My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:261
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:261
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/15/2005 4:12:27 PM
Creation date
9/15/2005 4:11:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/6/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:261
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />September 21, 2005 <br /> <br />{Individual letters to be addressed to: <br /> <br />Senator Dianne Feinstein <br />Senator Barbara Boxer <br />Representative Pombo <br />Representative Stark] <br /> <br />Re: Medical Marijuana: H.R. 2087 <br /> <br />Dear <br /> <br />I am writing to you on behalf ofthe City Council for the City of Pleasant on. As you <br />know, the California electorate passed Proposition 215, "The Compassionate Use Act of <br />1996" ("Act") to allow seriously ill Californians to obtain and use marijuana for medical <br />purposes. The Act particularly highlights marijuana as beneficial in the treatment of <br />cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, and migraines. <br /> <br />Through this Act and subsequent legislation (S.B. 420, 2003), state law has attempted to <br />create some parameters for the legitimate use of marijuana for medical purposes. Quite <br />honestly, this effort has achieved mixed results. Although ill Californians may be better <br />able to obtain marijuana for medical purposes, there also appears to be a fair amount of <br />fraudulent or illegal use. In addition, there has been a proliferation of large-scale <br />"medical marijuana dispensaries," leading to secondary impacts in our communities, such <br />as increased criminal activity, loitering and traffic. In considering increased local <br />regulation, cities and counties are caught between effectuating the will of Californians in <br />enacting Proposition 215 and the federal government's absolute prohibition on dispensing <br />or using marijuana even for medical purposes. To protect our neighborhoods, we would <br />be forced to regulate an activity that is illegal under federal law - an unenviable position. <br /> <br />It seems that a possible solution to this conundrum would be for the federal government <br />to declassify marijuana from a banned Schedule I drug to a Schedule II drug under the <br />federal Controlled Substances Act. This would allow doctors to prescribe the drug in <br />legitimate situations and for it to be dispensed through the already established and higWy <br />regulated pharmaceutical framework, like morphine or other addictive drugs that have <br />some medicinal uses. Accordingly, we urge your support of such efforts, including H.R. <br />2087 introduced this year. <br /> <br />If you or your staff wishes to discuss this issue in more detail, I encourage you to contact <br />Police Chief Tim Neal at 925-931-5100. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Jennifer Hosterman, Mayor <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.