Last week’s contest was won by Gordy. It was Baring, WA, which may lose it’s historic post office due to federal cutbacks.

This week’s contest is a random location somewhere in the world. Good luck!

It seems like the secretive American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) isn’t so happy about being less of a secret now:

Yesterday, at a conference in New Orleans, two ThinkProgress reporters were attacked by security guards for no apparent reason. Reporters Scott Keyes and Lee Fang were at the Marriott Hotel for the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) annual meeting, an event that brings together state lawmakers with corporate lobbyists to draft “model” legislation.

While we stood by the second floor lobby of the conference hotel, security guards surrounded us, demanding that we leave. As we were leaving, they approached us, violently pushed us and twisted our arms. A guard approached Fang from behind, tackling him and later bending his arm to take his camera. Keyes, faced similar treatment: two security guards roughed him up on the escalator, taking his video camera, and cutting Keyes’ hand as he attempted to leave the premises. As Keyes asked why he was being forced to leave, he was shoved from the back.

Asked why they were being so belligerent, the security guards said they were acting on instructions from ALEC.

The video is here.

I’m sure we all remember this:

Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire has vetoed key parts of a bill that aimed to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries.

Gregoire said Friday she could not approve the measure after the state’s two U.S. attorneys said that state regulators would not be immune from prosecution. A union that represents thousands of state employees asked Gregoire to veto the bill.

“I will not subject my state employees to federal prosecution. Period,” Gregoire told reporters before signing parts of the bill into law.

At the time, there was no shortage of people pointing out the absurdity of Gregoire’s belief. And since then, even Republican Governor Chris Christie allowed New Jersey’s medical marijuana dispensary regulations to move forward. But now you can add another name to the list of those who find it absurd that the Department of Justice would arrest state employees:

The Department of Justice.

From Raw Story:

The Department of Justice filed on legal brief on Monday that indicated the federal government would not prosecute state employees for implementing state medical marijuana programs, according to the Marijuana Policy Project.

The brief asks for a lawsuit filed by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R) to be thrown out.

…

The Department of Justice said Brewer’s claims had no merit, noting that her lawsuit failed to provide credible evidence that state employees were under threat of imminent prosecution.

Unlike Arizona, though, where the voters passed a law that set up dispensaries, we’re left with a giant mess. So much so that the Municipal Research and Services Center still isn’t entirely clear on what cities can do to regulate medical marijuana production and distribution. Here’s part of their page on the new law:

Cities and counties can place zoning restrictions and impose licensing requirements on collective gardens, but it is not clear whether local governments can totally prohibit them, so long as the collective gardens comply with the restrictions on the numbers of plants and numbers of qualified patients. See Sections 403 and 1102 of E2SSB 5073. Also, Chapter 69.51A RCW still allows a “qualified patient” or a “designated provider” to possess a quantity of Cannabis not exceeding a 60-day supply for a patient, which has been interpreted in the regulations as including up to 15 Cannabis plants, so individual gardens are clearly allowed. [If you have been following this webpage recently you will notice that we have changed our interpretation twice on the issue of whether collective gardens can be prohibited. That is a measure of how we are struggling with interpretation of the provisions that go into effect on July 22nd.]

Of course, this hasn’t stopped numerous cities from imposing moratoriums, meaning that a judge will likely sort it all out once a local jurisdiction tries to arrest someone who’s following the law.

UPDATE: More from Dominic Holden and Steve Elliott.

UPDATE 2: According to Dan Catchpole of the SnoValley Star, North Bend may be the first municipality to have its collective garden moratorium challenged in court.

You can click here to see one of the videos that the Renton Police Department considers cyberstalking. Apparently, six more of these will be released soon. Full story here.

King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg writes about the recent tragic death of Google engineer Steve Lacey:

Steve Lacey was on his way to Costco on Sunday afternoon, July 24, and was sitting in traffic, waiting for a light to change when his life ended. A minute before he was tragically killed, a 52-year old driver, Patrick Rexroat, was allegedly speeding southbound on I-405, carrying three and a half times the legal limit of alcohol in his bloodstream, and chasing a car that he thought had cut him off in traffic. While in hot and drunk pursuit of the other driver, Rexroat failed to negotiate the turn he attempted at high speed and slammed into the driver’s side door of Steve Lacey’s car, killing him instantly.

Witnesses report that the 52-year old Rexroat got out of his car and pounded his chest in a defiant gesture. When he was told that he had killed another person he shrugged his shoulders and started to walk away.

…

What sort of justice awaits the victim’s family, the community and the defendant in this case? The answer is as infuriating as the crime. Under Washington State sentencing guidelines, the killer of Steve Lacey faces no more than 41 months in prison, minus one-third of the sentence that will almost certainly be reduced for good behavior. That means that vehicular homicide offenders actually are removed from our streets for less than 2 and half years.

Want to be even more infuriated? Compare that to this:

The owners of two medical marijuana dispensaries in Spokane have been indicted by a federal grand jury.

Charles Wesley Wright and Jon Richard Vivian, owners of the THC Pharmacy on South Perry Street, and Jerry Wayne Laberdee and Dennis Lewis Whited, owners of Medical Herb Providers, face time in federal prison under multi-count indictments filed today in U.S. District Court.

…

Wright and Vivian face [up to 20 years] if found guilty of maintaining a drug-involved premise near a school. THC Pharmacy was located at 1108 S. Perry St. – which is less than 1,000 feet from Grant Elementary School.

Wright and Vivian are also charged with distribution of marijuana near a school, possession with intent to distribute marijuana near a school, manufacture of marijuana near a school. Each charge carries not less than a year and no more than 10 years.

As with anyone, I’m in favor of having zoning laws that keep dispensaries away from schools, but just to provide clarification on the seriousness of that offense, here’s a map of the neighborhood:

Of the five Spokane defendants, Wright is the only one I’ve communicated with so far. He sent me a rather desperate email yesterday about his situation. He’s in the process of selling all his possessions in order to defend himself (his dispensary was only open for a very short period of time and it never actually made any money). Unlike the caricature that law enforcement likes to present, these folks weren’t high rollers raking in the dough. They’re generally patients themselves who had the resources and entrepreneurial drive to provide for the growing numbers of authorized medical marijuana patients in the Spokane area who couldn’t provide for themselves.

Comparing that to the circumstances and likely sentence of the man who murdered Steve Lacey is enough to make one ill. Long after Patrick Rexroat has served his time and is once again a free man, Charles Wright will almost certainly remain behind bars, never seeing his two kids (who are now 10 and 12) grow up. You may not agree with Wright’s choices, or his defiance after being told to close up shop, but you lack a soul if you find any of this to be acceptable for a civilized society. And that comment is directed most pointedly at Eastern Washington U.S. Attorney Michael Ormsby and his office.

Next Tuesday, August 9, 1:30pm at the federal courthouse in Spokane is Wright arraignment. There are some preliminary plans for protests both here in Seattle and in Spokane. If anyone would like to participate, please feel free to email myself or contact the CDC.

Last week’s contest was won by wes.in.wa. It was the location of a deadly shooting in Grand Rapids, MI.

This week’s contest is both a location in Washington AND it’s related to something in the news from July. Good luck!

Just as it was before the events of the last legislative session, Tacoma is the flashpoint for the fight between those working to create access points for medical marijuana patients and the anti-drug establishment trying to turn back the clock. The News Tribune’s Jordan Schrader, who is – unlike his paper’s editorial board – both competent and sane, provides the latest news:

Tacoma’s push to shut down more than 30 medical-marijuana sellers inched forward Monday, even as outlets in unincorporated Pierce County received letters from the Sheriff’s Department putting them on notice.

Sheriff Paul Pastor said his office sent letters to about 15 dispensaries late last week to notify them about the county’s interpretation of a state law that took effect Friday.

Businesses say the law gives them a way to keep operating, but Pastor said it puts limits on any seller wanting an “atmosphere of lots of clients and easy access.”

“They’re allowed as long as they conform to the law,” Pastor said. “It’s my understanding that would strongly limit what they were able to do.”

I have a feeling that both Sheriff Pastor and the lunatics at the News Tribune editorial board are going to be somewhat disappointed. While the new law certainly disallows direct sales to any authorized patient who comes in off the street, individuals who want to set up a storefront and run a business will likely still be able to do so by organizing their customers into a series of different gardens and possibly even rotating them in and out of those gardens in order to conform with the law. Even without rotating them, a single person can belong to many different gardens and therefore maintain a fairly large network of patients from a single location and still stay within the letter of the law.

And in a post from Seattle Weekly today, Keegan Hamilton reports that Ed Troyer from the Pierce County Sheriff’s Office struck a far more reasonable tone when asked how aggressive they’d really be. It’s possible that over the course of the past few days, Pierce County officials are realizing that the mess created by the partial veto did little more than force dispensaries to reorganize their business models.

Of course, no one seems to have any idea what the law exactly allows. And even fewer people know what the hell the folks at the News Tribune editorial board are smoking. They see Seattle’s tolerance of these medical marijuana access points as a cover for drug trafficking, but that makes absolutely no sense. By having them operate above ground, it’s far easier to ensure that they’re not selling to unauthorized people. In Tacoma, on the other hand, if city and county officials are successful at putting those who want to play by the rules out of business, the drug traffickers win. It’s nothing short of amazing that the city’s main newspaper can’t figure that out.

The bigger potential problem here, however, is that with medical marijuana still illegal under federal law, there’s a genuine concern that overzealous local officials could invite in federal enforcement to take down even the providers who follow state law. And Tacoma voters will provide a good gauge of how popular such a move would be when they vote in November to make marijuana law enforcement the city’s lowest priority.

If this is where we’re at right now with the debt ceiling negotiations, I’m starting to become legitimately worried that Republicans in the House will succeed in driving this country over a cliff.

Last week’s contest was another really tough one. After a clue, wes.in.wa came up with the right location. It was La Center.

This week’s contest is related to something in the news from the month of July. Good luck!

The state’s new medical marijuana law took effect Friday. But between the governor’s reckless partial veto, the unresolved state-federal conflict, and a state Attorney General who hides under his desk every time he hears the word ‘marijuana’, no one seems to have any idea exactly what the law does or doesn’t allow.

To give a brief illustration of how fucked up this is, here’s part of the new law [emphasis mine]:

The medical use of cannabis in accordance with the terms and conditions of this chapter does not constitute a crime and a qualifying patient or designated provider in compliance with the terms and conditions of this chapter may not be arrested, prosecuted, or subject to other criminal sanctions or civil consequences, for possession, manufacture, or delivery of, or for possession with intent to manufacture or deliver, cannabis under state law, or have real or personal property seized or forfeited for possession, manufacture, or delivery of, or for possession with intent to manufacture or deliver, cannabis under state law, and investigating peace officers and law enforcement agencies maynot be held civilly liable for failure to seize cannabis in this circumstance, if:

…

(2) The qualifying patient or designated provider presents his or her proof of registration with the department of health, to any peace officer who questions the patient or provider regarding his or her medical use of cannabis;
(3) The qualifying patient or designated provider keeps a copy of his or her proof of registration with the registry established in section 901 of this act and the qualifying patient or designated provider’s contact information posted prominently next to any cannabis plants, cannabis products, or useable cannabis located at his or her residence;

One rather large problem here…section 901 and the registry were vetoed by the governor. So instead of finally having a class of patients protected from arrest, we still have a medical marijuana law that makes it impossible to avoid getting arrested by any police officer who decides to overrule your doctor’s recommendation.

Despite this, there’s a new section (1102) that still supposedly leaves the door open for cities like Seattle to allow for what this bill was supposed to do before Gregoire mutilated it: Regulate the distribution of medical marijuana.

(1) Cities and towns may adopt and enforce any of the following pertaining to the production, processing, or dispensing of cannabis or cannabis products within their jurisdiction: Zoning requirements, business licensing requirements, health and safety requirements, and business taxes. Nothing in this act is intended to limit the authority of cities and towns to impose zoning requirements or other conditions upon licensed dispensers, so long as such requirements do not preclude the possibility of siting licensed dispensers within the jurisdiction. If the jurisdiction has no commercial zones, the jurisdiction is not required to adopt zoning to accommodate licensed dispensers.

But as I mentioned on Tuesday, defense attorney Douglas Hiatt thinks that this section is invalid. In his opinion, because there’s still only an affirmative defense (while all marijuana possession remains illegal at the state level), Seattle and other municipalities can’t regulate it. In his opinion, the state isn’t allowed to regulate what remains an illegal activity. Nick Licata, in a statement regarding the proposed regulations for Seattle dispensaries, appears to misstate Hiatt’s case [emphasis mine again]:

This ordinance is the City’s response to a bill passed by the Washington State Legislature earlier this year – and that will go into effect on July 22 – that permits cities to regulate and license the production, processing, or dispensing of cannabis products within their jurisdiction. Although my recent bill received a great deal of media coverage, the legislation will only make sure dispensaries across the city act like the businesses they are, and that we hold them accountable as such rather than only turning a blind eye.

This ordinance is a crucial step forward toward providing clarity for medical cannabis dispensaries in the area, particularly in wake of the new state law. While the federal government still prohibits the production, processing, dispensing, and possession of medical cannabis, responding to the state government’s new rules is a responsibility that will minimize the impact of changes to the roughly 25,000 Seattle medical cannabis users.

Some opponents of the legislation have questioned whether the City has the authority to regulate a federally prohibited substance, such as medical cannabis. The legislation in every way recognizes that there is a federal prohibition, but also takes the needed steps to ensure safety and basic standards of dispensaries in Seattle. Regardless of whether the business is illegal, we want to make sure it is not jeopardizing the rights, health or safety of the surrounding community, which is why this ordinance is so important.

That’s actually not what Hiatt is questioning. Hiatt is questioning whether Seattle can regulate a substance that remains illegal at the state level, not the federal level. Now I’m still not sure whether Hiatt’s opinion makes sense legally (although I’m aware that several attorneys strongly disagree with him), but it’s not good that no one even seems to understand what he’s even arguing. As another attorney I spoke to mentioned, this will eventually be decided in a courtroom – probably fairly soon – and it’s really hard to predict how any judge is going to interpret all this.

One thing that does seem to be clear about the law is that anyone setting up shop in Seattle (or any other tolerant city) to provide medical marijuana must abide by the framework of Section 403, which defines “collective gardens”. Thanks to the governor, simply selling medical marijuana to authorized patients remains illegal, so if folks want to set up a storefront, they’ll have to organize their business in a way that segments their customer base into 10-person cooperatives and ensure that people only get supplied with medicine from their own designated garden. With the City Council estimating that there are roughly 25,000 medical marijuana patients in the city, it could then require roughly 2,500 collective gardens to supply them all. Some of those could probably function independently in a private setting among acquaintances, but many others will likely require some entrepreneurial help organizing themselves. And it’s these large networks of patients and collective gardens that the city has an interest in regulating.

As I mentioned above, Douglas Hiatt is arguing that cities and towns can’t regulate it at all. And even if his argument has a legal basis, the politics of it are murky. Most cities want to make sure that marijuana distribution happens in a place that’s safe for both patients and the community as a whole. They’d love to have all this commerce happen in commercial and industrial areas. But if there’s an incentive to stay small enough as to not be seen as a “business”, people will strive for that. And this will inevitably lead to grow operations staying within residential areas and largely hidden. From a political standpoint, Hiatt thinks this will lead to people getting mad and demanding change. But it could also backfire and lead to futile attempts at moratoriums (maybe not in Seattle, but possibly elsewhere), which might also be against the law. No one knows.

Of course, the punch line to all of this (if you have to choose just one), is that Attorney General Rob McKenna – the gubernatorial hopeful who thinks that the individual health insurance mandate is an egregious abuse of federal power, but that the federal prohibition on marijuana is just dandy – is simply refusing to deal with any of this. When Liz Jones from KUOW contacted his office, they claimed that his office is not involved in the issue. And honestly, I have no idea if that’s a good thing or a bad thing at this point.

– News reports on Laura Ruderman have stated that she’s running for the 1st Congressional District seat being vacated by Jay Inslee, however in her FEC Statement of Organization filing, she left the district field blank. On June 28, the FEC sent her a letter asking her to specify which district she plans to run in.

– Remember those Hitler-loving teenage twins who started a band called Prussian Blue? Well, they’ve changed quite a bit since then…

– Scott Morgan writes about the myth that support for marijuana law reform is political suicide. This actually reminded me of an incident recently at Drinking Liberally in Burien. A certain city council candidate for a city just outside of Seattle showed up with his campaign manager on a night when I came by to collect signatures for I-1149. The candidate himself was very forthright with me that not only did he think marijuana should be legal, but that we should even look at different ways of dealing with harder drugs. But his campaign manager (both men were probably in their 50s) sternly advised him not to sign my petition. He was convinced that if it became public that he signed a petition to legalize marijuana, it would wreck his chances in the campaign.

I found that to be laughable and said that in the greater Seattle area today, the opposite is almost true. Failing to support the legalization of marijuana could actually hurt you politically. Not to mention that Ron Paul, who’s been on record supporting the legalization of marijuana for over twenty years, keeps getting re-elected in the one of most conservative parts of the country. But this is how many folks in the political establishment still think. The taboo that marijuana represented long ago still lives on in the minds of political consultants, even though the political risks to supporting reform are non-existent today.

Later on at that Drinking Liberally event, though, State Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon – one of the youngest, if not the youngest, member of the state legislature – signed my I-1149 petition as that same campaign manager tried to warn him not to.

– Seattle has become the first city in the state to move forward with a plan for regulating medical marijuana establishments. Under the parts of the bill that escaped the governor’s veto pen, it’s now legal for a group of up to 10 authorized patients to band together and form a “collective garden”. And there’s nothing in the new law that prevents someone from opening up a storefront and making it the shared access point for a large number of those collective gardens (Seattle alone probably has more than 20,000 authorized patients, meaning the city could have over 2,000 collective gardens). The city of Seattle has an interest in controlling where those access points will be located and have them pay business taxes just like any other establishment.

But now, attorney Douglas Hiatt is threatening to sue the city over the regulations. I’ve worked with Douglas a lot for I-1149 and I’m frankly baffled by what he’s doing. When I emailed him about why he was planning to sue, he told me that it’s because marijuana is illegal at the state level still, so the city can’t regulate it. After re-reading the actual language of SB 5073 that passed, I don’t think that’s true, but that’s actually beside the point. These are regulations that will allow for Seattle to have a system of access for medical marijuana that’s above-ground and – while still an administrative mess (thanks governor!) – better for patients. And the relevant local law enforcement figures are perfectly ok with it. The only entity I would expect to nitpick the legality of all this in order to shut it down is the DEA, not someone with a well-earned reputation for defending the state’s medical marijuana patients in court.

Last week’s contest was won by milwhcky. It was the golf course in Davie, Florida that was the actual filming location of Bushwood Country Club in Caddyshack.

Here’s this week’s, a location somewhere in Washington. Good luck!

I’m a little late on the gloating on this one, but I was certainly happy to see DOC head Eldon Vail step down from his post earlier this month after he got busted having an affair with a subordinate. Although if this state had a press corps that considered coverups of lying corrections officers as newsworthy as marital infidelity, he would’ve resigned over a year ago.

Last Friday, the Obama Administration’s DEA finally replied to a 9 year old request to reschedule marijuana out of Schedule I in the Controlled Substances Act. The response was as predictable as it was insane.

We stop being surprised by this stuff, and all weekend I was at a loss to even know what to write about this, but it begs us to take a step back and look at just how completely bonkers the anti-drug establishment in this country has become. The report claims that marijuana has a high potential for abuse, has no currently accepted medical use, and that it lacks even accepted safety for use under medical supervision.

Just to make this as clear as possible, the American Medical Association has already asked the Federal Government to review its classification after concluding that it has some medicinal benefits that scientists should research further. As far back as 1999, our own government’s Institute of Medicine concluded that there were only mild safety concerns with the drug if it wasn’t smoked – which it doesn’t have to be. A European company called GW Pharmaceuticals already produces a medicine called Sativex directly from marijuana plants that’s used in the UK, Canada, and now Germany for MS patients. And to top it off, the Federal Government’s own Department of Health and Human Services holds a patent on the plant’s medicinal compounds.

But even beyond all that, this is the Obama Administration’s DEA – led by someone, Michele Leonhart, who he appointed – saying publicly that they think that marijuana is a more dangerous drug than cocaine, opium, oxycodone, and methamphetamine, all drugs found in Schedule II; which means that – unlike marijuana – it can be safely used with a doctor’s supervision. We can laugh all we want at the crazy shit that Michele Bachmann says, but she’s never said anything close to as crazy as that. And this is coming from the administration who came into office in 2009 saying that they were going to put science ahead of ideology?