Proposed San Bernardino County pot ordinance

[bigbrokush]

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/inland_empire&id=7931641

SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. (KABC) -- No outdoor growing of medical marijuana. That's the most controversial part of a proposed ordinance in San Bernardino County.


The county is moving to restrict the growing and selling of marijuana for medical purposes. It's been almost 15 years since voters approved the use of medical marijuana in California.

Today, cities and counties are struggling with exactly what that means. Right now, a lot of patients grow their own pot at home.

But in San Bernardino County, that could soon become much more difficult if the county goes forward with a plan to ban all outdoor marijuana growers.

"You got to take it indoors," said Lanny Swerdlow, who runs Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center in neighboring Riverside County. "You have to buy expensive equipment and all kinds of bills."

In Swerdlow's opinion, the proposed ordinance is just another example of law enforcement thumbing its nose at something voters have already approved.

"Our elected officials are elected to enforce the laws," said Swerdlow. "And San Bernardino County officials don't like this law, so they're doing everything they can to thwart it from being enforced in San Bernardino County."

But the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department says outdoor grows are simply too difficult to properly secure.

San Bernardino County also wants to ban all privately-run dispensaries because they say it's just too hard to tell which places are legitimately selling pot to patients, and which places are just selling pot for profit.

"There's an awful lot to sort through in the different ordinances," said Arden Wiltshire, a spokeswoman for the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. "The state laws that apply to legally owning medical marijuana, and who is justified in possessing it and growing it, making it available."

There is a 14-page ordinance that's going before the planning commission this week. If it's approved, it would then go before the Board of Supervisors for final approval

 

[HighDesertJoe]

So private citizen's are not going to be aloud to grow a few plants outside with a Rec in SB county?

 

[thatgreenstuff]

San Bernardino County also wants to ban all privately-run dispensaries

What does privately run dispensaries mean?

 

[Hydrosun]

What does privately run dispensaries mean?

Silly rabbit it means a business not run by the state or local government Wonder if they want to ban privately run prisons?

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

If I lived in that country I would start going door to door giving away free clones, med license applications, and "how to grow" pamphlets to anyone who agreed to grow out doors. that's called real protest. I take a doctor with a lose pen hand too, so he can write out the rec on location. Make it super easy for folks to grow there own.

OVERGROW!!!

 

[vta]

Source: San Bernardino Sun (CA)


MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES NOT BANNED YET


The Planning Commission decided Thursday to push back a proposed ban on medical marijuana dispensaries on unincorporated county land for at least two weeks, while two commissioners work with county staff to develop what they say would be a more balanced presentation of the issue.

Commissioners also said they needed time to digest nearly five hours of comments from the public - most of them from medical marijuana patients who said using it has dramatically increased their quality of life without the side effects of other drugs they had been prescribed.

Other speakers supported the staff conclusion that the county's moratorium on new marijuana dispensaries should be upgraded to a ban, based on what they said was the immorality of using it and statistics suggesting crime increased around dispensaries in other counties.

The Planning Commission will reconsider the issue Feb. 17, then choose whether to recommend the ban to the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors.

 

[j242]

So what WOULD happen if you got busted growing outdoor in this county? They call the Feds???

 

[kmk420kali]

So what WOULD happen if you got busted growing outdoor in this county? They call the Feds???

They did not with us-- Over 700 plants (including clones, of course)
Skated free and clear...thanks to stupid cops, who didn't want to follow the "Rules"-- Shit works both ways, as they found out--

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

So what WOULD happen if you got busted growing outdoor in this county? They call the Feds???

that's why you need like 3000 more people growing. do you know how hard it is for the feds to bust an entire city?

 

[IKILL3RI]

They don't call the feds they will just see if you don't have more than allowed, but state cops are cool with it as long as you follow state laws.

 

[iBogart]

If only prop 19 passed...

 

[Hydrosun]

If only prop 19 passed...

Sorry to burst your bubble but these ass clowns would be making up rules and restrictions if 19 had passed. The local fuck tards still had the right to BAN dispensaries under 19.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^ ya and turn down all the tax revenue they could have collected. that sounds like a double fuck up on the part of the county to me.

 

[vta]

Medical marijuana advocates propose San Bernardino County ordinance
By Ryan Hagen


Medical marijuana advocates met with San Bernardino County officials on Thursday to present a proposed ordinance they say would keep pot out of inappropriate hands and honor Californians' vote to allow access to medical marijuana.

The proposal, based on the county's regulations for adult businesses, comes as the Planning Commission studies another proposed ordinance that medical marijuana advocates said would essentially eliminate access to medical marijuana in the county because of bans by cities.

Opponents say the stricter ordinance, which would limit marijuana distribution in unincorporated areas to a small number of providers such as hospices, violates the California Constitution's guarantee that patients with a doctor's permission can use medical marijuana.

"I really don't believe they were passing sensible resolutions," said Lawrence Bynum, the attorney who drafted the alternative ordinance. "I challenged them to come up with even one (location) that fits their exceptions and has marijuana available. They couldn't."

James Squire, who heads the county's advance planning division, met with owners of medical marijuana dispensaries and their attorneys to go over the proposed ordinance.

He did not return calls for comment on Thursday.

But anti-drug activists ridiculed the proposal.

"We're not surprised that they would try to align themselves with adult businesses because much like adult businesses these marijuana shops destroy community values and children's potential for living a healthy life," said Paul Chabot, founder of the Coalition for a Drug Free California, based in Rancho Cucamonga.

Selling or using marijuana remains a violation of federal law, he said, giving cities and counties the right and the duty to outlaw it.

"Our Board of Supervisors understands public safety, and they understand how important our children are to our future," he said. "There is no way they are going to allow anything of this kind."

Courts have split on the legality of local bans, given the contradiction between state and federal law.

But Bynum said the county should stay away from a total ban to avoid expensive lawsuits - and to provide treatment he said can help tens of thousands of county residents.

"A tax, license and regulate ordinance will actually prevent the type of exposure kids would get under a ban, which doesn't encourage good corporate citizens," he said.

Bynum's proposal, which county employees say they're reviewing, would tax marijuana an additional 1.8percent and limit marijuana dispensaries to general commercial zones within 750 feet of "sensitive uses" such as residences, schools or areas where minors congregate. Other restrictions include a requirement that only authorized patients may enter the buildings.

It does not address commercial growing, which he said will take more time to study.

 

[iBogart]

Sorry to burst your bubble but these ass clowns would be making up rules and restrictions if 19 had passed. The local fuck tards still had the right to BAN dispensaries under 19.

this is true in part, but there is already a thread with like a thousand posts about the pros and cons of prop 19. There is one point about 19 that renders all others moot from the prospective of a personal home grower and that is the 5x5 grow space. No matter what regulations or other bullshit that no doubt would have been pulled in the different counties across CA you would still have this right as a recreational toker and grower. Sounded cool to me.

 

[Duplicate]

Paul Chabot eh?

Sounds like someone to keep an eye on.
http://www.paulchabot.com/about/bio.html

 

[420247]

The Planning Commission will reconsider the issue Feb. 17, then choose whether to recommend the ban to the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors.

Today is the big day

 

[David762]

Looks like San Bernardino is due for a change in government, asap. IMHO, it is not the job of the local LEO "to secure" constituents' outdoor grows, only enforce the State's laws. And it is not the job of the local government council to regulate out of existence valid State laws.
It would appear that prohibitionists have taken over the local government council and the local LEO. They are trying to do by local government edit what the State's system of courts refuse to do -- nullify State laws.
While the citizens of San Bernardino work to recall and replace their local government (and the Chief of Police), it's time to seek a court injunction against these MFers.

 

[420247]

http://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/sanbernardinocounty/ci_17417611

San Bernardino County moves closer to ban on marijuana dispensaries
By Ryan Hagen Staff Writer
Posted: 02/17/2011 06:35:35 PM PST


A ban on medical marijuana dispensaries and outdoor cultivation of marijuana moved a step closer to reality Thursday when the San Bernardino County Planning Commission unanimously approved a proposed ordinance.

The ban - which commissioners said was not a prohibition of medical marijuana use but which dozens of residents said amounted to one - now moves to the county Board of Supervisors for a final decision.

Commissioners, who two weeks ago delayed a decision and formed a subcommittee to explore what they said felt like an incomplete presentation of data, said little Thursday except they were satisfied by arguments that the ordinance protected residents' safety and preserved medical marijuana users' rights.

"I have received the information. I have processed it," said Commissioner Audrey Matthews. "What our regulation is about is not your use of marijuana. Our regulation is to clarify what the development code says about land use."

The proposed ordinance, which would affect unincorporated county lands, would ban distribution of medical marijuana to more than two people by one party except by limited professionals such as hospitals. It also limits marijuana cultivation to buildings and greenhouses.

The ordinance aims to limit crime, which some evidence suggests increases around marijuana groves and collectives, said Senior Planner Judy Tatman.

That's based on cherry-picked anecdotes, argued Lanny Swerdlow of the Inland Empire Anti-Prohibition Project.
"If you want statistics, look at Denver," he said. "Although between 2009 and 2010 the city had a decrease in crime of 1percent, within 1,000 feet of dispensaries the city had a decline of 3.7percent."

With an effective ban on dispensaries in all of the county's incorporated municipalities - and attempts to ban it in neighboring counties - uninsured medical marijuana users said the high prices at the few eligible distribution centers would leave them nowhere to go for treatment.

"I tried cultivating indoors, and the expense on that took my electric bill up to $450 a month," said Kathie Zamanjoromi, who added that up-front costs added even more. "We can't afford that."

The ordinance is a good first step, said Paul Chabot, founder of the Coalition for a Drug Free California, based in Rancho Cucamonga.

"In light of the strong opposition to a ban from the drug legalization crowd, we commend the county Planning Commission for not wavering on public safety standards," he said. "Today's vote reflects the growing momentum against medical fraud pot in California."

ryan.hagen@inlandnewspapers.com, 909-386-3916