Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd No. 1102 - Marijuana DispensariesORDINANCE NO. 1102 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 25.112 TO TITLE 25 OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT WHEREAS the people of the State of California have enacted Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (codified at Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5, et seq.,) ("the Act") to allow the medical use of marijuana for certain persons; and WHEREAS the Act does not require or provide for the opening of businesses or cooperatives commonly known as Medical Marijuana Dispensaries; and WHEREAS notwithstanding passage of the Act, the distribution and use of marijuana is prohibited by the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. Section 841; and WHEREAS the United States Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Raich, confirmed that the Controlled Substances Act does not contain a 'compassionate use' exemption and therefore it is a violation of Federal Law to possess or distribute marijuana even if for medical purposes; and WHEREAS the City Council of the City of Palm Desert concludes that federal law prohibiting the distribution and use of marijuana precludes the opening of Medial Marijuana Dispensaries within the City of Palm Desert; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Palm Desert hereby finds and determines that it is the purpose and intent of this Ordinance to prohibit Medical Marijuana Dispensaries in order to promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the residents and businesses within the City. SECTION 2. Chapter 25.112 is hereby added to Title 25 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code to read as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 1102 "Chapter 25.112 MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES Sections: 25.112.010 Medical marijuana dispensaries defined. 25.112.020 Prohibited. 25.112.010 Medical marijuana dispensaries defined. A. As used in this chapter, "medical marijuana dispensary" or "dispensary" means any facility or location where medical marijuana is made available to and/or distributed by or to one or more of the following: a primary caregiver, a qualified patient, or a person with an identification card, in strict accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq. B. A "medical marijuana dispensary" shall not include the following uses, as long as the location of such uses are otherwise regulated by this code or applicable law: a clinic licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, a health care facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, a residential care facility for persons with chronic life -threatening illness licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, a residential care facility for the elderly licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, a residential hospice, or a home health agency licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, as long as any such use complies strictly with applicable law including, but not limited to, Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq. 25.112.020 Prohibited. Medical marijuana dispensaries are prohibited in all City zones, and no permit shall be issued therefor." SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction or preempted by state or federal legislation, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Palm Desert hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to any such decision or preemptive legislation. ORDINANCE NO. 1102 SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once, in a newspaper of general circulation, publishes and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California. This Ordinance of the City of Palm Desert shall be effective thirty (30) days after the date of its passage. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of 2005, by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Buford A. Crites, Mayor City of Palm Desert, California ATTEST: Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: David J. Erwin, City Attorney City of Palm Desert, California 10/26./2005 11:12 FAX fm 001 1616 BEVEM Y BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES CA 9002.6-5711 T, 213 M TM F: 213 = 3919 WWW.ACLU-SCARG Sent: October 26, 2005 (11:15am) To: Palm Desert City Council Company: City of Palm Desert Fax #: 760-340-0574 From: Peter Eliasberg Fax M. 213-250-3919 Tet#: 213-977-9600 Ext. 228 Pages: 4 (including cover) Subject: Proposed Ordinance No. 1102 Notes: Please see the attached letter This communication contains confidential or privileged information. It is intended only for the addressee. if you received it in error, then any distribution, reading, copying, or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. In such circumstances, please notify us immediately by calling the above number and return the original communication to us at the above address by mail. Thank you. CHAIR JARL MOHN I PRESIDENT DANNY GOLDBERG I IMECUITIVE DIRECTOR RAMONA RIPSTON I LEGAL DIRECTOR MARK 0. ROSENBAUM CHAIRS EMERIT6 DANNY GOLDBERG I ALLAN K JONAS I DURT LANCASTER' IRVING LICHTENSTEIN. MD' I LAURIE 051ROW I STANLEY K. 5110NBAUM I roecweo Received Oct-26-05 11:18am From- To -PALM DESERT CITY CLE Pale 01 10/264:2005 11:12 FAT Q 002 AMEAICAN CIVIL UftI IES UNION FOUNDATION DRUG LAW allw-OA PROMrr 1101 PACWIC Avpmz. SU= 353 SANTA C= CA 96000 TI631.471.9000 r201-41t.0000 NATIONAL OMCE 126 MOAD BTR£JZ'1'. 16TH FL. NEW YO= NY 1OW"400 T412463500 TCOAiiC'1%2isx�4s.8s6o WWWACLUAMC >'n1sa49s664 OEFICERS AMID DWJSCSORs NADINE STSMEN ARMONY D. E0 MMCUTM Diascroa KZNNM S. CLARK CNAM NATIONAL ADWSM COUNCIL ACLUr AMERICAN CIVIL LIRFRIIES W410N 0 Via Facsimile to (760) 340-0574 Palm Desen City Council 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 October 25, 2005 Dear Honorable City Council Members, We are writing on behalf of the National ACLU Drug Law Reform Project and the ACLU of Southern California to express our deep concern about some of the language in proposed Ordi wwce No. 1102 concerning medical marijuana dispensaries. We believe that the troubling language may be inadvertent and urge you to amend it. Specifically, we are concerned that the ordinance prohibits the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries and defines the term "medical marijuana dispensary" far too broadly. The ordinance provides that the tern, "any facility or location where medical marijuana is made available to and/or distributed by or to one or more of the following: a primary caregiver, a qualified patient or a person with an identification card...." By adopting this overly -broad definition, the ordinance creates a blanket prohibition of activity clearly permitted by state law, and would therefore be invalid and subject to legal challenge. UMASUMM Under this definition, the ordinance could be construed to prohibit, for instance, an individual medical marijuana patient or her caregiver from growing xraarijuans in a private residence for use by the patient. The ordinance could also be construed to prohibit a small group of patients and/or caregivers from growing their marijuana collectively for their personal medical use, as permitted by Health and Safety Code section 11362.775. This point is critically important. your proposed ordinance's second "whereas" clause states that, "the Act does not require or provide for the opening of businesses or cooperatives commonly known as Medical Marijuana Dispcnsarics." But it is clear that state law, specifically section 11362.775, in fact quite specifically does provide for the establishment of cooperatives: that section provides that, Qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, and the designated primary caregivers of qualified patients and parsons with identification cards, who associate within the State of Califor4ia In order collectively or cooneratively tq eultivpte mariiqana fir medical pnrnoRes. shall not solely on the basis of that fact he stljgct to state crimipal sanctions ... Because of the overly -broad manner in which your proposed ordinance defines "dispensary," the ordinance completely prohibits activity plainly and specifically Received Oct-28-05 11:18am From- To -PALM DESERT CITY CLE Page 02 10/2bV2005 11:13 FAX 0003 AMMUCAN CWM MUM UNION FOUNDATWN permitted under stato law. Given that the objective of the ordinance seems to be a moratorium on the establishment of `buyers clubs" where medical marijuana is sold for a profit, we suspect that your intent was not to create this sweeping prohibition upon individual patients and caregivers, and that the language can be easily amended to obtain the desired effect without violating state law. We draw your attention to a recent official published opinion of Attorney General Bill Lockyer, Opinion No. 04-709, dated June 23, 2005 (published at 88 Ops. Cal. Atty, Gen. 113) Opinion No. 04-709 examined the question of whether individual cities' medical marijuana patient identification card programs were preempted by the statewide registry and card program, and the related question of whether cities could continue to operate their own programs until such time as the statewide program was implemented in the county in which the city is located. The Attorney General concluded that state law did preempt local ordinances, but that cities could continue to operate their own programs until the statewide program was implemented in their counties, with an important proviso directly relevant to your proposed ordinance at issuo here: the individual city programs can operate only to the extent no element of the city program is contradictory to state law. A local ordinance is contradictory to state law if it is, "...inimical to state law, i.e., it penalizes conduct that state law expressly authorizes or permits conduct which state law forbids." (Suter x City of Lafayette (1997) 57 Cal.App-e 1109, 1124; see Sherwin-Williams Co. v. Ciry ofLos Angeles (1993) 4 Cal.0 893, 898; 77 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 147, 148 (1994))." 88 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 113 at p. 7 (2005)_ For instance, the Attorney General vxplairu:d, "a city would be preempted from allowing possession of marijuana at levels less than what the state law permits and making identification cards a mandatory prerequisite for prohibiting detention and seizure, because such provisions would directly contradict state law." Ibid. Under this same analysis, the proposed ordinance as currently drafted is contradictory to state law in that the definition of "dispensary" prohibits activity that is clearly legal under state medical marijuana law provisions. We are also very conce>noed by the proposed ordinance's third, fourth and fifth "whereas" clauses which indicate that the City Council is basing its decision to refuse to comply with valid state law on the Council's interpretation of federal law, including the Supreme Court's recent decision in Gonzales Y. Raich. Properly understood, the Supreme Court's decision in Raich has no bearing on whether or not the City Council can ban activity clearly permitted under state medical marijuana laws. California Attorney General Bill Lockyer has unambiguously and repeatedly confirmed that the Supreme Court's decision in Raich did not invalidate nor render unenforceable California's medical marijuana law. Subsequent to the Supreme Court's Raich decision, Pdr. Lockyer has issued an official statement (rune 6, 2005), two bulletins to law enforcement (June 9 and June 22, 2005), a formal opinion (June 23, 2005), and an informal opinion (July 15, 2005) affi n-m ng that California's medical Received Oct-28-05 11:18am From- To -PALM DESERT CITY CLE Page 03 10/26V2005 11:13 FAX 9004 marijuana laws are not preempted by federal law as a result of the ruling. The Attorney General has confirmed that nothing in the Raich decision changed anything about the validity and enforceability of California's medical marijuana provisions. Like Attorney General Lockyer, every state attorney general who has reviewed the validity of state medical xnar�uana laws post-Raich has concluded that such laws remain valid and in full force and effect. The practical impact of the Raich ruling is that federal officials may enforce federal law even in states where medical use of marijuana is legal under state law, but this does not justify state or local law enforcement officials ignoring or refusing to comply with valid state medical marijuana laws. CANC1D Moreover, the Suprcme Court did not hold in Raich that possession or use of AMWUMON FOUNDATION marijuana in compliance with California law violates the federal Controlled Substances Act. Rather, the Supreme Court upheld the Controlled Substances Act in the face of a constitutional challenge brought affirmatively by California patients under the Commerce Clause. The Court held that intrastate cultivation and use of marijuana for medical purposes authorized by California law Ma be prohibited by federal law as a valid oxercise of congressional authority under the Commerce Clause. 125 S.Ct. at 2201-2215 (emvhasis added). The Supreme Court did not reach the question of whether the actions of plaintiffs Diane Monson and Angel Raich in fact violated. the Controlled Substances Act, because that issue was not before the Court. Nor did the Court invalidate, or even call into question the validity of, California's mcdical marijuana laws. Rather, the Court merely confirmed the federal government's authority to regulate marijuana under the Commerce Clause. Ibid. We believe the County can obtain the desired effect of regulating for -profit "buyers clubs" without using this overly -broad language that clearly violates state law. We urge you to amend the definition of "medical marijuana dispensary" before Ordinance No. 449.223 is presented for vote by the Board of Supervisors. We would be happy to discuss this matter with you further. Please call Allen Hopper at the number provided in the letterhead if you would like to do so. Sincerely, P411f, X/IXZ-- Allen Hopper Senior Staff Attorney ACLU Drug Law form Project Pcter Eliasberg Managing Attorney ACLU of Southem California Received Oct-26-06 11:16am From - To -PALL DESERT CITY CLE Page 04 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Borders8@aol.com Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 9:53 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Ban of Medicinal Marijuana To Whom It May Concern: am opposed to the ban on medicinal marijuana. It is not fair or just for sick and dying citizens of this country, and your city, to have to obtain their medicine on the black market. By implementing this ban, that is exactly what you are doing. Coops are nonprofit medical marijuana facilities that distribute medicinal marijuana only to people who participate in the process of growing and maintaining the medicine. These facilities produce no threat to society, provide medicine for the sick, keep money out of drug dealers pocket, and also there is growing scientific evidence shows that marijuana can be used as medicine. There is no legitimate reason for a ban on medicinal marijuana. Although I am opposed to any ban on medicinal marijuana, if one has to be implemented it should be implemented with the phrase, "NO CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW. This ordinance shall in no way limit the right to possess, use or cultivate marijuana for medicinal purposes as is presently authorized by the laws of the State of California as set forth in the Health and Safety Code." Thank You, Matt Borders Riverside, CA tna -13 es, ,r.' 10/27/2005 Klassen, Rachelle From: Cathy Kaldhusdal [hempist@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 2:52 PM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: I'M OPPOSED TO THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA BAN, PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR IT Hello Just a quick note to let you know that marijuana is medicine. Medical marijuana dispensaries are critical to sick & dying people. Only doctors should decide what is medicine and what is best for their patients. If someone has a serious illness and they say medical marijuana helps them, who are we to disagree? Patients should not have to suffer, as I said before, marijuana is medicine & has been used as such for many years. Please do not ban the dispensary. Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. Sincerely, Cathy Kaldhusdal (i1 1`i na Ca? c cn > — 1 GORDON M. SOLOMONSON 48-5 cwood Way/M 4.0 y ¢ 70 Palm Desert, CA 92260 v) (760) 568-6574 igict.u., dati.24..c..c.e ik&vult44) W) 4Ad'rs4� fa �a� .c. •.e i4v et,4- 3 yaLog4- A14.4i d47,14AL /45;& 6.40 izte..z_ At4/140) *A_ kxf.f-.4/ 4(44.464/0.4-f-7 xfree(A. ,o, ke_ 4-4 8ruk A,g6g.&- fieue-s< Aza& Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Hideovideo@aol.com Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 7:57 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Medical Marijuana I urge you to include the following sction in the medical marijuana ordinance: NO CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW. This ordinance shall in no way limit the right to possess, use or cultivate marijuana for medicinal purposes as is presently authorized by the laws of the State of California as set forth in the Health and Safety Code. It is the same as that included by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors and I see no reason why Palm Desert should feel the need to go beyond that. Yours truly, Darrell DeCosta C1 GPI 10/27/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Jules [onlyl julie©gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 4:32 PM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Palm Desert Dispensary Ban AGENDA PACKET SIMON mantle DATE /D-a 7d S` I am opposed to the medicinal marijuana ban. Please do not vote for it. Thank you. 10/25/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Kim Weider [jobcatcherl @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 6:32 PM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Medical Marijuana SECTO MEETI?4S SATZ 10 -0 Please do not vote against medical marijuana. There are hundreds of people who need the medicinal properties marijuana has to offer. It is not a "street drug" to people who are suffering. It is better medicine than the perscriptions I am offered from my doctors. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Kim Weider Yahoo! FareChase - Search multinle travel sites in one click. 10/25/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Ldog573@aol.com Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 8:47 PM To: Klassen, Rachelle Cc: lannyswerdlow@earthlink.net Subject: medical cannabis eiCi AGENDA PACKET SECTIOi I� MEETING DATE I 0 • -/-oj "I am opposed to the medicinal marijuana ban. Please do not vote for it." Medical marijuana has been an integral part in my treatment since day 1, of type 2 diabetes that I was diagnosed with over 3 years ago. Please don't take my access to helpful medication away from me. Thank you for considering this letter. 10/25/2005 Klassen, Rachelle From: Lisa Silverman [anaconda@lstnetusa.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 11:03 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Marijuana Ban I want you to know I am opposed to the marijuana ban. It is immoral and wrong. Lisa Silverman 1 Kiassen, Rachelle From: Sent: To: Subject: Mari Jensen [DaFurryPurry@webtv.net) Monday, October 24, 2005 11:31 PM Kiassen, Rachelle Dispensary Ban In Palm Desert To Whom It May Concern: AGENDA PACKET r,1 SECTION MEETING DATE97-.O I am writing on behalf of my disabled husband, my own disabilities, and those of my son. I am 50 years old this year and was diagnosed with glaucoma at the age of 17, and was told I'd be blind in 5 years. I can still see well enough to drive a car, read, and obviously use the net. I am disabled because of chemical sensitivities due to exposure to many harmful chemicals. I grew up in Glen Avon-Rubidoux area where our well water was tainted by the Stringfellow Acid Pits. My little brother and I used to swim in the irrigation ditches near our house; he's sterile and my only son was born with an extremely rare form of dwarfism, he's also sterile. I am HIGHLY allergic and sensitive to so many chemical compounds and medicines, including not being able to breathe around perfumes, laundry scents, make-up, etc., NOT fun for a woman at all. Being so highly sensitive I am unable to use eye pressure relieving drops for my glaucoma. My opthamalogist suggested that I use medical marijuana for the eye pressure. At first I thought he was joking, but he told me it was worth it to save my eyesight. He was right. I can still drive. I can see the sunrise and sunset, I can see the faces of my grandchildren. I have grandchildren only because my son married a lady with children, the point is...I can SEE them. My son is now 31 and along with his disability, has glaucoma, diabetes, as well as chemical sensitivities and uses medical marijuana for his eye pressures and migraine headaches, because he can't tolerate the medicines for those headaches; hives, heart palpitations, dizziness, side effects almost as bad as his pain. My husband has had 2 spinal surgeries due to not -at -fault car accidents twice in 7 years, and has had to be on pain medicine for over 10 years now. He was given so many different pills, pain block shots in his spine, pain patches that delivered medicine directly through the skin, they didn't work at all and made him very ill. The pain medicine he's on has so many side effects and the ONLY thing that allows him to stop the nausea long enough to eat and relaxes him enough to get to sleep and STAY asleep...WITHOUT ANY SIDE EFFECTS is medical marijuana. PLEASE try to street we beg of you, do not vote to ban dispensaries! Do YOU have to FIND your doctor recommended medicine on some dark and scary corner, or drive hundreds of miles to get it? Methinks not. We are so very grateful to be able to go somewhere that's as a clinic and controlled atmosphere to get medicine for our illnesses. If patients do not have the proper identification and doctor's recommendations, they are NOT allowed into a dispensary, end of story. People like us on fixed income due to illness or sudden car accident injuries, don't have a lot of money to pay for gasoline expenses to travel 1-o-n-g distances like Oakland to get our medicine. I only speak for my family, but there are hundreds of patients right here in our - N c_rt CD CD cn XID tt? 0 1 beloved Coachella Valley, think of them too please?? We never thought something like this would have happened to us, but it did, all in the blink of an eye, and it could happen just as suddenly to you or any one of your loved ones! Have the compassion and common sense to continue to let people get their medicine from a compassionate and common sense approach. Thank you for your time and concern for this issue, and the very best to you and your families. Sincerely, The Jensens Joshua Tree CA Message Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Mallika Albert [mallika@dc.rr.com] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 8:12 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Cc: Lanny Swerdlow Subject: Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ban Palm Desert City Councilmembers: I am absolutely opposed to the ban you are proposing for medical Marijuana dispensaries in Palm Desert because it not only limits the choices of patients but their physicians as well when addressing a multitude of health problems. I limit my intake of pharmaceutical drugs and would rather choose a more natural form of medication to treat any illnesses. When the public controversary surrounding medical marijuana initially erupted here in Riverside County, I accompanied the MAPP representatives when we met with Supervisor Roy Wilson and I also offered testimony before the County Supervisors. My physican, a well respected internal medicine specialist, whose practice is based in Palm Desert, said she would honor and support my preference for medical marijuana if ever the need arose. Enacting your ban would infringe upon my physician's ability to treat me as a patient. If you haven't already read the vast amount of literature documenting the benefits of medical marijuana, you should, before voting on a ban. The powerful side effects of pharmaceucial drugs are reported daily in news coverage. My father, who was prescribed and took Vioxx for years, suffered a stroke and died. Perhaps if he had other choices, he would still be here today. Americans are becoming more proactive with health choices, and although I do not need medical marijuana yet for a health problem, I want my physician to be able to prescribe whatever medication best suits my needs. Medical marijuana is my choice. Please support it. Thank you. Mallika Albert, M.S. 2241 N. Leonard Road Palm Springs, CA 92262 10/27/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: MELISSA D. [mdprod@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 10:20 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Marijuana dispensary rule AGENDA P SE+CT(pp '' ET i It is a crime to withhold people's medicine from them. This was voted in clear back in 1996. Marijuana is considered, and rightfully so, a safe soft herb that helps many for medicinal use. In Holland, Marijuana has been de -criminalized for over 20 years; you don't even have to have a liscense there to obtain it. No one is stealing to get this natural drug, no one is going into the D.T's. but you sure see and hear of it happening from other drugs which are considered hard ones. There are bars and liquor stores on every corner here in the U.S., and this is are number one drug problem in liquid form. People go into black outs from alcohol, people stagger around and make fools of themselves on it. I've never seen that from someone using marijuana. The difference is unbelievable. Many patients have gone through the steps to obtain a medical marijuana liscense to obtain the medicine that works best for them. What is wonderful about this natural herb is that it is not addicting. Many have used it for years, then stop without any side effects. What other drug over the the counter, or prescribed can do that? There isn't one I know of. Usually I have honestly found, the people who judge this safe, herbal drug have never used it, or have never known anyone that has. Just like everything else, marijuana may not work for everyone, but the ones that actually know that it does should be able to not be bothered with hearing all the time now that their liscense isn't going to be any good now, or that dispensaries will be banned now 10 years after the people voted it in. Lots of people that did vote it in don't even use it, but they see nothing wrong with sick people being able to obtain if it helps them. I personally feel it should be totally legalized, it does not lead people to harder drugs. If a person goes to harder drugs, they would have done that anyway. Many people are content and pacified with this light, herbal drug. By being able to go to a dispensary makes it much safer for people, they shouldn't have to deal with drug dealers off the streets. Why let drug dealers make the money, that is ridiculous. By making marijuana legal there is a lot of tax money that could be used for other things far more important than someone using marijuana. Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. 10/25/2005 Klassen, Rachelle From: Martin Victor Sr [m.victor@adelphia.net] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 12:14 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: SB420 om SB 420 Amended Full Text.htm To whom it may concern: From a citizen's view on SB420, your in violation of this law by not allowing the sick and dying citizens to use cannabis under the care of their doctor whom had recommended this to them. I am really confused how a simple law that passed in January 2004 is not accepted by Palm Springs. This law recognizes all patient's rights as embodied in Prop 215 and it also allows a patient to grow their own medicine/and or as a collective of patients whom grow together and support each other in Unity and understanding. I know for a fact that change is a hard thing to accept, and also a law that we disapprove of. But this is the State Law and should be abided by. I am sure that there is a big misunderstanding. A co-op allowed by SB420 is a group of patients whom grow together and provide medicine for themselves. There are so sales involved, nor traffic involved all hours of the night. Each patient must have a valid recommendation provided by their doctors whom had recommended the use of cannabis (marijuana) for their illness. This law allows agencies to provide medical marijuana to qualified patients 11362.7(d)(2). This law provides "around the clock" validation of participation in the program when police confront a patient or caregiver 11362.71(a)(b). Need I go on. But if you still not sure, please do the research yourselves. Attached is a copy of SB420, just in case it was misplaced. As on a personal note: I am a grandmother of 5 beautiful children and had been involve with against drugs of any kind for a very long time. I have seen how drugs can destroy a family, the mind and spirit of our citizens. And I am a strong believer in the cannabis plant that has provided many citizens with a natural relief without any side effects. I have seen it work and also experienced the use of cannabis for my own illness (MS). I understand that marinol is on the market. Not only is this drug as expensive as mine, it is also unaffordable for citizens whom live on limited income. There is no excuse for this kind of behavior. You work for the state of California. (not Federal) and all State laws are to be followed. No matter how we disapprove of it or not. You are not in the position to change this law. And your in violation of this law by not allowing what SB420 states that the citizens of Palm Springs and across California citizens are allowed to have. Section 1. (e) The Legislature further finds and declares that it enacts this act pursuant to the powers reserved to the State of California and its people under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Since I am sworn to uphold the laws as a citizen and also with the neighborhood watch, I took a sworn oath , I expect you also to uphold the laws of California, which you also took a sworn oath to follow. I signed the __J same paper as you did. Please revised the Palm Springs Band on co-ops and collectives. As this is allowed by law. Thank you. Mrs. Lavonne Victor. Z -J -n C'7 T CA i� M 1 Page 1 of 12 From: The Elegant [amestizo@neteze.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:00 PM To: RAMC New Talk Subject: SB 420 Amended Full Text BILL NUMBER: SB 420 AMENDED BILL TEXT AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER 4, 2003 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 18, 2003 AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 27, 2003 INTRODUCED BY Senator Vasconcellos (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Leno) FEBRUARY 20, 2003 An act to add Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 11362.7) to Chapter 6 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to controlled substances. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 420, as amended, Vasconcellos. Medical marijuana. Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, prohibits any physician from being punished, or denied any right or privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for medical purposes. The act prohibits the provisions of law making unlawful the possession or cultivation of marijuana from applying to a patient, or to a patient' s primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician. This bill would require the State Department of Health Services to establish and maintain a voluntary program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified patients and would establish procedures under which a qualified patient with an identification card may use marijuana for medical purposes. The bill would specify the department's duties in this regard, including developing related protocols and forms, and establishing application and renewal fees for the program. The bill would impose various duties upon county health departments relating to the issuance of identification cards, thus creating a state -mandated local program. The bill would create various crimes related to the identification card program, thus imposing a state -mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement, including the creation of a State Mandates Claims Fund to pay the costs of mandates that do not exceed $1,000,000 statewide and other procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed file://C:\Documents%20and%24Settings\rklassen\Local%20S ettings\Temporary%20Internet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 2 of 12 $1,000,000. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State -mandated local program: yes. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (1) On November 6, 1996, the people of the State of California enacted the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (hereafter the act), codified in Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code, in order to allow seriously ill residents of the state, who have the oral or written approval or recommendation of a physician, to use marijuana for medical purposes without fear of criminal liability under Sections 11357 and 11358 of the Health and Safety Code. (2) However, reports from across the state have revealed problems and uncertainties in the act that have impeded the ability of law enforcement officers to enforce its provisions as the voters intended and, therefore, have prevented qualified patients and designated primary caregivers from obtaining the protections afforded by the act. (3) Furthermore, the enactment of this law, as well as other recent legislation dealing with pain control, demonstrates that more information is needed to assess the number of individuals across the state who are suffering from serious medical conditions that are not being adequately alleviated through the use of conventional medications. (4) In addition, the act called upon the state and the federal government to develop a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need thereof. (b) It is the intent of the Legislature, therefore, to do all of the following: (1) Clarify the scope of the application of the act and facilitate the prompt identification of qualified patients and their designated primary caregivers in order to avoid unnecessary arrest and prosecution of these individuals and provide needed guidance to law enforcement officers. (2) Promote uniform and consistent application of the act among the counties within the state. (3) Collect data to ascertain the extent of serious medical conditions that are not being adequately relieved in order to plan for future research and resource allocation. (4) (3) Enhance the access of patients and caregivers to medical marijuana through collective, cooperative cultivation projects. (c) It is also the intent of the Legislature to address additional issues that were not included within the act, and that must be resolved in order to promote the fair and orderly implementation of the act. (d) The Legislature further finds and declares both of the file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\rklassen\Local%20Settings\Temporary%20Intemet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 3 of 12 following: (1) A state identification card program will further the goals outlined in this section. (2) With respect to individuals, the identification system established pursuant to this act must be wholly voluntary, and a patient entitled to the protections of Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code need not possess an identification card in order to claim the protections afforded by that section. SEC. 2. Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 11362.7) is added to Chapter 6 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, to read: Article 2.5. Medical Marijuana Program 11362.7. For purposes of this article, the following definitions shall apply: (a) "Attending physician" means an individual who possesses a license in good standing to practice medicine or osteopathy issued by the Medical Board of California and who has taken responsibility for an aspect of the medical care, treatment, diagnosis, counseling, or referral of a patient and who has conducted a medical examination of that patient before recording in the patient's medical record the physician's assessment of whether the patient has a serious medical condition and whether the medical use of marijuana is appropriate. (b) "Department" means the State Department of Health Services. (c) "Person with an identification card" means an individual who is a qualified patient who has applied for and received a valid identification card pursuant to this article. (d) "Primary caregiver" means the individual, designated by a qualified patient or by a person with an identification card, who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of that patient or person, and may include any of the following: (1) In any case in which a qualified patient or person with an identification card receives medical care or supportive services, or both, from a clinic licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 1200) of Division 2, a health care facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1250) of Division 2, a residential care facility for persons with chronic life -threatening illness licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 (commencing with Section 1568.01) of Division 2, a residential care facility for the elderly licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 (commencing with Section 1569) of Division 2, a hospice, or a home health agency licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 1725) of Division 2, the owner or operator, or no more than three employees who are designated by the owner or operator, of the clinic, facility, hospice, or home health agency, if designated as a primary caregiver by that qualified patient or person with an identification card. (2) An individual who has been designated as a primary caregiver by more than one qualified patient or person with an identification card, if every qualified patient or person with an identification card who has designated that individual as a primary caregiver resides in the same city or county as the primary caregiver. (3) An individual who has been designated as a primary caregiver by a qualified patient or person with an identification card who file:/IC:\Documents%20and%20Settings\rklassen\Local%20Settings\Temporary%20Internet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 4 of 12 resides in a city or county other than that of the primary caregiver, if the individual has not been designated as a primary caregiver by any other qualified patient or person with an identification card. (e) A primary caregiver shall be at least 18 years of age, unless the primary caregiver is the parent of a minor child who is a qualified patient or a person with an identification card or the primary caregiver is a person otherwise entitled to make medical decisions under state law pursuant to Sections 6922, 7002, 7050, or 7120 of the Family Code. (f) "Qualified patient" means a person who is entitled to the protections of Section 11362.5, but who does not have an identification card issued pursuant to this article. (g) "Identification card" means a document issued by the State Department of Health Services that document identifies a person authorized to engage in the medical use of marijuana and the person's designated primary caregiver, if any. (h) "Serious medical condition" means all of the following medical conditions: (1) Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). (2) Anorexia. (3) Arthritis. (4) Cachexia. (5) Cancer. (6) Chronic pain. (7) Glaucoma. (8) Migraine. (9) Persistent muscle spasms, including, but not limited to, spasms associated with multiple sclerosis. (10) Seizures, including, but not limited to, seizures associated with epilepsy. (11) Severe nausea. (12) Any other chronic or persistent medical symptom that either: (A) Substantially limits the ability of the person to conduct one or more major life activities as defined in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-336). (B) If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient's safety or physical or mental health. (i) "Written documentation" means accurate reproductions of those portions of a patient's medical records that have been created by the attending physician, that contain the information required by paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 11362.715, and that the patient may submit to a county health department or its designee as part of an application for an identification card. 11362.71. (a) The department shall establish and maintain a voluntary program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified patients who satisfy the requirements of this article and voluntarily apply to the identification card program. (b) Every county health department shall do all of the following: (1) Provide applications upon request to individuals seeking to join the identification card program. (2) Receive and process completed applications in accordance with Section 11362.72. file:IIC:\Documents%20and%20S ettings\rklassen\Local%20Settings\Temporary%20Internet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 5 of 12 (3) Maintain records of identification card programs. (4) Utilize protocols developed by the department pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d). (5) Issue identification cards developed by the department to approved applicants and designated primary caregivers. (c) The county health department may designate another governmental or a nongovernmental entity or organization to perform the functions described in subdivision (b), except for an entity or organization that cultivates or distributes marijuana. (d) The department shall develop all of the following: (1) Protocols that shall be used by county health departments and their designees to implement the responsibilities described in subdivision (b), including, but not limited to, protocols to confirm the accuracy of information contained in an application and to protect the confidentiality of program records. (2) Application forms that shall be issued to requesting applicants. (3) An identification card that identifies a person authorized to engage in the medical use of marijuana and an identification card that identifies the person's designated primary caregiver, if any. The two identification cards developed pursuant to this paragraph shall be easily distinguishable from each other. (e) No person or designated primary caregiver in possession of a valid identification card shall be subject to arrest for possession, transportation, delivery, or cultivation of medical marijuana in an amount approved by the department pursuant to Section 11362.77, unless there is reasonable cause to believe that the information contained in the card is false or falsified, the card has been obtained by means of fraud, or the person is otherwise in violation of the provisions of this article. (f) It shall not be necessary for a person to obtain an identification card in order to claim the protections of Section 11362.5. 11362.715. (a) A person who seeks an identification card shall pay the fee, as provided in Section 11362.755, and provide all of the following to the county health department or its designee on a form developed and provided by the department: (1) The name of the person, and proof of his or her residency within the county. (2) Written documentation by the attending physician in the person' s medical records stating that the person has been diagnosed with a serious medical condition and that the medical use of marijuana is appropriate. (3) The name, office address, office telephone number, and California medical license number of the person's attending physician. (4) The name and the duties of the primary caregiver. (5) A government -issued photo identification card of the person and of the designated primary caregiver, if any. If the applicant is a person under 18 years of age, a certified copy of a birth certificate shall be deemed sufficient proof of identity. (b) If the person applying for an identification card lacks the capacity to make medical decisions, the application may be made by the person's legal representative, including, but not limited to, any fi le://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\rklassen\Local%20Settings\Temporary%201nternet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 6 of 12 of the following: (1) A conservator with authority to make medical decisions. (2) An attorney -in -fact under a durable power of attorney for health care or surrogate decisionmaker authorized under another advanced health care directive. (3) Any other individual authorized by statutory or decisional law to make medical decisions for the person. (c) The legal representative described in subdivision (b) may also designate in the application an individual, including himself or herself, to serve as a primary caregiver for the person, provided that the individual meets the definition of a primary caregiver. (d) The person or legal representative submitting the written information and documentation described in subdivision (a) shall retain a copy thereof. 11362.72. (a) Within 30 days of receipt of an application for an identification card, a county health department or its designee shall do all of the following: (1) For purposes of processing the application , as well as for the purpose of obtaining data to assess the number of individuals in this state suffering from serious medical conditions that are not being adequately alleviated through the use of conventional medications , verify that the information contained in the application is accurate. If the person is less than 18 years of age, the county health department or its designee shall also contact the parent with legal authority to make medical decisions, legal guardian, or other person or entity with legal authority to make medical decisions, to verify the information. (2) Verify with the Medical Board of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California that the attending physician has a license in good standing to practice medicine or osteopathy in the state. (3) Contact the attending physician by facsimile, telephone, or mail to confirm that the medical records submitted by the patient are a true and correct copy of those contained in the physician's office records. When contacted by a county health department or its designee, the attending physician shall confirm or deny that the contents of the medical records are accurate. (4) Take a photograph or otherwise obtain an electronically transmissible image of the applicant and of the designated primary caregiver, if any. (5) Approve or deny the application. If an applicant who meets the requirements of Section 11362.715 can establish that an identification card is needed on an emergency basis, the county or its designee shall issue a temporary identification card that shall be valid for 30 days from the date of issuance. The county, or its designee, may extend the temporary identification card for no more than 30 days at a time, so long as the applicant continues to meet the requirements of this paragraph. (b) If the county health department or its designee approves the application, it shall, within 24 hours, or by the end of the next working day of approving the application, electronically transmit the following information to the department: (1) A unique user identification number of the applicant. (2) The date of expiration of the identification card. file://C:1Documents%20and%20Settings\rklassen\Local%20S ettings\Temporary%20Internet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 7 of 12 (3) The name and telephone number of the county health department or its designee that has approved the application. (c) The county health department shall issue an identification card to the applicant and to his or her designated primary caregiver, if any, within five working days of approving the application. (d) In any case involving an incomplete application, the applicant shall assume responsibility for rectifying the deficiency. The county shall have 14 days from the receipt of information from the applicant pursuant to this subdivision to approve or deny the application. 11362.735. (a) An identification card issued by the county health department shall be serially numbered and shall contain all of the following: (1) A unique user identification number of the cardholder. (2) The date of expiration of the identification card. (3) The name and telephone number of the county health department or its designee that has approved the application. (4) A 24-hour, toll -free telephone number , to be maintained by the department, that will enable state and local law enforcement officers to have immediate access to information necessary to verify the validity of the card. (5) Photo identification of the cardholder. (b) A separate identification card shall be issued to the person's designated primary caregiver, if any, and shall include a photo identification of the caregiver. 11362.74. (a) The county health department or its designee may deny an application only for any of the following reasons: (1) The applicant did not provide the information required by Section 11362.715, and upon notice of the deficiency pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 11362.72, did not provide the information within 30 days. (2) The county health department or its designee determines that the information provided was false. (3) The applicant does not meet the criteria set forth in this article. (b) Any person whose application has been denied pursuant to subdivision (a) may not reapply for six months from the date of denial unless otherwise authorized by the county health department or its designee or by a court of competent jurisdiction. (c) Any person whose application has been denied pursuant to subdivision (a) may appeal that decision to the department. The county health department or its designee shall make available a telephone number or address to which the denied applicant can direct an appeal. 11362.745. (a) An identification card shall be valid for a period of one year. (b) Upon annual renewal of an identification card, the county health department or its designee shall verify all new information and may verify any other information that has not changed. (c) The county health department or its designee shall transmit its determination of approval or denial of a renewal to the department. 11362.755. The department shall establish application and renewal fees for persons seeking to obtain or renew identification cards fi le:IIC:\Documents%20and%20S ettings\rklassen\Local%20S ettings\Temporary%20Internet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 8of12 that are sufficient to cover the expenses incurred by the department and each county health department of administering the identification card program and fees waived under this section. Not less than one-half of the fees collected pursuant to this section shall be made available to county health departments for reimbursement for costs incurred by each county health department for administering the program, pursuant to this article. However, upon satisfactory proof of indigence, these fees shall be waived. The department shall reimburse each county health department for its costs of administering the program from the revenue generated by the fees. department, including the cost of reduced fees for Medi-Cal beneficiaries and the cost of maintaining the 24-hour toll -free telephone number. Each county health department may charge an additional fee for all county department costs incurred for administering the program pursuant to this article. However, upon satisfactory proof of participation and eligibility in the Medi-Cal program, these fees shall be reduced by 50 percent. 11362.76. (a) A person who possesses an identification card shall: (1) Within seven days, notify the county health department or its designee of any change in the person's attending physician or designated primary caregiver, if any. (2) Annually submit to the county health department or its designee the following: (A) Updated written documentation of the person's serious medical condition. (B) The name and duties of the person's designated primary caregiver, if any, for the forthcoming year. (b) If a person who possesses an identification card fails to comply with this section, the card shall be deemed expired. If an identification card expires, the identification card of any designated primary caregiver of the person shall also expire. (c) If the designated primary caregiver has been changed, the previous primary caregiver shall return his or her identification card to the department or to the county health department or its designee. (d) If the owner or operator or an employee of the owner or operator of a provider has been designated as a primary caregiver pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 11362.7, of the qualified patient or person with an identification card, the owner or operator shall notify the county health department or its designee, pursuant to Section 11362.715, if a change in the designated primary caregiver has occurred. 11362.765. (a) Subject to the requirements of this article, the individuals specified in subdivision (b) shall not be subject, on that sole basis, to criminal liability under Section 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366, 11366.5, or 11570. However, nothing in this section shall authorize the individual to smoke or otherwise consume marijuana unless otherwise authorized by this article. (b) Subdivision (a) shall apply to all of the following: (1) A qualified patient or a person with an identification card who transports or processes marijuana for his or her own personal medical use. (2) A designated primary caregiver who transports, processes, file://C :\Documents%20and%20S ettings\rklassen\Local%20S ettings\Temporary%20Internet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 9 of 12 administers, delivers, or gives away marijuana for medical purposes, in amounts not exceeding those established by regulations that shall be adopted by the department pursuant to Section 11362.77, only to the qualified patient of the primary caregiver, or to the person with an identification card who has designated the individual as a primary caregiver. (3) Any individual who provides assistance to a qualified patient or a person with an identification card, or his or her designated primary caregiver, in administering medical marijuana to the qualified patient or person or acquiring the skills necessary to cultivate or administer marijuana for medical purposes to the qualified patient or person. (c) Any individual who receives reasonable compensation for services provided to an eligible qualified patient or person with an identification card to enable that person to use marijuana under this article, or for payment for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in providing those services, or both, shall not, on the sole basis of that fact, be subject to prosecution or punishment under Section 11359 or 11360. 11362.77. The department shall issue may adopt, if necessary, emergency regulations by July 1, 2004, pursuant to this article after public comment and consultation with interested organizations, including, but not limited to, patients, health professionals, researchers, and law enforcement, to determine appropriate amounts of marijuana for the qualified patient's or person's own personal medical use. The regulations shall be consistent with the intent of this chapter, and shall be based on currently available scientific research and knowledge and shall be reviewed annually to determine if revision is necessary to reflect material changes in research and knowledge. knowledge. A qualified patient or a person holding a valid identification card, or the designated primary caregiver of that qualified patient or person, may possess amounts of marijuana consistent with the emergency regulations. 11362.775. Qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, and the designated primary caregivers of qualified patients and persons with identification cards, who associate within the State of California in order collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes, shall not solely on the basis of that fact be subject to state criminal sanctions under Section 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366, 11366.5, or 11570. The department shall adopt regulations, after public comment and consultation with interested organizations, governing the operation and supervision of these cooperatives, no later than December 31, 2004. The regulations shall specify only the methods, procedures, and criteria that the cultivation projects will employ to ensure the consistency of composition, noncontamination and nondiversion of medical marijuana. The department shall have the right to inspect the cultivation projects to ensure compliance with the methods, procedures, and criteria. 11366.5, or 11570. 11362.78. A state or local law enforcement agency or officer shall not refuse to accept an identification card issued by the department unless the state or local law enforcement agency or officer has reasonable cause to believe that the information fi le://C :\Documents%20and%20S ettings\rklassen\Local%20S ettings\Temporary%20Internet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 10 of 12 contained in the card is false or fraudulent, or the card is being used fraudulently. 11362.785. (a) Nothing in this article shall require any accommodation of any medical use of marijuana on the property or premises of any place of employment or during the hours of employment or on the property or premises of any jail, correctional facility, or other type of penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a person shall not be prohibited or prevented from obtaining and submitting the written information and documentation necessary to apply for an identification card on the basis that the person is incarcerated in a jail, correctional facility, or other penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained. (c) Nothing in this article shall prohibit a jail, correctional facility, or other penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained, from permitting a prisoner or a person under arrest who has an identification card, to use marijuana for medical purposes under circumstances that will not endanger the health or safety of other prisoners or the security of the facility. (d) Nothing in this article shall require a governmental, private, or any other health insurance provider or health care service plan to be liable for any claim for reimbursement for the medical use of marijuana. 11362.79. Nothing in this article shall authorize a qualified patient or person with an identification card to engage in the smoking of medical marijuana under any of the following circumstances: (a) In any place where smoking is prohibited by law. (b) In or within 1,000 feet of the grounds of a school, recreation center, or youth center, unless the medical use occurs within a residence. (c) On a schoolbus. (d) While in a motor vehicle that is being operated. (e) While operating a boat. 11362.795. (a) (1) Any criminal defendant who is eligible to use marijuana pursuant to Section 11362.5 may request that the court confirm that he or she is allowed to use medical marijuana while he or she is on probation or released on bail. (2) The court's decision and the reasons for the decision shall be stated on the record and an entry stating those reasons shall be made in the minutes of the court. (3) During the period of probation or release on bail, if a physician recommends that the probationer or defendant use medical marijuana, the probationer or defendant may request a modification of the conditions of probation or bail to authorize the use of medical marijuana. (4) The court's consideration of the modification request authorized by this subdivision shall comply with the requirements of this section. (b) (1) Any person who is to be released on parole from a jail, state prison, school, road camp, or other state or local institution of confinement and who is eligible to use medical marijuana pursuant file:IIC:\Documents%20and%20Settings\rklassen\Local%20S ettings\Temporary%2 01nternet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 11 of 12 to Section 11362.5 may request that he or she be allowed to use medical marijuana during the period he or she is released on parole. A parolee's written conditions of parole shall reflect whether or not a request for a modification of the conditions of his or her parole to use medical marijuana was made, and whether the request was granted or denied. (2) During the period of the parole, where a physician recommends that the parolee use medical marijuana, the parolee may request a modification of the conditions of the parole to authorize the use of medical marijuana. (3) Any parolee whose request to use medical marijuana while on parole was denied may pursue an administrative appeal of the decision. Any decision on the appeal shall be in writing and shall reflect the reasons for the decision. (4) The administrative consideration of the modification request authorized by this subdivision shall comply with the requirements of this section. 11362.8. No professional licensing board may impose a civil penalty or take other disciplinary action against a licensee based solely on the fact that the licensee has performed acts that are necessary or appropriate to carry out the licensee's role as a designated primary caregiver to a person who is a qualified patient or who possesses a lawful identification card issued pursuant to Section 11362.72. However, this section shall not apply to acts performed by a physician relating to the discussion or recommendation of the medical use of marijuana to a patient. These discussions or recommendations, or both, shall be governed by Section 11362.5. 11362.81. (a) A person specified in subdivision (b) shall be subject to the following penalties: (1) For the first offense, imprisonment in the county jail for no more than six months or a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both. (2) For a second or subsequent offense, imprisonment in the county jail for no more than one year, or a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both. (b) Subdivision (a) applies to any of the following: (1) A person who fraudulently represents a medical condition or fraudulently provides any material misinformation to a physician, county health department or its designee, or state or local law enforcement agency or officer, for the purpose of falsely obtaining an identification card. (2) A person who steals or fraudulently uses any person's identification card in order to acquire, possess, cultivate, transport, use, produce, or distribute marijuana. (3) A person who counterfeits, tampers with, or fraudulently produces an identification card. (4) A person who breaches the confidentiality requirements of this article to information provided to, or contained in the records of, the department or of a county health department or its designee pertaining to an identification card program. (c) In addition to the penalties prescribed in subdivision (a), any person described in subdivision (b) may be precluded from attempting to obtain, or obtaining or using, an identification card for a period of up to six months at the discretion of the court. file://C:\Documents%20and%20S ettings\rklassen\Local%20Settings\Temporary%20Internet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 12 of 12 11362.82. If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this article is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and that holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. 11362.83. Nothing in this article shall prevent a city or other local governing body from adopting and enforcing laws consistent with this article. SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district because in that regard this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution. In addition, no reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for other costs mandated by the state because this act includes additional revenue that is specifically intended to fund the costs of the state mandate in an amount sufficient to fund the cost of the state mandate, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code. For News, Recipes, and Medical Info Come visit at http_//www.letfreedomsgrow.com AA -- ............................................................... This email was sent to: dherrick@earthlink.net EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: h_ttp_//topica.com/u/?a2iWNJ.a3hfYp.ZG_hlcnJp or send an email to: aamcnewtalk-unsubscribe@topica.com TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! llttR://www.topica.com/paKtne�r/tag02/create/index2.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- file://C:\Documents%20and%24Settings\rklassen\Local%20Settings\Temporary%201ntemet%20... 10/27/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: pete anderson [petert420©hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 11:22 PM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Re: Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ban this is to urge you at best, to vote down the ban on medical marijuana dispensaries, or at worse, to add the appropriate wording as proposed by MAPP. Regardless of how you may feel about recreational pot smokers, withholding this treatment that has no bad side effects, like prescription drugs do, from people who really can use this to ease their pain/symptoms is reprehensible. I mean have you looked at these people? They're not stoners, they are truly whacked. 89% of the population supports medical marijuana, so if you represent the general population as an elected servant, I urge you to vote down this evil ban. If you happen to believe what the 'government experts' say, then I have four things to restore reality to you. 1. Separate But Equal 2. It was a weather balloon. 3. the Warren Commission Report 4. Iraq has WMDs Respectfully yours, PETE ANDERSON, Murrieta, CA PS: if you want the real skinny on the pot issue, read the blogs at www.myspace.com/newmusicmatters C) 10/27/2005 Klassen, Rachelle From: Sent: To: Subject: Folks, Paul Krassner [pkrassner@earthlink.net] Tuesday, October 25, 2005 12:06 PM Klassen, Rachelle medical marijuana li C AGENDA SECTION it // MEETING DATE_ - I have recently returned from Santa Cruz, and was inspired by WAMM, the Women's Alliance for Medical Marijuana, by their altruistic dedication to serving people in pain, some preparing to die, all of whom have been recommended by physicians. To deny Palm Desert patients the convenience and safety of a dispensary would show fear triumphing over compassion. Sincerely, Paul Krassner 1 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: patsyinparadise@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 8:41 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Medicinal marijuana ban Dear Mr. Klassen, I am opposed to the medicinal marijuana ban. Please do not vote for it. Thank you for your time in this matter. Sincerely, Patricia L. Thomas 10/25/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Rick [keenmusic@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 9:47 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: med.cannibus please allow safe access for people who need med. cannibus .it's our right, we voted,to take care of our sick. keep the med. off the street,that keeps the money in the city and not some crimeal hand. GOD BLEES AMERICIA rick keen 10/25/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Rick [keenmusic@verizon.net] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 10:32 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: med. cannibus dear council members please allow safe access to med .marijuana,) hope none of your family members get sick like my self and needs it. believe me when you or your loved one has medical problems and cannabis relieves the problem,or helps you eat or kills the pain you will get it for them or you. I vote so this is just not about my med. it's about my vote counting, haven't we had enough rights taken from us in the USA.the sad part is if you don't allow dispensaries,then it's back on the street and any kid can get it, also there goes the money to criminals and not to our fine cities and state again please allow safe access, so sick people like me don't have weary,about whets on the cannabis and you wont have to keep me in jail like I'm some bad criminal have you checked the cost of keeping someone sick and none violant in jail. GOD help us all I pray you will do the right thing for your patients and let our votes count. thank you Rick Keen tr W rn 10/27/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Shilo Herrling [shilo@dc.rr.com] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 7:31 PM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: medicinal marijuana ban C ei AGENDA PACKET 3ECT$C I MEETiNi` DATE I understand there is discussion at City Council regarding a medical marijuana ban. I am a registered, voting Libertarian who is strictly opposed to such a ban. I urge you to vote against any such ban coming before the Council. Thank you. Kent Herrling Palm Desert, California 10/25/2005 Page 1 of 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Lawanda Whipple [Iwanda@mybluelight.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 6:08 PM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: dispensary ban Dear City Counsil, Ce AGENDA PACKET tt Q I/ SECTION �) MEETING DATE�.--- il I am writing to you to ask you to please vote against the marijuana dispensery ban in the city of Palm Desert. I am mentally a disabled 53 year old. I suffer from Major Depression. The medicial use of marijuana has helped me to live a somewhat normal life. Without it I find it hard to stay on my medications. Again , please reconsider your vote and let the City of Palm Desert be free to have legal despensaries. Thank you for your time, Lawanda S Whipple Joshua Tree, Ca. 10/26/2005