Pubdate: Tue, 21 Aug 2007
Source: Lassen County Times (CA)
Copyright: 2007 Feather Publishing Co., Inc.
Contact: http://www.lassennews.com/email_us.edi
Website: http://www.lassennews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3871
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?115 (Cannabis - California)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)

COUNTY TO APPLY STICKER TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA ID CARDS

Instead of stamping state medical marijuana ID cards "not valid under 
federal law," Lassen County officials will apply a sticker with the 
same message.

When the board approved a resolution in June establishing the medical 
marijuana ID card program, created in 1996 by Proposition 215, the 
Compassionate Use Act, Supervisor Jim Chapman insisted on stamping 
the statement on the cards in red ink.

At the board's Tuesday, Aug. 14 meeting, Assistant County 
Administrative Officer Kevin Mannel said state officials vetoed 
stamping the cards, but there's nothing to stop the county from 
adding the sticker.

Unless the board instructed him otherwise, Mannel said he planned to 
have nickel-size yellow stickers printed with red lettering. Lassen 
County Public Health staff will apply the stickers to the cards and 
explain to card carriers that the medical marijuana ID card does not 
protect them from federal prosecution for marijuana possession.

None of the five board members objected and Chapman said he was glad 
the county has the ability to put a sticker on the cards.

A letter dated July 24 from Karen Parr, the chief of the medically 
indigent services section of the California Department of Public 
Health, states the cards, or MMICs, are produced through a contracted 
vendor "and the production price of the MMIC specified within the 
contract is based on the current design, therefore, it cannot be changed."

It said any design changes would increase the card costs and any 
increase "must be passed on to the counties. Furthermore, in order to 
assist law enforcement in verifying valid medical marijuana patients 
or caregivers the information contained on the MMICs must be 
consistent statewide."

The medical marijuana ID card application informs patients they are 
not protected from prosecution under federal law, Parr's letter said, 
providing "sufficient notification to patients and primary caregivers 
of possible federal prosecution."

"It appears that the letter can also be interpreted that we can 
comply with the sticker to meet the full intent of the previous board 
action and not conflict with the intent of the MMP program at the 
state level," Mannel told the board.

Senate Bill 420, which implements Prop 215 and became law in January 
2004, specifies a patient must have documentation from a physician 
verifying the client suffers from a serious medical condition and the 
use of medical marijuana is appropriate.

The client must pay a fee, which the resolution sets at $150, or $117 
for those served by MediCal.

The county must verify the address of the person applying for a card 
by checking proof of residency and a government-issued photo ID. The 
state issues the card after the county health department screens the 
application and reviews it for completeness.

If anything is missing the state automatically denies the application.

Once the application is entered into a computer the state will issue 
a card within five days and send it to the county public health 
department. Public health staff then notifies the user to pick up the ID card.

Mannel said the staff can warn the recipient the card does not offer 
protection from federal prosecution one last time.

"The public health nurses will draw their attention to it," he said. 
"We will place that sticker on the card, and then the recipient can 
leave. Obviously, from a practical standpoint, whether it?s stamped 
or a sticker is put on, the recipient can peal it off. It will be 
like a donor sticker on a driver's license."

Chapman said Mannel brought him a copy of Parr's letter.

"It's very clear the state doesn't like the idea that we don't want 
to conform to their program," Chapman said. "And we fully expected 
that and fully appreciate that."

Even though 56 percent of voters approved Prop 215, "it's clearly not 
in conformance with federal law," he said. "And it puts the county in 
the position of making a choice."

Chapman said all the board members took an oath when sworn into 
office, vowing to uphold the constitutions and the laws of the United 
States and the state of California.

"It doesn't say anything about when they're in conflict," he said. 
"To date, the Supreme Court has clearly ruled against the state in 
terms of its enforcement of the state law over federal statute and 
there's an ongoing debate as to federal authorities attacking 
'citizens of our state who may think they have a certain amount of 
immunity to' federal law."

The cards must be renewed annually, Mannel said, but he said he 
didn't know if the card holder has to pay the fee each year. He added 
the physician recommendation is not a prescription.

"Otherwise you'd be prescribing an illegal substance," he said.

If public health staff finds the sticker has been removed on most of 
the cards each year at renewal, Chapman said the board will have to 
revisit the program.

Adding the sticker should be cost neutral, Mannel said, if it adds 
any labor costs to the program, "we can include that in the overall fee."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom