can.i.buz
Well-Known Member
The Los Angeles City Council will debate regulations for medical cannabis collectives again on Tuesday, and may vote to adopt an ordinance that day. Americans for Safe Access (ASA) is calling on supporters of safe access to help make final improvements to the draft regulations. Your representative on the Los Angeles City Council needs to hear from you in advance of Tuesday’s City Council meeting. Please take a moment to day to make a call or send an email asking him or her to make the changes listed below.
What: Los Angeles City Council Meeting
When: 10:00 AM * Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Where: Room 340, City Hall, 200 N. Spring Street, Los Angeles 90012
You can locate your representative on the City Council by typing your address in the box labeled “My Neighborhood” near the bottom of the page at http://www.lacity.org or calling 311 (from inside Los Angeles).
Choose one or all of these topics to frame your comments:
1. It is not necessary to have a cap on the number of regulated medical cannabis collectives in Los Angeles. But if we must have a cap, it should be high enough to meet the needs of patients in the city. Based on current demand for safe access, seventy collectives are not enough. (Section 45.19.6.2.B)
2. Even LAPD Chief Charlie Beck agrees that collectives are not magnets for crime. Requiring collectives to be located 1,000 feet from a laundry list of sensitive uses and any residential property will make it impossible to find a location suitable for patients. Let collectives locate in regular commercial zones, just like pharmacies and doctor’s offices, without restrictions on residential uses. (Section 45.19.6.3.A2)
3. Patients may need to visit more than one collective to find the right medicine at a reimbursement cost that works for their budget. The ordinance should not limit them to membership in only one collective – especially since state law already limits how much medicine a patient can have. (Section 45.19.6.3.B15)
4. State law does not require every member of a collective to grow medicine at the same place. The City Council should change the definition of a collective to exclude the phrase “at a particular location.” (Section 45.19.6.1.B)
5. Patients’ privacy must be protected. The draft requires that the name and address of patients who receive medicine be recorded in records subject to inspection. This is unnecessary and must be removed. Strike subsection 8 from Section 45.19.6.4.
You may have other issues you want to discuss with your City Council representative. You can download the latest version of the draft ordinance http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/200 … 4-0010.pdf
What: Los Angeles City Council Meeting
When: 10:00 AM * Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Where: Room 340, City Hall, 200 N. Spring Street, Los Angeles 90012
You can locate your representative on the City Council by typing your address in the box labeled “My Neighborhood” near the bottom of the page at http://www.lacity.org or calling 311 (from inside Los Angeles).
Choose one or all of these topics to frame your comments:
1. It is not necessary to have a cap on the number of regulated medical cannabis collectives in Los Angeles. But if we must have a cap, it should be high enough to meet the needs of patients in the city. Based on current demand for safe access, seventy collectives are not enough. (Section 45.19.6.2.B)
2. Even LAPD Chief Charlie Beck agrees that collectives are not magnets for crime. Requiring collectives to be located 1,000 feet from a laundry list of sensitive uses and any residential property will make it impossible to find a location suitable for patients. Let collectives locate in regular commercial zones, just like pharmacies and doctor’s offices, without restrictions on residential uses. (Section 45.19.6.3.A2)
3. Patients may need to visit more than one collective to find the right medicine at a reimbursement cost that works for their budget. The ordinance should not limit them to membership in only one collective – especially since state law already limits how much medicine a patient can have. (Section 45.19.6.3.B15)
4. State law does not require every member of a collective to grow medicine at the same place. The City Council should change the definition of a collective to exclude the phrase “at a particular location.” (Section 45.19.6.1.B)
5. Patients’ privacy must be protected. The draft requires that the name and address of patients who receive medicine be recorded in records subject to inspection. This is unnecessary and must be removed. Strike subsection 8 from Section 45.19.6.4.
You may have other issues you want to discuss with your City Council representative. You can download the latest version of the draft ordinance http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/200 … 4-0010.pdf
