George Rebane
Measure S to replace Nevada County’s current Ordinance 2349 specifying how medicinal marijuana (MMJ) has become our community’s latest cause celebre and also the casus belli between the pro and anti Measure S factions. Measure S is a public initiative on the November ballot to replace the current 2349. Both S and 2349 deal only with growing MMJ in the county. Growing recreational marijuana (RMJ) for fun and profit is illegal everywhere in California. Access to 2349, Measure S, and a side-by-side comparison of the S and 2349 provisions is available here.
Before S arrived on the scene, I never thought I would become so interested in the MMJ issue. My thoughts on MJ and the legalization of drugs in general was declared some time ago (here) and should be no mystery to RR readers. (Full disclosure: neither Jo Ann nor I have been or are marijuana users.) My interest has grown in MJ use since moving to one of the world’s prime MJ growing areas, and becoming involved in the county’s politics primarily as a conservetarian blogger, commentator, and speaker. So let me meander a bit on this latest dust devil on our main street that is trying to grow up into a cyclone. I’ll try to be structured so readers can easily reference their comments to the various parts of this piece.
1. Last Tuesday (23sep14) there were two ‘information sessions’ on S and 2349 – one sponsored by the pro-S (at Nevada Theater) and the other by anti-S (at Rood Center). I attended and reported on the anti-S affair. Now the League of Women Voters will sponsor a debate on the matter on the eve of 16 October at the Rood Center. (Apparently the same kind of debate as recently proposed by The Union and KVMR for the Rood Center was not as acceptable as the upcoming one by the LWV. Oh well.)
2. The efficacy of MMJ for medical purposes, and the legality of prescribed use of MMJ are not an issue. Only at issue are the factors surrounding the growing of MMJ. The county’s position on growing MMJ revolves around neighborhood nuisance and enforceability factors. The county maintains that the current 2349 strikes the proper balance between the interests of MMJ users, growers, and the growers’ neighbors. The pro-S people maintain that 2349 is too restrictive, ambiguous, and does not provide sufficient supply for the county’s MMJ users. (The insufficient supply aspect was raised in the 26sep14 Union by Ms Patricia Smith, president of the local Americans for Safe Access pro-MMJ group.)
3. To my knowledge no one knows the number of prescribed MMJ users in the county – is it in the hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands? (Why don't we know it?) Given the number of illegal RMJ grows in the county, and the frequent tell-tale smell of RMJ and RMJ users in the community, I assume that our recreational users number in the thousands and greatly outnumber the MMJ users.
4. Growing RMJ is arguably the largest and most profitable ‘agricultural’ business in the county, and most certainly the largest illegal revenue producing private enterprise. Neither side disputes that RMJ money contributes significantly to the county’s retail economy, especially in its hospitality and ag supply sectors. I want to insert here that both law enforcement (LE) and the drug cartels strongly agree in opposing the legalization of RMJ production and consumption for the same reason – it’s the money. Both sides know how to manage their respective risks and play the cat & mouse game at the proper level of intensity to satisfy their constituencies. Although the LE side must maintain the respectable visage and argue that drug enforcement, incarceration, and remediation bureaucracies are unique in that, unlike other government bureaucracies, they have no motivation to grow in size, scope, and power. The cartels are not so burdened with respect to their profit motive.
5. Given the variety of MJ plants possessing different amounts/ratios of organic chemicals that are alternately beneficial for medicinal purposes as opposed to providing the desirable high for recreational use, our RMJ growers, with unknown frequency, pose as MMJ growers displaying posted prescriptions and certificates at their grows as called for by 2349. The anti-S people summarize this in their slogan ‘It’s not about medicine.’ Remember, growing RMJ in California is illegal according to both state and federal law.
6. Sheriff Keith Royal readily admits that LE’s biggest problem is finding the right “balance” for MMJ grows that 1) satisfies the legitimate needs of MMJ users, and 2) the legitimate nuisance and safety concerns of the public. To find this balance has been a ‘cut and try’ process since legal MMJ growing in various jurisdictions nationwide is a relatively new area of code enforcement. The benefits of regulating MMJ grows under 2349 is that it is relatively easy to amend as the county gains experience and new considerations arise. This is evident through the ordinance’s existing history of amendments. The Board of Supervisors passed 2349, and as such they can amend it at their pleasure. This is not the case for S.
7. A comparison of S and 2349 (see above) readily reveals that S greatly loosens the requirements on MMJ growers imposed by 2349, either through specific numerical pro-grower callouts or simply being silent on many factors affecting the grows and their neighbors. Since Measure S will be a regulation by voter initiative, it can only be changed through another voter initiative in a future election. Pro-S supporters answer that there is nothing to prevent the BoS to pass a new ordinance that dovetails with S (call it S+) and goes into more details on regulatory concerns that S left out or on which it is moot. Besides the added confusion of enforcing the details of the then three sources of regulations (state, S, S+), this approach promises to be another full employment act for lawyers. Disgruntled and/or cited growers can now sue the county for drafting the S+ ordinance in violation and contradiction of the people’s intent expressed in the more ambiguous or moot Measure S. You no doubt see where all this will lead.
8. If there is any real evidence of problems with MMJ availability for prescribed patients, I had neither seen it nor heard about it. There was no mention of such a shortage last Tuesday at the Rood Center, and I specifically brought it up to the pro-S contingent present. Be that as it may, there certainly is enough of the stuff grown locally to keep at least all of our MMJ users going 24/7. So if access is the problem, ASA (it’s in their name) could eliminate that concern by starting a MMJ hotline that ‘patients’ can call and get the information where locally grown MMJ is most readily and affordably available. Or maybe churches could band together – after all it’s to alleviate human suffering – and man a MMJ distribution center wherein users are properly vetted and registered so that things can go very smoothly when they come again to pick up their, say, monthly stash.
Having said all that, I want to remind readers that I do support legalizing the growing and use of RMJ as a regulated (and taxed) adult consumable similar to how we have established the means to produce, distribute, and consume other recreational drugs such as the various tobacco and ethanol (booze) products. This is not the place to present all the studies done on MJ, especially the effects of regular and/or early use of RMJ. Like ethanol, RMJ does make you dopey; you don’t have to be a consumer to verify that. And like smoking tobacco, smoking RMJ is noxious to many bystanders. But again, we have laws and ordinances that can deal as effectively with RMJ as they deal with society’s other legal recreational drugs.
Before California makes RMJ consumption legal, we should continue to learn from the Colorado and Washington RMJ experiences. I believe it is just a matter of time until RMJ becomes legal, no matter the opposition from the LE and criminal cartel industries, because we will literally run out of money if we continue playing cops and riefers.
So there you have it. I oppose Measure S because it looks, feels, and smells like a cumbersome legal bamboozle to promote an increased local supply of marijuana that can be grown with minimum impediments under the auspices of MMJ, while in reality expanding the sources (and illegal distribution) of RMJ. After all, we are told that Nevada County is a renowned national supplier of the best marijuana on the market, a market which appears to be insatiable as long as RMJ is illegal. We should try something else to control and regulate RMJ. Right now 2349 works for MMJ, and it can be further and readily amended to find the ‘goldilocks boundary’ that balances the county’s legitimate MMJ, neighborhood nuisance, and community health/safety needs.
rebanesruminations.com 
Leave a comment