cannabisnews.com: Marijuana Dispensary Tax Considered





Marijuana Dispensary Tax Considered
Posted by CN Staff on June 12, 2004 at 16:38:06 PT
By Elizabeth Larson - Record-Bee Staff
Source: Record-Bee 
Lake County -- Proposition 215, passed in 1996, legalized the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes in California.Since that time, controversy has arisen as officials have wrestled with the fundamental difficulties in managing the use of a substance that has been outlawed for many years. At the same time, patient groups have lobbied for understanding and freedom to use marijuana.
Upper Lake resident Eddy Lepp has been a lightning rod in the medical marijuana movement. He has lobbied tirelessly for the rights of people with severe illnesses and disabilities to use marijuana medicinally. Lepp has also been arrested, tried and acquitted in his pursuit of establishing patients' rights.On Tuesday, Lepp appeared before the county's board of supervisors to take part in a discussion that was at times heated and illustrative of the issue's polarizing effect on the public and government officials alike. Supervisor Rob Brown initiated the discussion by asking the board to consider proposing state legislation to allow taxation of medical marijuana at the dispensary level.Although they may be viewed as unlikely allies, Brown told the Record-Bee on Friday that he and Lepp had been discussing the issue informally for some time."It's been something I've been looking into since January," Brown said. The dispensary tax, as envisioned by Brown and Lepp, would be used to fund the medical marijuana identification cards, which would be issued through the county's health department. The tax could also be used to fund any other agencies affected by the issue, added Brown.Throughout Tuesday's board discussion, Lepp emphasized the need to protect patients, create standards for growing medical marijuana safely and promote understanding.Lepp said that taxation of medical marijuana use at the individual level is "unheard of, and cannot be done," citing the fact that many medical marijuana users are on disability and fixed incomes."If it's to be taxed, it's to be taxed at the retail level," suggested Lepp."Marijuana, without a doubt, will become legal within the next few years," Lepp said. He also referred to the importance of legalizing the growing of hemp, which he said can be used to make thousands of products.Marijuana has been used for medicinal purposes for thousands of years, said Lepp. Growing medical marijuana commercially could produce both jobs and substantial income for the county, he added.Such an industry, he said, needs be governed by rules and regulations to help ensure that patients receive high-quality marijuana."The time has come for the medical marijuana community to be accepted for what we want to be, which is part of mainstream America," said Lepp. "Most of us are decent, hardworking people who were struck down by some disease or affliction ... that we had no control over."Board members voiced several concerns, one of them named by Supervisor Gary Lewis is the clash between the state and the federal government over medical marijuana.Lepp maintained that his experience in court has proven that, unless the federal government can prove jurisdiction through ownership of land or property, it cannot exert direct authority. This, he said, came into play when he was fighting the California Highway Patrol in court to have marijuana impounded from him returned.The discussion veered off in a different direction when Finley resident Philip Murphy took the opportunity to criticize the board and the sheriff on drug-related issues."Over the years, I've seen this board spend a lot of time and mental energy and taxpayers' money dealing with marijuana," said Murphy. "I've seen very little time, energy and money devoted to dealing with the crank problem, which is 100 times of greater impact on the community than the marijuana problem, if there is one."Murphy also stated that he believed Sheriff Rod Mitchell wasn't enforcing Proposition 215. In response to Murphy's comments, Lewis, Brown and Supervisor Ed Robey defended both Mitchell and the board's own record on drug law enforcement.Robey reminded Murphy of a letter the board sent to the state asking that marijuana suppression money given to the county be used instead for cracking down on methamphetamine, "because that's the biggest problem in our county," he said.Mitchell, who arrived shortly thereafter, defended his department's drug enforcement record. He explained that there has never been a legal provision directing the sheriff or the district attorney to issue medical marijuana identification cards, which is the responsibility of the state's health department. Since the effort hasn't been funded, said Mitchell, it hasn't happened, although some counties have managed to fund their own ID card efforts.Lepp suggested that this local tax could fund those cards locally."The patients need to be put first, and quit being put last," said Lepp. He added, "The biggest problem here is ignorance."The board tentatively agreed Tuesday to form a committee and begin discussing the issue more in depth. "I'm going to pursue it," Brown said Friday, noting that, "I don't think it's anything the rest of the board wants to be involved with yet."Brown said the board will probably be more receptive if the idea returns with more definition. He plans to talk to County Counsel Cameron Reeves, Mitchell, Lepp and Health Department Director Ruth Lincoln in order to come up with a feasible plan, he added. Source: Lake County Record-Bee (CA)Author: Elizabeth Larson - Record-Bee StaffPublished: Saturday, June 12, 2004Copyright: 2004 Record-Bee.com Contact: editorial record-bee.comWebsite: http://www.record-bee.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Medicinal Cannabis Research Linkshttp://www.freedomtoexhale.com/research.htmUpper Lake in An Uproarhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18915.shtmlThe Perils of Prop. 215 http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15946.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #6 posted by Hope on June 14, 2004 at 10:05:22 PT
unrelated was also published last week NYT
Business section?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/10/business/worldbusiness/10coca.html?ex=14022864
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by mayan on June 13, 2004 at 03:48:45 PT
unrelated links...
Cocaine in tea served at U.S. Embassy:
http://www.unknownnews.net/040611cocaine.htmlJustice Department Loses Laptop With DEA Data:
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aZhPt9aVXArQ&refer=us
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on June 12, 2004 at 21:13:02 PT
Thanks BGreen and Virgil
What will happen to him since the offense was from 89? How did he avoid jail from the charge years ago? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by BGreen on June 12, 2004 at 20:57:54 PT
Here's A Machine Translation About Nol
Spanish cell for suitor soft drugs HAARLEM - Nol van Schaik, the haarlemse suitor for legalisation of soft drugs, be stuck in an cell in the Spanish capital Madrid. He has been civil arrested during a holiday by the Guardia. According to its lawyer Gerard Spong its customer is not apprehended
on suspicion of some indictable offence, but because France has a request for extradition against the
haarlemmer run. Spong savage yesterday do not say if he is optimistically or
pessimistic concerning the chance of its customer of coming rapidly
rather. ' ' it concerns an old sentence, in 1989, at contumacy pronounced by a French judge. Van Schaik was then condemned up to five years cell because of the
possession of cannabis.'' The request for extradition is in treatment at a judge in Madrid. Spong try with a Spanish colleague retrieve if the French sentence has
become prescribed meanwhile. It is unclear when the matter occurs. ' ' the limitation periods differ in Europe from country to country. In Spain a new law which a variable knows limitation period, has
recently become effective.'' The two lawyers examine if they can get the haarlemmer on the basis
of this law free. Also the Dutch right arc itself ever concerning a request for
extradition of France. End 1999 seemed the nothing obliged departure of Van Schaik direction
France stand in the way still, after also the Supreme Court had stipulated that the French wish had
sufficiently legal basis. The then minister of justice Benk Korthals put however a rod for the
extradition, when the french refused let sit out Van Schaik is punish in the
Netherlands. Van Schaik has originally taken the voortouw in the Netherlands in the
discussion concerning ' mediwiet ', the supply of cannabis to patients. In Haarlem Van Schaik has three coffee shops.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Virgil on June 12, 2004 at 20:48:40 PT
John Turmel cocky as Thursday showdown nears
There is some interesting reading from the Engineer Turmel at Yahoo groups in his last two comments. The penultimate (Yes, I picked up the word from Cockburn) message is informative in regards to important dates in the Canadian courts concerning Miracleplant- http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/MedPot/message/1229#10 refers to facts presented as "WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS" in Turmel's blank form for people needed to clean up convictions when the laws are dead and they are still dead and usable in present cases. The whole lid could be blown of on Thursday. But #10 says the Supreme Court on December 23 of last year even said the laws were dead- 10. On Dec 23 2003, the Supreme Court of Canada denied the
Crown's application for leave to appeal the unheralded Alberta
Court of Appeal decision in R. v. Krieger which, the Crown's
Memorandum states that since Dec. 11 2000:
"[57 as matters now stand s.7(1) has been declared of no force
and effect by the highest court in Alberta."In the last message now up- http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/MedPot/message/1230 - Turmel says there will be a case that will foretell his outcome when a person arrested after the October 7th announcement that the courts had created laws that Canada should live by- http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/MedPot/message/1230It is the most interesting of all things in the cannabis movement. I really enjoyed reading these two messages, but it is all a great disappointment in the making if the courts do not come back this week and say that in Canada, Cannabis is free for everyone.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Virgil on June 12, 2004 at 20:21:24 PT
Nol van Schaik was arrested in Spain
The news is in Dutch in the second response to the thread starter. It seems that this would make marijuananews.com by Monday, plus there is the tread at HempCity that begged an answer on the question of arrest- http://www.hempcity.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=425&highlight=
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment