Pubdate: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 Source: Farmington Observer (MI) Copyright: 2011 Observer & Eccentric Newspapers Contact: http://www.hometownlife.com/section/CUSTOMERSERVICE20 Website: http://www.hometownlife.com/section/news06 Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/5251 Author: Stacy Jenkins PROPOSED POT ORDINANCE BURNS OUT IN FARMINGTON HILLS An ordinance amendment dealing with medical marijuana has been snuffed out by the Farmington Hills City Council after a year of study and debate. The council voted 4-3 Monday to deny an ordinance amendment, for reasons that include the one at the core of the issue -- that marijuana is against federal law, even though Michigan voters approved its use, cultivation and distribution for medicinal purposes in November 2008. The public vote on the Medical Marihuana Act has been virtually ignored by lawmakers in Lansing, so there are no provisions in the Act that address the specifics of its use and distribution in Michigan. A reminder came last week from the U.S. Justice Department that marijuana, medical or otherwise, is a controlled substance that remains illegal, and that users, growers and distributors are not immune from prosecution, even if a state has passed a medical marijuana law. Against amendment On that basis, Farmington Hills Mayor Jerry Ellis was among the council members who said they couldn't support a local ordinance. Ellis said he's lived his life without breaking laws -- except for stealing, then immediately returning, a water gun from a Kresge's store when he was eight years old, and a couple of traffic tickets as an adult. "Passing an ordinance we know is contrary to federal law is just kind of wrong," said Ellis. "Why should I pass an ordinance that I know is contrary to federal law? It took me a year to get here." The council and the city's planning commission have considered three or four drafts of an ordinance amendment to address the land use aspects associated with the medical marijuana industry -- including large-scale growing operations, distribution centers and compassion clubs where state card-holders can gather to smoke marijuana. Specifying where and how a "caregiver" can grow and distribute marijuana in a residential zoning was also spelled out in the proposed zoning ordinance amendment. It placed several restrictions that are consistent to any other home occupation. City attorney Steve Joppich noted that the amendment doesn't specify that people are allowed to use marijuana -- it's not a criminal ordinance. It only addresses the land use aspect. Councilman Michael Bridges said he believes marijuana use for medicinal purpose is a good thing, particularly for pain relief, but he voted against the amendment because it doesn't do anything for the patient. "I don't see the value of the ordinance (for patients)," he said. The planning commission, upon its most recent review, decided late last month to recommend the council deny it. Planning commissioners felt the issue remains too fluid, too open for interpretation, too unresolved at this point. In the meantime, a moratorium on all requests relating the medical marijuana operations remains in effect in Farmington Hills through Sept. 8. Joppich said the moratorium could be extended through Nov. 8, but he wouldn't recommend extending it beyond that one-year mark. Ellis said after a year of discussion, he believes the council members are "all on the same page" of supporting the relief of pain for patients who need it. Councilwoman Nancy Bates, who voted against the amendment, said the state Legislature needs to address the specifics of the law. "I cannot pass something that's simply against the law," she said. "The state (Legislature) needs to do its job." Councilman Barry Brickner said that's highly unlikely, since any change to the Act would require a three-quarters majority in the Legislature. Brickner voted in favor of the amendment because the language is consistent with the Act. He was comfortable with placing restrictions on caregivers in residential areas and also on any proposed commercial activity that could come along. He admits there are many ambiguities in the Act. "It's out there, and we have to deal with it," he said. "Doing nothing isn't dealing with it." Misnomer Councilman Ken Massey, who also voted against the amendment, said it shouldn't be called "medical" marijuana because its cultivation, toxicology and dosage are not regulated or tested. "This is not a drug, because it has not been tested. That's why you can't go to a pharmacy and buy 30 days worth of marijuana," he said. "These regulations need to be worked out. The state Legislature needs to do its job." The city council plans to send a resolution to Lansing, urging lawmakers to address the specifics of the Act. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard R Smith Jr.