If you do not see anything or are having problems using this page click here.

August 20, 2012 – Digest for s..[email protected] – 17 Messages in 9 Topics

    Mickey Martin <s..[email protected]> Aug 20 08:31AM -0700  

    CALI-WEED 2014! The battle begins?
    Posted by Mickey Martin on August 20th, 2012
    So the latest word from Camp Kubby is that forces are coming together to create an adult use legalization initiative for November….wait. I mean November 2104. Here is the message Kubby sent out over the weekend entitled “The California Super Initiative”:
    Judge Gray, Stephen Collett, and I will be at Seattle Hempfest and we have the same message to share with our fellow activists:
    >There is a very good chance we can pass a least one statewide voter initiative this November.  If that happens, we need to all come together and create a CALIFORNIA SUPER INITIATIVE, which truly represents us all and will gain the respect and support of our major donors. Without such a consensus, our hopes for funding are greatly diminished.  Given that it will take at least $3 million to win in California and that the major donors rarely give more than $1/2 million, it is clear that we have our work cut out for us.  There is no limit on how many authors and proponents can be listed for a voter initiative, so everyone has much to gain and little to lose by joining together now for victory in 2014 in California.
    When I saw the phrase, “There is a very good chance we can pass a least one statewide voter initiative this November,” I thought I had bumped my head and missed some path to victory for this year. But, alas, it was just another Kubby odd way of phrasing things, and by the end of the paragraph I understood we were talking 2014.
    Yay. What a great reminder that we could not get our shit together to make it for 2012, and that it will be at least 2 more years before we can put another initiative on the ballot, and we get to do it in a non-Presidential election year to boot. I am very excited! (Did I sell it?).
     
    So then another message came through from Camp Kubby, complete with picture of the new alliance between the folks who did Repeal Cannabis Prohibition, Like Wine, UFCW, and Emerald Grower’s Association. Here is that message and picture:
    Coming Together for Victory in 2014
    >Members of the Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act and Regulate Marijuana Like Wine, along with two top Union officials, as well as representatives from the cannabis grower community have followed the lead of Judge James Gray and pledged to work together after the November election to draft a new California Super Initiative.
    >We invite you to take a similar pledge and join our effort to create a unified team, a winning initiative, and a stunning victory in 2014.
    To pledge or not to pledge? That is the question…..Whether it is nobler to cooperate on an effort in which you are skeptical, or to take arms against what could be a sea of trouble.
    Do not get me wrong. I am down for the effort. But just as “Like Wine” had issues maintaining and controlling the message, and made one poor decision after another, any effort where Steve Kubby is front and center is troublesome to me. Why? It is not because Steve is not one of the smartest guys in the room. He certainly is. It is because he has zero ability to provide messaging and composure in his approach, and his antics are generally a large distraction from the work that needs to be done. Call me skeptical.
     
    But when your initial roll-out for an effort are two poorly drafted emails from Steve Kubby, it makes me wonder why we are even going to bother. I have seen this show before, and it sucks IMO. If people want to make this a real and meaningful effort then let us do that. But do it right. Formulate the core group, set sound strategies for outreach to the community, maybe write a vision and objectives statement that spells out principles of the effort, and open up a discussion within the larger community as to what they want to see from the effort. Maybe a democratically elected Board would help, instead of just letting the first person to run out the door and say “We are doing this. Do you want to join us” be the leadership on the project. I mean, no offense…..but if we are going to repeat the same failures of earlier this year, only under one flag instead of three, I am still not thrilled….
     
    But that does not mean I am not interested in the effort, though. While I still firmly believe that this will be a moot point by 2014, and weed will indeed be legal due to social change and demand from the masses, I am still glad to give the effort my attention and experience. I am glad to help draft a “super initiative,” but I am not willing to play bullshit “what if” games with the lowest common denominators to do it.
     
    So let us lay some ground rules.
    * The first motherfucker to mention Monsanto or outsourcing growing to Mexico gets bitch-slapped.
    * The first person to call another “cointelpro” gets socked in the throat. All people working on the campaign should be able to vote in California.
    * All public messaging needs to be approved by a messaging committee and vetted before released.
    * A survey of certain points of the initiative should be done to allow the community at large to have their input on controversial matters.
    * The process should be open and transparent, with any group publishing all happening, meeting minutes, and strategy objectives for the community to explore and understand in full.
    * There HAS GOT TO BE an appointed liaison that is willing to interact with the community, and respond in a timely manner to all questions and concerns professionally and respectfully.
    * ALL organizations, INCLUDING ASA, need to come on board to WHOLE-HEARTEDLY support the effort. I do not want to play the “what about the sick people” game on this one. The bottom line is that anyone advocating for patients to have more access to more affordable medicine should be 100% on board with an effort for adult use. Anyone claiming to want to stop the backlash happening in the medical cannabis community has got to be honest and upfront, declaring that the best solution to creating a distinct and respected medical system is to remove the adult enjoyable use crowd from the doctor’s office.
    * And most of all….we must be willing to have tough conversations with one another and learn to develop solutions to our differences. It is easy to demean one another. It is more difficult to hear a person’s point, do the research, and make a valid and substancial argument to change their mind. People do not work to do that in this community; as if it is too much trouble to actually defend a position, and make a valid argument to support it.
     
    Do not let my thoughts here discourage this effort. I just want to put out my positions and reservations early in the process, in hopes of setting a precedent for open and honest dialogue and discussion. Can this be done? Sure. Will it take a perfect effort to make it happen. Probably. Do I currently see the initial roll-out and team gathered as the beginning of the “perfect” storm…time will tell. I would be silly if I told you that I was not a little cynical, just considering how this story came to me.
    But I am happy to be a part of the effort moving forward, if this is the direction the community sees as most beneficial. I hope there is a dynamic leader in the mix who is going to be able to put the square peg in the round hole and get the community to come together over the CA SUPER INITIATIVE. Otherwise, it will be very exciting to watch another episode of “Three Monkeys Fucking A Football.”
    Godspeed, California…..
     
    Mickey Martin
    T-Comp Consulting Director
    Author of Medical Marijuana 101
    www.cannabiswarrior.com
    www.tcompconsulting.com
    s..[email protected]
    (phone#-removed)
    http://twitter.com/micKEYmarTIN
    http://twitter.com/CANNABISconsult
     
    ***The views expressed in this communication are not necessarily the views of T-Comp Consulting, Tainted Compassion, Cannabis Warrior any other group I am affiliated with.***

     

 

 

    David Malmo-Levine <s..[email protected]> Aug 20 03:58PM -0700  

    > talk with him I believe he will honestly tell you that he does not believe
    > people should be able to cultivate and be in control of their own medicinal
    > cannabis. Am I wrong?
     
    Yeah. You're wrong.
     
    Judge Grey signed on to RMLW, which allowed home cultivation.
     
     
     
     
    > This was the impression that I received while speaking personally with
    > him.
     
    I believe his actions speak louder than your impressions.
     
     
     
     
     
    > line "medicinal cannabis patients may possess and transport" and leave out
    > CULTIVATION again, people are going to jump right on it as people noticed
    > this glaring obliteration the last time.
     
    Neither RMLW nor Repeal had threatened med pot rights. Since the people
    behind these two initiatives are the back-bone of this new coalition, one
    has no reason to suspect that 215 rights will be threatened this time
    around by these people.
     
     
     
     
     
    > 2)If you truly are the cannabis pioneers, and truly want freedom, why
    > would you not push for Panzer's and companies "Repeal Cannabis Prohibition
    > 2012", only change it to 2014? Did it have any flaws?
     
    Yes. I've written about them here:
     
    http://www.cannabisculture.com/node/28992
     
    And here:
     
    http://www.cannabisculture.com/content/2011/09/29/Battle-Marijuana-Bills-Why-Regulate-Better-Repeal
     
    The major reason why repeal is not a good ideal is that discriminatory
    and/or monopolistic regs can be foisted on the community post-repeal. If
    you have regs built into the initiative, they can't be removed without
    another initiative. If they are non-monopolistic (such as RMLW) then they
    are "locked in" – thus preventing a monopoly.
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    > Panzer and company wrote an iniative whereby people would actually cease
    > to be arrested for cannabis? How much simpler can this be?
     
    Read my critiques, linked to above.
     
     
     
     
    > the freedom to grow without arrest would drive the price sharply down to
    > what it should be? This is a WEED we are talking about. A safe non-toxic
    > weed.
     
    Nope. My problem is that it does nothing to prevent monopolistic laws being
    foisted upon us post-vote. RMLW and the Herer initiatives are the only
    initiatives which are designed to prevent a monopoly and designed to drive
    the price down, and RMLW is the only one of the two likely to get the
    financial support to get on the ballot and get the votes required to pass.
     
     
     
     
     
    > over-permitting kick, other than to create a two tiered system whereby a
    > chosen few get permits to sell marijuana while the rest of the citizenry
    > continue to be arrested and go to prison?
     
    Prop 19 and AB2312 are part of that "kick". Repeal is not but does nothing
    to prevent it. There is no "chosen few" with RMLW or Herer – just like
    there is no "chosen few" who are allowed to sell wine.
     
     
     
     
     
     
    > it was a power grab and would run them out, the patients saw that they lost
    > their right to cultivate, and middle America saw that people wanted to
    > "push" cannabis to their teenagers. So much money and effort, for what?
     
    If you can differentiate between Prop 19 and RMLW, why not join me and help
    me keep these people honest and make sure none of the monopolists take over?
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    > You do not need to write some highly taxed b.s. to sell to the taxpayers.
     
    RMLW wasn't "highly" taxed, it was minimally taxed. Repeal contained no
    taxes at all (but would not prevent taxes post vote). Why not work with
    this group to keep the taxes minimal rather than adopt the "tomato model or
    nothing" attitude that has resulted in ZERO initiatives being placed on the
    ballot for the last 40 years?
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    > The tradeoff of one more "product" with a reefer madness hangover
    > against taxes is dubious. You are perpetuating the reefer madness myth
    > every time you offer up this over-tax over-regulate model.
     
    That's the Prop 19/Ab2312/ASA people you are talking about … not this
    group.
     
     
     
     
    > record of cannabis, by not playing into the reefer madness stereotypes and
    > by the MILLIONS OF DOLLARS SAVED IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IF CANNABIS
    > IS NO LONGER A CRIME.
     
    By making the same mistake Letitia Pepper constantly makes, by lumping all
    non-Peronist pot activists into the Prop 19 crowd – you do yourself – and
    the movement – a disservice.
     
     
     
     
     

     

    "Axis of Love SF, Shona Gochenaur" <s..[email protected]> Aug 20 02:21PM -0700  

    I would like to Reveiw proposal. Is there a draft? Would like to help .
    May I ask again how are decisions and equality being approached? May I ask
    whose at table now and outreach efforts ? I see a few familiar faces in
    very cute photo. I truly hope this the fresh start we all need to craft
    something fair for us all. Thanks for the pulling forward.when is the next
    roundtable?

     

    "Axis of Love SF, Shona Gochenaur" <s..[email protected]> Aug 20 01:51PM -0700  

    Congrads Julian!

     

    brenda kershenbaum <s..[email protected]> Aug 20 09:33AM -0700  

    anyone? Jan is a longtime activist?  check out his website.   If he is interested in helping, let's give him what he needs…brenda
     
     
    Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:59 AM

     

    I need one of those 756 letters to the dispensaries… they need to respond and demand a reason to cause to action… it has no judicial authority.. . i have someone willing to help. I need one of those letters now. If the city doesn't follow through with replies to response letters, then it's an illegal act.
    http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_21319300/city-attorneys-office-warns-marijuana-dispensaries-los-angeles
    http://www.dailynews.com/breakingnews/ci_21319300/city-attorneys-office-warns-marijuana-dispensaries-los-angeles
    the city is acting without law… each recipient of the letters must file a response… or they will be forced to shut down… if they file a response, the city of LA must respond with probable cause – which they don't have.
    You'll want / need to talk to Clint Richardson ASAP… he ran for president as an independent…he's the one who exposed CA hiding 586 billion dollars while claiming to be bankrupt…

     

    "andrew garret" <s..[email protected]> Aug 20 01:32PM -0700  

    There is a copy of one or two up on the museum's internet site:
     
    http://antiquecannabisbook.com/chap03/Landlord/Landlord-P1.htm
     
    Please tell Jan
     
    antique andy
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    —————————————–
    Sent via Catholic Online Webmail!
    Use Catholic Online Webmail to proclaim your faith to the world.
    http://webmail.catholic.org/

     

    Ron Green <s..[email protected]> Aug 20 04:08AM -0400  

    In Lake County, CA, an "urgency" cultivation ordinance limiting cultivation was passed on July 9, in the middle of the growing season. A Superior Court Judge just granted a preliminary injunction protecting crops planted before the ordinance went into effect, provided they comply with state law. Attorney Joe Elford represented the plaintiffs.
     
    Judge grants preliminary injunction for marijuana cultivation ordinance
     
    By Jeremy Walsh — staff reporterrecord-bee.com
     
    Updated: 08/17/2012 06:59:54 PM PDT
     
    LAKEPORT — A Lake County judge Friday granted a preliminary injunction until Jan. 1 for all qualified people and collectives growing marijuana in conformity with state law at the time the county adopted its interim medical marijuana cultivation ordinance.
     
    "Needless to say this doesn't apply to any illegal grows," Judge David W. Herrick said during the afternoon hearing at the Lake County Courthouse.
     
    Herrick set the timeline with the current marijuana grow season in mind, saying cultivators conforming with state law before the temporary ordinance was enacted this summer should be protected from having their current year's crop destroyed under the new regulations.
     
    Don Merrill and three people known in the case as "Doe" — who stated they feared retribution if they revealed their real identity — sued the county and Sheriff Frank Rivero soon after the Lake County Board of Supervisors (BOS) adopted the temporary law July 9.
     
    Merrill said the ruling helped accomplish the lawsuit's main goal of "protecting those people that believe they're in compliance with state law and have the ability to show that they are."
     
    "We want the county to continue to abate the illegal grows. We don't want to stop them from abating illegal grows. We only disagree on what they consider to be an illegal grow," he added.
     
    The interim ordinance limited the number of marijuana plants allowed for outdoor cultivation and banned commercial growing as well as growing on vacant lands.
     
    The limits depended partly on parcel size, with a maximum of six plants on land smaller than half an acre allowed outside on the lower end of the scale and as many as 48 plants on parcels larger than 40 acres allowed on the upper end.
     
    The ordinance required that all outdoor marijuana cultivation be accessory to an approved residential use and be screened from public view.
     
    Herrick said the county did have the ability to adopt land-use laws to regulate medical marijuana cultivation activities allowed under state law.
     
    "We're happy that the court confirmed that the county does have the legal authority to adopt a land-use ordinance that regulates conduct under the Compassionate Use Act," County Counsel Anita Grant said after the hearing.
     
    Herrick also said the plant limits in the ordinance were "reasonable," adding, "It does not expressly limit the number of plants and I think that is its redeeming constitutional feature."
     
    The temporary law did not specifically regulate indoor grows or the number of parcels on which a qualified person could grow.
     
    Herrick said he hoped a hearing and subsequent ruling on a permanent injunction, if necessary, would occur before Jan. 1.
     
    The judge's ruling came less than a week before the temporary ordinance expires, unless extended by the BOS.
     
    The supervisors are set to discuss whether to extend the regulations during their meeting Tuesday, which will take place at a special time and location.
     
    The BOS will hold its Tuesday meeting at 4 pm in the Kelseyville High School student center.
     
    The supervisors met at the Lake County Fairgrounds in July when they discussed, and ultimately voted to adopt, the interim ordinance because their normal meeting space at the courthouse proved too small a venue.
     
    BOS Chair Rob Brown called Herrick's ruling, "disappointing." He added, "I think we still have some options to deal with the problem and still abide by the judge."
     
    Ron Green, Esq.
     
    PO Box 1110
     
    Lower Lake, CA 95457
     
    (phone#-removed) (office)
     
    (phone#-removed) (cell)

     

 

    LANNYSWERDLOW <s..[email protected]> Aug 20 11:17AM -0700  

    Our radio show Marijuana Compassion and Common Sense will focus on the lawsuit before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to reschedule marijuana as well as a real election in which mmj patients elected an out and open supporter.
     
    The lawsuit, Americans for Safe Access vs. DEA, was filed in January 2012 when the DEA, after stalling for nine years, denied the rescheduling petition the previous July. Discussing the lawsuit will be Kris Hermes, media coordinator for Americans for Safe Access, and Bill Britt, one of the plaintiff’s in the lawsuit.
     
    Our second guest is Ron Lawson, a member of the City Council of Lacey WA. Ron’s election to the Lacey City Council was in no small part due to the support of mmj patients. Ron will discuss how mmj patients played a role in his election and how patients can work to influence elections in their own communities.
     
    Join us this Monday, August 20 at 6 p.m. and every Monday at 6 p.m. for Marijuana Compassion and Common Sense broadcast on IE Talk Radio KCAA 1050AM and simulcast at kcaaradio.com – where you can also watch us live in the studio. Past shows can be heard on the website by clicking on Monday under “schedule” and then clicking on Marijuana Compassion and Common Sense.
     
    Our advertisers’ only pick up a portion of the cost for producing this historic radio show – your support is needed to keep the show on. Please take a moment to go to our website, www.marijuananews.org, and make a donation to keep the radio show on by clicking on the very large DONATE button. Just like Public Broadcasting, but this is Marijuana Broadcasting.

     

 

    s..[email protected] Aug 20 01:05PM -0400  

    Can't happen this year. There is NOT "a very good chance we can pass a
    least one statewide voter initiative this November". Please correct me if I am
    wrong. Either Mr. Kubby has knowledge I am not familiar with regarding this
    November ballot or there is some concern he and some of he is associates
    lack understanding of what is really happening in California. Again,
    correct me if I am wrong. Since he says "If" we pass at least one voter
    initiative "this" November, "we need to all come together and create a CALIFORNIA
    SUPER INITIATIVE, which truly represents us all and will gain the respect and
    support of our major donors", it seems he is more or less just stumping
    for donations. I hope he will clarify his point. Overall the underlying
    intent of getting us all to join together is certainly laudable, including
    soliciting donations. Let's just be sure to stick to reality of time frames
    as we pursue any Initiative and make sure any money raised is given to the
    right leadership and or the right purposes.