Pubdate: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 Source: Kalamazoo Gazette (MI) Copyright: 2011 Kalamazoo Gazette Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/vggfBDch Website: http://www.mlive.com/kzgazette/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/588 Author: Paula M. Davis, Kalamazoo Gazette Cited: Read Robinson's the letter here:http://media.mlive.com/kzgazette_impact/other/Clyde%20letter.pdf PROPOSED MARIJUANA BALLOT MEASURE CONCERNS KALAMAZOO CITY ATTORNEY KALAMAZOO -- Kalamazoo city attorney Clyde Robinson has several concerns with a proposed charter amendment that would make the use or possession of a small amount of marijuana the "lowest law enforcement priority" in Kalamazoo, including that, in Robinson's view, the provision seems to seek medical marijuana-type legal immunity for the general population. Robinson highlighted his concerns in a letter informing the Michigan attorney general and governor's offices that the coalition pushing for the city charter amendment had collected the number of valid signatures needed to place the question before city voters. Kalamazoo Coalition for Pragmatic Cannabis Laws has championed making possession of one ounce or less of pot by anyone 21 years and older a bottom-rung issue for Kalamazoo police. In late May, those circulating petitions to get the issue on Kalamazoo's Nov. 8 ballot obtained the 2,579 valid signatures required. Coalition director and founder Louis Stocking said Tuesday that "we are not seeking to extend immunity to the general population. We are seeking fiscal relief for our city." He suggested it costs the city thousands of dollars to process arrests for misdemeanor and felony marijuana violations. Because the proposed ballot question seeks to change the city's charter, both the attorney general's and the governor's office must review the ballot language. Robinson said in his June 27 letter to state officials that he has "several concerns" with the proposed charter amendment. "In attempting to make the possession or consumption of one ounce or less of usable marijuana, the 'lowest law enforcement priority' it appears the proponents of the charter amendment are seeking to extend the immunization from prosecution and law enforcement currently enjoyed by medical marijuana patients and caregivers to the general populous," the city attorney wrote. Robinson informed the state officials that he also found the language of the proposed amendment "troubling for several reasons." He suggested law enforcement might have difficulty accurately determining "when the quantity of marijuana being possessed is one ounce or less." This proposed new section of the Kalamazoo city charter would read in part that, "this lowest law enforcement priority policy shall apply to the cooperation by city law enforcement officers with county, state or federal agents or employees to arrest, cite, investigate, prosecute, or seize property from adults for marijuana offenses." In his letter to state officials, Robinson wrote that "the prohibition on city law enforcement officers cooperating with court, state or federal agents appears to be contrary to" a state law "which seems to require cooperation with the Michigan State Police when requested." This proposed charter amendment defines "adults" as age 21 years and older, but Robinson points to state law defining the age of majority as a person at least 18 years old. "I question whether the city has the legal ability to define who may be considered an 'adult' given the Age of Majority Act," his letter says. Stocking said that the coalition's lawyer suggested "we use the age 21 and older for our amendment due to its use regarding alcohol at our state's level." Another problem in the proposed language, Robinson wrote to state officials, is that marijuana is spelled differently than it is spelled in state laws such as the "Medical Marihuana Act" or in the public health code. Both the governor's and attorney general's offices have received Robinson's letter. AG spokeswoman Joy Yearout said the role of the attorney general's office is "advisory" in this case, reviewing the proposal to ensure it follows Michigan's Home Rule City Act. For example, the proposed amendment must be limited to one subject. The governor's office also re-views the language of the pro-posed amendment. If this were a city charter amendment sought by a legislative body, the governor could refuse to sign it and send it back for reconsideration and a successful two-thirds vote of the body before it could be placed before voters. But because it is an amendment sought by "initiatory petition" versus a legislative body "it shall be submitted to the electors not-withstanding such objections" by the governor. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard R Smith Jr.