Getting a Whiff of Reefer Madness

Having medical marijuana in the workplace will be an interesting frontier. Will employees be imbibing a drug or medicine? What’s next? Meth to increase productivity at work? 

In light of the increasing acceptance of medical marijuana, some employers are even bypassing drug testing. 

For the first two weekends in July, in true L.A. fashion, there was a marijuana farmers market in Boyle Heights where people with medical marijuana cards could buy direct from vendors instead of dealing with dispensary markups. 

On Tuesday, a judge issued a temporary restraining order on behalf of the City Attorney’s office blocking the farmers market from operating. City Attorney Mike Feuer said the market violated Proposition D which restricts the number of marijuana dispensaries allowed in the city and other land use issues. As some of you may be aware, there are way more than 134 dispensaries in the city. 

The writing’s on the wall: the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) is losing their footing on the war on drugs and particularly marijuana as more states move to legalize it. Marijuana is still listed as a Schedule I drug which is  "defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. 

Schedule I drugs are the most dangerous drugs of all the drug schedules with potentially severe psychological or physical dependence." Marijuana is under the same Schedule as heroin. 

Cocaine, meth, and oxycodone are considered Schedule II drugs defined as "drugs with a high potential for abuse, less abuse potential than Schedule I drugs, with use potentially leading to severe psychological or physical dependence."

I don’t know how anyone could argue that oxycodone has a lesser abuse potential than marijuana. A few years ago, there were rashes of pharmacy robberies for OxyContin (oxycodone hydrochloride) which is basically heroin. The chemical dependency on some of these prescription drugs is unparalleled. 

As you can see, the DEA should update drug schedules for common sense’s sake but they have been so reluctant to reschedule marijuana that I don’t see any change happening to the other substances listed. 

The back and forth between California and the federal government regarding marijuana legislation drives me crazy. With the extent of my power, I’ve introduced several resolutions and motions basically begging for federal intervention:

• My resolution in opposition to H.R. 499, the "Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2013" which would "remove marijuana in any form from all schedules of controlled substances under the Controlled Substances Act."  

• My resolution in opposition to H.R. 710, the "Truth in Trials Act" which "allows a person facing prosecution or a proceeding for any marijuana-related offense under any Federal law shall have the right to introduce evidence demonstrating that the marijuana-related activities for which the person stands accused were performed in compliance with State law regarding the medical use of marijuana, or that the property which is subject to a proceeding was possessed in compliance with State law regarding the medical use of marijuana" and, should the person be found innocent, the marijuana seized would be returned to the person.  

• My resolution in opposition to H.R. 689, the "States Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act" which would reschedule marijuana out of Schedules I or II and would officially recognize medical marijuana for medicinal/therapeutic purposes. 

● My resolution in opposition to H.R. 784, the "States Medical Marijuana Property Rights Protection Act" that would exempt "real property, including any right, title, and interest in the whole of any lot or tract of land and any appurtenances or improvements from forfeiture due to medical marijuana-related conduct that is authorized by State law."  

Read the letter I sent to Speaker of the House, John Boehner earlier this year expressing my disgust with H.R. 784 in which I state, "Providing a blanket exemption to real property from civil forfeiture due to medical marijuana related conduct runs counter to the fact that forfeiture is a invaluable tool in the prosecution of drug charges."  

• My resolution in opposition to S.B. 439, which protects existing marijuana dispensaries that comply with California law from being federally prosecuted (because marijuana still seen as drug under federal law) 

• My resolution in opposition to A.B. 604 which would create a medical marijuana regulation board within the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, in turn regulating marijuana like alcohol. 

• My resolution in opposition to A.B. 473 which has the same recommendations as A.B. 604 

• My motion asking for a report with recommendations for creating a Citywide on and off duty policy governing City employees' use, contact and/or association with medical marijuana                            

• My motion where I asked for a ban of all medical marijuana dispensaries in the City 

• My motion dictating parameters for where medical marijuana dispensaries could be located 

As you’ll notice, for most of my items, Council simply files them or sends them to never-never land, aka, various committees to die. 

{module [862]} {module [662]} 

I want to know, is it true that the President’s administration went on record this week to say that marijuana legislation is a states’ rights issue? Well that’s it then. Pass it to the left hand side for me.

It may not happen within my final Council term, but marijuana legislation is coming to California and I’m curious as to how life will change - for the better or worse because of it.

(Bernard Parks is Los Angeles Councilman for the 8^th Council District. He is also a former Los Angeles Police Chief. He can be reached at [email protected]) 

-cw

CityWatch

Vol 12 Issue 59

Pub: Jul 22, 2014