Town Puts Medical Pot on Hold

Town Puts Medical Pot on Hold
Posted by CN Staff on May 25, 2005 at 07:29:54 PT
By David Bunker
Source: Tahoe Daily Tribune
Truckee, California -- Prospective medical marijuana shop owners and their customers will be waiting to inhale for at least 45 days until leaders here develop zoning regulations for such establishments.Last week, Truckee's council members voted to prohibit medical marijuana shops in town for 45 days. The prohibition, which comes following a string of inquiries about locating a cannabis club in town, will also give residents a chance to voice their opinions on medical marijuana shops in Truckee before a decision is made, said Truckee Town Manager Tony Lashbrook.
"What we are trying to do is call a time-out so we can have a typical Truckee process," said Lashbrook.The concern over unregulated marijuana shops is being faced by cities across the state. Medical marijuana shops were not foreseen as a potential commercial use when many city guidelines where finalized.Now, cities find themselves adopting the moratoriums to prevent "someone coming in with an application with no rules in place," said Dennis Crabb, the town of Truckee's attorney . The council's unanimous vote on the moratorium belied a lengthy discussion that signaled the council members' varied views on medical marijuana issues.Councilwoman Beth Ingalls said that the temporary moratoriums have often morphed into long-term prohibitions on medical marijuana shops in other cities."I'm not comfortable with the trend of what moratoriums are turning into, which is an outright ban without community involvement," Ingalls said.But Councilman Richard Anderson said that Truckee must be aware of the problems that have sprung up around marijuana shops in other towns. "It's a nuisance issue," said Anderson. "It's simply prudent to adopt a moratorium for 45 days to give us time to address this as a town."A change to the development code to add special regulations for marijuana shops would take more than 45 days, Councilman Josh Susman pointed out. The issue would have to be reviewed by the planning commission, the town council and then become part of the code after a 30-day waiting period. "This is not a 45-day moratorium, this is at minimum a six month (moratorium)," said Susman. In the end the council agreed that an in-depth discussion of the other issues surrounding medical marijuana and its place in Truckee would be discussed at a later meeting."I can only support the moratorium with the intent that we are not taking a position now," said Susman.Town employees will present the town council with proposed amendments to the development code to address medical marijuana shops at a later meeting.Complete Title: Town Puts Medical Pot on Hold: Truckee Council Votes To Prohibit Marijuana Shops Until Zoning Regulations Can Be StudiedSource: Tahoe Daily Tribune (South Lake Tahoe, CA)Author: David BunkerPublished: May 25, 2005Copyright: 2005 Tahoe Daily TribuneContact: editor tahoedailytribune.comWebsite: Medical Marijuana Archives
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help

Comment #5 posted by Richard Zuckerman on May 25, 2005 at 10:43:54 PT:
While checking, last night, I noticed that a federal judge has ordered the Marijuana Legalization Initiative to be put on the 2006 Election Ballot. Unfortunately, I also noticed that the Nevada State Senate has a movement to abolish the Initiative process! What I want to know is whether the Nevada State Senate has made prior attempts to abolish the Initiative or whether this movement is in Retaliation for the Marijuana Legalization Initiative? At least the timing of their movement to abolish the Initiative is indicative of Retaliation!Richard Paul Zuckerman, Box 159, Metuchen, New Jersey, 08840-0159.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by FoM on May 25, 2005 at 10:33:47 PT
About Andrea Barthwell
How can she be proud of helping to defeat medical marijuana in Illinois and also be an advocate for medical marijuana in spray form for Sativex? Isn't that a conflict of interests?It's like me saying I want the laws changed so people can have an excellent herbal plant and then turn around and say that I don't want people to have the same herbal plant.I really mind double standards.Let our yes mean yes and our no mean no.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by runderwo on May 25, 2005 at 10:28:12 PT
"She helped defeat an Illinois bill to legalize marijuana."  A bill to legalize MEDICAL marijuana. Wow, suddenly she doesn't sound as noble, eh?"*Random student drug testing is a valuable tool that gives students another reason to say no when approached to use drugs,*"Since when does anyone need a reason? Isn't an answer of "no" enough? How about "my parents would kick my ass" or something along those lines? "They have drug testing" isn't a free pass out of a coercive situation. Sample coercive replies: "I've been here 4 years and I've never been tested or known anyone who has been tested... cmon man" "So what, you aren't even in any sports... cmon man" "Just one time won't show up on the test... cmon man" etc. I see no way in which this improves the situation of a youngster who either associates regularly with bad characters or who is caught in a tough situation at a party. I still think the parental excuse is the strongest.I love how the article fails to mention the taxpayer costs of random drug testing and the unintended consequences. For example, Billy is caught with THC in his system. As a result, he is barred from participating in extracurricular activities. What exactly is this going to accomplish in terms of helping Billy have the opportunity to improve himself as a person? This is nothing more than segregation based on the prejudicial notion that a child who receives a positive drug test is somehow better off separated from "privileged" activities. It is intentionally conflated with the issue of performance enhancing drugs in athletics so that these moral warriors obtain a crack to insert their pry bar into.Unfortunately, their deceptive agenda ensnares otherwise well-meaning people who can't see through what they are trying to pull off here, why it will fail as a deterrent to teenage drug use and perhaps even contribute to the problem, and how much this useless policy will cost the taxpayer. All the average person hears is that it will prevent cheating in sports and at worst it might hurt some "druggies" who are scorned anyway.Hell, if random drug testing is going to be the norm in public schools, I think the better policy would be to *require* the student to participate in at least one extracurricular activity per semester, and make it a graded effort. What the hell are these people thinking turning away kids who more than likely could use their help?Just another nail in the coffin of the ailing American public school system. You'd think they could find better things to spend money on, besides this futile exercise that serves no more purpose than conditioning youngsters for the rest of their lives to expect invasion of privacy by law enforcement and moral busybodies.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by FoM on May 25, 2005 at 08:20:27 PT
Article About Andrea Barthwell
Drug Forum Draws National InterestBy Rusty Carter, The Virginia GazettePublished: May 25, 2005WILLIAMSBURG -- Drug prevention is so high on the radar screen that the White House is watching how a local initiative plays out. The Historic Triangle Substance Abuse Coalition is hosting a town hall Wednesday night about the pros and cons of testing student athletes. A press conference has been scheduled to draw more attention, and a dozen students were planning a pro-testing picket. 
The WJC School Board has heard two presentations on drug testing but has deferred voting until after the forum. Local parent Dee McHenry, who helped organize a parental task force seeking testing for high school athletes, recently called the Office of National Drug Control Policy to request one of two booklets on student drug testing the agency publishes. “I'd never actually talked to anyone there before,” McHenry said Tuesday. “But when they heard it was Williamsburg, they said they were very aware of our efforts and their drug czar [John P. Walters] wanted to know how it turns out.” More promotion came from Dr. Andrea Barthwell, herself a former deputy drug czar who now works on the local level in Chicago against marijuana usage. She helped defeat an Illinois bill to legalize marijuana. Barthwell joined the Bush administration in January 2001. When she left in July 2004, she was in charge of “Demand Reduction,” which included prevention and intervention. “When I got home, I was confronted by my son's middle school principal because they had found a fifth-grader with marijuana,” Barthwell said. “I had been working on the national level against drugs but hadn't done enough at the local level to protect my own child.” Why Williamsburg? “The students are asking for it,” Barthwell said. “They're asking for help from responsible adults.” Barthwell enlisted the help of John Pastuovic, whose Chicago public relations firm specializes in issues promotion. He's sent alerts to local and national media about Wednesday's press conference, including to the networks, cable news and major newspapers. “There's been lots of interest,” he said. “No commitments until the last minute, but I think they do that to harden my arteries.” Should the national media turn out, they'll get some visuals to shoot. Students advocating drug testing plan to hold an informational picket outside the library. “Random student drug testing is a valuable tool that gives students another reason to say no when approached to use drugs,” said Christine Bottles, a junior at Jamestown High. Pastuovic said the issue appealed to him because he has two young children. “I'd like to see a policy in place so that kids like my own have a good reason to say no if they're offered drugs. “Random drug testing is important because children become addicted more rapidly than adults, and their recovery is less likely,” said DeForest Rathbone, chairman of National Institute of Citizen Anti-drug Policy, in a news release that will go out Wednesday. “The intent of this program is not to punish students. The goal is to deter kids from using drugs.” Watchdog groups could see the issue here as a test case for how difficult it is to implement a drug-testing policy at the grassroots. If the effort fails, it could serve as a live manual on what to do differently. Discussion over drug testing began almost a year ago, and the parent task force pushing for implementation was formed last fall. The group hopes to have testing in place by September, but that's iffy even if the School Board approves the plan in June. McHenry said she e-mailed numerous national groups looking for information and advice, but she never expected the focus on what's happening here. “What I hope is that it causes the School Board to say ‘This is bigger than Williamsburg.'” Copyright: 2005 The Virginia Gazette,0,2984443.story?coll=va-news
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by cannaman on May 25, 2005 at 08:17:19 PT
Meanwhile the sick and dying are still sick and dying while these bozos decide the fate of a legal medicine in California, moratoriums what will they think of next.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment