Supervisors Approve Plan for MMJ Dispensaries

Supervisors Approve Plan for MMJ Dispensaries
Posted by CN Staff on March 28, 2006 at 20:05:05 PT
By North County Times News Service 
Source: North County Times
Los Angeles -- A plan to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries in unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County, including provisions to eat and smoke cannabis on-site, was approved Tuesday by the Board of Supervisors.The board approved the plan 4-1, with Supervisor Mike Antonovich voting against the proposal.
Medical marijuana dispensaries are defined as "facilities that provide marijuana for medical purposes to patients or primary caregivers who have a related recommendation from a physician."California voters passed Proposition 215 in 1996, making it legal for certain patients to use marijuana for the treatment of their illnesses.Under the plan approved Tuesday, dispensaries cannot be located in residential areas or within 1,000 feet of schools, youth facilities or recreational areas.Dispensaries will be required to provide proper signs, lighting, graffiti- and litter-removal, a security system and guards.Supervisors also voted to ban the sale and consumption of alcohol at dispensaries.The state law, which is at odds with federal law, allows marijuana use for certain patients with AIDS, anorexia, arthritis, cancer, glaucoma, seizures and persistent muscle spasms.More than 20 people testified before the board in support of dispensaries and on-site consumption of cannabis."(The plan) represents a major step forward," said Don Duncan, with Americans for Safe Access. "This ordinance puts the county of Los Angeles ahead of the curve on this issue."Cancer patient Amanda Brazel said she supported edible forms of cannabis for patients who cannot or will not smoke marijuana."Edibles are the only options for patients who have lung problems," she said.Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky urged his colleagues to approve the plan, noting he has seen the positive effects of medical marijuana."I have personal friends, very close family members whose quality of life was radically improved," Yaroslavsky said."People who know understand fully what this can mean -- the difference between really a torturous life, and in some cases final days, final months, and being able to handle life," he said.Antonovich proposed a change to the ordinance that would have given the Board of Supervisors, and not the Regional Planning Commission, final say on whether a dispensary can open."What we have before us is an opportunity for the community to be engaged in a decision that would be made, that impacts their community," Antonovich said. "To have it decided by a non-elected body does not allow the community to be actively engaged."Yaroslavsky and Supervisors Gloria Molina and Yvonne B. Burke voted against Antonovich's proposal, noting members of the public can voice their concerns directly to the commission.Although voters approved medical marijuana dispensaries 10 years ago, the first dispensary did not open in unincorporated Los Angeles County until May 2005.When the dispensary opened on Halliburton Road in Hacienda Heights, officials realized there were no county regulations for such facilities.As a formality, supervisors will vote on the issue again in two or three weeks when a final version of the ordinance is prepared.Complete Title: Supervisors Approve Plan for Medical Marijuana DispensariesSource: North County Times (Escondido, CA)Published: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 Copyright: 2006 North County TimesContact: letters nctimes.comWebsite: http://www.nctimes.comAmericans For Safe Access Medical Marijuana Archives
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help

Comment #4 posted by Max Flowers on March 29, 2006 at 08:39:35 PT
This is an interesting development
Because L.A. (county) is one of those places where up til now they have sort of refused to get it, and cops have been unsympathetic to the medical cause, keeping that area set back from the rest of the state (north of it) all along.Let's hope this marks the point that they turn it around and start accepting medical cannabis as the legally permitted thing that it is.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by mayan on March 29, 2006 at 04:40:13 PT
L.A. Vs. S.D
May the servant supervisors of San Diego take note. You can't stop the inevitable. Respect your employers. Ohio's servants would do well to listen also. Please, don't tread on us.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by Taylor121 on March 28, 2006 at 21:58:26 PT
Ohio Action Alert: Fight SB8, the "Drugged Driving
Dear Friend,As expected, the House Criminal Justice Committee approved Senate Bill 8,
Ohio’s proposed “drugged driving” bill, earlier this week by a 12-2 vote.
While some of our allies on the Committee tried to address some of our
concerns by introducing several amendments to the bill, SB 8 – as
currently written – would still improperly punish marijuana smokers for
"drugged driving," even if the individual is neither under the influence
nor impaired to drive.The bill is now expected to go to the full House for a vote, and if
approved, back to the Senate. Please contact your House Representative
now and tell them to vote “no” on this dangerous and unnecessary proposal.Senate Bill 8 represents an all out assault on the marijuana smoking
community. Because marijuana's main metabolite, THC-COOH, remains
detectable in certain bodily fluids, particularly urine, for days an
sometimes weeks after past use, this legislation seeks to define sober
drivers as if they were intoxicated. Someone who smokes marijuana is
impaired as a driver at most for a few hours; certainly not for days or
weeks. To treat all marijuana smokers as if they are impaired, even when
the drug's effects have long worn off, is illogical and unfair.In addition, Ohio already has effect-based laws on the books targeting and
prosecuting drivers who operate a motor vehicle "under the influence" of
illicit drugs. Under Section 4511.19 of Ohio's Revised Code, motorists
face up to six months in jail if they drive "while under the influence of
a drug of abuse." By contrast, SB 8 seeks to create a new crime of
"drugged driving" that is divorced from impairment and that would jail
motorists for simply having consumed an illicit substance at some prior,
unspecified date. While Ohioans certainly do not wish to condone illegal
drug use, it's also clear that this proposal seeks to misuse the state's
traffic-safety laws to target illicit drug use in general. In short,
there is no need for this additional legislation.Please take time today to contact your state House Representative and tell
him or her that SB 8 is neither fair nor sound public policy and should be
rejected by the legislature. The lobbying efforts of NORML supporters and
concerned citizens like you helped to successfully derail a similar
legislative effort in 2004, and we need your assistance again now.
Prewritten letters opposing SB 8, as well as a listing of Committee
members, are available online at: you for your support on this important issue.Sincerely,
Paul Armentano
Senior Policy Analyst
NORML | NORML Foundation
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by FoM on March 28, 2006 at 20:08:12 PT
Related Article from Snipped Source
 L.A. County Gives Green Light to Pot Dispensary 
 March 28, 2006LOS ANGELES – An ordinance enabling medical marijuana dispensaries to operate in unincorporated areas of the county was approved by the county Board of Supervisors on Tuesday. The dispensaries will be permitted in commercial and industrial zones of Lennox, Del Aire and other unincorporated areas, but they will have to be at least 1,000 feet from schools, parks, churches and day-care centers. They also will have to hire security guards, and will have to publicly post their owners' contact phone numbers, among other requirements.  
In addition to marijuana, the dispensaries will be able to sell candy and other comestibles containing the drug to authorized patients. 
 Snipped:Complete Article:
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment