Cannabis Cures Cancer

Educate City Hall about medicinal cannabis, prevent an unwarranted crack-down!!

A Medical Cannabis Ordinance is being considered by the Planning Commission of the City of Vallejo, threatening to "crack down" on legal medicinal cannabis dispensaries.

“Future Planning Items for Consideration”, from the report for the Economic Development Department - Planning Division, published in the “City Manager’s Bi-Weekly Report”, Volume 2, Issue 4, December 6, 2013, from Daniel E. Keen, City Manager, City of Vallejo:
 
The list of agenda items is used exclusively by City staff as a draft working document for planning and tentative scheduling of agenda related items and does not represent any final dates for placement and presentation to the legislative body (Planning Commission and City Council). The list provided is an abbreviated version including only the most significant items. The list is subject to change by staff and may not represent all items that eventually will appear on any given final meeting agenda.
Planning Commission Agenda Item
December 17, 2013 (Special Meeting): Medical Cannabis Study Session
January 22, 2014: Medical Cannabis Ordinance


---
Yet, in the same report, they tell how they approved more ALCOHOL establishments across downtown Vallejo, the waterfront, and Mare Island.
“Brewpub Approved for Vacant Ferry Building Space”
The Planning Commission recently voted to approve a Use Permit to allow the Mare Island Brewing Company, LLC to operate a brewpub/microbrewery, tasting room and restaurant within the City owned Ferry Building on the waterfront. The project involves use of the vacant tenant space in the west rotunda and includes indoor seating, an outdoor patio area next to the waterfront promenade, and seating on the second story observation deck.
Depending on demand, business hours will vary between 10:00 am to 1:00 am, seven days per week. Along with a minimal amount of beer production on-site, the business intends to provide a limited menu of gourmet appetizers and entrees. The owner anticipates having four employees initially and may employ additional staff as business expands. The project is a result of the 2012-2013 Council adopted code and plan amendments to allow these businesses in the Downtown, the Waterfront and on Mare Island

Uses for High-Cannabidiol Cannabis Extracts

"The Use of High-Cannabidiol Cannabis Extracts to Treat Epilepsy and Other Diseases"
2013-11-25 by Justin Kander, posted to [http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Use-of-High-Cannabidiol-Cannabis-Extracts-to-Treat-Epilepsy-and-Other-Diseases&id=8142665]:
There has been a dramatic rise in news attention to medicinal cannabis in 2013, with reports on CNN, ABC, CBS, and local publications about high-cannabidiol cannabis oil effectively controlling the symptoms of rare epileptic conditions like Dravet syndrome, Doose syndrome, infantile spasms, cortical dysplasia, and more. These diseases can cause hundreds to thousands of seizures a week, while also impairing development in a number of other ways. For families with children suffering from such conditions, the challenges are overwhelming. Due to the extremely complex nature of Dravet and related syndromes, traditional pharmaceuticals are ineffective and often make the problems worse. With no other hope, families have turned to high-CBD cannabis oil, which is proving to work with miraculous efficacy.
To clarify, high-CBD cannabis oil is non-psychoactive and apparently even more beneficial than high-THC cannabis oil. Cannabidiol is another cannabinoid in the cannabis plant, like the more well-known psychoactive cannabinoid THC, with significant research suggesting neuroprotectant, anticancer, antidiabetic, anti-ischemic, antispasmodic, antipsychotic, and antibacterial properties, among others. Furthermore, cannabis oil is a type of extract from cannabis. Such oil contains large amounts of concentrated cannabinoids that can be orally ingested rather than smoked, preserving the medicinal compounds and allowing them to be delivered through digestive system, rather than the respiratory system.
The research suggests that CBD has panacea-like properties, and in practice, this is proving to be the case. On August 11th, 2013, Sanjay Gupta released a documentary on CNN about Charlotte Figi. Charlotte is a young Dravet syndrome patient who was having 300 grand mal seizures a week. No pharmaceuticals or dietary changes could do anything to reduce this number. Charlotte's parents learned about high-CBD cannabis oil, and after literally the first dose, Charlotte's seizures stopped. She now has less than three minor seizures a month. This case is nothing short of miraculous, and it's not isolated. Dr. Margaret Gedde, a Colorado Springs physician, is tracking 11 new patients of the Stanely brothers, the providers of Charlotte's high-CBD medicine. 9 of them have had 90-100% reductions in seizures, which again, is simply miraculous.
The epileptic conditions that CBD is proving to be effective against are extremely complex, and not even the most powerful, well researched pharmaceuticals have been capable of inducing any healing. Yet high-CBD cannabis oil is immediately and potently reducing symptoms, with the only side effects being systemically beneficial - more energy, better learning, improved behavior, and more.
It should not be surprising that results like these have been going on for years. Just like research shows cannabinoids are therapeutically effective against epilepsy, there is research suggesting they can eliminate cancers and control other serious diseases. And in practice, for epilepsy and these other conditions, the results are translating to humans. People have been reliably eliminating cancers for years and mitigating diseases like diabetes, Crohn's, fibromyalgia, heart disease, chronic pain, multiple sclerosis, and more. This is as serious as it gets, and more attention must be brought to this issue.
As you can see, the use of medicinal cannabis is extremely important. This isn't about alleviating the side effects of chemotherapy or improving appetite - this is about putting serious diseases into remission, eliminating cancer in humans, and improving all aspects of human health. To see the scientific and experiential evidence supporting this, including medical documentation of terminal cancer patients now in remission, visit CannabisExtractReport.com.

Mendocino County Court finds valid medicinal cannabis ID card to pre-empt probable cause for Police vehicle search

"Ukiah Attorney Eric Rennert fighting for right of valid 215 patients to NOT have their car searched for probable cause"  
2013-11-09 from "Mendocino Country Independent Newspaper"
Eric Rennert writes: Hello, all. I just won my 1538.5 on the issue of probable cause to search a vehicle with the presence of marijuana when my client presented a valid 215 card. It is a case of first impression in California and I'm hoping the DA will file an appeal so I can move this up through the courts and get it published-then to the C/A, and, in my wildest dreams, to the Cal Supremes.
Obviously, the courts have been dodging the issue since the Compassionate Use Act passed in '96. It is almost the perfect test case. I will make Judge Moorman's written decision available to all and am still trying to figure out how I can use it, for the time being, as at least persuasive authority here in our local jurisdiction.
I will try to post it here, and also on the Claraweb/CPDA site. Carly Dolan, recently promoted to Assistant Public Defender for Mendocino County wrote the brief, and I took the case on with an extensive oral argument which started with the Rule of Lenity, on to the Founding Fathers, the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th and 10th Amendments, with my theme being, "Porn, Pills, Pistols, Pot." (Context is everything, and no, the possession of marijuana does not require and 'Affirmative Defense')
The case is: The People vs. Kevin Hawkins, SCUK CRCR 13-71986, 11/8/2013, Judge Ann Moorman, Superior Court of California, County of Mendocino. Not Published (yet). "The defendant's motion to suppress the search of the car for lack of probable cause is granted. (annie at el sol)

Solano County invites public to support medicinal cannabis clinics

"Solano County sets meetings on marijuana dispensaries"
2013-10-23 by Tony Burchyns from "Vallejo Times-Herald":
Solano County's evolving medical marijuana debate continues next week as leaders begin the first in-depth look at allowing dispensaries in unincorporated areas.
 Five public-outreach meetings are scheduled throughout the county, including one for the Vallejo-Benicia area set for 6 p.m., Oct. 30, at Vallejo City Hall. The other meetings will be held in Vacaville, Dixon, Fairfield and Winters.
The approach is new for Solano's county government, which has banned dispensaries in the past. It also contrasts with the policy of the local cities. For a number of reasons, including possible conflicts with federal law, no Solano County city allows dispensaries.
The board of supervisors' attitude on the issue shifted, however, after the 2012 election added two new members who favor medical marijuana regulations over outright bans.
"We had a moratorium in place, and it was about to expire," said Supervisor Linda Seifert, whose district includes Benicia and parts of Vallejo. "We were put in the place of either adopting a ban or adopting some kind of regulatory process."
In unincorporated Vallejo, four parcels have been identified as possible dispensary sites -- all located near Lemon Street and Benicia Road, within Seifert's district.
Seifert has been a proponent of regulating dispensaries rather than banning them, noting that a majority of county voters in 1996 supported Proposition 215, which legalized medical marijuana in the state.
However, she added it's still too early to know if the county will actually end up allowing dispensaries.
County officials say the meetings will allow for public input on the controversial issue, including -- but not limited to -- the potential placement of dispensaries in certain areas.
State law prohibits dispensaries within 600 feet of schools. County officials, however, are recommending a 1,000-foot buffer between dispensaries and schools, daycare centers and churches.
The board is set to consider the public feedback, along with further advice from staff, in December. County officials also plan to reach out to local city and law enforcement officials as well as representatives of the medical marijuana industry.
The effort stems from a July 30 board of supervisors decision to look at possible regulatory options for dispensaries. The county's current dispensary ban expires on July 29.
Supervisors Seifert and Erin Hannigan, whose districts both cover parts of Vallejo, support dispensary regulations. Supervisor Skip Thomson -- whose district spans Rio Vista, Elmira and parts of Vacaville, Fairfield and Suisun City -- also supports researching and drafting a medical marijuana law. Thomson and Hannigan joined the board after the last election.
Supervisors Jim Spering -- Fairfield, Suisun City -- and John Vasquez -- Vacaville, Dixon -- have supported a permanent ban, arguing that roughly 96 percent of the county's population lives in cities that don't allow dispensaries.
Locally, Benicia has outlawed dispensaries since 2009. The City Council also voted 4-1 in 2011 to revisit the issue at some point, but there's been little interest so far.
In Vallejo, the council has been deeply split over the issue. Voters overwhelmingly passed a dispensary sales tax in 2011, but the city has delayed drafting regulations. Meanwhile, police raided several dispensaries last year, but all of the cases fell apart because, lawyers argued, the establishments were following California law.


Medical marijuana meetings -
Solano County is holding a series of public outreach meetings to discuss options for regulating medical marijuana dispensaries in unincorporated areas:
* Vacaville/Elmira, 6-8 p.m., Oct. 29, Nut Tree Airport, First Floor Conference Room, 301 County Airport Road, Vacaville

* Vallejo/Benicia, 6-8 p.m., Oct. 30, Vallejo City Hall, 555 Santa Clara St., Vallejo

* Dixon/Rio Vista, 6-8 p.m., Nov. 5, Dixon May Fair, Tremont Hall, 655 S. First St., Dixon

* Fairfield/Suisun City/Birds Landing, 6-8 p.m., County Administrative Center, first floor multi-purpose room, 675 Texas St., Fairfield

* Winters, 6-8 p.m., Winters City Hall, 318 First St., Winters


Supervisors' medical marijuana votes:
2009 -- Board adopts 45-day moratorium on dispensaries in unincorporated areas. It was not extended.

July 26, 2011 -- On a 3-2 vote, board denies proposed zoning amendment allowing dispensaries in certain areas

Aug. 23, 2011 -- On a 4-1 vote, board enacts second 45-day moratorium.

Oct. 4, 2011 -- On a 4-0 vote, board extends moratorium by 10 months, 15 days

Aug. 7, 2012 -- On a 4-0 vote, board extends moratorium a year

July 30, 2013 -- Board opts against proposed dispensary ban, chooses instead to develop a regulatory framework for dispensaries.

California State Committee to investigate legalizing of medicinal cannabis

"Newsom, ACLU look to legalize marijuana"
2013-10-17 by Joe Garofoli from "San Francisco Chronicle" [http://www.sfgate.com/politics/joegarofoli/article/Newsom-ACLU-look-to-legalize-marijuana-4904985.php]:
Marijuana advocates took a step toward making California the third state to legalize the drug for adult recreational use Thursday when Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and the American Civil Liberties Union opened a campaign intended to land a measure before voters during the next presidential election.
Newsom, who came out in favor of legalization last year, will lead a panel of academics, drug policy experts, law enforcement authorities, and officials from Colorado and Washington - the two states whose voters legalized recreational use last year.
The panel's goal: to answer legal and practical questions about the state-endorsed sale of marijuana before advocates move forward with a measure to tax and regulate the estimated $1.5 billion cannabis industry in California.
Backers intend to go to the voters in November 2016 - coinciding with the presidential election, when the electorate is likely to skew younger than average and thus more marijuana-friendly.
Even older voters, however, are becoming more open to marijuana legalization, according to a pair of recent polls.
One, which the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California released last month, found that 60 percent of likely voters overall backed legalization. A survey by San Francisco pollster Ben Tulchin, commissioned by the ACLU and released Thursday, found that 65 percent of 1,200 respondents considered likely to vote in 2016 would support a measure to tax and regulate marijuana.
The state's voters rejected a legalization measure in 2010 by 53 to 47 percent.
"The fact is that the public's support for marijuana is increasing," Tulchin said. "The key, though, is that they want regulations and limits on this. And they want the revenue (from taxation) to fund essential services.
"They don't want to be able to go to Costco and buy it in bulk," Tulchin said.

What legalization entails -
At a San Francisco press conference Thursday, members of the ACLU panel acknowledged that voters will have many questions about what legalization would entail. Over the next year and a half, the group will travel around the state, holding town hall meetings and periodically issuing recommendations.
"People want to know what a DUI would be. Employers want to know what happens if their employee shows up stoned at work," said Craig Reinarman, a panel member and professor of sociology and legal studies at UC Santa Cruz who has written about drug policy for 30 years.

Looking elsewhere -
For answers, advocates will turn to officials and activists from Colorado and Washington, who have been wrestling with such issues since legalization measures passed in their states last fall. It wasn't until this week that Washington's Liquor Control Board adopted rules that will permit 334 retail marijuana stores to open statewide next year.
California advocates said they'd like to be able to outline what a regulatory system would look like before they go to the voters.
A large incentive for advocates is that federal officials are demanding more structure and regulation from states where some form of marijuana use is legal, in exchange for leaving them alone.
Federal prosecutors have periodically cracked down on medical marijuana dispensaries in California, including some that local officials have characterized as model operations. In August, however, U.S. Deputy Attorney General James Cole declared that federal authorities would go easier on "states and local governments that have enacted laws legalizing marijuana in some form" and have "strong and effective regulatory and enforcement systems."
California is not one of those states.
Legalization "is not going to happen unless the public and, frankly, the federal government are persuaded that this can be done in a way that's safe, that makes sense and is tightly regulated," said Allen Hopper, director of criminal justice and drug policy for the ACLU of California.
Star attraction
Hopper said that although the ACLU and Newsom support legalization, several members of the panel do not.
As its chairman, Newsom is the centerpiece of the newly formed group and political star attraction. He's believed to be the highest-ranking elected statewide official in the country who supports legalizing marijuana.
But Tulchin, who was Newsom's pollster during his 2010 lieutenant governor campaign, and others say fronting this issue isn't a political suicide mission.
Same-sex precedent
Newsom, Tulchin pointed out, was considered in political no-man's land back in 2004, when he allowed same-sex couples to marry at San Francisco City Hall. Less than a decade and many court battles later, hundreds of elected officials support gay and lesbian marriage rights.
"That gives him a lot of credibility on this," Tulchin said.
Other legalization groups are talking about going to the ballot in 2014. Hopper said the ACLU is not going to run any ballot measures or decide who should.
"We want to make sure that whatever coalition ends up doing this has the data and the facts and the research to do it right," Hopper said.

2013-08-29 "Justice Department Announces Update to Marijuana Enforcement Policy"

from USA Federal Department of Justice - Office of Public Affairs [http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/August/13-opa-974.html]:
Today, the U.S. Department of Justice announced an update to its federal marijuana enforcement policy in light of recent state ballot initiatives that legalize, under state law, the possession of small amounts of marijuana and provide for the regulation of marijuana production, processing, and sale.
In a new memorandum outlining the policy, the Department makes clear that marijuana remains an illegal drug under the Controlled Substances Act and that federal prosecutors will continue to aggressively enforce this statute. To this end, the Department identifies eight (8) enforcement areas that federal prosecutors should prioritize. These are the same enforcement priorities that have traditionally driven the Department’s efforts in this area.
Outside of these enforcement priorities, however, the federal government has traditionally relied on state and local authorizes to address marijuana activity through enforcement of their own narcotics laws. This guidance continues that policy.
For states such as Colorado and Washington that have enacted laws to authorize the production, distribution and possession of marijuana, the Department expects these states to establish strict regulatory schemes that protect the eight federal interests identified in the Department’s guidance. These schemes must be tough in practice, not just on paper, and include strong, state-based enforcement efforts, backed by adequate funding. Based on assurances that those states will impose an appropriately strict regulatory system, the Department has informed the governors of both states that it is deferring its right to challenge their legalization laws at this time. But if any of the stated harms do materialize—either despite a strict regulatory scheme or because of the lack of one—federal prosecutors will act aggressively to bring individual prosecutions focused on federal enforcement priorities and the Department may challenge the regulatory scheme themselves in these states.
A copy of the memorandum, sent to all United States Attorneys by Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole, is available below.
Related Material: DAG Memo 8-29-13 (http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/3052013829132756857467.pdf) 13-974, Office of Public Affairs