Thursday, August 25, 2011

Ramsey gets over on Chico City Council with idle threats and friends in high places


Chico City Council gamed on dispensaries

Ramsey harshes its medi-pot high by bringing in a ringer


This article was published on .

On July 5, following “almost 30 months of research, deliberations, discussions, and consideration,” as City Manager Dave Burkland described it in a memo to the Chico City Council, the council approved an ordinance that would have allowed establishment of two medical-cannabis dispensaries in the city.
Two councilmen, Bob Evans and Mark Sorensen, voted against it on principle, and Mayor Ann Schwab opposed it because she thought that, at up to 10,000 square feet each, the dispensaries would be too large.
On Aug. 16, the council did an about-face and repealed the ordinance on a 5-2 vote, with Mary Flynn and Scott Gruendl dissenting.
What happened? In a nutshell, the council got gamed.
The big winner was Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey, who brought in a ringer in the person of U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner. Wagner issued a veiled threat to prosecute council members and even city staff for “facilitating” commercial cultivation activities by passing the ordinance.
Mind you, nobody thought Wagner would follow through on the threat. Most cities in California allow dispensaries, and none of their officials have been prosecuted. Redding, for example, has an estimated 17 dispensaries. Chico is small potatoes.
Besides, imagine the uproar that would result from arresting elected officials for doing something that is perfectly legal under California law. It wasn’t going to happen.
But the threat was sufficient to scare City Manager Dave Burkland, who recommended repeal, and at least two council members, Jim Walker and Andy Holcombe, who voted for it after supporting the original ordinance.
To his credit, Holcombe was willing to support an ordinance allowing smaller dispensaries (1,500 square feet) that could fly under Wagner’s radar. He also noted the city wasn’t repealing its ordinance allowing cultivation, which is also illegal under federal law. And he wondered where “seriously ill” people who had legitimate recommendations for cannabis but who were disabled or lived in apartments were going to obtain their medicine.
This is a question Mike Ramsey has failed to answer. Now he’s been joined by the Chico City Council.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Maybe Mike Ramsey is not the only one needing a recall. Seems like 3 other Supervisors lie to waste County resources on non-problems too


Pot ordinance going to the voters

By ROGER H. AYLWORTH-Staff Writer

OROVILLE — Butte County's controversial marijuana cultivation ordinance is slated to go to the voters next June, due to a successful referendum petition drive.
In a 21-minute hearing Tuesday, a divided Butte County Board of Supervisors voted to put the ordinance on the ballot in the June primary.
The decision came on a 3-2 vote, with Chico Supervisor Larry Wahl, Oroville Supervisor Bill Connelly, and Paradise Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi voting to put the ordinance before the voters for an up or down decision.
The ordinance prohibited marijuana cultivation on any lot smaller than a half-acre, required growers to register with the county and provide the names of all those for whom they were growing. Additionally, it put limitations on the number of plants that could be cultivated on a parcel based on property size, and forbade the growing of any plants within 1,000 feet of a school, church, childcare facility, or a drug and/or alcohol treatment center.
The ordinance had been the topic of intense debate since March, with three massive public hearings and more than 15 hours of often rancorous public testimony. The supervisors approved it during a special meeting May 24, conducted in a pavilion at the Butte County Fairgrounds to accommodate the massive crowd.
An organization called Citizens for Compassionate Use, was immediately formed and it launched a petition drive to block the ordinance. 

On July 27, the county Clerk/Recorder Office certified the referendum petitions had sufficient signatures to halt enforcement of the ordinance and to force the board to take one of three options:
* It could repeal the measure; 
* It could vote to put it on the ballot for the next planned election, in this case the June 2012 primary; or,petitions had sufficient signatures to halt enforcement of the ordinance and to force the board to take one of three options:


* It could schedule a special election of its own.
Before the board voted, County Chief Administrative Officer Paul Hahn, said a special election would cost Butte between $450,000 and $500,000. Piggy-backing the referendum on the June primary would cost $50,000 "or substantially less," Hahn said.
Compared to previous hearings, a relative handful of individuals spoke to the board, mostly urging the supervisors to repeal the ordinance and be done with it.
Robert MacKenzie, who described himself as the attorney for the Citizens for Compassionate Use, said the group had a substitute ordinance for the board to consider, if they chose to repeal the existing measure.
"I would like to repeal the ordinance and come up with another ordinance that works," said Chico Supervisor Maureen Kirk.
She made her proposal a motion.
Board Chairman Steve Lambert, whose district stretches from the southwest corner of the county to parts of Chico, seconded the motion.
"My thing is, we need to address this now," explained Lambert.
He said if the county waited until June for a resolution of the situation, the county would again be in the middle of a marijuana growing season. Lambert said he didn't want to wait another year or spend $50,000 to deal with this concern.
The motion died when Connelly, Wahl, and Yamaguchi voted no.
Wahl said the opponents of the ordinance asked for a referendum, "They asked that it be put before the entire people of Butte County, and I think we should honor their wishes."
Kirk said, "I don't think our ordinance is legally defensible even if it passes ... I think if we put it to a ballot we will waste the money and then face a lawsuit."
Yamaguchi, Connelly, and Wahl then voted to put it on the ballot.
Staff writer Roger H. Aylworth can be reached at 896-7762 or raylworth@chicoer.com.

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Will Butte County waste taxayer money trying to uphold Ramsey's restrictive ordinance?


Medical Marijuana Advocates Prepare for Possible Election

POSTED: 5:21 pm PDT August 8, 2011
AAAText Size
UPDATED: 6:42 pm PDT August 8, 2011
Medical marijuana advocates in Butte County will soon find out if the county's ordinance regulating growing and distribution will go before the voters.
Tomorrow the Board of Supervisors will discuss the ordinance passed last May.
Opponents of the ordinance successfully gathered enough signatures on a petition to keep the ordinance from going into effect.
Now the Board must either repeal the ordinance or put it on the ballot.
Citizens for Compassionate use, which circulated the petition, will be at the meeting with a proposal of their own.
“We're not against having an ordinance here in Butte County, just ordinance 4029,” said Weston Mickey. “We're all just anticipating that they rescind. Hopefully they do, but if not it will be an uphill battle, but it is a battle we're willing to take on and we feel that we can win.”
The Board will take up the ordinance at tomorrow's meeting at 1 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors Chambers in Oroville.

Thursday, August 4, 2011

CN&R on ordinance repeal Ramsey orchestrated. Council feels "bullied..."


City Council back-pedals on medi-pot ordinance

Panel also votes to retain redevelopment agency

By Meredith J. Graham 
meredithg@newsreview.com
More stories by this author... 

This article was published on 08.04.11.

“We’re being bullied.”
That was the general feeling conveyed at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting related to medical marijuana, the “we” being the city and the bully being the federal government. Under vague threats of prosecution—city staff, including council members, could go to jail for conspiracy, according to U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner—the council backed down, voting to repeal the dispensary ordinance it passed just last month.
“When you get a letter from the U.S. attorney addressed to yourself, that really opens your eyes,” said Mayor Ann Schwab. She was referring to the letter Wagner sent her just days before the council approved the ordinance July 5. “The eyes of the federal government are on us as elected officials.”
City staff tended to agree. City Manager Dave Burkland and City Attorney Lori Barker made a trip last month to Wagner’s Sacramento office to try to understand better what the city could do to keep from being prosecuted. Neither could offer any specifics gleaned from the meeting, other than the dispensaries’ facility size seemed to be an important factor. The message that did get through, loud and clear, was that city officials could face prosecution for conspiracy by allowing for facilities meant for the manufacture and distribution of marijuana.
“I don’t understand how a conspiracy charge could be held up,” countered Councilman Andy Holcombe, also an attorney. He pointed to several ways in which the ordinance could be reworded to clearly state the intent of the law is to provide safe access to medicine for seriously ill patients. “It really comes down to intent.”
Surprisingly, only 16 members of the public showed up to offer their opinions on the matter, and they varied from members of the Chico Police Officers Association, which has already come out publicly against the ordinance, to those involved in local dispensaries, who pleaded for the ability to offer a safe, legal way for patients to obtain their medicine.
Some, like Chamber of Commerce President Jolene Francis, suggested that not repealing the ordinance would be “calling their bluff.” Others, like local blogger Quentin Colgan, considered repeal nothing short of cowardice. “This is when we need the City Council to stand up for us—stand up to the bully,” he said.
“We are being bullied. But we’re being bullied by the federal government,” acknowledged Vice Mayor Jim Walker. “I don’t like this at all. I think we should take a breath and revisit this—maybe six months is the right amount of time to do that.”
Holcombe shot back: “We’ve taken enough breaths; it’s time to exhale. We’re not thumbing our noses at anyone—this is about protecting sick people. I think we can—and should—stand up to the bully.”
In the end, though a majority of the council seemed to agree that some sort of similar ordinance ought to be in place at some point, a motion to repeal by Councilman Mark Sorensen carried 4-3, with council members Holcombe, Scott Gruendl and Mary Flynn—who posed the curious question of how Chico happened on the U.S. Attorney’s radar in the first place—dissenting.

DA Mike Ramsey Uses Fed Connection to Bully Chico City Council to denying patients access




Giving in to bullying

DA Ramsey gets his way—but at what cost?


This article was published on 08.04.11.

With their decision (see Newslines, page 9) to repeal their medical-marijuana ordinancepertaining to collectives and dispensaries, members of the Chico City Council who supported the ordinance because it provided safe access to cannabis for qualified patients lost a round to District Attorney Mike Ramsey and the Obama administration.
Basically, they gave into bullying by U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner, who threatened city staff with prosecution if they facilitated dispensaries. It’s obvious he did so at Ramsey’s behest.

Credit the DA with consistency on this front. He’s opposed dispensaries from day one and has done everything in his power to get rid of them.

President Obama and the U.S. Department of Justice have been anything but consistent, however. The president campaigned promising to end the war on drugs and establish a progressive policy designed, as much as possible, to take the profits out of the drug trade. Early on, Attorney General Eric Holder made it clear that his agency would not enforce federal laws against marijuana in states where medical-cannabis use was legal.

That’s all changed. Now a U.S. attorney is threatening to prosecute local officials for trying to implement California law. It’s shameful.

Mind you, we have no illusions about medical marijuana. Proposition 215 is widely abused. But there are many people who have a legitimate need and use for medical cannabis. Not all of them can grow their own. Some are disabled. Some live in apartments. How are they now supposed to obtain their medicine?

That’s a question Mike Ramsey has yet to answer.

Source: http://www.newsreview.com/chico/giving-in-to-bullying/content?oid=3088214


IT IS CLEAR MIKE RAMSEY DOES NOT INTEND ON FOLLOWING STATE LAW AND COULD CARE LESS WHERE PATIENTS IN NEED GET THEIR MEDICINE. WHY IS HE WASTING THE COUNTY RESOURCES ON THIS FIGHT?

Reaction to Repeal of Chico's Medical Marijuana Ordinance

Advocates are calling the repeal of Chico’s medical marijuana ordinance a "major setback," but city officials say it was necessary after local police refused to enforce it and federal prosecutors threatened to press charges.
After much discussion, the Chico City Council voted 4 to 3 to repeal the medical marijuana ordinance just weeks after the ordinance passed by the same margin. Vice Mayor Jim Walker, who changed his vote from last month, says he felt bullied by federal prosecutors.
"I knew going in that we would have to make changes, wasn't sure what those changes would be. I knew that we would we would have to make amendments somehow," Walker said.
Those changes came in the form of an outright repeal of the medical marijuana ordinance the Chico City Council had been fine tuning for nearly three years.
The move came less than a month the council approved the ordinance despite a letter from the U.S. Attorney who warned the ordinance violated federal law. Council members say after reading the letter and talking with the U.S. Attorney, they felt it was best to take a step back.
"It was very clearly said what you are doing is illegal and we will prosecute, and I think they are looking for a place to make a case,” Walker said.
Proponents of the ordinance say they are disappointed that the council let themselves be bullied by the federal government, but say they accept the decision.
"If they reiterate a threat, it's going to scare people. Obviously it scared our city and that's understandable. I'm scared of the federal government and the district attorney. They have power I don't," Dylan Tellesen of the Citizen Collective said.
Even though the ordinance was repealed, both sides say they will continue working toward a plan that can satisfy local, state and federal law enforcement.
"We just need to step back, reconsider it but I'd really like to move forward with the intent of Prop 215 in the future," Walker said.
"Every time a challenge comes up, it's an opportunity for more clarity. Time to come back and represent the facts, get everyone in a comfortable place," Tellesen said.
There is word that council members are discussing plans to tweak the ordinance.
The city attorney is also researching the law and will present her findings in six months.



Source: http://www.khsltv.com/content/localnews/story/Reaction-to-Repeal-of-Chicos-Medical-Marijuana/93CqlRIsM0mJs0BMZ_fahg.cspx