will have 30 days to correct all the discrepancies. He said it is common for businesses to open and not even be aware of the fact that they have to certify their scales. “We run into this often, and try to work with the business”, Mr. Byers explained.

He also mentioned that if the discrepancies in the scale are in favor of the business rather than the patient or member that the organization could also be subject to additional fines. In order to see if your scale is in compliance visit www.ncwm.net/certificates

Congress Tries to Stop Denial of Banking Services to Medical Marijuana Providers

Washington, DC -- Fifteen Members of Congress sent a letter Friday to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner urging him to issue "written guidance for financial institutions," which would commit the Department to not targeting those institutions whose account holders are in compliance with state medical marijuana laws. The patient advocate group Americans for Safe Access (ASA) has received dozens of reports over the past couple of years from medical marijuana providers in California, Colorado and other states who have either been denied financial services or had their existing bank accounts terminated with little-to-no justification.

"[I]t seems clear that legitimate state-legal businesses are being denied access to banking services, which does not serve the public interest," stated the letter authored by Colorado Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO), who ASA has been working with to bring this issue to the attention of Treasury. The Congressional letter, which was co-signed by Representatives from Arizona, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin, asserted that the denial of financial services produces "an increased risk to public safety with potential theft or robbery that any cash-only or cash-reliant business faces," and is "an affront to fundamental fairness."

Some federal prosecutions of medical marijuana cases have included the charge of "money laundering," which according to the government simply means depositing proceeds from a dispensary into a bank account. However, multiple states now expect medical marijuana dispensaries (and by extension, patients) to pay sales tax. "While financial institutions may have valid concerns," said ASA Government Affairs Director Caren Woodson. "The risk to banks is minimal, whereas their refusal to work with state-compliant medical marijuana providers jeopardizes countless people and delegitimizes lawful businesses."

ASA has received reports over the past two years that financial institutions such as Bank of America, US Bank, Wells Fargo and Chase have either refused to work with medical marijuana suppliers altogether or more specifically refused to provide credit card transaction services. Gary Kishner, a spokesperson for Chase, told Boulder Weekly that Chase refuses to do business with dispensaries due to "financial operational and compliance risk," but Kishner was unable to explain what that meant. ASA estimates that this widespread financial obstruction has directly impacted hundreds of dispensaries in multiple states.

In October 2009, the Justice Department issued its own guidance on enforcement of marijuana laws in medical marijuana states. However, this shift in policy has appeared insufficient for quelling fears in the banking industry. "Americans for Safe Access is working with Congress to obtain a Treasury policy similar to that of the DOJ," continued Woodson. "We appreciate the leadership of Representative Polis and others as we attempt to remove federal obstacles from the implementation of safe access to medical marijuana at the local and state levels."

Further Information:
Original Article: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6016
Congressional letter to Treasury Secretary Geithner: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Congressional_Letter_to_Treasury.pdf
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's recent statements before Congress: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMCHmU-nFAM
October 2009 DOJ directive: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192

San Diego Office IBA Issues Report on Medical Marijuana Regulatory Structure Cost and Fees

Eugene Davidovich, San Diego Americans for Safe Access

SAN DIEGO - The Office of the Independent Budget Analyst (IBA) on May 24, 2010 issued a 15 page report (IBA Report 10-45) on the Medical Marijuana Medical Marijuana Regulatory Structure Costs and Fees. “This report will expand upon the discussion within (IBA Report 10-15) with specific recommendations regarding the regulatory structure appropriate within the City of San Diego based on Task Force and Council Committee recommendations.

The new report (IBA 10-45) in summary states that “The IBA evaluated each of the Task Force’s regulatory recommendations for the appropriate departmental jurisdiction within the City that would undertake the administrative and regulatory oversight as recommended by the Task Force and Land Use and Housing. Our review determined that there are existing regulatory structures within the Development Services Department, the Police Department, and the Treasurer’s Office that are appropriate to address the recommended regulatory actions. These departments will have to work to determine the most effective and efficient manner to conduct the various permitting processes across their departments”.

“The identification of the costs and a recommendation for specific cost recovery fees for the regulation of medical marijuana collectives/cooperatives would require a determination of the specific requirements and departmental responsibilities as outlined within a future City Ordinance. Where an appropriate fee structure does not already exist, the identified City departments will need to conduct a fee study to assign costs to their required administrative and/or regulatory duties, based on the specific personnel or non-personnel costs particular to each”.

THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO will be meeting on May 26, 2010 at 2pm to take action on the San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force recommendations as well as to hear a presentation of the IBA report (AGENDA ITEM 10) from the Independent Budget Analyst as well as the report from the San Diego City Attorney.

Here is the AGENDA for the meeting: http://docs.sandiego.gov/ccagenda_psns/p100526.pdf | The San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force recommendations and all other relevant information can be viewed on their website: http://www.sandiego.gov/medicalmarijuana/

The community needs to be there in FULL FORCE to help educate and continue to monitor what the committee does with the recommendations of the task force:

• WHEN: WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 2010, AT 2:00 P.M.
• WHERE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ROOM (12TH FLOOR), 202 C STREET, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org

Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org

San Diego City Attorney and Budget Analyst Report on Medical Marijuana

The Committee on Public Safety and Neighborhood Services of The City Council of the City of San Diego, will be meeting on May 26, 2010 at 2pm to hear a report (AGENDA ITEM 10) from the San Diego City Attorney and the Independent Budget Analyst about the San Diego Medical Marijuana Recommendations.

The community needs to be there in FULL FORCE to help educate and continue to monitor what the committee does with the recommendations of the task force.
Here is the AGENDA for the meeting: http://docs.sandiego.gov/ccagenda_psns/p100526.pdf

The San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force recommendations and all other relevant information can be viewed on their website: http://www.sandiego.gov/medicalmarijuana/

WHEN: WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 2010, AT 2:00 P.M.
WHERE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ROOM (12TH FLOOR), 202 C STREET, SAN DIEGO, CA

San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org

Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org

Riverside Medical Marijuana Collective Stays Open While Tackling Lawsuit

By: Lanny Swerdlow

As many of you know from the article in the Press Enterprise and from the medical marijuana grapevine, the THCF Medical Clinic and the Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center were served with a lawsuit asserting that we are in violation of a zoning ordinance in the city of Riverside that bans the distribution of medicinal marijuana. Although the Press Enterprise story (http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_wpot22.13dff793.html) did a good job of explaining the issues, I would like to give you some in-depth insights as to what is happening, why it happened and what is going to be done about it.

But before I do I want to remind you about what this email was going to be all about if this lawsuit had not been served and that is the Rally for Access at the San Bernardino Board of Supervisors this Tuesday, May 25

On June 19, the moratorium on medical marijuana collectives in San Bernardino County comes to an end. The promised medical marijuana collective ordinance is not going to happen which means San Bernardino County will most likely pass another one year moratorium. The question is what do we do now?

Although jumping up and down and stamping our feet would be cathartic, it would not get much accomplished and we have to deal with the situation now at hand and figure what can be done to actually get a medical marijuana collective ordinance into place once a ban is in place.

The problem last time is that there was no ongoing monitoring of the process that was supposed to be in place to draft an ordinance so when patients finally realized that nothing was being done, there wasn't time left to actually get one written and in place. How do we solve that problem this time?

On May 25 when we go before the Board of Supervisors, in addition to reminding them of their commitment to implementing state law and passing a mmj collective ordinance, we need to ask that they follow the example of Palm Springs, San Diego and many other cities and counties and establish a committee to oversee the process.

The Palm Springs Medical Marijuana Task Force, of which I was a member, was composed of two representatives from the City Council, the Chief of Police and a Deputy, City Manager, City Attorney, Planning Staff and representatives from patient organizations and dispensaries. The meetings were open to the public and it was not unusual to have ten to twenty or more patients at a meeting providing the committee with input and guidance.

It worked and Palm Springs became the first, and so far only, city in the Inland Empire to enact a medical marijuana ordinance allowing for collectives to operate under their zoning laws. In fact, the first licensed collective anywhere in the Inland Empire, Cannahelp, will hold its grand opening the same day as our rally in San Bernardino. (Any one up to
carpooling to Palm Springs to celebrate their grand opening after our presentation before the SB Board?)

This is what we need to do on Tuesday, May 25 before the Board - ask them to establish a Medical Marijuana Task Force and charge the Task Force with developing an ordinance and bringing it to the board in as rapid a manner as is consistent with developing a good solid workable ordinance.

Hopefully 3 of the 5 Board members will recognize this as a viable solution and at a subsequent Board meeting, establish the Task Force.

I know this is kind of going hat-in-hand before the Board that has spurned us before, but we have to be realists and take actions that hold out the promise of obtaining safe, reliable and local access. If we don't do it, who will? Better I should ask, if you don't do it, who will?

Please make the time to join us on Tuesday, May 25 at our rally at the SB Board of Supervisors meeting. Let them know how disappointed you are by the County's inaction and why access is so important to you and other patients. Ask that this time a committee be formed to oversee the process and that patients be on the committee. If you have the time, let them know that you would be willing to serve on this committee.

The Rally for Access at the San Bernardino Board of Supervisors begins at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, May 25. We will rally in front of the County Administration Building where the Board meets. We will have some speakers, signs to wave, cheer as cars, trucks and assorted other vehicles honk in support and time to meet with friends and make new friends. When the public comment section comes up, we will go into the Board chamber and those who would like to make a 3
Minute presentation before the Board are strongly encouraged to do so.

The County Administration Building is located at 385 N. Arrowhead in downtown San Bernardino 92415.

If you are interested in making a day of it and car pooling to the Grand Opening of Cannahelp in Palm Springs after the Board meeting, send me an email or call me at 760-799-2055 and let me know so car pool arrangements can be made.

OK - WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE RIVERSIDE COLLECTIVE

On Thursday afternoon two gentlemen from Riverside County visited my house in White Water and handed me a summons to notify me that I had been named in a lawsuit filed by the city of Riverside to close down the collective operating in Riverside which the lawsuit listed as the THCF Health and Wellness Center. I was not surprised that a lawsuit had been filed – what stunned me was that I was the only person named in it.

In the article in the Press Enterprise, it states that Riverside City Attorney Greg "Priamos said that simply issuing recommendations for medical marijuana isn't a problem, but the city is going after both facilities because officials believe they are one operation, with Swerdlow as the operator."

Obviously someone in Riverside County hasn't done their homework. The clinic and the collective are totally separate with no legal or fiscal connections. The actual work of running the collective is overseen by William Sump. I continued to oversee the operations of the THCF Medical working alongside Dr. Paul Ironside who provides qualified patients with their recommendations.

The lawsuit filed by the city of Riverside does not allege that the collective is doing anything not in compliance with the AG Guidelines. It is only alleging that the collective is violating a city zoning ordinance that bans the operation of "a facility where marijuana is made available for medical purposes in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 (Proposition 215)." This definition is so overbroad that it arguably bans even cultivation in a patient's private home and certainly a home in which a patient may be growing for other patients.

In any case, violating a zoning ordinance is a civil offense, not a criminal offense. You do not arrest, confiscate and imprison a person for violating a civil ordinance. You serve them a summons like the city of Riverside has done and you duke it out in court and may the party with the best arguments win.

We are not afraid of fighting for patient rights in a civil court - in fact we welcome it as we believe we are legally right and the city is legally wrong and we will win. What concerns us is the possibility of a raid such as collectives have recently experienced in San Bernardino County. I have spoken with one of our attorneys who is of the opinion that this
is not likely to happen although he admits that Riverside County DA Rod Pacheco and Riverside City Attorney
Priamos move in strange ways.

So what are we going to do? First off, we are consulting with a number of attorneys as to what this lawsuit is all about and how we should best respond. We will be answering the lawsuit within the 30 days given to us to respond. We will be denying all allegations of violating any ordinance and claim that the city's ban on collectives violates the rights of patients to form them as provided for in SB 420.

Most importantly the collective will be staying open providing member patients with medicine and the clinic will be open providing prospective patients with their recommendations and current patients with their renewals.

The Press Enterprise article was a good start in letting the public know what is going on and how the city is refusing to license and regulate collectives and instead has created a Wild West free-for-all. But most importantly, we need to let the people of Riverside and the Riverside City Council know that wasting tax payer money and city employee time drafting voluminous lawsuits to close collectives is wrong, wrong, wrong. Instead, tax payer money and city employee
time should be used productively to draft a medical marijuana collective ordinance that will provide local access to patients and do so in way that causes no problems for the city or its residents.

The way to bring that about is to use our rights under the U.S. Constitution which guarantees "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." We have grievances and we are going to let the Riverside City Council know about them on Tuesday, June 1 at 6:30 p.m. where we will assemble one of the largest groups of people ever to attend a Riverside City Council meeting.

Our elected officials are well aware that general public supports medical marijuana and that they support licensed and regulated access to medicinal marijuana. The refusal of our elected officials to recognize this and instead kowtow to Riverside City Attorney Priamos's reefer madness mentality is both counter-productive and a slap in the face to Riverside
city residents and the voters of California.

Watch for future emails with updates on what is happening with the collective and the clinic, but right now circle Tuesday, June 1 and write in 6:30 p.m. and be at Riverside City Hall at 3900 Main Street, Riverside 9255 to demand your right to safe, reliable and local access as well as the respect that you so rightfully deserve.

REMINDER: RIVERSIDE COUNTY DA CANDIDATE FORUM THURSDAY, MAY 27 @ 7:30 P.M.

I am sure you have placed a gold star on your calendar for Thursday, May 27 at 7:30 p.m. when there will be a special forum featuring the candidates for Riverside County DA - well one of the two candidates anyway. Judge Paul Zellerbach has accepted the invitation and will be there.

We have not heard from Rod Pacheco and don't expect to, but that's OK as Judge Zellerbach is an outstanding candidate with 22 years experience as a Riverside County Deputy District Attorney and ten years as a Judge in the Riverside Superior Courts.

Judge Zellerbach will inform you of his candidacy and position on a variety of important issues facing the voters of Riverside County. He will specifically address the issue of medical marijuana law enforcement and let us know where he agrees with current enforcement practice and where he thinks change needs to be made. There will be ample opportunity for questions at the end of his presentation.

The DA Community Forum will take place on Thursday, May 27 beginning promptly at 7:30 p.m. at the THCF Medical Clinic, 647 Main Street,, Riverside 92501. Plan now to be at this special event and get there early if you want a seat as it will most likely be standing room only.

PUBLIC APOLOGY

At the last meeting of MAPP in Riverside, I really goofed and I want to offer a public apology to Tim Dresman of BP Medical Solutions in Lake Elsinore.
Tim had, on his own volition, met with staff members in Riverside County Planning Department on why they were dragging their feet in implementing an ordinance for medical marijuana collectives. They asked him to prepare a draft ordinance for their consideration and Tim had done so.

Tim and I had some very intense discussions on just what is involved in meeting with Riverside County staff. I have a lot of respect for a guy that took it upon himself to try and get something going. It would be so cool if we had more people like him that would take the time to meet with Riverside County officials and let them know that their lack of action is disgraceful.

Tim is a committed activist who has opened a collective and braved all the threats and blusters of local officials and law enforcement to provide medicine to patients. I felt what he did in meeting with Riverside Co. planners was important and an example that others could follow so I asked him to come to the meeting and present his draft ordinance to the meeting and to let everyone know what he had found out during his meeting with these staff members.

Unfortunately, after the rather lengthy discussion of the problems in San Bernardino, I brought on our main speaker, Dr. Christopher Fitchner and totally forgot to bring Tim on. I know everyone is thinking "short term memory loss" but honestly I hadn't imbibed for several hours so I can't blame it on cannabis. I can only blame it on myself and apologize to Tim for being so empty-headed. I hope he will be able to make to the next meeting on Wednesday, June 2 and I absolutely promise not to have any short term memory loss of any kind.

MONDAY RADIO SHOW FEATURES A PATIENT DISCUSSING THE CONUNDRUM OF BEING ON DISABILITY AND USING MARIJUANA MEDICINALLY

Our featured guest will be a mmj patient on disability who has found that using marijuana has so benefited him that he is in danger of losing his disability benefits. Wanda Smith will also join us to discuss the SB Rally on Tuesday. The radio show is interactive, so call in your questions and comments on our listener call-in line at 888-909-1050.

Tune in this Monday and every Monday at 6 p.m. to Marijuana Compassion and Common Sense on radio station KCAA 1050AM heard everywhere in western Inland Empire. If you can't tune it in on your radio, then fire up your computer, log on to www.kcaaradio.com and click on LISTEN LIVE.

I would like to thank the William H. Gunn Construction Co. and THCF Medical Clinic for sponsoring our radio show. If you would like to let our dedicated audience know of your business, get the word out that you are cannabis friendly and help support the cause, then contact me and I will let you know about our very reasonable advertising rates.

LOST BRIEFCASE AT MAPP MEETING

A black brief case with no one's name but information relating to Humane Health Care in it was left at the last MAPP meeting in Riverside. If you are wondering where it went, it's at the THCF Medical Clinic and can be picked up Monday through Friday from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. See ya at the rally on Tuesday and the DA Candidate forum on Thursday. - Lanny - 760-799-2055

Keeping Scales in Compliance for Medical Cannabis Trade in San Diego

By: Eugene Davidovich and Marcus Boyd



SAN DIEGO - In a continuing effort to keep the community safe and in compliance with all possible state, city, and county laws, today we will be discussing the San Diego County requirements for scales and their use at dispensing collectives throughout San Diego.

First we want to thank every single collective and cooperative out there for providing safe and legal access to the many thousands of patients who rely on cannabis as their medicine. Your courageous efforts and work despite overwhelming adversity by the District Attorney have not gone unnoticed, and the community and patients truly thank you for being here.

Over the last few days San Diego Americans for Safe Access has received phone calls from our members around the county, telling us that facilities have been visited by County Weights and Measures Inspectors to have their scales certified for trade.

To shed a little more light on the issue for everyone in San Diego, we decided to do a little research and share our findings with you here:

“The State of California Dept. of Measurement Standards sets the standards that measuring and weighing devices must meet, in accordance with national standards. Each county in California has a sealer for weights and measures whose responsibility it is to ensure that measuring and weighing devices meet state standards.

Before using a weighing or measuring device for commercial purposes, the device must be inspected by the county sealer. If the device passes the inspection, the sealer will affix a sticker to the device indicating it has passed the inspection”. http://www.sandiego.gov/cityattorney/pdf/cepunewsjune09.pdf

Today we called the Department and received a little clarification. The folks we spoke to were very kind and provided answers to a lot of questions we had about these inspections, the laws, as well as the certification process. They explained that on a regular basis, the county sends out inspectors to visit, inspect, and certify businesses and organizations that use scales in their trade. The inspections are pretty much random and are based on zip codes of the location.

As most of us already know medical cannabis typically in collectives and cooperatives, is dispensed either by being weighed out the medicine right in front of the patient, or by providing it to the patients already weighed out and prepackaged. Both are legitimate ways of providing members with their medicine.

The folks we spoke to at the Department of Weights and Measures explained that If at a dispensary, the medicine is being weighed out in front of the patient, then the scale used must be certified and in compliance.

According to the San Diego City Attorney’s office, “anyone who uses for commercial purposes an incorrect weighing or measuring device or a device that has not been sealed by the County Sealer is guilty of a misdemeanor.”

In order to see if your scale is in compliance visit www.ncwm.net/certificates

If the medicine is prepackaged and not weighed out in front of the patient, then the scale does not need certification. In that case however, the weight and all the other required information on the package must be in compliance.

One of the facilities visited recently by the inspectors was The Holistic Café. We contacted members of the collective who explained that the inspectors called ahead of time, scheduled an appointment, and when they arrived, the whole appointment took less than 20 minutes. They were very pleased with the interaction with their officials and are excited to provide safe, accurate, and certified amounts of medicine to their patients.

When describing how the inspection went, members told us “we unplugged the scale, brought it out, the inspector took a look and complimented us on the scale, provided the certification and that was it”.

Today when I spoke with the Department of Weights and Measures, I asked what happens if a collective is not in compliance when you arrive for the inspection?

The explained “they would receive a letter of violation, and the issue would be dealt with from there”.

They were curious to know how many collectives weigh out vs. prepackage their medicine. I explained to the person on the phone that it really varied, that a large number of collectives employ one method and a large number employ the other as well.

To get a better understanding of the labeling requirements for collectives that pre package their medicine, we took a look at a 2009 Memo issued by the San Diego City Attorney’s office http://www.sandiego.gov/cityattorney/pdf/cepunewsjune09.pdf regarding Weight and Measures, the memo states that “packaged consumer goods must indicate the net quantity of the contents in both inch-pound and the metric system. This rule does not apply to foods that are packaged at the retail store level. Products that are sold by weight or volume but are not in packages, like gasoline, can be sold by the gallon or pound”.

FAIR PACKAGING AND LABELING:

Every packaged product offered for sale to the public must have a label that meets California law. The label must state:

• The identity of the product
• The name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer or distributor
• The net quantity of contents on the principal display panel

It is unlawful to add qualifying words to the statement of the net quantity, like “about 16 ounces.”
The package of a product must also be constructed in a way that does not facilitate the perpetration of deception or fraud. This includes:

• Using a false bottom, false sidewalls, or a false lid or covering
• Using non-functional slackfill to make a product look larger than it is. Nonfunctional slackfill is the empty space in a package that is filled to less than its capacity when that space is not otherwise necessary. If the packaging allows the consumer to see the contents of the package, then this provision does not apply.
• More detailed information about labeling requirements can be obtained from the California Department of Food and Agriculture: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/dms/programs/qc/qc.html including detailed labeling specifications and requirements.

If a collective would like to schedule an appointment for their scale to be inspected, they can call 858-694-2778 and to download the application and more information about the county’s weights and measures department visit their website at http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/awm/wm.html

We hope that this information helps keep you in compliance and around to continue to provide safe access to medical cannabis in San Diego.

San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org

Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org

San Diego ASA News Brief - James Stacy Federal Trial

Listen to Today’s San Diego Americans for Safe Access News Brief! Marcus Boyd and Eugene Davidovich discuss James Stacy Federal Case, National ASA Press Release, and the Truth in Trials Act (HR3939)!

Interview and Update - Federal Medical Marijuana Case - James Stacy

San Diego – The courtroom was packed with James Stacy’s supporters today in San Diego Federal Court, in fact several people had to wait outside of the courtroom as there wasn’t enough seats to accommodate all the supporters. Federal Public Defender Kasha Castillo filed a motion asking for a defense in Mr. Stacy’s case. The judge after hearing a few brief statements from the prosecution, gave the defense more time to file additional information to be included in their motion.

The Judge wanted to see transcripts of the statements made by then Candidate Obama and Eric Holder regarding medical marijuana raids and federal resources being spent on prosecutions as these are what Mr. Stacy is citing as having relied upon in opening the medical marijuana collective.

The Judge today also made a historic statement. In federal court, he acknowledged that there was no way for the Jury not to hear that Mr. Stacy was operating a medical marijuana facility. It seems that Mr. Stacy may not get to present an actually medical defense, but the truth in his trial, very well may be told.

The trial is currently set for July 12, 2010

The next hearing in Mr. Stacy’s case is June 9, 2010 at 10:30 in Courtroom 15 - 940 Front St. San Diego CA - Please mark your calendars and come out to support James as he fights for our rights in Federal Court.

Read the press release that Americans for Safe Access issued about James Stacy’s case: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6015

San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org

Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org

San Diego Medical Marijuana Provider First to be Tried Under New DOJ Policy

ASA National – Press Release about James Stacy Case! - www.safeaccessnow.org

San Diego, CA -- A North San Diego County medical marijuana provider, James Stacy, whose Vista dispensary was raided on September 9, 2009, by a multi-agency narcotics task force, will be the first such case to go to trial after the Justice Department issued its enforcement policy in October 2009, a month after the raid. Stacy's trial date will be scheduled Wednesday during a hearing at which Stacy will argue he's entitled to admit evidence of state law compliance, something routinely denied federal defendants. Stacy's dispensary, Movement in Action, was raided along with more than a dozen other San Diego County dispensaries as part of local-federal enforcement actions called, "Operation Endless Summer," which resulted in more than 30 arrests. Only Stacy, and one other medical marijuana dispensary operator Joseph Nunes, were charged federally as a result of the raids. Nunes has since pleaded guilty and was recently sentenced to a year in prison.

What: Federal hearing on whether dispensary operator James Stacy can use medical marijuana and state law as a defense at trial
When: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 at 10:30am
Where: Courtroom 15, U.S. District Court, 940 Front Street, San Diego, CA

"With a new enforcement policy on medical marijuana, the federal government should not be trying this case at all," said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access, the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy organization. "At the very least, Mr. Stacy's case should be tried in state court where he's guaranteed a defense against his charges." Because of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on medical marijuana, defendants are prevented from entering evidence of medical use or state law compliance in federal court.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder testified before Congress last week and reaffirmed that the Obama Administration was not interested in using the Justice Department's "limited resources" to prosecute people who are in compliance with their state's medical marijuana laws. Stacy argues that he was in full compliance with state law, nevertheless he was federally charged with cultivation of marijuana, conspiracy to cultivate and sell marijuana, and possession of a firearm, which could result in more than 20 years in prison. The federal government has so far failed to show any evidence of state law violations and has blocked repeated attempts by Stacy's lawyer Kasha Kastillo to try the case in state court.

Another San Diego dispensary operator, Jovan Jackson, was arrested as a result of the raids in September and prosecuted by San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis in state court. Jackson was acquitted by a jury after a November 2009 trial on similar charges. More recently, the San Diego Board of Supervisors has taken note of the county's failure to gain convictions and has decided to regulate medical marijuana distribution in the unincorporated areas of the county. The City of San Diego City Council is similarly debating a dispensary ordinance. "The move to regulate local medical marijuana distribution is certainly a positive step for San Diego," continued Elford. "However, it begs the question of why Mr. Stacy is still being prosecuted in federal court."

Because of the government's continued efforts to prosecute medical marijuana patients despite a new Justice department enforcement policy, advocates are urging Members of Congress to pass HR 3939, the Truth in Trials Act, which would allow defendants to use a medical or state law defense in federal court. The Truth in Trials Act currently has more than 30 Congressional cosponsors.

Further Information:

• U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's recent statements before Congress: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMCHmU-nFAM 
• Truth in Trials Act: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/downloads/TruthinTrials.pdf

San Diego ASA Presents Map as proof of De-facto Ban at County Planning and Land use Commission

By: Eugene Davidovich, San Diego Americans for Safe Access

Listen to the NEW San Diego ASA News Brief and audio podcast of this report:


San Diego, CA – On Friday May 14th, 2010, the San Diego County Planning and Land Use Commission (DPLU) met for their regularly scheduled meeting. This time, instead of the typical land use discussions, the DPLU were faced with a very controversial and sensitive issue; regulating the zoning restrictions on medical marijuana collective facilities in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County.

Although the issue at hand was land use, the debate at the commission meeting surrounding the issue was filled with emotional testimony both for and against the use of medical cannabis. Despite the law, patients are still forced to defend there rights, even at the land use level, in order to facilitate safe access to their medicine.

In 1996, California voters passed proposition 215 ensuring the rights of seriously ill patients to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes. In 2003 the California legislature passed Senate Bill 420 (SB420) which among other things established a statewide identification card program for medical marijuana patients. San Diego County stubbornly refused to implement both the initiative and the state wide legislative effort.

Not to be confused with San Diego City’s efforts; patients, concerned citizens, and advocates have been literally forced to drag their county officials, kicking and screaming, to legally regulate medical marijuana collectives.

Fourteen years later, after losing their battle to overturn the will of the voters at the highest court, the County decided to fight with a different approach. Instead of simply refusing to implement regulations to support the law, they now rely on the District Attorney (DA) to raid the currently operating facilities in order to scare others away from opening, and are now focusing on zoning out or banning these facilities via land use ordinances and the distribution of outdated and anecdotal propaganda about medical marijuana through their county funded prevention groups.

HARM, San Dieguito Alliance, and the North Coastal Prevention Coalition were out in full force at the commission meeting on Friday spewing reefer madness propaganda about the dangers of marijuana. It was obvious, as they talked about how the law has been misused and was only intended for terminal patients, the representatives of these groups had either failed to read the law themselves or are purposefully trying to confuse the issue.

Clearly stated, the law reads that medical marijuana is not just for the terminally ill. The original voter initiative says “Seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief.”

When we focus solely on chronic pain for a moment, we find that the Department of Veterans Affairs tells us that 1 in 3 Americans “suffer from some kind of chronic pain in their lifetimes, and about one quarter of them are not able to do day to day activities because of their chronic pain” http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/pages/pain-ptsd-guide-patients.asp yet cannabis is proven to treat chronic pain.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, San Diego County’s population as of July 2008 was over 3 million people which would make approximately 1 million people potentially eligible for the use of medical marijuana in San Diego County alone. The unincorporated areas comprise approximately 15% of the county’s population, which equates to over half a million people living in the unincorporated areas and at least 166,000 potential medical marijuana patients that would be affected directly by the policy recommended by this commission and the County.

The saga with the most recent proposed county ordinance officially began on March 3, when the county announced its inception on Twitter and on then on March 29, Edward Sifuentes of the San Diego North County Times called San Diego ASA for comment sending us a link to the document over email http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/docs/POD_09-007_Medical_Marijuana.pdf

Until that call from the North County Times, only a small, private number of individuals were privy to the proposed ordinance. Immediately San Diego ASA sent it out to the community for input, evaluated and began to weigh in on the regulations proposed in the ordinance in collaboration with Kris Hermes with Americans for Safe Access (national).

Within days, Americans for Safe Access (ASA), and organizations such as the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), issued statements urging the county to immediately reconsider their position on this issue, to revise the ordinance, and extend the public input period. The ACLU outright threatened the county with a law suit if they adopt the ordinance as proposed. The county was even provided with lists of specific issues in their language that were most egregious violations of state law. Everyone was asking for more time for the community’s input.

No additional time was allowed. The proposed ordinance however, was slightly modified and a new staff report issued http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/docs/PC/2010/100514-2.pdf. In yet another tactic to navigate around voters, the ordinance didn’t outright ban safe access to medical cannabis in the unincorporated areas of the county, this time it effectively zoned it out.

The May 14th DPLU meeting began with Project Manager Joseph Farace’s presentation of the latest staff report to the commission. The staff report focused heavily on the DEA’s negative self-serving rhetoric about medical marijuana holding very little substantive medical truth.

Mr Farace’s report and testimony to the commission went as far as saying “law enforcement agencies have documented serious and adverse impacts associated with dispensaries” He said “the communities and the media reported increased crime, including burglaries, robberies and violence.” However in his report he failed, to cite any legitimate documentation or reports to backup his claims. The only documentation he provided as proof was a non scientific opinion piece by the Police Chiefs Association; a lobbying group for law enforcement unions.

Several members of the public reminded Mr. Farace and the commission about the recent comments of Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck, where he told reporters, “Banks are more likely to get robbed than medical marijuana dispensaries" http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_14206441

Also not found in Mr. Farace’s analysis of the issue was The City of Oakland’s law enforcement report of significant crime drops in that area where there are regulated dispensaries.

The report painted a scary picture of dispensaries. Portrayed them as dangerous, large scale grow operations which must operate far from the public, under extreme caution, and under most strict scrutiny of law enforcement, in order to ensure the public’s safety and welfare. The staff recommended that medical marijuana collective facilities be limited to industrial zoned properties and that they be required to maintain a 1000 foot separation from a laundry list of what they deemed as sensitive uses; schools, playgrounds, parks, churches, recreation centers, youth centers, and other collectives.

Mr. Farace, during his presentation, displayed several monitors and a large projection screen showing a zoning map of the county. This map, according to his math, displayed 15-20 potential sites where a facility might be located under the current recommendations.

There was testimony from over two dozen concerned citizens, attorneys, collective directors, and patients including a large turnout from San Diego ASA.

San Diego ASA members came armed with their own analysis of the supposed 15-20 potential sites. During public comment, Marcus Boyd and Eugene Davidovich on Mr. Farace’s large projection screen and monitors,and just to make sure everyone saw clearly, presented a large poster board of a map of San Diego County similar to Mr. Farace’s map, except SDASA’s analysis showed the 15-20 potential sites are a reality only if the 1000 foot residence distance is removed. If that distance, in combination with the 1000 foot from residential use requirement remains, there effectively would be perhaps twenty five square feet in the entire unincorporated area of the county where a collective could be located.

The map was prepared by San Diego ASA member Kate Valentine, who worked tirelessly for several days to create an accurate visual representation of how the county’s recommendations would effectively zone out safe access in San Diego County. Ms. Valentine said “Everything in red, represents the off-limits zones, blended blue is the unincorporated area in question, black are other cities' jurisdictions, and green are zones are where the dispensaries may be located. Any green that is touching the red zones is automatically disqualified because it is not outside the 1,000 foot setback. As you'll note, that leaves about 25 sq feet of land on which a dispensary may open. I mean, it may as well be that little.”

Later when pressed by the commission, it was apparent that Mr. Farace did not believe, himself, that even one collective would realistically be able to open under these proposed recommendations.

Testimony from members of the community and the presentation of the map by San Diego ASA helped persuade the commission to take a closer look at the accuracy of Mr. Farace’s staff report. The commission now sought to know if there were any other types of land uses where such regulations and distance requirements existed in the county land use regulations. Mr. Farace quickly pointed to adult entertainment, and said he used that ordinance as an example to craft this recommendation.

When pressed specifically for distance requirements of adult entertainment in the county, Mr. Farace admitted he didn’t know. The commission took a five minute break for Mr. Farace to check and upon his return, he confirmed that the adult entertainment ordinance was a little less restrictive, and that it required a 500 foot separation from residential use.

Upon hearing this confirmation, receiving a little more clarification from members of the community who spoke, including Boyd whom originally presented the SD ASA Zoning Map, the commission voted 5-0 that they, “recommend the Board of Supervisors approve staff recommendations, with conditions, on Medical Marijuana Facilities…Countywide. The action, including the conditions, recommends the Board of Supervisors change the County Zoning Ordinance to allow medical marijuana collectives to be sited in industrially-zoned areas of the unincorporated County no closer than 500 feet of residences; no closer than 600 feet of schools, churches and parks; and no closer than 1,000 feet of other medical marijuana facilities.” http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/docs/Planning_Commission_Actions_5-14-10.pdf

On Friday, a few dedicated members of the community with their hard work, preparation, and dedication were successful in educating and then persuading the commission to recommend a less restrictive ordinance thereby following the law. This effort will affect many thousands of patients’ rights. Members of the community still have many concerns about the recommendations, and hope that the County Council will remove all the inconsistencies and unfounded overly restrictive language from the ordinance.

Wednesday, June 23 at the Planning and Land Use hearing, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote on the proposed ordinance. The meeting will start at 9am, 1600 Pacific Highway, Room 310

View videos of the commission meeting:
The County Planning Commission video clips are definitive proof that activism works and the efforts of individuals can effect enormous change! And our fight continues . . .

SD County Planning Commission (clip 1) MMJ Zoning Ordinance REVISED! 5/14/10 -
The San Diego County Planning Commission was presented with a revised medical marijuana dispensary zoning ordinance after activist were successful in pointing out inconsistencies and illegalities in the original ordinance attempt by the county staff. During this meeting activists were also successful in causing the county proposed zoning ordinance to be broadened from an imaginary 15-20 possible dispensary locations to an absolute 70 to 80 viable location options.

SD County Planning Commission (clip 2) MMJ Zoning Ordinance REVISED! 5/14/10 -
San Diego Americans for Safe Access (SDASA) board members Marcus Boyd and Eugene Davidovich effectively present a county map provided by SDASA member Kate Valentine to the Planning Commission. Surprisingly, the chairman grants SDASA additional time to present.

SD County Planning Commission (clip 3) MMJ Zoning Ordinance REVISED! 5/14/10 -
Discussions in this clip go into the existing non-conforming dispensary locations and the county staff answers to some of the many complaints regarding the ordinance process.

SD County Planning Commission (clip 4) MMJ Zoning Ordinance REVISED! 5/14/10 -
When size and square footage become a topic of discussion in the meeting, the county staff again goes "deer-in-the-headlights". Luckily activism works and activists were able to offer guidance to the supervisors where the county staff failed to do so.

SD County Planning Commission (clip 5) MMJ Zoning Ordinance REVISED! 5/14/10 -
This clip goes into the Conditional Use Permit issue and the size or square footage of dispensaries. The clip ends with a supervisor making a motion to accept the county staff's recommendations without any changes, and the motion is seconded.

SD County Planning Commission (clip 6) MMJ Zoning Ordinance REVISED! 5/14/10 -
This is the final clip for the Planning Commission meeting on 5/14/10. In this clip the county staff actually begins stuttering and scrambling when pressed by Commissioner Peder Norby to provide options for zoning. The clip ends with a win for the MMJ community! The commissioners voted unanimously to revise and relax the proposed ordinance.

Presenting Medical Marijuana Truth in a San Diego Federal Trial - James Stacy Federal Court Hearing

By: Eugene Davidovich, Terrie Best, James Stacy

SAN DIEGO – Medical marijuana patient, collective director, James Dean Stacy, on May 19th, 2010 at 10:30am will be appearing in San Diego Federal Court. His collective, Movement In Action (www.movementinaction.org) was raided on September 9, 2010, in District Attorney (DA) Bonnie Dumanis’ raids on medical marijuana collectives and Mr. Stacy was arrested, charged in Federal Court, and is now facing a Federal Jury Trial and the possibility of life in prison.

Since the latest round of Operation Green Rx raids began in August of 2008, San Diego DA Dumanis, has lost both cases that went to trial in State Court. Realizing that she stands no chance in state court it seems that she has redirected her efforts and taken a new approach.

Dumanis has enlisted the efforts of US Attorney Karen P. Hewitt, and has filed charges on legitimate patients and collectives in Federal court, going against the standing orders from President Obama not to target legitimate medical marijuana collectives in states where they are legal.

On Wednesday May 19, 2010, history will be made in San Diego, in Courtroom 15, at the Federal Courthouse at 940 Front St. in downtown San Diego, where U.S. Federal Judge Moskowitz will decide if medical marijuana patient James Dean Stacy will be allowed to tell the Truth in his trial.

Mr. Stacy is arguing entrapment by estoppel based on statements made by President Obama during his presidential campaign and then his first year in office, as well as the U. S. Attorney General Holders statements, both of which in summary say that the Federal government would stop prosecutions, investigations, and arrests of legal medical marijuana collective members and patients.

Ignoring this order, and the will of the California voters, Dumanis and Hewitt in partnership with the local Narcotics Task Force arrested 31 collective members in a swat style raid last September, and rumors have it, are planning more ways to harass collectives and patients. 

Mr. Stacy, one of those charged federally, refused to be bullied by the prosecutor into a plea deal, and is fighting the charges. His case has the potential to set precedent throughout the state with his defense. Mr. Stacy is asking to simply tell the whole truth to the jury in during his trial.

The Federal government currently does not allow defendants to tell the jury that they are a legitimate medical marijuana patient in compliance with California State law. The mention of this fact is vigorously fought by the prosecutor.

On May 19th we will find out if the jury will be allowed to hear the Whole Truth.

Come out and support Mr. Stacy as he stands up for our rights against the misguided policies of the Federal Government and our bias driven local DA and US Attorney.


San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.safeaccesssd.org

San Diego North County ASA Meeting - Update

Friday night May 14th North county ASA meeting was well attended with 15 people participating.
Thanks to Green Health for giving us a location for the meeting. 950 E. Vista Way in Vista.

The meeting was run by James Dean Stacy a federal defendant who is having court May 19th at 10:30 am in court room 15 940 Front St. Downtown San Diego. James Talked about some national issues such as Washington DC's Medical marijuana law that could have far reaching effects. He also talked about HR 3939 the truth in trials act. Then more local issues were talked about starting with the Counties zoning rules and how we were able to present our side and that it had an effects on the zoning. We also talked about Joe Nunes sentencing and the effect that a pack court room had on the outcome. The subject of the state card came up and was discussed, presenting the pros and cons. Help is our history week is starting next Monday and was presented. In all the meeting was very informative and presented the participants with some actions they could do to help in our fight for safe access.

James Stacy
www.movementinaction.org
San Diego Americans for Safe Access

Action Alert: Help ASA End the Bank Account Closures

As you know, dozens of state compliant medical cannabis dispensing collectives and related businesses have had their accounts closed, often without notice or explanation.  ASA is deeply concerned about this trend and we’ve been working multiple channels in Washington, DC, to investigate the nature of the bank account closures and end these closures once and for all.      

This week, U.S. Representative Jared Polis (D-CO) and Financial Services Committee Chairman, Representative Barney Frank (D-MA), together with their colleagues in the House of Representatives have agreed to sponsor a congressional sign-on letter to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.  The letter requests that the Treasury Department issue written guidance to financial institutions to clarify that the Department’s priorities do not include targeting or pursuing institutions whose account holders are involved in a business operating in clear compliance with a state medical marijuana law.   

TAKE ACTION TODAY:   TELL YOUR U.S. REPRESENATIVE TO CO-SIGN THE POLIS/FRANK LETTER TO TREASURY SECRETARY GEITHNER

1.       Please call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at 202.225.3121 and ask to be connected to your Representative’s office.

To identify your Member of Congress, visit http://www.house.gov and enter your zip code.

2.       When connected with the office, request to speak with the person who handles “medical marijuana issues”  for the Representative

3.       Whether you speak to this person directly or leave a message, tell them:

“My name is     (Your Name)     and I’m a constituent of Representative     (Rep.’s Last Name)    .  I am calling to urge Representative    (Rep.’s Last Name)    to sign on to the Polis/Frank letter to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner urging that the Department clarify in writing that investigation of banks whose customers are state-legal medical marijuana businesses will not be an enforcement priority.    Denying business who operate in compliance with their state medical marijuana law access to banking institutions jeopardizes public safety and constitutes and inefficient waste of federal resources.   This is important to me personally because      (add a personal comment, if you like)   .   For more information or to add  Representative    (Rep.’s Last Name)   to the growing list of co-signers, please contact Shawn Coleman in Representative Jared Polis’ office at 5-2161.  Thank you for listening to me; I am counting on my Representative’s support on this matter.” 

It is urgent that your calls be made immediately!  The more Members of the House that sign on to the letter, the better chance we have to ensure Treasury will work with financial institutions to resolve the problem and ensure legal medical cannabis dispensaries and related business are free to operate without undue burden or hardship.   For your reference, a copy of the “Dear Colleague” invitation and sign-on to the Treasury letter is below.

==========================

==========================

Caren Woodson

Americans for Safe Access

www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org 

To receive our quarterly newsletter, send a blank email to asa-policy-subscribe@lists.safeaccessnow.org.

Respect State Law and Patients Rights and Safety

From: The Honorable Jared Polis
Sent By: Shawn.Coleman@mail.house.gov
Date: 5/11/2010

Dear Colleague

Fourteen states have enacted laws to ensure the safe delivery of medical marijuana to qualified patients. These laws are designed to allow for regulated delivery of marijuana for medicinal purposes. This regulation is essential for controlling access and public safety. The Department of Justice, in an effort to aide local governments in regulating marijuana in manners appropriate for their communities issued a memo indicating that state-legal medical marijuana businesses would not be an enforcement priority for the Drug Enforcement Agency.

The Department of Justice memo has helped to create regularity where there was once uncertainty for states, however; due to anti-money laundering compliance issues, medical marijuana businesses in full compliance with state law are unable to establish bank accounts. The unavailability of banking services forces these businesses to become “cash-only” and as a result a soft target for crime. Further without bank records it makes it difficult for both the businesses and local governments to ensure that appropriate taxes are being remitted. 

We have been working closely with patient advocates and Treasury officials on this issue. We have reason to believe that with support of Congress, the Treasury Department will issue a memo similar to the action taken by the Department of Justice to clarify that investigation of banks whose customers are state-legal medical marijuana businesses will not be an enforcement priority.

We ask you to join us in this effort to increase safety for patients and the public, and ensure proper revenues for local governments by allowing these legal businesses to access banking services.

To co-sign this letter, contact Shawn Coleman in Representative Jared Polis’ office at 5-2161 or Shawn.Coleman@mail.house.gov.

Sincerely,

Jared Polis,                       Barney Frank,                            Dr. Ron Paul,

Member of Congress       Member of Congress                  Member of Congress  

  

---

May XX, 2010

The Honorable Timothy Geithner

Secretary

Department of the Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20220

Dear Secretary Geithner:

As you know, the voters of Colorado approved a law providing for the use of medical marijuana for qualifying patients with a doctor’s recommendation in 2000. Since that time, the provision of this medicine to patients has become more streamlined, with collective non-profit organizations providing marijuana to patients at retail locations. The other 13 states that have medical marijuana laws have similarly made progress to ensure the safe delivery of medical marijuana to qualified patients. Currently many more states are in the process of developing their strategy to address this issue in a manner that is both compassionate and consistent with our shared goal of public safety. 

Your counterparts at the Department of Justice are to be commended for issuing formal written guidelines on October 19, 2009, making clear that federal resources should not be used against people in compliance with state law in states that have legalized marijuana for medical use. Following that announcement, on November 16, 2009, Colorado Attorney General John. W. Suthers’ office issued a formal opinion stating that “Medical marijuana is tangible personal property and is subject to the state sales tax…” and that “[t]he obligation to collect and remit sales tax due is borne by the vendor [emphasis added.]”[1] 

In attempts to comply with the policy articulated by Attorney General Suthers, many medical marijuana dispensaries have opened or maintained accounts with major national banking institutions or local banks. However, dispensary operators are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain accounts with financial institutions, due to what a spokesman for Chase bank called, “’financial operational and compliance risk.’”[2] 

Thus, it seems clear that legitimate state-legal businesses are being denied access to banking services, which does not serve the public interest. Among other concerns, the effects of this denial of service include: (1) an increased risk to public safety with potential theft or robbery that any cash-only or cash-reliant business faces; (2) a decreased likelihood that medical marijuana vendors will have the ability to accurately account for tax liability; and (3) an affront to fundamental fairness, since forcing businesses to operate with cash exposes the owners to greater legal risk under the Bank Secrecy Act.[3]

As individual states move forward with establishing a regulatory framework for how to address the distribution of medical marijuana, it is essential that providers and patients alike are not subjected to undue danger from criminal activity by forcing providers to be “cash-only”. To the criminal element these places become soft targets. In a time when local governments are already financially strained; ensuring providers access to banking services has the double benefit of increasing public safety and giving local governments and providers alike the ability to ensure compliance with tax remittance.

Accordingly, we respectfully request that your office issue formal written guidance for financial institutions assuring that Department priorities do not include targeting or pursuing institutions whose account holders are involved in a business ostensibly operating in compliance with a state medical marijuana law. Not only does this remedy a fundamental inequity, it also seems a wise use of the Department’s limited resources. 

We look forward to hearing from you. Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.

Respectfully,

_______________________   ________________   __________________________

Jared Polis                                Barney Frank                  Dr. Ron Paul

Member of Congress               Member of Congress      Member of Congress

---

[1] State of Colorado, Office of the Attorney General, Formal Opinion of John W. Suthers, No. 09-06, November 16, 2009. 

[2] Jefferson Dodge, Elevations Credit Union Refuses Business with Medical Marijuana Dispensaries, The Boulder Weekly, February 12, 2010. 

[3]For example, the Act requires depository institutions to file a Currency Transaction Report (CTR) of any cash transaction involving $10,000 of currency in one business day. Additionally, there are numerous imaginable outcomes under the current circumstances that would cause a dispensary owner to trigger the filing of a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR).

Misguided Lake Forest Judge Rules Dispensaries are Not Legal

LAKE FOREST - Superior Court Judge David Chaffee in Lake Forest CA on Wednesday, May 12, 2010, granted a request by the city for a preliminary injunction which will now allow the city to shut down all medical marijuana dispensing collectives, cooperatives, grows, and other related uses. Judge Chaffee “found that under state law a city cannot pass a land-use law that violates state and federal law…He found that because marijuana is illegal under federal law, the city has not and cannot have a land use law that allows medical marijuana dispensaries”(OC Register, 2010).

Dale Gieringer of CA NORML weighed in on the issue writing “The decision applies only to Lake Forest, but if appealed it could set a very bad precedent, as many cities currently allow dispensaries in their land use plans”.

Erika Ritchie of the OC Register wrote “in his ruling on City of Lake Forest vs. Moen, et all, Chaffee wrote: "Defendants are barred from conducting, allowing, permitting, inhabiting, leasing, renting or otherwise granting authority to use properties in the above described manner".

If this case goes to appeal, and the appellate courts uphold the Judge’s ruling, safe access to medicine across the state could be jeopardized. Many thousands of patients hope that a temporary stay to this ruling is achieved, and that if this case is appealed, that the courts find in favor of sensible safe access.

Read the OC Register Article:
http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-248417-law-dispensaries.html

Eugene Davidovich
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org

Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org

San Diego County Medical Marijuana Ordinance - Planning Comission Hearing

This Friday come out and let the COUNTY planning commission know how we feel about the illegal county ordinance being proposed.

They will be voting on the San Diego County Ordinance originally proposed last month and revised last week. Here is the revised version: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/docs/PC/2010/100514-2.pdf

The ordinance effectively bans medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives in unincorporated areas of the county. While the city is light years ahead in regulating these facilities, the county is still trying to overturn state law.

Mark your calendars and be there!

Meeting starts at 9am - 5201 Ruffin Road, San Diego, California - Suite B (DPLU Hearing Room)
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=120396817974133

Eugene Davidovich

San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org

Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org