|
SUPERVISORS
Medical marijuana
New look at pot ID cards
COUNTY COUNSEL, SHERIFF SAY THAT STATE LAW MANDATES ISSUING THEM TO PATIENTS USING DRUG
By Robert Lewis - rlewis@sacbee.com
You might not like the state’s medical marijuana laws, but you’d better follow them.
That’s the message Sacramento County’s attorney has sent the Board of Supervisors, which once again is debating whether to issue state-mandated medical marijuana ID cards to patients.
The board today will reconsider a resolution to issue the cards nine months aftershootingdown a similar measure and five months after an appeals court upheld the state law requiring such a program.
Currently, Sacramento County is one of the few counties in the state that doesn’t issue medical marijuana cards and where there is no process for determining who is using the drug for legal medical purposes as defined by the state.
The county’s attorney as well as its top cop, Sheriff John McGinness, both are recommending the board approve the resolution.
“Someone might sue us and I can’t defend it,” said Robert Ryan, the county’s counsel.
“Local governments have a duty toimplement thestatutoryrequirements.”
California has allowed the use of marijuana for certain medical conditions since 1996, and a 2003 law required counties to issue ID cards to patients.
Most counties now issue the cards, which advocates say protect patients from arrest and seizure and guard against subjectivity when determining who is legally entitled to use the drug.
A few large counties, however, have challenged the law.
In March, supervisors voted 3-2 against a resolution that would have required county health officials to start issuing the identification cards.
Supervisors Don Nottoli, Susan Peters and Roberta MacGlashan voted against the cards. At that time, Sheriff McGinness also opposed the measure.
Since that vote, a state appeals court has ruled against San Diego and San Bernardino counties, which sued on the grounds that the identification cards conflict with federallawscriminalizingmarijuana.
In late July, the appeals court found the cards did not pose a conflict, and in October the state Supreme Court decided not to hear the case. The counties are now trying to take their case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
McGinness said he shifted positions on the cards after the state Supreme Court’s move in October.
“I can’t encourage the board to do anything contrary to the law,” McGinness said. “I don’t like it, but there are other laws I don’t like.”
Given the recent court decision, the county counsel is recommending supervisors authorize the county to begin issuing the cards to avoid a lawsuit from a patient or advocacy group.
“It seems to me to be irresponsible to put the county in a position where we leave ourselves exposed to litigation our counsel not only says we won’t likely win, but can’t win,” Supervisor Roger Dickinson said.
DickinsonalongwithSupervisor Jimmie Yee voted for the identification cards in March. Both said they will support the measure today.
“What’s the use of fighting it?” Yee said. “I’m not condoning smoking marijuana, but that’s the state law.”
Not everyone on the board feels that way. MacGlashan saidshewouldoppose theresolution.
“I really think we’re doing people a disservice by issuing cards knowing it’s a crime under federal law,” MacGlashan said. “Until a court orders me to vote that way, I won’t vote for it.”
Supervisors Nottoli and Peters did not respond to several requests for comment.
Advocates from the Marijuana Policy Project as well as the American Civil Liberties Union have said they will be at today’s board meeting to voice supportfor passage ofthe resolution.
The board will discuss the resolution at 2:45 p.m. today. For more information, visit the board’s Web site at www.bos.saccounty.net.
Call The Bee’s Robert Lewis, (916) 321-1061.
|
