Pubdate: Fri, 28 May 2010 Source: Aurora Sentinel (CO) Copyright: 2010 Aurora Sentinel Contact: http://www.aurorasentinel.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1672 Author: Sara Castellanos CANNABIS CAMPAIGN SET TO BEGIN IN AURORA Voters Are Poised To Decide Future Of Medicinal Marijuana Within City Limits This Fall AURORA - Voters will be asked point-blank whether they want to ban dispensaries within city limits if Aurora City Council members follow through with a proposal to introduce the item on the November ballot. Council members agreed May 21 at their spring workshop that voters should be asked whether the city's doors should be closed to dispensaries, and they also said the city's current moratorium on dispensaries should be extended to July 1, 2011. The council still has to formally vote on the issue. The Colorado Legislature passed a law this year that allows cities to ban dispensaries at their own discretion or allow voters to decide whether they want to ban medical marijuana dispensaries in their city. Under the measure, a city can only extend a moratorium until July 1, 2011. The new law allows for ballot language that can only ask voters whether they want to prohibit the operation of medical marijuana centers, grow operations, and manufacturers' licenses for medical marijuana-infused products. The city won't include language about location of dispensaries and other restrictions, said the city's attorney, Charlie Richardson. "We want to stay as close as possible to the state law," Richardson said. He said any action that the city takes on medical marijuana would likely be wrought with legal issues because of controversies surrounding medical marijuana, and advocates won't want to wait until mid-2011 to have dispensaries in the city. "Under any of these scenarios, some would say there may be the possibility of litigation or there will be the possibility of litigation," Richardson said. Medical marijuana supporters say they have enough evidence to suggest that voters would approve regulated marijuana dispensaries within their city. About 65 percent of people polled throughout the state said they approve of dispensaries, said Mason Tvert, executive director of the Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation. "I think there is going to be a lot of support," Tvert said of the potential ballot initiative in Aurora. "I think people of Aurora are sensible and recognize that individuals need a local place to access their legal medicine." He said the proliferation of dispensaries in Aurora would be a revenue generator for the city. "Right now they are requiring all of their residents to purchase a product that's in high demand from other cities," he said. "Not only is it a fiscal mistake to ban dispensaries, but it's really uncompassionate." Even if voters in Aurora in November approve dispensaries, the city may not see its first one open until the moratorium is lifted because council members suggested they extend the moratorium to the maximum limit. The city's moratorium on dispensaries has already been in place for eight months. "That's a mistake," Tvert said. "They are delaying the inevitable, and Aurora is putting itself at risk to potentially have to defend itself in court and spend funds on that." If dispensaries don't start cropping up in Aurora soon, the city could face some legal ramifications, said Brian Vicente, a lawyer and executive director of Sensible Colorado, a medical marijuana advocacy group. Vicente calls the moratorium is a 'de facto ban' which doesn't correlate with the state's laws. "The state ... allows people to access medical marijuana and allows the dispensary models to exist at a local level," he said. "I think there's a good chance of a lawsuit that the city would have to pay for if they continue to ban dispensaries." The majority of voters in Aurora approved Amendment 20, which legalized medical marijuana, according to data introduced at the spring workshop. Judging by that fact, some council members suggested that the majority of voters would approve of medical marijuana dispensaries in Aurora as well. "My preference would be to ban it in Aurora. But given the fact that people voted in favor (of Amendment 20), we can talk all day about whether anything has changed," said Councilman Bob Broom. "I'd say let's go to the voters to see if they want to ban it or not." But Mark Ratdke, a policy advocate for the Colorado Municipal League, says voter sentiment might not be as prone to medical marijuana dispensaries as marijuana advocates tend to believe. "Many people I have spoken to did not envision these retail storefront operations when they voted for (Amendment 20)," said Mark Ratdke, policy advocate for the Colorado Municipal League. "They envisioned what we had in the first seven years, where we had patients who were under the care of caregivers, and it wasn't what we have today." Since the bill just passed this month, Radtke said he has not yet heard of any city other than Aurora that has proposed to leave the decision of whether to ban dispensaries up to the voters. "It's awfully early," he said. "Lots of people are scratching their heads and deciding what to do now." Before the November ballot item is introduced, the city should already have some regulations in place regarding dispensaries, said Councilman Ryan Frazier at the spring workshop. "We shouldn't wait until the vote is cast to start working on rules and regulations," Frazier said. "We should have something that we could have ready to give to the public to digest and give us feedback on." Mayor Ed Tauer said the dispensaries should be in industrial areas only. Under municipal rules, Aurora is allowed to make zoning regulations for businesses in which ever way they deem appropriate. Councilwoman Renie Peterson suggested that the city propose zoning regulations with the ballot item in November. "There are people that would vote for it if they knew it was not going to be next to their school or in their neighborhood," Peterson said. "There are people that would be in support of it in that case but would not if they had no idea." Richardson said that zoning regulations could not be introduced with the ballot item because the state law precludes the city from doing that, and because that would mean that future city council members would have to follow the previous council's regulations, even if they didn't agree with them. "It's inconsistent with the question," Richardson said. "In a question that says 'to prohibit' you wouldn't want to say 'subject to reasonable regulations.'" The conversation turned from marijuana dispensaries to caregiver operations towards the end of the spring workshop discussion. The bill that was passed earlier this year does not allow cities to ban "caregivers" within city limits, but councilwoman Sue Sandstrom said she'd like to see stricter regulations and enforcement of rules regarding caregiver operations. "We're probably going to extend the moratorium and go to the ballot, but none of that effects caregiver operations," Sandstrom said. "I would like to see something going forward to deal with caregiver operations." Caregivers can grow six marijuana plants and serve up to five patients, and Sandstrom says there is a caregiver operation in her ward that is causing controversy. "There is one caregiver operation that is causing havoc," she said. Since January 2009, there have been more than 45 grow operations in homes within the city that the Aurora Police Department has identified, said Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates. "We see that it causes anxiety because of electrical issues, walls being taken out, high intensity heat lamps," Oates said. "We're seeing that it calls out for some type of regulations." - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D