HomeMy WebLinkAbout4-20-11 med marijuanaA~U~'E
MIN1S,T~~'TY
APB ~rloN
o~o~IL ~ ~ ~~,f
A-Call for Reasonable implementation of c~ c~rFO`~
The Compassionate Use Act and the Medical Marijuana Program Act
From the County of Butte
And wi#hin the Butte County Code
Butte Alliance for Medical Mar~uana
04/20/1.1
The Qualified Patients residing in the County of Butte hereby request an immediate re-direction
by the Butte County Board of Supervisors, away from these deprivations of our property rights
and of our medical rights, and towards a more reasonable and thought out public policy, in
regards to the medical cultivation and uses of cannabis within the County of Butte.
The Qualified Patients of Butte County would hereby remind the B.C.B.S. that they do not
"ordain" anything under our democratic Republic and that they instead represent our interests and
are instructed to henceforth conduct these matters accordingly. Our grievances' against the
processes you have undertaken in suggesting this proposed legislation areas follows:
According to the public record, at no time has this body chosen to form a Committee or
Commission empowered to hold public meetings about this very important subject, thus
removing all local participation from the process of researching and developing
appropriate guidelines for our community. (Note: we would not view the formation of an
"ad hoc" committee that meets in private and ignores the public, like Tehama County did,
as a substitute for real Democracy).
California's cannabis industry has grown and begun to flourish in the past 15 years,
attracting all manner of auxiliary and ancillary businesses, including large investors and
many professional services. Yet, at no time has this Body invited representatives of the
industry, including the consumers it serves (patients) and the producers of cannabis
(patient-farmers), to participate in this process and educate you, as you propose to enact
these policies.
• Your current legislation negatively impacts the property rights and personal medical
rights of thousands of patients and property owners who reside here, in a substantial and
significant manner, yet at no time have you seriously considered any alternatives to this
legislation or the negative impacts it could have (including potential litigations).
• At every public meeting you have held regarding this legislation, you have consistently
ignored or downplayed the testimony of a clear majority of the participants, who have
repeatedly asked you to scrap this language and to facilitate a more public process that
takes the realities of the medical cannabis industry and our rights under California law
into consideration.
~t is well accepted fact that the combined legal and illegal market value of the cannabis
crops in California makes it the #1 cash crop of this state. Many communities have
chosen to implement reasonable policies and taxes in order to encourage the legal
cannabis market, while simultaneously discouraging the illegal market. Your proposed
legislation would have the opposite affect...making the legal market go else ware, while
maintaining the criminality of most cannabis production in Butte County?
cc ~. ~ -3a5,
X 05 ~ ~n~ ~.v1
For these reasons and more, we request your review of the following Findings, our Critique of
your Proposed Ordinance and our Community Cannabis Act (an alternative that creates healthy
guidelines to make our community safer while encouraging the completely legal medical
cannabis market, in accordance with state laws}.
~ Our Findiags•
A) Allowable Amounts and Associations. According to the C.U.A. and the
M.M.P.A., qualified patients in California may possess any amounts of cannabis
that we require, for proscribed periods of time. Those amounts vary greatly,
based on personal use requirements and the needs of each patient, on the methods
of delivery employed to consume the cannabis, and on the amount of time the
cannabis has to last before the nest likely harvest. Cannabis is a plant-based
medicine, and no amount of legislative intent can change the realities of using it
for medicinal purposes.
Also according to California laws, qualified individuals (patients, primary
caregivers and personal assistants) may cultivate, possess, transport, process, use,
store and manufacture our cannabis together, in various forms of Association
(including but not limited to "collectives" and "cooperatives"). Your public
claims that this proposed ordinance does nothing to limit our Rights of
Association do not belabor the fact that implementing it would in fact result in
depriving us of said rights. Calling an attack on patient associations merely a
"zoning issue" does not make it so.
B) Determining Yields and Other Agricultural Facts. There is a perfectly
scientific method #o determine the probable yield of any cannabis garden, and it
primarily involves knowing the amount of available light and the square footage
ofthe plant canopy. It does not involve plant numbers, as they are completely
irrelevant to determining cannabis yields. Expert witnesses routinely testify about
such matters in state courts everywhere, including in Butte County. Likewise, our
own Federal Government (D.E.A.} has published studies having the same results
and law enforcement officers throughout California are quite aware of this. Your
restrictions on plant numbers are a de-facto limitation on the amounts of cannabis
that patients here may cultivate for themselves, which is a direct limitation on the
amounts we can possess and use? They are also completely unscientific, as they
bare no relation to the amounts of cannabis being produced and they make no
sense. For example, a patient with 6 "mature" outdoor plants could produce much
more cannabis than a patient with 6 "mature" indoor plants might produce.
Also of significance here are the agricultural requirements to actually produce
usable cannabis. Just as with all other plants, the production of cannabis flowers
requires the ongoing propagation of plants at various stages of growth, including
male and female "breeders", female "mother" plants (for producing either seeds
or clones}, seeds and young (un-sexed) seedlings, cuttings that live to become
clones, and depending on the time of year and garden specifics, younger as well
as older plants will exist simultaneously. Yet, only the mature female plants will
produce any usable cannabis. This is recognized already under State law. Yet,
according to your proposed legislation, these farming methods, which are
required to actually produce cannabis, will become "illegal".
2
C) Lx~mediate Conflict with Butte County Agricultural Code. This legislation, in
attempting to turn cannabis into something it is nat, has created a conflict in
regards to the way all other Agriculture is treated in Butte County. As you well
know, Properties that produce Agriculture are exempted from all public nuisance
claims. If a mound of manure stinks up the neighborhood, too bad! If the sounds
of trucks and breathing in dust and pollen make life uncomfortable for neighbors,
too bad! When pesticides are sprayed right on the open roads, exposing us all to
known carcinogens, too bad! When the cows moo all night for 2 weeks strait and
you can't get any sleep, too bad! Yet, somehow the moderate (and arguably
pleasant) smell of our cannabis is being trumpeted around as an actual public
threat?! This is both absurd and insulting to our intelligence. The legal
implications are compelling enough to suggest that qualified patients should
simply grow their cannabis with other recognized commercial craps or grow it on
land zoned Agricultural, in order to thwart this attempt at "re-education".
Cannabis and Hemp production have always been agriculture and will always be
agriculture. We hope that you reconsider your opposition to this fact and accept
cannabis as a legitimate farm of Agriculture in Butte County.
D) Immediate Conflict with Insurance Providers and Immanent Domain.
Medical cannabis crops are now being covered by several insurance companies,
throughout California and all of the medical cannabis states. Several forms of
insurance are in fact available to the cannabis industry at this time, including
liability insurance, building and fire insurance, product insurance (for
dispensaries), vehicle insurance (for deliveries} and crap insurance (for farms).
The underwriters of these companies have different policies on government
actions, depending on whether or not any criminal charges are filed, etc... Your
proposed ordinance could lead to the filing of insurance claims from property
owners and renters suffering theft (i.e. government takings), if "compliance
officers" in fact remove any legally grown cannabis from a medical farm. And
some carriers (international companies) might not be as forgiving as those that
are more locally based, in regards to protecting their clients" assets from
administrative takings like the ones you propose here.
Depriving people of the rights to use our property (and the subsequent de-
valuation of property worth that stems from that) are essentially a form of
Immanent Domain, and will certainly become a matter for Civil Litigation.
E) Citizens should not be "Registered" in the United States of America. This
should go without saying, yet your proposed ordinance actually requires that
qualifed patients, primary caregivers, assistants and even their landlords must ail
register with the County, in order to somehow facilitate greater public safety. It
begs the question of how serious the drafters ofthis Proposed Ordinance expect
to be taken, when they liken cannabis users to sex offenders! This requirement
flies in the face of our rights to confidentiality under both state and federal laws,
and it makes a "list" that could be circulated in all manner of ways that might
constitute a serious and real threat to the privacy, property, employment and
personal safety of everyone on it! The ID Card Program under the M.M.P.A. is
voluntary and it protects the identities of everyone on it by not listing names or
other sensitive information on any data-base. California does not require a "list"
of patients, and neither must Butte County!
3
F) The lawsuits against Tehama and Mendocino Counties are not resolved yet.
Despite public claims to the contrary, the litigation against two ordinances
sharing the same drafters as this one is actually pending in the Appellate Courts.
Specifically, the Tehama suit is pending Appeal, and the Mendocino suit will
likely be re-activated after the Tehama suit is ruled on (they were filed by the
same attorneys). So now is not the time to rush forward, as this very issue is
pending review in the higher Courts as we speak.
G} The language of this Proposed Ordinance was drafted by Outside ieterests.
It is common knowledge within the ca~mabis industry that the drafters of these
extremely hostile ordinances throughout the state are actually attorneys hired by
Law Enforcement Associations that are based outside of most of the communities
adopting them. This ordinance was brought to us by political lobbies that actively
oppose all efforts at reasonable implementation of the medical cannabis laws and
was only topically changed with some involvement of local law enforcement and
the office of county counsel, It does not represent the views or interests of a
majority of Butte County citizens and its drafting did not involve the
participation of any local representatives of our community. For this reason
alone, it should be scrapped and real efforts should be made to do the work here
and to create our own guidelines, rather than relying on paid lobbyists to "ghost
write" the legislation for you.
H) Distances from "Children" and 1000 foot boundaries are a Red Herring. The
very idea that merely being near cannabis plants is somehow dangerous to
children is completely without merit. Many qualified patients currently have
children and many more have been children in households that use cannabis, as it
has been for tens of thousands of years. The very real dangers created by the
criminalization of cannabis, such as thefts or violence, can better be addressed
through security requirements, visibility restrictions and by employing normal
methods of policing, such as community watch programs. They are not addressed
at all by simply banning legal cultivation (and thereby eliminating any regulatory
protections that legal markets afford). Non-medical (illegal} "marijuana" gardens
will certainly not be affected by this requirement, as they are subjected to
criminal sanctions and will be far less likely to receive a nuisance abatement
order. This proposed ordinance will only affect legal, medical gardens and will
have no positive effect on reducing crime. Additionally, statistics regarding
medical cannabis dispensaries and neighborhood crime rates (in LA) have shown
that cannabis dispensation is less significant to increased crime than banking
institutions are! Should we hide banks from the children too?
The actual effect of any i OOQ foot radius ban is to make a circle approximately
78 Acres in size! In order for any cannabis gardens to not be within 78 Acres of
the numerous facilities that you claim are endangered by mere proximity to our
plants, they cannot reasonably exist on most properties available for residence
within Butte County. Also, you have made no attempt thus far at providing a man
outlining where cannabis gardens can and cannot be, according to this restriction,
and that map would presumably have to be updated every year. It is impossible to
even attempt compliance with this proposed ordinance without having such a
map available for public viewing.
4
I) The Creation of Monopolies and the Greed of the Rich. The actual effects of
the acreage requirements that you are considering are obvious to us as an attempt
for large property owners to gain an exclusive monopoly on the cultivation of
"medical" cannabis, to the detriment of everyone else. There is no public safety
issue here, and this isn't about "the children". It's a blatant attempt to deprive
low income and even middle class patients of the right to grow our own cannabis
and to decide where and how to grow it. This is about greed, pure and simple.
Allowing anyone with 160 Acres or more to grow 99 plants, with no restrictions
whatsoever regarding amounts and no requirements that the cannabis produced
there is even distributed to patients is a clear violation of both the Spirit and the
Letter of the Law. Requiring all patients to receive our cannabis from wealthy
landowners and banning our ability to provide it for ourselves is the very
definition of classism. This anti-democratic agenda of taking from the masses to
provide for the rich seems to be a common political theme lately, so let's be clear
which side you're each on, if our right to cannabis is to become the latest victim
of the American Class War.
~ Critique of Proposed Ordinance:
A} On Your Findings and Purpose Language. You have included several
statements here that are blatantly false or misleading (we know that law
enforcement interests drafted this legislation, and it really shows here}. For
example:
The "limited, specified circumstances" that we may use {and
cultivate, possess, store, transport, process and manufacture) our
cannabis are when we do so for medicinal purposes, in accordance
with state laws.
While Proposition 215 did not allow "unlimited quantities" to be
grown "anywhere", it also prohibits local governments and even the
state legislature from imposing any limits regarding amounts as they
relate to patient needs {see People v. Mower cmd People v. Kelly).
The issue of amounts is clearly up to the physician and the patient to
decide, not the state? It also tacitly allows cannabis to be grown
everywhere that patients reside, because we are allowed to grow our
OWn.
The "limited defense to certain specified State criminal statutes" is
actually Qualif ed Immunity from being charged with certain
specified criminal statutes. In other words, we have the right to affirm
a defense based on our exemption from the statutes in question,
because those statutes were abridged when the C.U.A. and M.M.P.A.
were added to the Codes.
California Health and Safety Code § 11362.83 does allow you to
enforce ordinances that are consistent with the M.M.P.A. However,
§ 11362.775 clearly states that "Qualified patients, persons with
valid identification cards, and the designated primary caregivers
of qualified patients and perso:as with identification cards, who
5
associate within ~e State of California in order collectively or
cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes, shall
not solely an the basis of that fact be subject to state criminal
sanctions under Section ...11.570." Section 11570 reads "Every
building or place used for the purpose of unlawfully selling,
serving, storing, keeping, manufacturing, or giving away any
controlled substance, precursor, or analog specified in this
division, and every building or place wherein or upon which
those acts take place, is a nuisance which shall be enjoined,
abated, and prevented, and for which damages may be
recovered, whether it is a public or private nuisance". When
you read these together, the state legislature clearly intends that
our cultivation of cannabis shall not be grounds for subjecting
us to any form of nuisance abatement or other sanctions.
Your mention of the Federal Controlled Substances Act has no place
here at all. Both California and U.S. laws clearly delineate the
enforcement of state and federal laws as belonging to separate
jurisdictions. Federal agents are not to enforce state laws, and State
agents are not to enforce federal laws. You do not serve the citizens
of Washington D.C., and Butte County is not empowered to enforce
federal laws.
The geographic and climatic conditions here are exactly the reasons
that your current approach is backward thinking and financially
unsound. Butte County is well suited for the cultivation of cannabis,
making it (along with the other big agricultural producing counties)
the perfect place for a well regulated and welcomed cannabis
industry. Other parts of the state will need to rely on our agricultural
communities to supply their cannabis needs, just as we provide food
to the rest of the world. This 1VIlVIBY approach to the cannabis
industry is not thinking ahead, as the increased tax base and revenues
generated from cannabis production are sorely needed here.
Additionally, creating more farm-related job opportunities should be
a welcomed benefit to our community.
You point to "the unregulated cultivation of (cannabis}" as having
"an (adverse} affect (on) the health, safety and well being of the
County, its residents and environment." There are several obvious
flaws in logic with this statement. By declaring most medical
cannabis production to be a "public nuisance", and subseyuentiy
eliminating it through zoning trickery, you have in fact added to the
"unregulated cultivation", as any legal cannabis patients that the
ordinance would prevent from exercising their rights would have to
become more secretive and could not register their garden...meaning
that less of the legal gardens that already exist would ever register.
You mention nowhere how our gardens adversely affect everyone
else's safety. Your casual mention of the environment is an obvious
mischaracterization, as it implies some relationship between the huge
6
gardens being grown on federal lands by international drug cartels
with the much smaller gardens that we grow in our homes and in our
back yards! We all know there is no connection and you should not
have let this language through the first reading.
You mention the significance of the dangers associated with growing
large amounts of cannabis on a single premise and of substantial
amounts of cannabis being concentrated in one place. Then you
specifically allow wealthy land-owners with large parcels to do just
that! In fact, by not even acknowledging the collective requirement
far larger gardens, you are inviting single individuals and families to
grow huge cannabis gardens (and presumably to sell it on the
cannabis market}, while preventing most patients here from merely
growing enough of their own cannabis to avoid having to buy any at
all. You are only making the real problems worse here, by preventing
a legal cannabis market from operating.
A "mature" (cannabis) plant is certainly a matter of interpretation.
You have no knowledge of the horticultural methods employed in
growing cannabis, and by declaring a plant that has just shown it's
sex to be "mature" for the purposes of flower production is
completely incorrect.
You are completely backwards from the truth in your statement that
every collective is a cooperative. In fact, every cooperative is also a
collective, but not the other way around. Cooperatives are statutorily
defined, while collectives are more loosely defined.
Ail aspects of property size restrictions and set_backs, as well as the
1000' requirements from everything on your list, have got to go.
None of this has any direct relationship to decreasing public safety or
to properly regulating the production of cannabis. Such matters are
more reasonably addressed with security requirements and visibility
restrictions. Also, children are not the ones with a problem knowing
that patients grow their own cannabis. It's you adults that really have
the unresolved issue here, not your children. Please stop dragging
them into this discussion.
The entire "nuisance" scheme you have unleashed in this proposed
ordinance is harmful to patients, disrespectful of private property
rights and completely lacking in any foundation of facts. Nowhere
have you shown statistics or government reports that would indicate
any public safety threats caused by the presence of medical cannabis
gardens. It flies in the face of our entire Agrarian based economy and
is unobservant of over 10,000 years of the recorded human uses and
production of cannabis. We are not a public nuisance, and neither are
our cannabis plants. We don't require "registration" and you don't get
to seize or destroy our property as the spoils of the drug war.
7
IIn Communi Cannabis Act: {See Attached)
In Closing;
Medical cannabis has been legal now for 15 years. Rather than pulling the curtain around Butte
County and attempting to live in the past, we hereby petition you to abort this current attempt do
de-rail and attack the cannabis industry and to instead re-direct your energies in a more
democratic and honest manner. We desire that you scrap this attempt by outsiders to influence our
political process and instead invite our community to participate in a real and lasting dialogue
regarding the best and most reasonable ways to implement California's medical cannabis laws
here in Butte County.
In this spirit of cooperation, we encourage dialogue about a possible local sales tax on cannabis
products, as well as an optional plant tax and corresponding plant-tag program. We remind you
that our industry already pays property taxes, sales taxes far all supplies and materials we use,
utility taxes, insurance, local business fees and that we pay a lot of labor costs as well. We
already pay our fair share and are a benefit to the local economy!
We oppose any "sin taxes" or any mandatory taxes for growing and possessing cannabis for ones
own consumption. Where there are no sales, there are no sales taxes.
We also oppose your position that any time a few patients gather for any purpose, that we are a
"dispensary" and are therefore subject to all manner of restrictions on our rights, We maintain the
rights to travel, to be gainfully employed, to contract our labor, to associate with one another, to
redress our government, to free speech, to education, to raising children, to voting and even to
own firearms, irrespective of whether or not we choose to use and grow cannabis.
Please review the enclosed "Community Cannabis Act", for alternative language and a greater
understanding of the options available to you in regulating the cannabis industry.
We thank you for your time and consideration of these matters.
Sincerely,
Butte Alliance for Medical Marijuana
And
Many concerned patients, primary caregivers, persona! assistants and property owners who
will remain undisclosed at this time, due to reasons of personal safety and privacy concerns.
S
~~N ~rRATjp
AAA N
(This California medical cannabis implementation model is provided by Jason Browne) ~ ®~o~~
oROVl~.t,~ C
20 Community Cannabis Act ~1F~
For
The City I County of
Sections: ,Title: ,Chapter:
of the Mu~aicipal Code, "implementation of the Compassionate Use Laws of
California", is added as follows:
Section: Background.
On November 5 1996, the voters of California state adopted the Compassionate Use Act
of 1996, an Initiative codified at California Health and Safety Code ~ 11362.5, pertaining
to the medicinal possession and cultivation of cannabis. As stated therein, the purposes of
the C.U.A. are to "ensure that seriously all Californians have the right to obtain and use
cannabis for medical purposes where such use is deemed appropriate and has been
recommended by a physician who has determined that the persons health would benefrt
from the use of cannabis in the treatment of Cancer, Anorexia, AIDS, Chronic Pain,
Spasticity, Glaucoma, Arthritis, Migraine, or an other illness or which cannabis
provides relief ', And to "ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain
and use cannabis for medical purposes, upon recommendation of a physician, are not
subject to criminal prosecution or sanction ".
Subsequently, on July 18, 2002, the California Supreme Court affirmed that California
Health and Safety Code § 11362.5 is the law of the land in California. The five specific
points enumerated by the Supreme Court in People v. Mower are:
1) The C.U.A. confers Qualified Immunity from prosecution, to patients and their
primary caregivers.
2) The burden of proving such Qualified Immunity based upon a claim of
medical authorization should be allocated in the same manner as a claim that a
prosecution is barred by the Statute of Limitations.
3) In any trial where the medical authorization to use cannabis is being asserted,
the jury should be instructed that the defendant need only raise a reasonable
doubt.
4} The C.U.A. pre-empts local policies limiting the number of plants a qualified
individual may grow or have grown, or the amount of cannabis used for
personal medical purposes.
5) Statements made by patients from their hospital bed can be excluded as
involuntary, where the patient is physically or psychologically vulnerable
(such as under the influence of certain medications).
Additionally, on January 1, 2004, Senate Bi11420 became law, codified at California
Health and Safety Code § 11362.7 et al. These sections afford additional privileges to
qualified individuals and promote greater implementation of the C.U.A., in accordance
with the stated purposes of said Act.
Sectian• Purposes.
The purposes of this measure /ordinance are to recognize and protect the rights of
qualified individuals (patients, primary caregivers and their assistants} and physicians
through implementation of the compassionate use laws of California, and to promote the
safe, consistent and affordable use of and access to medical cannabis by qualified
individuals, pursuant to said laws.
In support of these purposes, this body recognizes three basic tenets which are in
furtherance of the purposes of this measure 1 ordinance. They are:
1) That the assistance of medical cannabis Collectives, Cooperatives and
Associations, as defined herein, will help to promote safe access to and use of
cannabis in accordance with California laws;
2) That lawful remuneration may occur between qualified patients, primary
caregivers and their assistants, and;
3} That qual~ed individuals and their respective collectives, cooperatives and
associations, shall receive the support of this body in their endeavors to
register and/or certify their cannabis, cannabis plant conversions and
cannabis gardens under California's Organic Food Standards.
Secfion: Definitions.
The following words and phrases, whenever used in this measure /ordinance, shall be
construed as herein defined.
A} Cannabis; Cannabis or "marijuana" means all parts of the plant cannabis
sativa L. whether growing or not; the fertile seeds thereof, the resin
extracted from any part of the plant, and every compound, manufacture,
salt, derivative, mixture, preparation of the plant, it's fertile seeds or resin.
It does not include sterilized seeds or foods, stalks, fiber or other industrial
and commercial products, otherwise known as "hemp". According to the
office of California's Attorney General, concentrated cannabis, such as
"hashish" is included within the meaning of cannabis "marijuana" as that
2
term is used in the C.U.A. (such concentrates are resins ar are extracted
from resins).
B) Plant Conversion; Plant conversion means concentrated cannabis and any
other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, preparation of the
plant or its resins. Weights of plant conversion shall not include nan-
cannabis based mediums, such as food, butter, oils or solvents, when
determining compliance with the C.U.A.
C) Qualified Patient; A qualified patient is a California citizen or resident
who has obtained a written or oral recommendation or approval from a
licensed physician to use cannabis for medical purposes. Patients enjoy
qualified immunity to Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366,
11366.5 and 11570 of California's Health and Safety Code {see Section
11362.765 {a), (b) and (c)).
D} Primary Caregiver; A primary caregiver is any individual who has been
designated as such by one or more qualified patients. A primary caregiver
may legally assist the patient(s) with the cultivation, processing,
manufacture, storage, procurement and transportation of cannabis and
plant conversions. By consistently providing safe and affordable access to
cannabis, the primary caregiver has assumed responsibility for the health
and safety of the patients}. Primary caregivers may also assume
responsibility for the housing of the patient(s). Primary caregivers enjoy
qual~ed immunity tv Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366,
11366.5 and 11570 of California's Health and Safety Code (see Section
11362.765 (a), {b) and (c)}. A primary cazegiver must also provide
additional services related to the housing, health or safety needs of the
patient(s) they serve, and must do sa consistently, at or before the time
they begin providing cannabis to the patient(s). (See People v. Mentch}
E) Assistant; An assistant is an individual who administers medical cannabis
to a patient ar a primary caregiver and provides assistance in teaching
them the skills necessary to cultivate and administer cannabis. Assistants
enjoy qualified immunity to Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366,
11366.5 and 11570 of California's Health and Safety Code (see section
11362.765 (a}, (b} and (c)).
F) Qualified Individual; A qualified individual is any of the three categories
of individuals just mentioned {qualified patients, their primary caregivers
and assistants).
G) Physician; A physician is an individual who possesses a license in good
standing to practice medicine or osteopathy issued by the Medical Board
of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California. The
physician takes responsibility for an aspect of the medical care, treatment,
3
diagnosis, counseling or referral of a patient. Under the terms of the
C.U.A., the physician and only the physician assesses whether a patient is
qualified to use cannabis, by approving or recommending its use.
H} Remuneration; Remuneration means the lawful. reimbursement by
patients to their primary cazegivers, or by patients and their primary
cazegivers to their assistants, for actual expenses incurred and services
rendered in cultivating and famishing medical cannabis.
I) Qualified Immunity; Qualified immunity is the legal status conferred
upon qualified individuals in California. Such individuals are ;immune
from criminal prosecution and shall not be subjected to legal sanctions
whenever their legal status has been asserted to law enforcement
personnel. Having qualified immunity means that such individuals are
exempt from the application of certain laws (see "C", "D" and "E"), so
long as their actions comply with the terms of the C.U.A.
~ Sanction; Under California laws, qualified individuals aze entitled to legal
protection from sanctions that would otherwise apply to them, if not for
the lawful, medical nature of their uses of cannabis. A sanction is any
punitive measure inflicted upon an individual.
I~ Identification Card; A photo identification card identifies a qualified
individual and is issued to a qualified patient or primary cazegiver by
either a County Health Department or a health related organization
designated by the Board of Supervisors (see California Health and Safety
Code, § 11.362.71}. Such Il7 cazds serve as a bar to arrest of the card-
holder(s) for cannabis related offenses covered in the C.U.A., where no
other criminal activity is suspected.
L) Confidentiality; According to California laws, information about a
person's medical history and personal medical decisions are considered
confidential. Such rights to pnlvacy aze not waived due to any uses of
medical cannabis. Likewise, medical discussions between physicians and
their patients are confidential. Therefore, the nature of a person's medical
condition is not subject to scrutiny by law enforcement persannel and need
not be disclosed in the pursuit of qualified immunity or the mounting of a
cn7minal defense or civil litigation regarding the medical uses of cannabis.
M} Male Plant; A cannabis plant that produces pollen, which is bright
yellow, is a male plant. The male cannabis plant produces no usable
flowers or cannabis "marijuana" and contains little to no medicinal
properties. However, male pollen is essential for the propagation of seeds
and the creation of new hybrid strains of cannabis. For legal purposes,
male plants shall not be included in determining the number of plants in a
cannabis garden.
4
N) Female Plant; A cannabis plant that produces flowers (buds}, which
begin as slender hairs, is a female plant. Only the female plant produces
medicinal cannabis in any usable amounts.
O) Ymmatnre Plant; All cannabis plants that have roots but have not yet
begun to flower (or bloom) aze considered immature {also called a
"vegetative state of growth"). In nature (here in the northern hemisphere},
the final planting of immature plants begins around Mazch -May, when
the sunlight is mare in the blue spectrum, and preferably after the last frost
of the season. Immature plants may consist of clones {cuttings from
female plants that have been rooted) and seedlings (plants grown from
seed). During indoor cultivation, more Ight than darkness {such as 18
hours on and 6 hours off) indicates a vegetative state of growth. Such
indoor vegetation takes between 2-8 weeks after roots are viable,
depending on the gardening methods and the plant strains, before
flowering is instigated.
P) Mature Plant; Whenever a cannabis plant reaches a flowering (or
blooming} state in i#s development, the female buds or male pollen will
hasten their development. In nature (here in the northern hemisphere} this
begins to occur when sunlight hours are reduced and the sunlight is more
in the red spectn.~m, around June -July. Full maturity does not occur until
the end of the growth cycle, around September -November, and this is
when the plants are harvested. With indoor cultivation, flowering begins
when the light cycle is reduced to somewhere near equivalent hours to
darkness (usually l2 hours on and 12 hours off}. Full maturity indoors,
once the light cycle is switched to flowering, takes an additional 5-12
weeks, depending on the strains being grown.
Q) Associations, Collectives and Cooperatives; This body hereby
recognizes the rights of qualified individuals to provide mutual assistance
and resources towards the lawful cultivation, possession, use, distribution,
processing, manufacture, storage and transportation of cannabis in a safe,
affordable and consistent manner, in accordance with California laws.
Associations, Collectives and Cooperatives may also provide social, legal,
political and civic services an behalf of then members. For the purposes of
this measure 1 ordinance, the following distinctions are made. An
Association is an aflxliation of qual fled individuals where the patients
may use cannabis together in private or public settings, in accordance with
state and local regulations affecting the uses of tobacco products.
Collectives and Cooperatives are any group consisting of two or more
qualified individuals who associate with each other with the intent of
procuring their cannabis as a group. Such Collectives and Cooperatives
represent the consumer interests of their membership and may serve other
housing, health or safety needs, in addition to providing direct access to
5
cannabis. A Collective is hereby recognized as an organization that serves
its members by allowing them to accumulate the goods and services they
require. A Collective of qualified individuals serves its membership by
providing direct access to cannabis, through the process of cultivation, anal
to plant conversions, through the process of extraction and processing,
where all cannabis products are provided directly from the Collective to
their qual~ed patient members. A Cooperative is hereby recognized as
an organization that provides its members the opportunity to transact
business to their greater advantage, usually by the elimination of an
intermediary's profit. A Cooperative of qual fed individuals serves its
membership by offering network opportunities for remuneration to actor
between members, as welt as by facilitating increased financial savings
and consumer advocacy on behalf of its members. A cannabis
Cooperative may include both qualified individuals and cannabis
Collectives as members.
R} C.U.A. and M.M.P.A.: Whenever C.U.A. is used in this measure
ordinance, it refers to the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, codif ed at
California Health and Safety Code ~ 11362.5. Likewise, whenever
M.M.P.A. is used in this measure 1 ordinance, i# refers to the Medical
Marihuana Program Act, codified at California Health and Safety Code ~
11362.7 et al.
Section: Physician and Patient Rights.
A} Confirmation of qualified status of individuals claiming goal fled immunity by
any agents or employees of, or private persons under contract with this
(city/county) shall preserve to the maximum extent possible all legal protections
and privileges consistent with reasonably confirming the licensing status of
physicians and the immunity status of goal fed individuals.
B) Disclosure of any confidential information, whether offered from persons with or
without identification cards, for the purposes of voluntarily asserting facts in
support of qualified immunity status, shall not be deemed a waiver of the right of
confidentiality under any provision of law.
C) Once a goal fled individual has provided law enforcement personnel with a claim
of qual~ed immunity and either offered in identification card, or the name and
phone # of the physician who recommended or approved the use of cannabis, no
further medical information is required. Law enfoxcement officers are not licensed
to practice medicine, and their testimony regarding such matters is given no
weight in a court of law (see People v. Mower and People v. Chal~os).
D) An approval or recommendation to use cannabis is valid for a period of time
exclusively determined by the physician.
6
E) A qual~ed patient and his or her recommending/approving physician are the only
two people who are to determine the following matters in regards to medicinal
uses of cannabis by the patient...quantities of cannabis, frequency of use,
strength of cannabis, reactions with and replacement of other medications,
tolerance associated with regular use, counter indications and methods of
delivery. A physician may approve of or recommend any amounts of cannabis
required to reasonably treat the medical needs of the patient, under the terms of
the C.U.A. Such physician authorized amounts are to be given the full weight of
law regarding amounts that a patient is allowed to use (see People v. Kelley,
People v. Mower and Cal H&SC ,~ .1.i36z. 77(b)).
Section: Cultivation and Possession of Medicinal Cannabis
A) All cultivation of cannabis used for medical purposes shall be lawful when
conducted in accordance with the C.U.A. and the M.M.P.A. This body hereby
recognizes the rights of qualified individuals to cultivate cannabis in
quantities consis#ent with the current and ongoing medical needs of the
patients represented by such gardens, as determined by their recommending /
approving physician(s). Every cannabis garden shall contain documentation
that asserts qualified immunity for, and clearly establishes the medical
approvals or recommendations of all patients receiving cannabis from said
garden, posted in plain sight for investigations ar inspections by law
enforcement personnel.
B) Lawful activities related to cannabis include; cultivation of both indoor and
outdoor plants; cultivation of both male and female plants at various stages of
growth; cultivation of both clones and seedlings as well as possession of both
seeds and cuttings, and; possession of materials, equipment and supplies used
for the purposes of cultivating, processing, transporting, manufacturing,
distributing and storing cannabis.
C} Qual fed individuals may cultivate, possess, process, manufacture, transport,
store and distribute medicinal cannabis individually or together, in the form of
collectives and cooperatives. Qualified patients may also use and share
cannabis with each other, in the form of associations, collectives and
cooperatives, where such actions aze performed in accordance with state and
local tobacco use Laws.
D) The rental, Teasing, sale or providing of equipment, materials, supplies or
space utilized for the cultivation, processing, manufacture, transportation,
storage, distribution, possession or use of cannabis that is used for medical
purposes in accordance with the C.U.A. and the M.M.P.A., shall be deemed
lawful.
E) Qualified individuals who cultivate their cannabis in this jurisdiction may
cultivate any number of plants, at various stages of growth, so long as the total
7
square footage of plant canopy being grown at any given time and
cumulatively far every individual patient does not exceed the square footage
required to produce the amount of cannabis that patient requixes, by any
combination of indoor, greenhouse and outdoor gardens. Furthermore, the
total amount of cannabis harvested for each qual fed patient shall not exceed
the total amount authorized by that patient's physician, for a period of one
year if the patient is involved in ongoing cannabis farming, ar two years if the
patient is not.
F) Qual~ed individuals may cultivate cannabis far the ongoing medical needs of
the patient{s) and possess cannabis for the current medical needs of the
patient(s), simultaneously, without violating the C.U.A. or the M.M.P.A., so
sang as the total amounts of cannabis in possession and being cultivated do
not violate the terms and conditions provided within this Section.
G) It is the responsibility of the qualified individuals farming the cannabis to
provide law enforcement officers with documentation that easily establishes
the contact information and legal identity of all garden members and the
business phone numbers} of their physicians, at the onset of any criminal
investigation or compliance inspection. Furthermore, at the time that such
investigation or inspection is instigated, it is the responsibility of the qualified
individuals farming the cannabis to provide law enforcement with information
that clearly asserts the total amount of cannabis that their gazden(s) may
cultivate {based on the physician authorized amounts). It is the responsibility
of investiaatin~ officers to measure, taking accompanying photographs, all
plants in the garden(s), to record the total plant canopy of each garden, to
verify the approvals /recommendations by contacting the physician's office,
to verify the physician authorized amounts of cannabis allowed to each
qualified patient, to accept into evidence all exculpatory information
presented by the suspects and to preserve any evidence seized in good
condition for the duration of any criminal or civil proceedings related to the
garden(s). (For this reason, taking small samples of each plant, leaving
corresponding evidence tags and photographing each plant, with a yardstick or
other measuring device, is recommended}.
H} Qualif ed individuals may possess any amount of cannabis that their physician
recommends or approves, in amounts equivalent to a one year supply where
evidence exists indicating an ongoing cultivation of cannabis, or a two year
supply where no such evidence is present. Where no such amount has been
authorized by the physician, qualified patients shall inform the officers, in
person or in writing, of haw much cannabis they use per day {in grams) and
will be given one chance by law enforcement personnel to modify their
approval / recommendation to include such information, on or before a date
set by the District Attorney, that precedes the filing of a criminal complaint or
other criminal proceedings, in order to honor the patient /physician
relationship and the patient's rights under the C.U.A. and the M.M.P.A. If the
8
qualified patient fails to provide such information, at either juncture, the
default "floor" guideline of eight ounces of cannabis established in California
Health and Safety Code ,¢ 11362.77(a) Fray be applied, at the discretion of the
(Police Chief /Sheriff} and District Attorney.
I) Qualified individuals may additionally possess up to eight ounces (112 pound)
or 16 ounces (one pound) of cannabis concentrate (hashish, hash oil, keif} at
any given time, in accordance with the provisions of "H" of this Section (i.e.
for a one year or two year supply). Amounts of other plant conversions
(butter, infusions, foods, tinctures, salves, massage oils, etc.) shall remain
unrestricted, for the reason that detern,;n;ng the weight of cannabis within
their various medium(s) is highly impractical.
J) For investigative purposes, only female plants shall be counted in
determining the number of plants iFi a cannabis garden. Likewise, cuttings that
have not yet rooted are not considered to be "plants" and shall not be counted
when determining total plant numbers. Also, immature plants shall be
considered in the context of the ongoing medical needs of the patient(s) rather
than as determinants of the immediate probable yield of a garden. Finally,
only mature, female plants shall be considered when determining the
immediate probable yields of all cannabis gardens.
Section: Transportation of Medicinal Cannabis.
The transportation of cannabis, in all forms, when performed by qualified individuals in
accordance with California Health and Safety Code ~ 11362.765, is lawful. As such,
whenever qualified individuals transport cannabis, where the quantity being transported
and the method, timing and distance of the transportation are reasonably related to the
current and ongoing medical needs of the patients}, and where there is no evidence of
additional criminal activity, no arrest or prosecution shall proceed unless and until
reasonable efforts have been made to ascertain the validity of the claims of qual fed
immunity first.
Section; Prohibited Acts.
In accordance with California Health and Safety Cade ~ 11662.81, qualified individuals
are prohibited from certain acts. Nothing in this measure /ordinance shall authorize any
qualified individual(s) to engage in the smoking of cannabis;
• In any place where smoking is prohibited by law.
• In or within 1000 feet of the grounds of any school, recreational center or youth
center, unless such use occurs within a residence or other private property.
• On a school bus (that is currently in service as such).
9
• Qn the property or premises of any place of employment, or during the hours of
employment, excepting where such use is accorded to employees as an
accommodation to a disability or medical condition.
• While in a motor vehicle that is being operated.
• While operating a boat.
Furthermore;
• Nothing in this measure /ordinance shall authorize the operation of any for profit
retail market engaged in the distribution of cannabis and cannabis plant
conversions. Such activities are not protected by the C.U.A.
• Nothing in this measure 1 ordinance shall create an intoxication defense to any
civil or criminal action.
• Nothing in this measure /ordinance shall authorize in any way the diversion of
medicinal cannabis, cannabis plants and cannabis plant conversions to any non-
qualified individual{s).
Section: Paraphernalia and Products.
Possession and use of the following items shall be deemed lawful when used in
accordance with the C.U.A. and the M.M.P.A.;
• Pipes, Water Pipes, Vaporizers, Rolling Papers and other paraphernalia used to
consume cannabis and cannabis plant conversions.
• Weights and measures (used for dosage regulation and confirmation of amounts
possessed).
• Containers used for storing and transporting cannabis and cannabis plant
conversions.
• All items, supplies and materials used for the purposes of processing cannabis
and manufacturing cannabis plant conversions.
Section: Pratecfions from Discrimination.
The rights of Americans to enjoy housing, privacy, employment, travel, public access,
education and freedom of assembly shall not be infringed within this (city /county) as a
result of the lawful uses of cannabis in accordance with the C.U.A. and the M.M.P.A.
In order to provide reasonable protection of these rights, this measure /ordinance hereby
ensures that;
10
A) Na qual~ed individual shall be subjected to discrimination, for utilizing
privileges afforded them under the C.U.A. or the M.M.P.A., by any agents or
employees of, or private persons under contract with this (city I county);
B} No physician shall be subjected to discrimination for reasons of consultations
with patients, the issuance of cannabis approvals or recommendations to
patients, ar medical opinions regarding the medicinal uses of cannabis, by any
agents of, or private persons under contract with this (city 1 county).
C} If an employee of, or any person under private contract with this (city /
county), who is a qualified patient requests an accommodation related to the
medical uses of cannabis, the request shall be analyzed like. any other request
for a reasonable accommodation to a disability or medical condition.
D) Qual~ed patients who are employees of this (city /county), or of its private
contractors, shall not, on the sole basis of a positive blood or urine test result
for cannabis use, be subjected to sanction.
Written policies and training information shall be provided to educate all employees and
agents of this (city /county) and all persons contracting business with this (city /county},
of this measure /ordinance, in its entirety, and of these antidiscrimination policies.
The (city /county) of reserves the right to warn, discipline
or terminate the employment of any of its employees, agents or persons contracting
private business with this jurisdiction, for any determinations ofnon-compliance with this
measure /ordinance, including any provisions of this anti-discrimination policy.
Administrative procedures shall be developed for individuals to file complaints against
this (city /county} incases of potential discrimination. A complaint process shall be
developed for such individuals seeking a remedy or corrective action, in conformance
with California Government Code ~~ 910, 910.2 and 910.4. Such complaints will be
heard within a timely and transparent fashion, by this Body or a lawfully appointed
designee, and the results shall be provided to the complainant(s) iua writing.
Section: Regulations for Cannabis Associations.
It is hereby recognized by this Body that cannabis associations may operate according to
local licensing or regulations that affect their specific operations (juice bar, coffee shop,
bed and breakfast, health club, day spa, fishing & hunting club, dude ranch, RV park,
retirement facility, night club, etc.... No special provisions related to their uses of
cannabis shall be required, excepting for the following:
1) All on-site cannabis consumption shall adhere to state and local fire codes.
11
2) All on-site cannabis consumption shall adhere to state and local tobacco
use laws and regulations enforced within this jurisdiction.
3) Use of vaporizers and/or non-inhaled methods of delivery are required in
all situations where "smoking" is otherwise disallowed.
4) No minors under the age of 18 shall be allowed on-site, excepting those
with valid medical authorizations to use cannabis while in the
accompaniment of a parent or legal guardian (note: in cases where alcohol
is served, no minors under the age of 21 are allowed at all).
Section. Regalatians far Cannabis Collectives & Cooperatives.
All agencies of this (city / county) having jurisdiction over any matters involving the
cultivation or dispensation of cannabis, far the purposes of defining legal requirements
and inspection parameters regarding zoning compliance, building inspections, public
health and safety, fire safety, business licensing and any other public purpose that entitles
the recipient to special privileges, are hereby instructed to incorporate and implement the
following regulatory provisions in regards to all cannabis collectives and cooperatives:
A) All cannabis collectives and cooperatives shall be handicap accessible.
However, those that offer delivery services to their members' homes may
temporarily forego handicap accessibility, for {duration of time determined by
this Body and incorporated herein as an amendment to this Section).
B} All areas and spaces maintained by cannabis collectives and cooperatives for
the purposes of cultivating, processing, manufacturing, storing, transporting,
dispensing and using cannabis shall be made inaccessible to all persons who
are not members of said organizations. However, such groups can maintain
offices and other facilities where such actions are not performed that are open
to the public.
C) Collectives and cooperatives operating within this jurisdiction shall not use
overt signage, billboards, placards, etc. to advertise their location or services,
excepting reasonable sized sign(s) on or above building entrances.
Furthermore, na displays of cannabis, cannabis plants, cannabis products or
plant conversions shall be visible to the public. However, all other forms of
advertising that are otherwise lawful in California far adult industries shall be
permissible.
D) Cannabis collectives and cooperatives shall not be permitted to operate
dispensary services within SOQ feet of any school, recreational center or youth
center. However, no such restrictions shall apply to the individual, collective
or cooperative cultivation, or to the use of cannabis by qual fed patients or
12
their associations, whenever any of these occur within a private residence ar
structure, so long as such activities are not obviously visible ar readily
accessible to the public and conform with local and state laws relating to the
smoking of tobacco.
E) The production of the smell produced from growing, drying, curing,
processing, manufacturing, transporting, storing or using cannabis shall not
constitute an offense or be considered grounds for any sanction or civil I
criminal proceedings against qualified individuals. However, the use of any
solvents or other chemicals must be in accordance with relevant ventilation
and fire safety regulations (see "G" of this Section}.
F) The preparation of all cannabis or plant conversion based butters, oil
infusions, foods, ar other food products that are made available for
remuneration between qualified individuals within collectives or cooperatives
shall be permitted only when such foods are made in a certified commercial
kitchen.
G} All areas maintained by qualified individuals and by cannabis collectives or
cooperatives for the purposes of cultivating, processing and using cannabis or
for the manufacture of plant conversions, shall adhere to all electrical codes,
fire codes, building codes, health and safety codes and other codes affecting
the occupancy of buildings within this jurisdiction. (If special regulations are
required for this industry, they shall be formulated using scientifically based
evidence provided by experts and with full public participation and then shall
be amended to this Section).
~ Other zoning restrictions or requirements may be considered by this body and
applied to this measure /ordinance, provided that they must be reached
through open, public meetings. Such additions, if enacted, will be amended to
this Section.
I) Cannabis collectives that plan on selling legal merchandise or other non-
cannabis related retail services must apply for a business license. However, no
business license shall be required of cannabis collectives for merely engaging
in the course of their Iawfiil operations (the cultivation, processing,
manufacture, storage, joint_possession, use and transportation of cannabis and
plant conversions by qual~ed individuals). These activities are rights
afforded to qual~ed individuals under California laws and are not considered
as business activities under the terms of this measure /ordinance.
J) The reimbursement of monies spent, services rendered and materials used in
the cultivation, processing, manufacture, transportation, distribution and
storage of cannabis and plant conversions, hereby known as remuneration,
does not constitute "profit" as that term is applied at law. Rather, such
reimbwrsements, wages, stipends and other farms of lawful payment are
13
protected activities under the M.M.P.A. (see California Health and Safety
Code ,~ 11362.765). Furthermore, the payment of wages, salaries or invoices
to staff and/or private contractors and professionals by cannabis collectives,
associations and cooperatives is lawful.
K) Cannabis cooperatives shall apply for state or local permits and licenses in a
manner consistent with those required to operate Lodges and/or Providers of
Herbal Supplements, as these business models most closely resemble such
operations (cannabis cooperatives offer network services between their
members for a variety of purposes and they allow for the lawful dispensation
of cannabis and plant conversions, as plant-based medicines}. Furthermore,
all cannabis cooperatives shall incorporate under California Corporations
Code §§ 12200 -12704, or under any other California Code(s), as anot-for-
profit or ran-profit organization.
L) No methods of taxation that specifically target cannabis industries shall be
permitted when applied to qual~ed individuals, their associations and
collectives. Furthermore, any taxation scheme that affects cannabis
cooperatives must first undergo public scrutiny and survive a vote by this
Body, in public session, before being incorporated herein, as an amendment to
this Section. Any existing taxation plans directed against cannabis
"dispensaries" within this jurisdiction shall be re-evaluated, to prevent any
conflict with this measure /ordinance.
M) Only cannabis from qualified cannabis gardens {i.e. those being grown by
qualified individuals and collectives) are permitted to be networked through
cannabis cooperatives. Such cooperatives can provide networking services for
any number of such gardens, provided that the following provisions shall
apply:
1) All qual~ed patients who receive cannabis and plant conversions
through a cooperative must receive it directly from either their primary
caregiver or their personal assistant(s).
2) The total amounts of cannabis {mature, processed "buds") dispensed
to each patient shall not exceed the amount approved by that patient's
physician, for a period of time equal to a 1-2 ear su 1 , in
accordance with Section (h~ "Cultivation and Possession of
Medicinal Cannabis'). The total amounts of hashish, hash oil or keif
that a qualified patient may receive is restricted to no more than eight
ounces (112 pound) per one year supply and 16 ounces (1 pound} per
two year supply. There is no limit to the amount of cannabis leaf, trim
or any other plant conversions that a qualif ed patient may receive.
3) The total number of plants grown, per patient, shall not be deemed
relevant. However, the total square footage of plant canopy allowed
14
per qualif ed patient shall not exceed the space required to provide an
amount of cannabis that is consistent with said patient's immediate and
ongoing medicinal needs, in accordance with Section (E)
"Cultivation and Possession of Medicinal Cannabis ").
4) Whenever a qual~ed patient does not know how much cannabis he or
she might consume, or that person's physician has not acknowledged
said amount in a timely fashion, the default "floor" guideline of eight
ounces of cannabis possession established in California Health and
Safety Code ~ 11362.77(a) may be applied.
Section: Investigations by Law Enforcement Personnel.
The terms and conditions of this measure /ordinance are the established rule of law for
the (city /county) of , under the established role of this
legislative branch of government, given to this Body under the Constitution of California
State. As such, the responsibility far the enforcement of this measure /ordinance is
mandated by all officers employed by or operating under the jurisdiction of this (city 1
county). Therefore, this measure /ordinance shall be made available, in its entirety, to all
law enforcement departments operating under this jurisdiction, and shall be included in
the operational procedures manual (or equivalent policy manual) of the following
department(s):
A) Whenever cannabis use, possession, cultivation, processing, manufacture,
storage, distribution or transportation is discovered by law enforcement
personnel and a status of qualified immunity is posted or asserted, reasonable
efforts shall be made to investigate and determine whether or not the
individual(s) may be entitled to qualified immunity prior to the leveling of any
sanctions against the qualified individual(s). Such sanctions include but are
not limited to, the arrest of ID Card holders for charges of which they may be
immune, the seizure of property where there is no intent to prosecute, the
destruction of property during the rand or while being held as evidence and the
prosecution of qual fed individuals where no reasonable efforts have been
made to ascertain their status of qualified immunity.
B) Law enforcement agents acting under this jurisdiction shall not refuse to
accept an identif cation card offered by any qualified individual, unless said
officer{s) have reasonable cause to believe that the information contained on
15
the card is false or that the identification card is being used fraudulently (see
California Health and Safety Cade ~ 11362.81(b)).
C) Any perceived conflicts arising between the enforcement of federal and state
Taws by any law enforcement agents operating under this jurisdiction shall be
resolved according to the following two provisions;
l) State Law: California State Constitution, ~ 3.S(c) "An administrative
Agency... has no power to declare a statute unenforceable, or to refuse
to enforce a statute on the basis that federal law or federal regulations
prohibit the enforcement of such statute unless an appellate court has
made a determination that the enforcement of such statute is
prohibited by federal law or federal regulations ", and
2) Federal Law: Printz Sheriff/Coroner. Ravalli County Montana v U.S
and Lopez v U.S. "The federal government may neither issue
directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor
command the States' officers, or those of their political subdivisions,
to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program... such
commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional
system of duel sovereignty ".
Dj Once any law enforcement officer operating under this jurisdiction has been
presented with exculpatory evidence of qualified immunity by any qual fed
individual(s), the investigation is to proceed under State jurisdiction. Any such
officer(s) who call upon federal law enforcement officers to intervene may be
liable far violating the civil rights of said qual~ed individual(s) and therefore
waive any claims to prosecutorial ox civil immunity.
Section: Violations and Penalties.
Any violation(s) of any provision{s) of this measure /ordinance, by any individual(s),
whether in their personal or professional capacities, shall constitute an Infraction.
Section. SeverabiGty.
If any provision(s) of this measure /ordinance or the application thereof to any person(s)
or circumstances} islare held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or
applications of this measure /ordinance, which can be given effect without the invalid
provision{s) or application(s), and to this end, the provisions and applications of this
measure /ordinance are severable.
Section: Date of Implementation.
This measure /ordinance shall take effect sixty {60) days after the date of its adoption.
l6