|
|
| Supes Panel OKs a Grace Period for Pot Clubs |
|
Posted by CN Staff on August 03, 2006 at 06:43:36 PT By Charlie Goodyear, Chronicle Staff Writer Source: San Francisco Chronicle 
San Francisco -- A Board of Supervisors committee voted Wednesday to relax the city's new medical marijuana regulations to give pot clubs operating in residential neighborhoods a grace period before they have to shut down and relocate. An ordinance passed in November establishing rules for where cannabis outlets can be located, how they are run and by whom restricts them to commercial and industrial areas. The proposed change -- approved by the supervisors' Land Use Committee and sent to the full board for the first of two votes on Tuesday -- would give clubs in residential areas at least a year longer to remain in business while searching for a new location. Critics of marijuana clubs assailed the move as tolerating neighborhood nuisances, while supporters said it was important not to cut off access to the drug as suppliers adapt to the new rules. "This area in the Haight is known as a drug-dealing corner," said Arthur Evans, referring to a section of his neighborhood that is home to a cannabis outlet. "Supervisors, this club has a record of lying in representing itself, and it continues to be in violation of the law that you yourselves passed and promised to enforce." But Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, an advocate for legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes and author of the new pot club regulations, said it isn't surprising that adjustments need to be made to ensure the results are what lawmakers intended, and that should not be a surprise given that that this was an 84-page document initially. This is the first time as a city and county that we have invented a complex regulatory system." In 1996, California voters passed Proposition 215 legalizing pot for people who have a legitimate medical need. Mayor Gavin Newsom, all 11 members of the Board of Supervisors and the city's elected district attorney are on record in support of making marijuana available for medical purposes even though sale of the drug remains illegal under federal law. Until supervisors took action last year, San Francisco officials were in legal limbo, watching as the number of clubs dispensing marijuana grew from nine to more than 40 in a five-year period. Residents across the city complained that the clubs were operating in close proximity to each other, attracting drug dealing and other criminal activity and in some cases doing business near schools or youth centers. The new ordinance, which took effect Dec. 30, prohibits a club from operating within 1,000 feet of a school or youth facility, bans the clubs from residential neighborhoods and requires all clubs -- including those already in business -- to apply for permits from the Planning and Health departments starting next July. Snipped: Complete Article: http://tinyurl.com/j35ms Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA) Related Articles: Fisherman's Wharf Shops Fume Over Pot Club Medical Pot Club Tests San Francisco Law Fisherman's Wharf Bid Tests New Pot Club Laws Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #12 posted by whig on August 04, 2006 at 01:52:53 PT |
| We've been noticed! http://biobrain.blogspot.com/2006/08/welcome.html Hello to Doctor Biobrain, too. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by Wayne on August 03, 2006 at 19:15:33 PT |
| Yeah that Michelle Malkin chic scares me. She really is a hateful person in the truest sense of the word. Any time I've ever seen her on TV (when I used to watch Fox), she started off screaming and never stopped. She never says anything positive...ever. Even if there was no news going on in the world, she could find a reason to hate something like paper plates. She is irritating and she is scary. God help us if she ever runs for public office, or anyone like her. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by lombar on August 03, 2006 at 12:50:43 PT |
| ...is but a small part of the politial spectrum YET it is the ideology that is applied to cannabis. That ideology is based upon the fear of the 'barbarians at the gates' and the underlying belief that those who 'put it on the line' are worth more than the rest of us. The combination of towering ego, desire for control(control freaks), and fear of the unknown creates a mentality that any percieved threat is a cancer that needs to be cut out and that these self-appointed guardians have the right to do it. Most cannabis users I know have more than a passing knowledge of alternative political ideas which in fact threaten the 'old boys club' by acknowledging reality rather than trying to create the illusion of master of reality. The percieved threat of cannabis and its users as the antithesis of society is the basis for the predjudice. WE may indeed be the antithesis of the non-sustainable, fear-hate, warmongering society that we have... but that would mean we actually want to IMPROVE things and that would lead to less profits in ther short term.(but allow there to BE a long term...) So they are willing to KILL(cage, rob, assault, kidnap) in order to coerce us to their ideology whereas I am not. I just want whats best and sometimes that is a 'right wing' idea and sometimes its a 'left wing' idea. The constant vying for dominance is just another distraction from the really bad stuff and by choosing one side or the other, we stop being 'real'... a person is not one way or the other unless they choose to overlook a lot. For instance, the staunchest opponent to capital punishment may still use lethal force to defend himself... and the most right wing-small government types have NO PROBLEM spending billions on the socialist program of prohibition. However being quite left of center myself, I conclude that the 'rights' lack of insight is soley due to a manifest lack of compassion and understanding...(ie compassionate people do not tell huge lies and then start wars on that basis) but then I am biased ;) [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #9 posted by whig on August 03, 2006 at 10:48:07 PT |
| I think this was a pretty insightful explanation of "conservative" thinking at least in some (wingnut) circles. Projection is one of the most common of things, and you can tell a lot about how someone is by what they accuse others of. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #8 posted by FoM on August 03, 2006 at 10:29:51 PT |
| I was cleaning in my kitchen and this thought came to me. It's just prejudice. Pot and young people in the 60s stood up when they saw injustice. They don't like that about that time and they fear it will return. I'm sorry to say to the powers that be but it never went away. It just knows when to be quiet but it doesn't change anyones values. Politicians should understand that a culture as powerful as the 60s was shouldn't be avoided but should help us learn how to make it all work. Thanks for reading my rant. Back to cleaning the kitchen! LOL! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by afterburner on August 03, 2006 at 10:04:17 PT |
| "Why is this nation so slow to learn things? Why are we still hung up on 1960s attitudes 40 years later? Why are we in a war that shows we haven't learned a thing since Vietnam, 40 years ago? We have a national learning disability." Don't forget 69 years later since cannabis prohibition was enacted federally, that too many public and police and politicians are still hung up on prohibition and zero tolerance. They still do not get it that cannabis prohibition enriches the criminals of the black market, ensures harm maximization, corrupts law enforcement, makes cannabis *more* available to children, bankrupts the state and federal treasuries, fosters disrespect for the law and the government by otherwise law-abiding hard-working tax-paying citizens and "guest workers." "A national learning disability," indeed! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #6 posted by FoM on August 03, 2006 at 09:39:49 PT |
| I don't even know or have ever known anyone that is or was a dirty pothead. They hate cannabis because it causes people to use their brains and in turn reason can prevail. We are not suppose to think. That's what they fear I believe. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #5 posted by afterburner on August 03, 2006 at 09:35:12 PT |
| {"medicine-free school zone" is absurd}
and another example of the double-standard and legacy prejudice against our plant and against our people. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by Max Flowers on August 03, 2006 at 09:30:29 PT |
| People are still hung up on the "dirty pothead stigma" from the 1960s. Plain and simple. And absurd is definitely the word for it, when all it takes is an honest look at the huge human damage alcohol causes daily, and then compare to the damage cannabis causes (basically none). Why is this nation so slow to learn things? Why are we still hung up on 1960s attitudes 40 years later? Why are we in a war that shows we haven't learned a thing since Vietnam, 40 years ago? We have a national learning disability. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by whig on August 03, 2006 at 09:21:37 PT |
| Unkat27 asks a very good question. There is absolutely no reason that medical marijuana should not be zoned the same as liquor stores and pharmacies. There needs to be some education of the surrounding community that a cannabis dispensary is not something to be afraid of. Right now it seems like there are many people in California who haven't yet internalized that it is legal in this state for medical patients and there is nothing shameful about it. The idea that you have to comply with some sort of "medicine-free school zone" is absurd. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by unkat27 on August 03, 2006 at 08:40:22 PT |
| I don't live in California, but I assume that this law doesn't apply to either liquor stores or pharmacies? Hmm, is a single block with a pharmacy and a gas station considered a commercial zone? I dunno California too well, but in Mass there are small commercial areas scattered all about residential zones. Some are small, others medium, others large. I also know that the town gets to decide if a house or houses at the edge of commercial areas can be replaced with an expansion of commercial property, if the owners agree to sell. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by FoM on August 03, 2006 at 06:45:00 PT |
| It was many years ago and still is the place where people really seem to understand. [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |