Pubdate: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 Source: Alameda Times-Star, The (CA) Section: Opinion, Editorial Copyright: 2003 MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers Contact: http://www.timesstar.com/Stories/0,1413,125%257E1524%257E,00.html Website: http://www.timesstar.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/731 Author: Nathan Miley Note: Nathan Miley is the Alameda County supervisor for District Four, Oakland. WORKING TO MAKE MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAWS FIT WITH COMMUNITY'S NEEDS AS author of Oakland's original medical cannabis ordinance, I would like to share my thoughts about ways to serve all of our goals, including compassion and public safety. After California voters adopted Proposition 215 in 1996, legalizing medical cannabis through- out the state, the city of Oakland showed great leadership by adopting standards to regulate medical cannabis to ensure safe access to patients in need. By authorizing medical cannabis dispensaries, our city showed common sense -- keeping cannabis and patients off the streets and out of the cross hairs of dangerous drug dealers. Unfortunately, the federal government stopped the first licensed dispensary, the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative, almost immediately after it opened. The dispensaries that have since opened are not at fault for the confusing situation they are in. The Oakland City Council tried to enact sensible regulations, but those who complied were persecuted by the federal government. I personally was called upon to testify in the now infamous Ed Rosenthal trial, where the jurors were not allowed to hear my testimony that Rosenthal was providing medicine to patients. Some have suggested that Oakland should back away from our stance on this issue. I think we should take pride in the fact that Oakland took a leadership role for justice and compassion -- and that others are following our lead. Recent history shows that Oakland's actions were the leading edge of a larger wave. Eight additional states have passed laws authorizing the use of medical cannabis. Dozens of dispensaries exist in other Bay Area cities. Recently, there have been dramatic legal advances which only serve to confirm the justness of Oakland's position. The California Legislature has enacted SB420, a bill that helps protect the right of medical cannabis patients. Even the U.S. Supreme Court got into the act, rejecting a Bush administration request to prosecute doctors who recommend medical cannabis. We should continue to hope and advocate for a more sensible federal policy. In the meantime, we should adopt interim regulations that make medical cannabis safe and affordable for patients, while requiring sensible steps to regulate the operation, such as ventilation requirements and providing security personnel. Cannabis dispensaries should be approved or rejected on the basis of their compliance with these standards, and in response to any complaints. It is important that patients have the option of consuming their medicine on-site, both so they have an environment of mutual support to break down the isolation that many patients experience due to their illnesses and in order to prevent consumption in public. The medical cannabis providers are not the ones who have put the City Council in a quandary. At recent hearings on the subject, not one person spoke in opposition to the cannabis dispensaries. Those providing a service authorized by the voters of our state should not be treated like criminals - -- they are upholding the law. If Oakland has a quandary, it is caused by the federal administration. Let us enact sensible regulations to make sure that cannabis dispensaries operate in a clean, safe, responsible manner and are good neighbors, and are able to continue to contribute to the health and economic vitality of our community. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman