cannabisnews.com: Medical Pot Issue May Go To Court





Medical Pot Issue May Go To Court
Posted by CN Staff on September 01, 2004 at 13:21:29 PT
By Troy Pieper 
Source: Pulse of the Twin Cities 
A grassroots organization has the necessary signatures to place a medical marijuana question on the November ballot, the Minneapolis Elections Office confirmed Monday, but its supporters still have a fight on their hands. The Minneapolis City Council has voted not to allow the proposed charter amendment on the ballot, and local and national advocates for reform of marijuana laws say they may have to take the issue to court. “We are determined to fight this, and it is extremely likely that we will have to do it through litigation,” said Neal Levine, director of state policies for the Marijuana Policy Project, a national organization that helped fund the ballot initiative.
The council’s August 20 decision was a blow for the nonprofit Citizens for Harm Reduction (COHR), the local organization whose volunteers have spent months gathering signatures for the petition. Marijuana can be used as pain relief for sufferers of diseases like cancer or glaucoma. The issue of allowing marijuana as a prescribed treatment has become a front line in the movement to reform drug laws. COHR’s mission, according to their website, is “working to reduce harms caused by the United States’ failed drug policies through education, legislative action, and citizen initiatives.” The group’s proposed amendment calls for the licensing and regulating of “a reasonable number of medicinal marijuana distribution centers in the city of Minneapolis as is necessary to provide services to patients who have been recommended medicinal marijuana by a medical or osteopathic doctor licensed to practice in the state of Minnesota to the extent permitted by state and federal law.”The group’s members collected more than 12,000 signatures from Minneapolis residents, but the city’s elections office only verified 7,571 — 203 less than what the law requires for a charter amendment to make it on the ballot. The group’s volunteers spent last week and the weekend to get the rest, which were submitted and certified Monday. COHR coordinator Jason Samuels said this initiative sends a clear message that the voters of Minneapolis do not believe that seriously ill citizens should be denied access to marijuana to ease their pain and suffering. No matter how many signatures were gathered, Charter Commission Chair Jim Bernstein said the petition is “manifestly unconstitutional,” because the distribution or use of marijuana, even for medicinal purposes, is not legal in the state of Minnesota. “If it conflicts with federal or state law,” Bernstein said, “then we can’t sanction it.” Samuels, however, said the amendment is conditional. “Its language goes into effect only when the current laws regarding medical marijuana change.”Samuels also cited Minnesota’s THC Therapeutic Research Act, which provides criminal protection to researchers working on medicinal marijuana. “We are furthering that policy,” he said. COHR notes on its website that neither the city nor the state has a referendum or initiative process, so proposing a charter amendment would serve to let the people vote on medicinal marijuana. Councilmember Scott Benson, Ward 11, said that the amendment is not appropriate to add to the city’s charter, because the charter is supposed to be a general document. “A framework, like the constitution,” he said, “not a specific legislative piece. That kind of detail does not exist anywhere else in the document.” Bernstein, who says he supports medicinal marijuana, said that the issue would be better taken up by the state legislature, or as Lisa Goodman, Ward 7 councilmember, said she will propose, a city council resolution. “I think [COHR is] really trying to bring the attention of the government to this issue, to other legislative bodies, not to change the charter,” Benson said. Bernstein called the initiative a way to get around the fact that Minneapolis has no referenda. In his comments to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee of the City Council, he said that “trying to circumvent the obvious fact that this provision is contrary to Minnesota law by inserting an ‘activation clause’ is a clever ploy but is clearly bad public policy and sets a potentially disastrous precedent.”But Samuels said that the charter commission should not have approved the language of the proposed amendment if they were later going to find that language inappropriate for an amendment to the city charter. “It is a subjective decision whether or not the subject matter is more appropriate for ordinance enactment. [The council] doesn’t like the outcome, so they’re changing the rules.” Ward 6 councilmember Dean Zimmerman and Ward 9 councilmember Gary Schiff also called the decision undemocratic. “The people deserve the right to vote on this issue,” said Zimmerman. “For eight members of the council to say they are right and everyone else is wrong,” said Samuels, “is a slap in the face to democracy, the residents who signed the petition and the people who did the work.” Source: Pulse of the Twin Cities (MN)Author: Troy Pieper Published: Wednesday, September 1, 2004Copyright: 2004 Pulse of the Twin CitiesContact: editor pulsetc.comWebsite: http://www.pulsetc.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:COHRhttp://www.cohr.org/Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Medicinal Marijuana Backers Make Pointhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19415.shtmlMedical Marijuana is Off Ballot http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19370.shtmlMinneapolis Marijuana Issue Gets No Support http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19352.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #3 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 13:49:03 PT
Related Article from The Spokesman-Recorder
City of Minneapolis is Sued to Allow Medical Marijuana VoteBy Rashard Zanders, Minnesota Spokesman-RecorderSeptember 15, 2004The Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States, announced last week that it is suing the City of Minneapolis on behalf of Citizens Organized for Harm Reduction (COHR), to compel the City to allow a vote on a medical marijuana charter amendment. The nearly 700 additional signatures turned in by COHR on August 30 guaranteed that COHR organizers had obtained enough signatures to qualify the measure, but the Minneapolis City Council, by an eight to four vote, has refused to put the proposed charter amendment before voters. Council Member Dean Zimmerman, who supported the measure, responded to MSR’s invitation to comment on the vote:“I think the reason the city council voted it down was that the subject was not a proper item for the charter. The view is that the charter should be about how the City is structured,” Zimmerman said.Last month, Detroit, Michigan’s city council approved a proposal similar to the one COHR canvassed for last month. Ann Arbor also has the issue on the ballot this fall. Zimmerman noted, “Other places that had this measure, it passed everywhere else. It’s an issue elected officials don’t want to touch because it is so controversial.”“It’s puzzling to us that they don’t want to let the people of the city speak on this issue,” said Bill Mirken, the director of communications of MPP.The charter process was instituted as a way for citizens to go around elected officials unresponsive to issues they deem important. How the process emerges from this conflict remains to be seen.Don Haumant is lead plaintiff in the action, a Minneapolis voter who was a legally registered medical marijuana patient during the time he lived in California, and who is being deprived of his right to vote on the amendment by the City’s action.The suit, filed Friday, September 3, in the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, Hennepin County, argues that the proposed charter amendment “meets all of the statutory requirements set forth in Minnesota Statute 410.12,” and that therefore Minneapolis Director of Elections Susanne Griffin “is totally without legal authority to refuse to place the proposed charter amendment submitted by Petitioner and others on the November 2, 2004 general election ballot in the City of Minneapolis.”“The City Council’s action was grossly undemocratic, disenfranchising the more than 12,000 Minneapolis voters who signed the petitions in good faith,” said Neal Levine, a former Minneapolis resident who now serves as director of state policies for MPP. “The reasons given for keeping the charter amendment off the ballot simply do not jibe with either the law or the plain language of the proposed amendment. We are happy to put our resources behind COHR and Mr. Haumant in order to make sure that the voters’ rights are respected.”“Based on our review with our attorneys, the only way they can keep something off the ballot is if it’s manifestly unconstitutional, which it [the charter amendment] isn’t,” said Mirken.Under the proposed charter amendment, Minneapolis would authorize medical marijuana distribution centers to serve patients using marijuana with their physicians’ recommendations “to the extent permitted by state and federal law.” Haumant, who suffers from pain and nausea related to liver disease, made use of a similar system while a resident of San Francisco, according to a statement from MPP.“What the charter states doesn’t jibe with the city council’s reasons against it. This looks to be a pretty clear-cut case. We wouldn’t have sued if we didn’t think we could win. As we understood the situation, the only thing we could do to get this on the ballot is go to court,” said Mirken.The hearing was scheduled for Monday, September 13, at 1:45 pm in the District Court of Hennepin County. MSR will keep readers informed of the outcome.The Marijuana Policy Project works to minimize the harm associated with marijuana. MPP believes that the greatest harm associated with marijuana is imprisonment of non-violent offenders at the public’s expense, by using up prison space that should be used for violent offenders. For more information on medical marijuana, visit: http://www.MarijuanaPolicy.orgRashard Zanders welcomes reader responses to rzanders spokesman-recorder.com
 Copyright 2004 Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder
 
http://www.spokesman-recorder.com/News/Article/Article.asp?NewsID=48265&sID=13
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by The GCW on September 01, 2004 at 15:05:04 PT
The prohibitionists better work overtime.
If this gets on the ballot, it will join all the other grand slams. All of these pass at the voters box.Cannabis is safer than even the water that is used to wash down all the drugs that are used otherwise, that contain side effects that include death.The Cannabis prohibitionists can not keep getting shut out. 
Desperate, they are to cage. Cunning evil Cannabis prohibitionists are losing ground.What has it cost their profits, already?Vicious animals, uncivilized, instinctively maul what is in their path.And We are taking away their habitat.The blood of inocent, coating their entire physical bodies.Worst of the worst.Vile
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Hope on September 01, 2004 at 13:42:28 PT
Good for them!
They won't be silenced that easily! Way to go, guys!
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment