------------------------------------------------------------------- Activist's Tactics Anger Many in Medical Marijuana Movement (Some California Cannabis Clubs Distance Themselves From Dennis Peron, Co-author Of Proposition 215, In Reaction To Judicial Shut-Down Order) Date: Sun, 28 Dec 1997 10:56:39 EST From: Jim Rosenfield
To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: art/lat: Peron's Tactics Anger Many in Medical Marijuana Newshawk: Jim Rosenfield Source: Los Angeles Times Author: MARY CURTIUS, Times Staff Writer Pubdate: December 28, 1997 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Fax: 213-237-4712 Activist's Tactics Anger Many in Medical Marijuana Movement Treatment: Dennis Peron's provocative style fuels legal battles that threaten sick people's right to get the drug, other pot providers say. SAN FRANCISCO - Nibbling Christmas cookies in his Cannabis Cultivators Club, marijuana guru Dennis Peron says he can't understand why he has become a pariah in the medical marijuana movement he helped to found. "It was my behavior that started this," the white-haired Peron says indignantly. "Now they are telling me, 'You've got to go away.' " Those wishing Peron would go away--or at least adopt a lower profile--are founders of some of the nearly 20 clubs now selling medical marijuana to patients in more than half a dozen California counties. They say that Peron's provocative style and the kind of club he runs have fueled the legal battle that is endangering them all. "We've had to pay a high price all along for the circus-like atmosphere in San Francisco," said Scott Imler, director of the Los Angeles Cannabis Resource Center in West Hollywood. "Dennis goes marching off on his way of folly, making [bad] law every step of the way, and everybody else has to just lump it. It's incredibly frustrating to all of us." A state appellate court ruling earlier this month is the immediate trigger for the anger toward Peron. The court ruled that Proposition 215--the medical marijuana initiative approved by voters in November 1996--did not make cannabis clubs legal. State Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren's office says the ruling means that Peron must shut his doors by Jan. 12, when the decision goes into effect. What frightens other club operators is that Lungren is insisting that the ruling applies to the rest of the state's clubs. "We read this decision as saying that cannabis clubs are no longer legal in the state," said Lungren spokesman Matt Ross. "We will advise district attorneys and law enforcement officials of each county of that." But other club operators say their lawyers tell them that the ruling applies only to Peron's club, which is unique. The appellate ruling grew out of an injunction Lungren obtained to shut down Peron's club in August 1996. A Superior Court judge lifted the injunction after Proposition 215 passed, ruling that the new law allowed clubs to serve as "primary caregivers" and sell medical marijuana on a nonprofit basis. When the injunction was lifted, Peron reopened his club, and it now serves about 8,000 clients near San Francisco's Civic Center in a five-story, 30,000-square-foot building decorated in what has been described as "high crash pad." The club opened in 1994. Thousands of colorful origami birds dangle from mobiles on each floor. The music of choice is hard rock. The blinking lights of two Christmas trees seem timid compared to the bold green colors of jungle murals that cover the walls. Dozens of people can be found toking up most days, and the air is always thick with the unmistakable smell of marijuana. The club sells about 50 pounds of marijuana a week, some from its basement cultivation project, most from growers in Northern California whom Peron contracts with to grow various grades of marijuana. On Dec. 12, the appellate court found that only individuals who are consistently responsible for a patient are primary caregivers, rejecting Peron's argument that his club qualifies as the primary caregiver for medical marijuana users who so designate it. Club operators point out that although Peron has butted heads with Lungren and drug officers, their much smaller facilities are operating quietly in communities as conservative as San Jose and Thousand Oaks. Medical marijuana distributors in those cities say they cooperate with local police and elected officials and run operations that feel more like clinics than clubs. "We're literally a doctor's office with a pharmacy," said Peter Baez, executive director of the Santa Clara County Medical Cannabis Center in San Jose. San Jose passed an ordinance several months ago regulating the operation of the cannabis center. A San Jose police officer inspects the facility regularly. Unlike Peron's club, the San Jose facility allows no smoking on its premises, Baez said. "Patients register with our secretary, she pulls their file and walks them to the back office," he said. "They choose from a board what we have available and we attach an Rx label to the bag." All records are made available for police inspection. * * * "We've turned over three attempted forgeries of prescriptions to the district attorney for prosecution," Baez said. One source of friction between the center and local authorities, Baez said, is a city requirement that the marijuana the club sells be grown at the center, to avoid clashing with federal laws prohibiting the transport of marijuana. The center's landlord has forbidden such cultivation, he said, and the center is too small to grow enough plants anyway. So Baez continues to buy street marijuana, sometimes from Peron, to supply his 225 patients. Baez says that he too worries that Peron's operation is causing trouble for everyone. "It does hurt the effort," Baez said. "Every time a news crew does a story on us, they always have clips of San Francisco, showing a bunch of weird-looking people smoking dope. My stomach cringes." Peron makes no apologies. A Vietnam veteran, Peron for years was the dope dealer of choice for San Francisco's gay community. He lost a lover to AIDS and said he came up with the idea of a cannabis club six years ago, while serving a sentence for felony possession of marijuana he said he bought to ease his dying lover's pain. "Jonathan was covered with sores and was a pariah before he died," Peron said. "I dreamed of building a place where people like Jonathan would feel welcomed, would feel accepted." In liberal San Francisco, hit hard by the AIDS epidemic, Peron's club was embraced by city officials when it opened. Both AIDS patients and cancer patients say that marijuana eases nausea caused by their drug regimens and helps them keep their appetites. Others say the drug can prevent epileptic seizures, ease headaches and control spasms. Peron, who insists that "all marijuana use is medical" and says that smoking it helps him control alcoholism, has vowed to appeal the 1st District Court's ruling to the state Supreme Court. He says that state drug officials will have to drag him and the club's patrons out if the Supreme Court rules against the cannabis club. "There is a deeper issue here, of who we are and where we are going," Peron said. "Do we have a say in America or not?" Peron is not alone in his frustration at the way state and federal officials have reacted to passage of Proposition 215, the first state initiative in the nation legalizing marijuana. On the federal level, the Drug Enforcement Administration has threatened doctors who might prescribe the drug. On the state level, Lungren keeps a running count of prosecutions brought for possession or sale of marijuana where the defense has cited Proposition 215. Local government officials complain that although the state is quick to say what is not allowed under Proposition 215, they have gotten no guidance on how to legally implement the law. In San Mateo County, Supervisor Mike Nevin, a retired San Francisco police officer, has proposed that the county get into the business of supplying medical marijuana. "It is clear that we need some state direction in getting marijuana to the sick and the dying," Nevin said. "We need to be sensitive and figure out a way to carry out Proposition 215. I understand what the appellate court is saying about cannabis clubs," he said. * * * "But that decision still leaves us with the dilemma of how to carry out the spirit of 215, with how to deal with the problem of cultivation and distribution." Nevin's solution? San Mateo should hand over the marijuana it confiscates from street dealers to county pharmacists and let them supply to anyone with a doctor's recommendation. It is a proposal that sparked some interest from Lungren before the appellate court ruling came down. "The program that I am suggesting would take the whole profit motive out of this," Nevin said. "It would limit distribution to the very, very sick. It takes away the whole underground, seedy aspect." Nevin met once with Lungren to discuss his proposal, which has won informal backing from his colleagues on the Board of Supervisors, who formed a committee to study it. He said he has promised Lungren that the county would couple the plan with an aggressive anti-drug education effort in the county's schools. "My police experience gave me a practical aspect to life," Nevin said. "You've got a law on the books that says that marijuana is legal for medicinal purposes. But there is no leadership." Lungren vigorously opposed Proposition 215 during the campaign and has repeatedly said that voters didn't know what they were voting for. Since the election, the attorney general has taken the position that it is up to each county to decide on implementation of the initiative, said Ross, the Lungren spokesman. Across the state, the county-by-county response to Proposition 215 has varied wildly. In Orange County, one volunteer at the county's only cannabis club is in jail, facing felony charges for possession and sale of marijuana. The club operates on an ad hoc basis, meeting patients in restaurants or at their homes to avoid local authorities. * * * In Thousands Oaks, city officials recently agreed to let a club operate out of a shopping mall. "There's just a lot of confusion out there," Baez said. "It is a nerve-racking situation." "Where there is a little more need and a little more tolerance, the providers have felt comfortable coming out and being public with what they are doing," said Dave Fratello, spokesman for Americans for Medical Rights, a group campaigning for passage of state laws legalizing medical marijuana. Fratello said his group anticipates four election battles in 1998--in Maine, Alaska, the District of Columbia and Colorado--in the push to legalize medical marijuana. Ultimately, he said, the goal is to change federal laws to reclassify marijuana as a legal drug. It is in that nationwide effort, Fratello says, that Peron's in-your-face style hurts. "Many people consider him to be the prophet of the movement," he said. "Dennis is a revolutionary, and more power to him. But most clubs run screaming from that image. Most are nonsmoking facilities. That's because in most cases, we're talking about an emergency service for real patients in need and there is no time for a revolution." Copyright Los Angeles Times
------------------------------------------------------------------- The Year In Review - Medical Marijuana ('Orange County Register' Editorial On 11362.5) Subj: US CA: The Year In Review Medical Marijuana From: John W. Black Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 18:50:48 -0500 Source: Orange County Register Contact: email@example.com Pubdate: 28 Dec 97 THE YEAR IN REVIEW MEDICAL MARIJUANA Last year California voters, by passing Proposition 215, made it clear that they want marijuana, when used for medical purposes under the supervision of a doctor, to be removed from the criminal arena - although most voters are not interested in across-the-board legalization. During 1997, implementation of the mandate was shakey. The year began with federal officials hinting they might pull the licenses of doctors who recommended marijuana for their patients, but they backed off, reinforced by a federal court decision. In California, several cannabis clubs continued to dispense marijuana, but their ability to do so legally was called into question by a 1st District Court of Appeals decision Dec. 12 that reinstated an injunction that shut down the Cannabis Buyers' Club in San Francisco. Most observers, led by Attorney General Dan Lungren, interpreted the decision as reaffirming state law that prohibits anyone, even a non-profit organization, from selling marijuana or possessing it for sale. If that's the case, however, the result in practice will be that medical patients with a doctor's recommendation will be able to possess marijuana legally, but will only be able to obtain it on the black market, unless they grow it themselves. Thus the black market will be reinforced. The voters, perhaps relying on a clause in the initiative declaring one purpose to be "to encourage the federal and state governments to implement a plan to provide for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need," thought they were voting for a small scale legal "white market" in medical marijuana. A few localities have made efforts. The city of Arcata came up with a detailed plan that could easily be adopted or adapted by other cities. San Mateo flirted with the idea of distributing pot confiscated in drug busts, and one Northern California city discussed the idea of using a vacant lot behind the police station to do it. Santa Ana is having the issue thrust in its face through prosecution of people involved with a cannabis buyers' club. A closer reading of the 1st District's decision shows the court virtually invited local governments to come up with safe and legal distribution plans and delineated several criteria that would have to be met. Next year, then, the ball will be in the hands of local governments. -------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments, questions and suggestions.Reporters and researchers are welcome at the world's largest online library of drug-policy information, sponsored by the Drug Reform Coordination Network at: http://www.druglibrary.org/
to the 1997 News page.
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/122897.html