Members of the Chico Police Officers' Association have revealed themselves to be some real grandstanding hot-doggers. These "public servants," the
lowest-paidof whom makes $
70,000 a year straight out of your taxpayer pocket, are refusing to do their jobs.
Did you know police officers
got to pickwhich laws they enforce? Did you know these big-bellied buffoons in blue, if they personally disapprove of a law, feel entitled to
ignore the damn thing? Hell, maybe
we should have all gone into law enforcement, if it's
that cushy a gig.
These drama queens, apparently trying to make some sort of point but mostly just ending up with "we're a bunch of unprofessional ass-bags," have sent a letter to Chico, California City Councilman Mark Sorensen stating that under federal law, they cannot be involved in any part of the city's recent commercial growing and marijuana selling ordinance.
The letter, according to
KHSL, states:
The members of the Chico Police Officers' Association will not participate in any part of the medical marijuana ordinance that involves commercial marijuana growing or selling operations. We will not assist in any way in any activity that normalizes, standardizes, expedites, or assists in the establishment of facilities set up for the commercial growing and selling of marijuana. It is our sworn duty to enforce all laws regarding controlled substances, and we will continue to do so.
The association claims the city ordinance, which was opposed by the Butte County District Attorney and not supported by Chico's mayor or chief of police, violates federal law, reports the Central Valley Business Times.
Of course, these half-wit douche bags aren't expected, empowered or authorized to enforce federal law, and since they're refusing to do their jobs in a clear dereliction of duty, all of their dimwit asses should be out on the street and into the unemployment line so fast it would make their porcine heads spin.
Keep in mind, this is the same bunch of greed-heads who, last December, rejected a 5 percent pay cut which would have saved the jobs of 10 fellow police officers. So apparently, they get to pick which parts of their duties they actually perform, but heaven forbid you should mention them getting paid any less!
After that particularly unseemly episode, Jack Lee at NorCal Blogs observed, "This looks bad, guys - it looks like you are putting self interest ahead of public safety." So this propensity of theirs to do whatever they want, the public be damned, is a pattern of behavior.
The cops' letter points to a July 1 letter from U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner that warned adopting an ordinance that violated federal prohibitions against marijuana could bring federal criminal penalties on city workers whose responsibilities would include administering the ordinance.
"The problem we have as police officers is that the marijuana trade is a huge safety issue," said Will Clark, who obviously should seek another line of work, like maybe flipping burgers. "We've had home invasion robberies, we've had people shot and killed over marijuana, we've had residential burglaries, robberies, over marijuana."
What Clark didn't mention was that a good portion of the people "shot and killed over marijuana" were victims of police violence.
Clark, who taxpayers pay $140,000 a year but who still refuses to do his job if it makes him feel uncomfortable, said that the officers feel that rather than easing the problems, the new ordinance will "just make a bigger mess."
The Chico Police Officers' Association said that if any of its 89 members get their porky little hands dirty by participating in the administration or enforcement of the city's pot ordinance, "we will be breaking federal law, the oath we swore to the city, the Municipal Code of the City of Chico, and the General Orders of our department. This is not acceptable."
No, Officer Clark. What is not acceptable is when public servants -- apparently unaware of their own webpage -- feel they have the right to ignore the will of the voters, the law of the State of California, and the City Council. Your hubris and arrogance -- and your apparent feeling of entitlement in picking which laws you feel comfortable enforcing -- is vastly unbecoming, entirely unprofessional, and grounds for your immediate dismissal and unceremonious expulsion from polite society forever.
If you'd like to offer some constructive feedback to the Chico Police Officers' Association, perhaps you should "Like" their Facebook page and then leave some choice comments for them.
And if you want to offer some feedback to the Chico City Council -- as in, what are they waiting for, to fire these insubordinate sons of bitches -- here's their contact info.
Contact Chico City Council by e-mail (just click on the names):
Written materials may be sent to the City Council at PO Box 3420, Chico, CA 95927.
Chico police union says officers will not enforce medical marijuana ordinance
By GREG WELTER -- Staff Writer
Posted: 07/22/2011 11:11:19 AM PDT
Updated: 07/22/2011 06:16:30 PM PDT
CHICO — The executive board of the Chico Police Officers Association said today they believe plans to allow two large marijuana dispensaries in the city are illegal, and they want no part of it.
The Chico City Council approved an ordinance establishing two dispensaries of up to 10,000 square-feet at its meeting July 5, although the vote was not unanimous.
Today CPOA board members delivered two versions of a letter to councilors expressing their concerns about dispensaries, and stated in the letters that members of the association "will not participate in any part of the medical marijuana ordinance that involves commercial marijuana growing or selling operations."
CPOA spokesman Will Clark said if the ordinance results in dispensaries being established, officers will follow federal and state laws, and the directives of the district attorney, in enforcing the law.
"To do otherwise would violate our oath as officers to follow the constitution of the United States, the California constitution, and our pledge to protect the citizens of this community," Clark said.
"We want to be known as the city of trees, not the city of weed," he stated.
Clark noted there is no formal opposition to another ordinance, which will allow citizens with a Proposition 215 medical marijuana card to grow up to 50 square-feet of pot plants on private property, or indoor grows of the same size with a permit, for personal medicinal use.
There is no limit on the number of plants allowed within that plot size, nor is there a limit on the number of patients who can share in the crop.
Clark said the CPOA's stance on city-authorized dispensaries is in line with Police Chief Mike Maloney and Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey, who have long warned they could lead to federal action taken against city officials.
A July 1 letter from Benjamin Wagner, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California, put an exclamation mark on the warnings, but Maloney, Chico City Manager Dave Burkland and City Attorney Lori Barker met with Wagner July 14 in Sacramento to get clarification on certain points in the letter.
Burkland said he plans to tell the City Council at its meeting Aug. 2 that Wagner said some city officials could face action from federal authorities, and said he hopes the dispensary part of the ordinance will be rescinded.
Other cities in California have authorized dispensaries in operation, including some within Wagner's jurisdicton. It's unknown why Chico and Isleton, in Sacramento County, are so far the only two in the Eastern District to receive warning letters.
Ramsey confirmed today that any dispensary operation would be considered "a marijuana store" and would therefore be illegal.
He said prosecutions connected to such operations would be handled by federal authorities, and not his office.
Clark pointed out that the City Council will, ironically, be considering the fate of the pot dispensary ordinance on Aug. 2, which is National Night Out.
"We'll be out telling citizens they should obey the law and report unlawful activity, while city leaders will be deciding if it's OK to not follow it."
Should dispensaries begin operation, Clark said officers would be duty-bound to respond to incidents and emergencies on the property.
"We will not assist in any way in any activity that normalizes, standardizes, expedites or assists in the establishment of facilities set up for the commercial growing and selling of marijuana," the letter to council members reads.
Mayor Ann Schwab and councilors Bob Evans and Mark Sorensen voted against the ordinance. In a Norcal blog posted Friday, Sorensen opined that if the state really wants to authorize pot dispensaries, it should task an organization such as Alcoholic Beverage Control to create a proper regulatory environment, operational guidelines, product quality testing, product potency testing and standards, legal impairment and intoxication standards. "We have the cart so far ahead of the horse, that the horse can't even see the cart," he wrote.
Mary Flynn, Andy Holcombe, Scott Gruendl and Jim Walker voted in favor of the ordinance.
WHY DOES MIKE RAMSEY WANT CANCER PATIENTS TO HAVE TO LEARN TO GARDEN WHILE THEY ARE GOING THROUGH CHEMO? DO THEY HAVE 3 MONTHS TO WAIT FOR MEDICINE? SHOULD THEY BUY IT IN A WAL-MART PARKING LOT?
