Weedpipe
Active Member
The Aurora City Council this week helped set into motion one of Colorados most contentious legal debates for years to come.
The council moved another step closer Monday night to approving a November ballot issue asking voters whether to ban medical marijuana dispensaries and just about every other associated outlet including grow operations within city limits.
The question comes after the state Legislature passed and Gov. Bill Ritter signed a series of bills this year attempting to clean up the vague language passed by voters a decade ago.
While its clear that voters in 2000 agreed that marijuana has medicinal value for clearly ill individuals, its unclear if the voters envisioned a booming industry with hundreds of dispensaries and tens of thousands of patients flooding state rolls with inexplicable, sudden back pain.
In an attempt to at least resolve some of the confusion regarding the voter-approved amendment, legislators took up the issue this year and passed out two bills that fall far short of clearing up the issue.
Included in the bill are prescriptions for where dispensaries can be, patient-physician relationships and licensing regulations, all of which were important steps for reining in the booming industry. However, the bill was passed and signed with one big hole left in the middle.
Pressured by Colorado municipalities and law enforcement, legislators included a local control clause within the bills allowing cities and counties in Colorado the option to opt out of Amendment 20 by banning dispensaries within city or county limits by either popular vote or statute passed out of elected bodies like city councils.
On the surface, the local control clause sounded like business as usual. Colorado has long held a tradition of local control for cities and counties, but this goes too far. And several groups have said theyre simply waiting until a municipality actually passes one of these citywide bans to pounce on the idea in court. Thats exactly the wrong place to decide whether patients in Colorado can receive legitimate treatment.
In the past, weve supported a long look at whether current federal drug laws and the billions spent to enforce them are logical considering the plant is easier to buy and more potent than ever.
Voter intent was clear in 2000 that Colorado supports medicinal marijuana, and current polls suggest that the sentiment has changed little since.
Allowing counties, cities and municipalities to revise their own ideas of what voters meant in 2000 is the wrong course to take. Just as its the wrong idea to force into court the issue that cities that seek some clarity on the confusion surrounding medicinal marijuana must adhere strictly to the vague outline that voters approved in 2000 and legislators lightly cleared this year.
Simply put, medicinal marijuana is a medical issue right now.
Cities arent asking voters whether they want to deny legitimately ill patients their medicine; theyre skirting issues and presupposing that dispensaries within city limits mean a free-for-all on pot. Thats wrong.
Just as pharmacies and physicians are licensed and regulated by the state, medical marijuana should fall under the same purview.
The state did little to help itself in clearing up proper dosing methods, prescription methods and possession limits so patients dont become suppliers themselves in the bills they passed this year. That was the work that they were tasked to do, and instead of holding them up to that idea, were left with a ticking bomb waiting to explode in the courts.
Aurora is likely in the crosshairs of organizations looking to challenge the constitutionality in court, considering Colorados third-largest city could be the biggest platform to test those laws.
By asking voters in November again whether they support medicinal marijuana in Aurora, were opening up another argument. Instead, citizens should hold their legislators to creating a manageable system for medical marijuana within the state before the July 2011 moratorium deadline expires. Thats what voters approved and what we expect.
News Forum: rollitup.org
Source: Aurora Sentinel
Contact: Aurora Sentinel
Copyright: 2010 Aurora Sentinel
Website: http://www.aurorasentinel.com/articles/2010/06/10/opinion/editorials/doc4c112aeab641c586542103.txt
The council moved another step closer Monday night to approving a November ballot issue asking voters whether to ban medical marijuana dispensaries and just about every other associated outlet including grow operations within city limits.
The question comes after the state Legislature passed and Gov. Bill Ritter signed a series of bills this year attempting to clean up the vague language passed by voters a decade ago.
While its clear that voters in 2000 agreed that marijuana has medicinal value for clearly ill individuals, its unclear if the voters envisioned a booming industry with hundreds of dispensaries and tens of thousands of patients flooding state rolls with inexplicable, sudden back pain.
In an attempt to at least resolve some of the confusion regarding the voter-approved amendment, legislators took up the issue this year and passed out two bills that fall far short of clearing up the issue.
Included in the bill are prescriptions for where dispensaries can be, patient-physician relationships and licensing regulations, all of which were important steps for reining in the booming industry. However, the bill was passed and signed with one big hole left in the middle.
Pressured by Colorado municipalities and law enforcement, legislators included a local control clause within the bills allowing cities and counties in Colorado the option to opt out of Amendment 20 by banning dispensaries within city or county limits by either popular vote or statute passed out of elected bodies like city councils.
On the surface, the local control clause sounded like business as usual. Colorado has long held a tradition of local control for cities and counties, but this goes too far. And several groups have said theyre simply waiting until a municipality actually passes one of these citywide bans to pounce on the idea in court. Thats exactly the wrong place to decide whether patients in Colorado can receive legitimate treatment.
In the past, weve supported a long look at whether current federal drug laws and the billions spent to enforce them are logical considering the plant is easier to buy and more potent than ever.
Voter intent was clear in 2000 that Colorado supports medicinal marijuana, and current polls suggest that the sentiment has changed little since.
Allowing counties, cities and municipalities to revise their own ideas of what voters meant in 2000 is the wrong course to take. Just as its the wrong idea to force into court the issue that cities that seek some clarity on the confusion surrounding medicinal marijuana must adhere strictly to the vague outline that voters approved in 2000 and legislators lightly cleared this year.
Simply put, medicinal marijuana is a medical issue right now.
Cities arent asking voters whether they want to deny legitimately ill patients their medicine; theyre skirting issues and presupposing that dispensaries within city limits mean a free-for-all on pot. Thats wrong.
Just as pharmacies and physicians are licensed and regulated by the state, medical marijuana should fall under the same purview.
The state did little to help itself in clearing up proper dosing methods, prescription methods and possession limits so patients dont become suppliers themselves in the bills they passed this year. That was the work that they were tasked to do, and instead of holding them up to that idea, were left with a ticking bomb waiting to explode in the courts.
Aurora is likely in the crosshairs of organizations looking to challenge the constitutionality in court, considering Colorados third-largest city could be the biggest platform to test those laws.
By asking voters in November again whether they support medicinal marijuana in Aurora, were opening up another argument. Instead, citizens should hold their legislators to creating a manageable system for medical marijuana within the state before the July 2011 moratorium deadline expires. Thats what voters approved and what we expect.
News Forum: rollitup.org
Source: Aurora Sentinel
Contact: Aurora Sentinel
Copyright: 2010 Aurora Sentinel
Website: http://www.aurorasentinel.com/articles/2010/06/10/opinion/editorials/doc4c112aeab641c586542103.txt