Do you grow Medical Cannabis? Does someone you know?
Is that grower the best neighbor he/she can be? Are others in the area disturbed by excessive traffic in and out at all hours, grow or security lights that shine onto or into the property of others, or other actions which might upset those who live near a grow site?
OMMP growers are licensed to grow for patients who need the medicine. Sounds rather simple, doesn't it? But, apparently, that license to grow is being misused by a tiny fraction of providers, and ALL growers could face severe changes in their gardening options if that tiny fraction does not wake up and "get with the program".
Complaints from neighborhoods are causing legislators and elected officials all over the state to rethink the current patient/grower arrangement ... and not in a way which will benefit patients. There is everything to lose here, including the right to grow at all. If neighborhood complaints continue to cross the desks of those who represent ALL Oregonians, they will be forced to act. They could pass new legislation regarding land use, restrict the hours at which patients or caregivers could pick up medicine, etc. We need everyone licensed under OMMP to be sure that their grow site is not a source of neighborhood trouble.
If you are a grower, take a look at your grow site. Would YOU like to live next door to you? If you are a patient, respect your grower and the neighborhood. Don't arrive at 2 AM with the stereo blaring to pick up your medicine. If we can't work out these issues among ourselves, a solution will be imposed on us. And we won't like it.
The OMMP is a treasure that is relied upon by over 23,000 people. It will only take a handful of bad apples to destroy the entire barrel for everyone. Be sure that if complaints are aimed in your direction that they are groundless and easily proven to be so when someone comes to investigate. Be a good neighbor. That's all it takes.
Well, there goes the neighborhood!
Jackson County Commissioners decide that Medical Marijuana Garden Complaints cannot be addressed at the county level.
01-20-10
Jackson County commissioners Tuesday decided to prod legislators for a solution to neighbor complaints about legal marijuana gardens rather than pursue local controls.
Madding said a local ordinance, which likely would be challenged in the courts, would require a significant increase in the cost of code enforcement.
Commissioner Jack Walker said the current law is difficult to enforce because of the way it's written.
"No way in the world can you regulate it," he said.
The county drafted a concept law and sent it to legislators asking for more regulation of medical marijuana grow sites, including alerting law enforcement about new gardens.
Legislators might not carry the bill forward for the county until they see how voters respond to several initiatives regarding medical marijuana that could be on the November ballot.
Mel Barniskis, information manager for Southern Oregon NORML, a cannabis resource and information center at 332 W. Sixth St., Medford, criticized the tenor of the county's proposed legislation.
"It seems to serve the purposes of law enforcement, but doesn't address the welfare of patients," she said. "It seems to put more hardships on patients."
Commissioners propose limiting the amount of marijuana on hand at any one time and restricting patients to possessing one ounce. Instead of six plants for a patient, commissioners propose allowing only two mature plants plus two seedlings.
"Allowing so much marijuana provides a clear opportunity for abuse," the concept legislation stated.
With 2,418 medical marijuana cardholders, Jackson County has the third highest number of patients using the drug behind Multnomah and Lane counties, according to the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program.
Under current law, a grower can have up to six mature plants and 18 starts and seedlings per patient for up to four patients.
Barniskis said the concept legislation shows a lack of understanding about the way medical marijuana is grown and used.
Barniskis said there is a big difference in the amount of marijuana that can be grown indoors versus outdoors. An indoor plant generally produces several ounces, while an outdoor plant can produce a couple of pounds, she said. Having additional plants helps ensure a grower won't experience a complete crop failure should bug infestations or mold occur.
Patients' needs for the medication vary wildly, she said. Some ingest the drug because they can't or don't like to smoke it, which requires more plant material to produce the medicinal effect, she said. Some patients require more than an ounce a week to deal with a particular health problem, Barniskis said.
Patients sometimes drive long distances to obtain their medication, so limiting them to just one ounce would also be a problem, she said.
Commissioners want to prohibit grow sites within 1,000 feet of a school. Barniskis said her organization encourages renters who want to grow medical marijuana to move to a different area. In other cases, where someone owns a house, she said NORML strongly advises the growers who are near schools to make sure the plants aren't visible and to take precautions to reduce the smell.
Commissioners acknowledged that initiatives in the works could change Oregon's marijuana laws.
In particular, Initiative 28 proposes creating a regulatory process through the Oregon Department of Human Services to keep better track of growing operations.
John Sajo, executive director of Voter Power, an organization backing Initiative 28, said if voters enact the initiative, it would create more regulatory authority and would resolve some of the problems such as large gardens.
He said the initiative would provide a role for county government to potentially enforce zoning restrictions on marijuana gardens.
Commissioners said it would be too complicated to enact a local ordinance to deal with odors, traffic, lights and other issues that have been reported over pot gardens in rural areas.
"Quite frankly, smell would be difficult to regulate," said Kelly Madding, director of Development Services.
She said the legal gardens are considered a not-for-profit agricultural crop, so they don't fall under the same constraints as a business.
Oregon Court of Appeals upholds Medical Marijuana patients' right to obtain a concealed handgun permit.
In May of 2007, a Jackson County Medical Marijuana patient filed a renewal for her concealed handgun permit. The application was denied by the Jackson County Sheriff's Office based on the applicant's disclosure that she used Medical Marijuana. She fought the decision in Circuit court, and won. The sheriff was required to approve her application, but appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals.
On June 16th, the Appellate Court released its ruling, which upheld the lower court's decision. Using Medical Marijuana is NOT sufficient reason to deny a patient a concealed handgun permit. See the full ruling >> HERE <<.
The issue in this case hinged, as does so much, on the disconnect between State Medical Marijuana laws and Federal prohibition of Marijuana overall. As long as Federal prohibition remains in effect, taxpayers and citizens will have to continue to fignt these issues in court, expending inordinate amounts of time, money and energy in resolving them. Until the Federal Government bows to the will of the people, we can expect more of these legal challenges to surface, clogging court schedules, enriching the legal community, and making patients feel as though their fundamental rights as US citizens are being thrown under the bus, simply because of their personal choice to handle their medical issues in a way that is most effective for them.
We applaud the Court of Appeals for their willingness to recognize that using Medical Marijuana does not invalidate someone's Constitutional Rights - in this case, Amendment II - the right to bear arms. We only regret that the Federal Government's position on Marijuana forced this case to even be heard in the first place. This can be changed, but only if enough of us care enough to work for those changes. Contact our Federal legislators, and express your frustrations with the Federal feet-dragging on Marijuana legalization.
Rep. Greg Walden - US House of RepresentativesSen. Jeff Merkley, US Senate
843 East Main Street, Suite 400 10 South Bartlett Street, Suite 201
Medford, OR, 97504 Medford, OR, 97501
Phone: (541) 776-4646 Phone: (541) 608-9102
Fax: (541) 779-0204
Contact Rep. Greg Walden via Web Form. Contact Sen. Jeff Merkley via Web Form
Oregon Board of Pharmacy drops cannabis to Schedule II
On June 16, the Oregon Board of Pharmacy announced their decision to reschedule cannabis as a Schedule II drug. While removal from Schedule I does acknowledge cannabis as a legitimate medicine, it is the belief of many that a lower schedule would have been far more appropriate. Plans for an appeal of this ruling are being made at this time.
Marinol, the synthetic form of THC, is only a Schedule III drug. There was no explanation from the Board justifying classifying cannabis at Schedule II, while its man-made substitute is listed as Schedule III. (The higher the schedule, the more dangerous the drug).
Drug Scheduling is based on 3 factors -
The potential for abuse
Medical effectiveness
Potential for addiction and dependency
Marijuana, therefore, according to the Oregon Board of Pharmacy, has:
(A) a high potential for abuse.
(B) a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.
(C) Abuse of the drug or other substances may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.
Just for comparison - other Schedule II drugs include cocaine, oxycodone, opium, methadone and morphine. These are marijuana's new neighbors in Oregon.
Of course, this is relatively symbolic, at least until the Federal Government reduces the scheduling of cannabis at the Federal level. There is, and has been, a petition to do just that, which the Feds have been ignoring since 2002. Americans for Safe Access has been following this issue. Click >>HERE<< for more info.
