City Council Agenda Wednesday- Medical Marijuana ordinance and Lactation Rooms

Wednesday was another big day at City Council with agenda items for the Medical Marijuana ordinance coming up and Agenda Item 9, the creation of "lactation rooms" in city buildings.

There were more adjustments to proposed ordinance and just as Council Presiden Eric Garcetti was going to cut things short and skip public comment until next Tuesday when it would be time to see the new language of the proposed ordinance. Janice Hahn spoke up to make the downtown trip worthwhile for the crowd who still only had one minute to comment.

Next Tuesday, more comment is going to happen since the changes will then be presented. At yesterday's meeting, there were an assortment of reasons for "favoring" the marijuana dispensaries- and at this point, it's hard to draw the line between those present who have interest in a "recreational use" more so than a "medicinal use." Some of the Council Members are already influenced by the numbers and are saying "the medicinne" instead of marijuana. I hear CM Huizar fall back into this usage last month.

One concern voiced by my CM (Huizar) was the prevention of an "over-concentration" of Dispensaries in any area. From a language viewpoint, I think it should be just phrased, "avoiding a concentration" because "over-concentration" is an unnecessary redundancy- and I think THAT phrase might itself be redundant. If you notice, the language in city council and other political areas is very long and drawn out and then when you get these guys (and women) to speak in simple direct English, they over-simplify or make illogical statements.

I have heard people in science fields speak and it's another world, with more easily understool terms to explaing ideas and operations. But remember, those in the science fields WANT people to understand the concepts presented. Politicians usually don't have the same goal. Science people understand what they are trying to do- Check politicians and other than staying in office- they squirm to try to please the largest numbers of potential votes out there.

So, back to City Council and MMDs and Marijuana Ordinances- The big problem was HOW FAR (or the reverse view, "how CLOSE") can an MMD be to residential areas, residences and anything else. 1,000 feet was initially the plan, but Ed Reyes and Rosendahl appear to be the most lax in moving this along with Rosendahl ready to legalize marijuana without the Medical part needed. Garcetti, for all his slickness, is moving along the same direction.

I think that the move to favor "legalization" of marijuana in any degree, is influenced by the budget issues that L.A. is experiencing that may move to bankruptcy for the city at some point soon. The idea of taxation of the product has them with dollar signs in their eyes. The state level has some proposals for legalization of pot altogether with a proposed tax of $50 per ounce to get the some dollars from the deal. That tax might work to chase people back to street dealers who might undercut the price, but that "tax as a solution" is getting some desperate ideas to sprout. In any event, the federal law still would not allow a state's legalization to neutralize the federal statute, so things would just get more messy, not clearer.

And this marijuana ordinance is really wandering way off the path that the state law's apparent concept, as flawed as it may have been in providing any city with proper guidance. A lot of comment "for" the marijuana side really was off. The Council IS going to approve some ordinance. The question is really HOW STRICT will the terms be and HOW MANY shops/dispensaries will be actually be allowed to operate with the ordinance in place?

The Council, like other cities, could have just outright banned the MMDs in the first place and that looks like it could have been a wiser choice and then when things become clearer, re-visit the issue. What happened now is like some kind of Gold Rush era operation for people to get their feet in the door to get rich. That clearly is not part of the vision of the Compasionate Use Act. There were some speaking at the Council meeting who were treating this issue as a business and not as a true "collective," that from my memory of terms in my college days, was about a "group" effort, with a "profit" not the goal. Survival of the collective's efforts was the idea.

That's amounting to "sales" no matter what they want to call it. Some comments mentioned letting all the moms and pops make a living and right there, I think they missed the idea. The collective aspect is really just a break-even kind of deal, not a "maximize profit" idea that you see in corporate settings. It's really nearly a volunteer effort in it's basic form, but we have progressed and there sure will be some more "misinterpretations" brought out as we go along.

The classes in setting up MMDs were not for just the experience of being a service provider as much as there were aimed at having their "students" get in on a highly profitable enterprise.

The real patients who could benefit from the MMDs really are not helped by the recreational usage people who try to come in under the camouflaged "medically needy" side of things. They really hurt the idea. Making a stand for the outright legalization of marijuana and not hiding behind any medical purpose, would make that crowd more honest.

And I remember that there was some problems with the city department of Building and Safety from the hearings in the last few months on this topic- the B&S people kept falling back on the lack of staff to perform investigations and inspections due to shortages of staff. This is the same department that could not even determine which billboards were set up legally and which were built without any permits. That inablity will no doubt affect policing of the MMDs situation and the Coucil is trying to give them the lightest duty possible because, really, you know they will not be able to inpect properly in either degree or timeliness.

Well, that's the city and what they should be doing now is CUTTING expenses. For a different view on the process, see "L.A. City Council Delays Medical Marijuana Vote Until Jan. 19," BY DON DUNCAN in the Opposing View blog. http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opinion-l-a-city-council-delays-medical-marijuana-vote-until-jan-19-r-1263488990

Don Duncan, you may remember from the LA WEEKLY story last year, was probably the major consultant to city council members for how the MMD situation should be handled, especially as to formation of an ordinance according to the WEEKLY'S story. [for that story see-
"L.A.'s Medical-Weed Wars- How the potheads outwitted Antonio Villaraigosa and the L.A. City Council," By PATRICK RANGE MCDONALD AND CHRISTINE PELISEK Published on November 23, 2009 at 11:49pm- http://www.laweekly.com/2009-11-26/news/l-a-39-s-medical-weed-wars/ ]

BREAST FEEDING- CREATING LACTATION ROOMS IN CITY BUILDINGS, AGENDA ITEM 9.

That LACTATION ROOM creation was put off to JAN. 20 for further action- CM Cardenas really needs to step back and see the big picture- worry about keeping the city alive without getting to the details of making more expenses which are not essential. This is something that everyone needs to see. Tough out the times, and the lactation issues have continued for years and were dealt with before, maby not happily so, but it's not the time now to add to city woes.

And that's just opinion since I am not in on any of this, nor was my opinion requested by anyone in the city. You can probably see why.

City Council back in session and the Mayor has a photo opp- and it's back to business as usual.

The city council is back in session after a few weeks of relative calm in the area of city announcements and actions.

THE MAYOR
The mayor took advantage of the additional airport security procedures, namely, the full body scanners, to tell the public that this was making flying safer and that because L.A.'s airport is the "safest airport," more people will want to come to L.A. Here's where I insert a Tom-Leykis-styled inflection, "Really?" And I suppose he means "tourists" will come, since new businesses aren't, nor do we need more people just moving here to an already-congested environment and under-equipped infrastructure.

Maybe Tony is just desperate for a chance to mug before the cameras after being out of the city and the country so often last month. Since the July inauguration that began his second term with a win, getting votes from just 8% of the city's registered voters to return him to office, and after an ambitious inauguration speech about being the best mayor and working for the city's interests, and getting jobs and businesses established in L.A., to paraphrase it, Tony is still in prime form in delivering his verbal message.

Does what's happening at the airports make anything more safe, or is it just more tedious and intrusive for someone taking a plane in Los Angeles? I think it's going to make a lot of people hit the road in their cars as their choice of travel and there's going to be some reduced activity in flying because people will decide against taking some trips that can be put off all because of the negatives that are associated with flying.

Mr. Mayor gave a delivery of his own opinions that were more public relations-oriented than fact-based. The really curious part about his comments is the very obvious hyperactive speaking style that makes listening to HOW he speaks more interesting that WHAT he's speaking about. He acts nervous while speaking, and for all the preparation that his staff may try to accomplish, he sounds totally like he's grabbing at any off-the-cuff analogy or anecdote to use as a verbal crutch and it's usually a style-disaster.

You have to wonder if maybe he's in need of a caffeine intervention or some meditation exercises to be able to settle down. Maybe just working on the real problems of the city instead of being a frequent flyer might help make him comfortable in knowing something about the subject that he talks about. He needs to find something to settle himself down as he speaks to the media. And why he should be tense or nervous is beyond me since he makes life easier at these press conferences by NOT taking any questions that might challenge his grasp of the situation or possibly delay the exit of the Mayor and his entourage from the scene.


THE COUNCIL
On the issue of City business being handled by the City Council, I want to direct you to Ron Kaye's blog that sums up today's first council meeting for 2010 and his comments are both accurate and uncomplimentary. http://www.ronkayela.com/
"They Saved Hollywood, Built the Subway, Created 1000s of Jobs -- All in a Council Day," By Ron Kaye on January 5, 2010 It's another session of heavy duty self congratulation for doing a few things that they are supposed to be doing, and a lot that they imagine is a useful application of their time and our money.

Like I have come to see, there is no reason to expect these politicians to change. The financial antics of L.A. County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas last month in first seeking approval $707,000 to remodel his office, including building a walk-in closet and kitchenette, followed by a low-key request for rescission of the deal (hastily approved by another unanimous vote of a more awakened Board of Supervisors) tells you of the reach of poor attitudes and performance of these people once they get into office.

Maybe some of the Council Members should read the blog to see where they are failing to deliver as public servants. From the way they act, the word "servants" seems oddly inappropriate to associate with their purpose in holding public office. (And just to remind you, they ARE the highest paid council members in the nation- check last February's story in the L.A. WEEKLY, "Los Angeles on $300,000 a year- Why next week's City Council "coronation" will cost you far more than money," By Patrick Range McDonald, published on February 25, 2009. http://www.laweekly.com/2009-02-26/news/los-angeles-on-300-000-a-year/ )

THE POLITICIANS GENERALLY
All this activity that we see just goes to show you that it's a "Me Generation" in office and we are on a lower rung of the ladder when it comes to getting attention or service from them. It is happening at all levels of public office. Once in a while, there's a politician actually working for something that makes sense and might actually help the city or its residents, but more often than not you will see there's not much useful being done on a regular basis. Well, let's see what happens next- There's still the Medical Marijuana Dispensaries ordinance to finally finish. From the Mayor's current demeanor before the media, it's unlikely that he's partaking in the ample supply of product supplied by the hundreds of facilities established in Los Angeles so far.

MMDs on the Tuesday Council Agenda; Proliferation In Los Angeles, Blogs Comment

The Tuesday Agenda Item (18) will present the opportunity for the Council to amend it's current ordinance, the "ICO" ("Interim Control Ordinance"). That ordinance imposed a moratorium in 2007 on the opening of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries ("MMDs") in the City. The amendment will be the elimination of the existing "hardship exemption" that was included in the language of the ICO, and by which MMDs use as a justification to begin business operations in violation of the ICO.

The violations are not being prosecuted by the City Attorney's office, although I think the language is there to allow it. The City Attorney's office has been waiting for the the City Council to rule on the existing applications "hardship exemptions" before it will act. There are over 500 MMD's in Los Angeles and it's growing, with more rushing to get in under the wire and beat the impending elimination of the "exemption."

ALL of the hardship exemptions filed before an elimination of the provision will not be affected, as it only will be effective for applications filed after it takes effect. The notion of "no ex post facto laws" bars retroactive application.

"RON KAYE L.A.," a blog on city issues http://www.ronkayela.com/ has presented views on this in the June 6, 2009 posting, "What Do Pot and Cell Towers Have in Common? You Can Help Stop Their Proliferation," by Ron Kaye, http://ronkayela.com/2009/06/what-do-pot-and-cell-towers-ha.html where he discussed two types of problems for local communities, left unattended by the city through the inaction of the City Council,

Public nuisances like cell phone towers and medical marijuana cooperatives seem to pop up everywhere around us on a daily basis

In both cases, the problem is caused by the failure to do its basic job of providing rational standards for regulation and control. In both cases, you can actually do something about the problems in coming days.

The blog has a lot of other posts, usually at least one new one a day on the ongoing topics in the Ctiy. (Look at the comment on CM JACK WEISS's exit and another example of favoring developers over residents in "Gateway to Hell: Jack Weiss' Goodbye Present to Developers," http://ronkayela.com/2009/06/gateway-to-hell.html .) And when you talk about development, you usually have to include the idea of, "What in the world is the Ed Reyes' Committee on "Planning and Land Use Managment" ('PLUM') doing?" Jack Weiss and Jose Huizar are the other two committee members, all staunch supporters of Villaraigosa and his policies. That might give you a clue on why things are as they are.

My other favorite blogger and activist, Zuma Dogg, posts today on his "L.A. Daily Blog," about "The Future of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries On City Council Agenda for Tuesday," http://ladailyblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/future-of-medical-marijuana.html .

It's a fairly detailed look at what's happened and what the Council will probably do. There's quite a bit of commentary here on the way the system is handling the issue.

A second and more recent posting Monday on ZD's blog is Do you have ANY idea how HUGE The Medical Marijuana Business Is In Los Angeles...It's THE BOOM Industry!!! by Zuma Dogg, June 8, 2009. The commentary is about the present picture we have in L.A. in particular and the idea that the City has mishandled the conditions so badly that they won't be able to change it. The suggested idea of taxing the sales to generate revenue is one that has been brought up in the past often and that has been discussed by many over the years in the support of legalizing marijuana. The overview of the situation seems pretty dismal, but it's the message, not the messenger that should be processed here.

We have a problem in the sheer numbers of facilities that have begun business operations as MMDs after filing for hardship exemptions, with that going into high gear after the announcement of Jose Huizar's proposed motion to end that exemption, exacerbated by the admitted inability of the city to act under it's the provisions of own ordinance. That condition is beyond belief. So this is what Council produces in light of the fact that they are the highest-paid Council members in the country? Obviously it has absolutely no relation to the quality of service provided. What a poor return on all that money that's paid out is all I can say about that.

MMDs really should be allowed for the purpose of what conditions they were supposed to address, medical needs of patients, but the whole picture has become so compromised that it makes a joke of the system. The function now of MMDs is being converted to address, simply put, the needs of marijuana users under the guise of a medical need. The list of conditions by which physicians make recommendations for the patient to present in order to get his or her marijuana is huge.

The City has handled this matter as poorly as it could have been done, it seems. If you compare what is opening in other cities in the state, you see this is where all the openings happen, a direct result of the idea that the City Council has painted themselves into a corner and are unable to cope with what they should have done earlier.

The suspicion and general idea on MMDs by many is that the "patients" are just people who find this a convenient way to get their supply of the weed without really having a medical condition that is affected by or relieved by it. Some people have bought enough weed to the point where they are able to resell it. This shows one example of the corruption of the purpose of MMDs and the real-life usage of MMDs is, plain and simple, a substitute for the overall legalization of marijuana. When you look at the ads placed in the "L.A. Weekly's" print edition, you can see a battle of marketing which might be related to all the money that can be made. Whatever happened to the concept of "co-ops" providing low-cost products for the co-op members, with the profit margin being a secondary concern? That's all too 60's-type thinking. Welcome to the 21st century.

The city has not charged any fees for the business of MMDs as Oakland and San Francisco have. Missing a big opportunity to at least recover expenses for the time that is needed to handle the processing of the applications is a major foul up by the CMs, especially when you consider how badly and eagerly they gouge the public at the parking meters. So here they simple give away city services, a completely unreasonable outcome, when they process MMDs, a business entity that should be subject to some sizeable fees. The other business that gets super low fees imposed upon it is the billboard industry. And in both cases, the Buiding and Safety Department's Inspectors that are suppposed to check up on the business are under-manned and can't do the job like it needs to be done. Thus, even where the law can theoretically be enforced, you have a tiny group to do a big job. So collecting NO money to offset the expenses that can be expected to be incurred by the City for the tasks is unreasonable or just stupid. But you wil find that a lot in what happens in City Hall.

City Council is always behind the times on thses things and when they do act, that act AGAINST the public's best interest unless, of course, it happens to match what special interests want, or it gets a CM some political mileage.

Well, we will see what's next, and that will probably include a whole bunch of delays while the proliferation of even more MMDs will continues. I really have little faith in the work of the city council as it is composed now. They have too much time spent on the wrong things and this is one of the consequences of many that are apparent; you can only imagine what's happening with what's less apparent in the City affairs.