[420 Girl]

A September Ukiah Daily Journal front-page story about vocal opposition to the county nuisance law may mislead readers into believing marijuana activists also generally oppose Medical Marijuana Regulation Ordinance 9.31, now under revision by the board of supervisors' Health and Human Services committee.

Ignored by the press, and unbeknown to the public, the August draft of 9.31 would provide a highly conditioned sheriff's permit for medical collectives and cooperatives to grow up to 99 plants per parcel.

As principle author of the now repealed year 2000 Green Party sponsored Measure G, which attempted to legalize cannabis personal use cultivation and possession, I support this farsighted concept and congratulate County Counsel Jeanine Nadel and committee members supervisors Kendall Smith and John McCowen for their stalwart work in bringing it forward. After careful consideration of its many provisions, the measure will be brought to the full board for possible adoption in November.

Clearly, consumers should eagerly embrace this little-known ordinance that will stabilize supply and reduce the risk of arrest and prosecution of members of a collective or cooperative cannabis farm permitted by the sheriff.

The public should support 9.31; it presents an unprecedented opportunity to require sheriff-inspected grower compliance with a uniform set of objective standards, including legal, security, environmental, labor, tax, visibility, nuisance, organizational, and land use conditions.

Numbering in the dozens, these conditions are still under development in committee meetings open to the public on the second Monday of the month at 3 p.m. in Conference Room C at the county Administration Center, 501 Low Gap Road.

While providing an avenue to cultivate cannabis within the law, the county would continue to crack down on illegal mass and trespass grows, providing no haven for outlaws, but protecting responsible medial cultivators agreeing to be accountable to pubic authority.

There are legal reasons why the county can only grant such a permit in the context of a nuisance ordinance:

1 ) State health and safety codes sections 11357 and so on make cultivation, transportation and sale of any amount of marijuana a felony;

2 ) The Compassionate Use Act and SB420 do not grant a permit to grow medical marijuana, only an affirmative defense when one is busted and facing charges of having violated the above statutes;

3 ) Counties and cities can only grant exemptions from county nuisance ordinances, not state law.

The brilliance of the August draft amended ordinance 9.31 is that it creates a de facto ( not de jure ) decriminalization of cannabis by requiring the sheriff to grant a permit for cultivation of up to 99 plants per parcel to those who meet the conditions. Who would not want a permit from the sheriff to grow up to 99 marijuana plants?

I call on everyone who agrees with the concept, or who wants to know more about it, to come to the next HHS committee meeting.

For more information, you can view the August draft at MENDOCINO COUNTRY Online. Pay special attention to 9.31.110.

http://www.420magazine.com/forums/in...consumers.html