Pubdate: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 Source: Ukiah Daily Journal, The (CA) Copyright: 2012 The Ukiah Daily Journal Contact: http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/feedback Website: http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/581 Author: Tiffany Revelle COUNTY MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW REVISION PROPOSED The Mendocino County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday will consider eliminating the county's medical marijuana permit program in answer to recent legal threats from the U.S. Attorney's Office. County Counsel Jeanine Nadel is recommending the board adopt a changed version of County Code Chapter 9.31, which currently allows medical marijuana collectives to grow up to 99 plants per parcel if they get a permit for an exemption to the county's 25-plant limit from the Sheriff's Office and follow a set of rules. Nadel is proposing to cut the ordinance's provisions that have to do with the exemption, the permits and inspection requirements, shrinking the 21-page document to eight pages. "This is not telling people they can't grow marijuana, as per the state attorney general's guidelines; it's telling local government that we can't collect money for it," Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman said. If the board adopts the changed ordinance, it would still allow growers to have up to 25 plants per parcel for medical use. Growers could still voluntarily buy zip ties the Sheriff's Office sells for $25 each to show the plants are grown in compliance with state law. If approved, the ordinance would be back for a second reading Feb. 14, and would be effective 30 days after that. Allman, whose department has collected about $500,000 in zip-tie and medical marijuana permit fees, said he doesn't yet know how the change might affect his finances. "Through June 30, we're OK," he said. The question that remains unanswered is how the permit program's elimination would affect his 2012-13 budget, according to Allman. No layoffs are planned for the near future, he noted. The county first adopted its medical marijuana cultivation ordinance in 2008 with a 25-plant limit, and revised it in 2010 to give the county a code enforcement hammer for neighborhood and environmental concerns, and to set up the 99-plant exemption and permitting process. At least part of the reason for the sudden about-face has to do with a legal threat from the U.S. Attorney's Office, delivered to the county at a Jan. 3 meeting. It's unclear how much the proposed changes have to do with the state Supreme Court's decision earlier this week to review the Pack v. City of Long Beach case. The court's October ruling dismantled the city's similar permitting program on the premise that it conflicts with federal law, which regards any marijuana use as illegal. The court found that the city's ordinance crosses the line of decriminalizing cultivation, use and possession of medical marijuana under California's Compassionate Use Act of 1996. Requiring a permit, according to the ruling, implies that the city is authorizing collectives to operate. In a Friday e-mail, 2nd District Supervisor John McCowen, who helped rewrite 9.31 to allow the exemption and permits in 2010, notes that the state Supreme Court "announced a couple of days ago that they will review the Pack decision which held that local jurisdictions may regulate, but not permit, medical marijuana," and goes on to say the Pack case has little to do with the proposed changes. "It may be assumed that the federal threat was consistent with the Pack decision, but did not rely on it," he wrote. "Therefore, the state Supreme court review of Pack does not affect changes that are required to address the federal threat." Nadel wrote in an agenda summary for the board that she is proposing the changes "due to concerns expressed by federal authorities and the recent ruling in Pack v. Superior Court (City of Long Beach)." Nadel said last month that her office was waiting for further developments, including an effort to take the ruling off the books as precedent for future court decisions. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom