CLEARLAKE – The Clearlake City Council heard from 16 people during its regular meeting Thursday urging the city against blocking patient access to medical marijuana.
Following a discussion that lasted about two hours, the council voted to form a sub-committee and begin evaluating options for supporting the Medical Marijuana Program (MMP) in the California Health and Safety Code. However, the council did indicate that it is possible that they may return with a decision to completely prohibit operations that provide medicinal marijuana in the city.
The council heard the remarks of 16 people supporting safe access while three spoke directly against allowing medical marijuana providers to operate in the city. Mayor Chuck Leonard and Councilmember Roy Simons were the only representatives to voice certain opposition to denying people access to their medicine.
“I am directly opposed to denying medical marijuana to people who need it,” Mayor Leonard said, adding his support for establishing regulations to govern legitimate operations.
Simons likened the situation to that of alcohol prohibition, which he said had led to people being killed. “You can prohibit something but you can”t stop it. If it does good for people we just have to learn how to control it and take the criminal element out of it,” he said.
“It isn”t going to go away. I think we need to do a lot more study on how we are going to control it.”
Vice Mayor Judy Thein was all for finding any way to shut down the three existing MMP providers currently operating in the city, immediately.
As recommended by City Administrator Dale Neiman and Police Chief Alan McClain, Thein moved to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries and take legal action to close the three operating in the city using public nuisance provisions because the operations are allegedly in violation of city zoning regulations. The motion failed.
The regulation pertains to licensees complying with federal law.
Although City Attorney Mala Subramanian did not include the information in her verbal report, the staff report on the item states that a Dec. 2008 court decision that upheld a finding that medical marijuana laws are not preempted by federal law is making it difficult to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries using the provision in the city code that requires compliance with federal law.
Thein suggested shutting the operations down based on an alleged act of perjury committed by the licensees. Staff is contending that Liz Byrd, as well as the other business owners currently operating, committed perjury in order to gain their business licenses.
However, Byrd contends that she acted upon the recommendation of city staff when providing the description of her business, which ultimately led to the license being granted.
The city”s attempt to revoke Bryd”s license is what initiated the current conversation regarding the MMP. The conversation is more than a year overdue in light of a moratorium that was implemented in April 2007, which was put in place in order to allow staff time to establish regulations regarding medicinal marijuana dispensaries and/or collectives/cooperatives.
“A moratorium is designed to control growth not exterminate it,” constituent Barron Diltz said, strongly recommending that the city establish regulations. “These people need their medicine.”
Thein suggested shutting the operations down based on the alleged perjury and then work on establishing guidelines. Subramanian advised against this approach because the city would incur legal costs in order to close the businesses and if the council did decide to regulate and allow the operations, it would result in a waste of money as well as city staff time.
Thein also tried to site possible violations in the MMP pertaining to caregiver status and non-profit status requirements. Councilmember Joyce Overton also suggested the possibility of shutting the businesses down for lack of non-profit status.
Overton did however, push for a round-table discussion to evaluate the options the city has. It was on her motion that direction was given to form a sub-committee and proceed with analyzing options.
Subramanian told the council that in establishing regulations impact fees could be implemented. “It may be possible to assess inspection fees each year to make sure they are complying with the law,” she said. Impact fees would have to be justified in association with actual costs to administer a compliance program.
“I”m all about revenue. I don”t smoke marijuana but I do like to have a drink. I don”t see any difference between booze and marijuana,” constituent Donald Hunt said. “The (MMP operations) that I”ve seen seem to be pretty clean. If you want to shut them down, I don”t know why. If it”s going to make some money, why would you shut it down?”
Jennifer Lombari disagreed with Thein”s and resident Gene Kencke”s assessment that MMP operations increase access to marijuana for children. “By having stores, it keeps the kids from getting it. You have to have a prescription to get it from them,” Lombari said.
Sherry Stokes shared similar thoughts. “If it weren”t for marijuana I could not be here talking to you today,” she said, stating she had long suffered from agoraphobia before utilizing cannabis. “When I go to a dispensary I know that I”m not growing it and the kids are aren”t stealing it from me.”
Greg Peters, a Middletown resident who said he was in attendance just to see what was going on in Clearlake, also shared his opinion. “Laws are to serve the people. I hope the council will look at this from a compassionate standpoint. If these dispensaries aren”t here, (the patients) may feel that they have to do illegal things,” he said.
Victoria Garcia, a former Clearlake resident who has relocated to Lower Lake said, “Rather than going out on the streets, we have some place safe to go. If you close it down, all you”re going to do is create more drug traffic.”
Alice Reece said she opposed medical marijuana operations. She claims that federal government provides medical marijuana to patients who need it and suggested patients take a pill instead of smoking the medicine.
Any decision the council makes will have to be enforced uniformly to avoid possible litigation. The issue is not expected to come back before the council for at least a month due to the discussion of the Provinsalia project being the primary item on the council”s next regular agenda.
Contact Denise Rockenstein at drockenstein@clearlakeobserver.com or contact her directly at 994-6444, ext. 11.
