Cannabis in Spokane:

Regulation & Enforcement By Ian Moody, SDP Executive Director 1st Edition - January 2012

A Non-profit Social Welfare Organization

Cannabis in Spokane: Regulation & Enforcement by Ian Moody, SDP Executive Director 1st Edition - January 2012

For more information or additional copies of this report contact:

Spokane Designated Provider 308 W. 1st Ave. Suite 201Spokane, WA 99201

Phone: (509)217-6048e-mail: [email protected]

Or download a .pdf copy at www.sdpdirect.org

Ian MoodyExecutive Director

Page Contents

i About Spokane Designated Providerii Author's Preface

1 Washington State Law1 Federal Issues

2 Major Stakeholders2 Patients & Providers 2 Cannabis Entrepreneurs 2 General Public & Minors 3 Law Enforcement

3 Full Legalization Advocates

3 How Washington Communities are Addressing the Issue 3 Seattle3 Ellensburg4 Tacoma4 Arlington 4 Spokane

4 The Future of Cannabis in Washington State

5 Recommendations for Spokane5 Task-force 5 Lowest Enforcement Priority Policy 5 Regulation 5 State & Federal Reforms

6 Proposals

Appendices7 Cannabis Regulation Ordinance 10 Medical Cannabis Task-force Resolution 12 Resolution in Support of Reclassification 13 Lowest Enforcement Priority Policy Resolution 14 Full Legalization Advocates in the News/Useful Links

About Spokane Designated Provider

Spokane Designated Provider (SDP) – 'Solutions for Cannabis Patients' A Non-profit Social Welfare Organization

Mission – Since 2008

To develop and implement safe, consistent, and reliable systems through which cannabis patients can obtain their medicine. We also seek to educate our members, as well as the general public, on the benefits of responsible cannabis use and foster change regarding marijuana laws.

Goals & Objectives

Safe Access

SDP began as a patient-provider referral service in 2008, in an effort to provide safe access for cannabis patients in the region. We now facilitate access to medicine through our collective garden located in Northeast Spokane.

Education

SDP facilitates free monthly film screenings and focus groups regarding cannabis at the downtown public library. We also make use of our web-blog and multiple social networking sites to educate our members, as well as the general public, on the varying issues surrounding cannabis in our modern society.

Law Reform

The one issue standing in the way of safe, consistent, and reliable access to cannabis in Spokane is the lack of adequate law reform. Since its inception in 2008, the vast majority of our organization's time and resources have been dedicated to state and municipal policy reform, via grass roots organizing, participation in petition drives, and lobbying and advocating at every level of government.

_____________

i

Author's Preface

I founded Spokane Designated Provider in 2008, in response to a raid and felony conviction against a close friend and authorized cannabis patient. This incident, as well as numerous similar actions throughout the region, inspired me seek out better methods for assisting patients.

The proliferation of unregulated marijuana dispensaries in Spokane was also a motivating factor as this phenomena posed a health and safety risk to our community and a threat to appropriate policy reforms. Having worked as a nurses assistant and medication technician within the long-term care industry for over ten years, I've become accustomed to standard systems and protocols for the handling of narcotics and other prescribed medications. For reasons which I touch on in this report, medical cannabis in Spokane and Washington state has fallen far short of these standards.

I present this information from the perspective of a political and entrepreneurial insider within the regional cannabis community; attempting to create a narrative and provide insight to those less familiar with the details of the industry. This edition is void of local crime statistics and economic data and is not intended to be construed as legal advise, nor does it advocate for any particular regulatory schema. Rather, I hope to use this document, and the proposals contained within it, as a foundation for discussing local reforms while considering potential effects on all area stakeholders.

Ian Moody, SDP Executive Director___________

ii

Cannabis in Spokane: Regulation & Enforcement

State Law

In 1998, Washington State voters approved Initiative 692, The Medical Use of Marijuana Act, which was later codified under RCW 69.51A. The purpose of the original law was to provide an affirmative defense in court for cannabis patients with terminal and debilitating conditions.1 It also intended to give physicians the ability to recommend cannabis and give patients the option to allow their caregiver to provide them with medicine, if necessary.2

The law remained virtually unchanged until 2007, when the Washington State legislature passed SB 6032, changing the word caregiver to designated provider 3 and expanding the number of qualifying conditions.4 One year later, the first medical marijuana dispensary opened in Spokane, attempting to exploit these, as well as other, amendments to state law. Upwards of thirty area providers followed suit between 2008-2011.

Finally, in response to the proliferation of dispensaries throughout the state, SB 5073, a bill revising Washington's medical cannabis laws, was passed by the state legislature on April 22, 2011, and included provisions for state-licensed production, processing, and dispensing of medical cannabis.5 However, these provisions were vetoed on April 29, when Governor Christine Gregoire signed the bill into law, under the assertion that state employees may be subject to federal prosecution for participating in such a program.6

The surviving portions of SB 5073 went into effect on July 22, 2011, allowing for 10-patient, 45-plant collective gardens rather than retail-style dispensaries. These collectives may possess 24 ounces of usable cannabis per patient or up to 72 ounces of usable cannabis total.7 They also include provisions eliminating loopholes exploited by many storefronts; limiting designated providers to assisting one patient every 15 days.8

Federal Issues

Spokane's cannabis community sustained a series of almost fatal blows from the United States federal government in the Spring of 2011. Beginning on April 6, 2011, U.S. Attorney Michael Ormsby notified local landlords and dispensary owners to cease and desist or face possible federal prosecution; maintaining that marijuana is still illegal under federal law due to its Schedule I status on the Controlled Substance Act (CSA).9 Many of the city's dispensaries closed their doors independently. However, a handful of storefronts remained open for business.

On April 28 and May 18, 2011, those still open were raided by a joint task force of local and federal agencies, including the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Spokane Police Department.10 Finally, on July 20, 2011, five area providers were indicted on a list of federal charges and could face up to 20 years in prison.11

Since this time, similar events have taken place in other medical cannabis communities, most recently

1

in Pierce, Thurston, and King Counties.12 On November 15, 2011, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington, Jenny Durkan, released a memo, in conjunction with raids by DEA agents on regional dispensaries, implying that federal resources were being used only to investigate, arrest, seize property from, and charge organizations in flagrant violation of federal guidelines, state law, and local policy.13

This trend toward a more targeted approach by law enforcement suggests that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) will respect state and local regulations as long as players are acting within federal guidelines.

Major Stakeholders

Patients & Providers

At the forefront of the debate surrounding cannabis in Washington State are the patients and their providers. Without safe access to medicine, patients are unable to alleviate a number of symptoms related to various conditions without turning to potentially dangerous black-market sources. Likewise, patients and providers are at the highest risk due to inadequacies and inconsistencies in local, state, and federal laws. Not only do they face the threat of home invasion and burglary by criminals, but also raids, arrests, property seizures, and prosecution by law enforcement.

Cannabis Entrepreneurs

Beginning in 2009, cannabis patients and providers in Spokane began grouping together under various business models in order to provide safer access to patients. The most popular model was that of retail distribution in the form of dispensaries. However, local and federal law enforcement found this model to be in violation of both state law and DOJ guidelines14 and thus, were ordered to close in Spring 2011.

In July 2011, SB 5073 went into effect allowing for patients to group together and form 10-patient, 45-plant collective gardens. Many patients and providers have formed non- or not-for-profit organizations in order to facilitate transactions for supplies, equipment, rent, labor, etc. This model, however, is less effective at providing efficient, consistent, and reliable sources of medicine.

General Public & Minors

The lack of clearly defined cannabis policy in Spokane and Washington state puts the health and safety of our community and children at risk. During the dispensary boom over the past few years, some cannabis storefronts were located within walking distance of schools and playgrounds.15 Furthermore, lack of regulation allows for cannabis intended for patients to be diverted to the black-market and, therefore, more easily distributed to minors.

Finally, conspicuous and unscrupulous patients and providers can pose a threat to the general well-being and safety of their neighbors by unintentionally inviting criminals into the neighborhood.

2

Local Law Enforcement

Law enforcement is currently attempting to simultaneously decipher legitimate cannabis patients and providers from illicit growers, interpret muddled state laws, and enforce archaic federal laws. This places undo strain on an already overburdened and under-resourced police department. Furthermore, these policies create and perpetuate animosities toward an agency which finds itself increasingly estranged from the community at large.

Full Legalization Advocates

Second only to lack of timely policy reform from Olympia, full legalization advocates based out of Seattle have done more to hinder progress in Spokane than any other group. An organization called Sensible Washington, formed in 2009 by trial lawyer Douglas Hiatt, has attempted, unsuccessfully for the past two years, to place an initiative on the statewide ballot which would remove all civil and criminal penalties for possession, distribution, cultivation, use, and sale of marijuana. Hiatt's all-or-nothing approach, coupled with a sophisticated public relations campaign on behalf of Washington NORML (the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws),16 legitimized and perpetuated a culture in the region which made it difficult to distinguish medical cannabis activity from illicit.

Trumped-up statewide efforts for full legalization have marginalized the concerns of regional stakeholders. Much of the cannabis community's political talent in Spokane is beholden to this agenda, as is the liberal media.17 These factors have rendered Spokane as nothing more than a pawn in a game between Seattle and Washington, D.C., with local patients and providers paying a severe price.

How Washington Communities are Addressing the Issue

It's important to note that Section 1102 of SB 5073, in essence, provides that cities, towns, and counties may adopt and enforce zoning requirements, business licensing requirements, health and safety requirements, and business taxes.18

Seattle

In 2003, the city of Seattle passed an ordinance making adult marijuana offenses the city's lowest law enforcement priority. This ordinance included provisions for the creation of a Marijuana Policy Review Panel whose responsibility was to oversee timely implementation of the chapter as well as to research and report its effects on overall public health and safety.19

In 2011, the Seattle City Council unanimously passed an ordinance regulating the production and processing of medical cannabis within city limits allowing for safe access to local cannabis patients.20

Ellensburg

The City of Ellensburg also passed a cannabis regulation ordinance in 2011. Unlike Seattle's

3

ordinance, Ellensburg's policy provides for zoning restrictions, including banning collective gardens within 300 feet of schools.21

Tacoma

Tacoma passed a lowest law enforcement priority ordinance in 201122 and created a task-force to research and develop appropriate regulations for cannabis within city limits.23 Furthermore, the City of Tacoma included cannabis policy reform in its 2011 Legislative Agenda.24

Arlington

Many smaller and more rural communities, such as Arlington, have chosen to place moratoria on collective gardens until the state legislature clarifies the issue in its 2012 session.25

Spokane

Spokane's current policy appears to be one of “don't ask, don't tell.” Spokane Municipal Code (SMC) Section 10.15.100 was amended in June 2011, to include language accounting for recent changes made to Washington's medical cannabis laws,26 appearing to allow for collective gardens within city limits. However, the provision pertaining to medical cannabis is vague and does not stipulate whether collective operators are to obtain a business license, pay taxes, or are subject to other local laws, such as zoning and land use codes.

The Future of Cannabis in Washington State

Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles, a long time advocate for cannabis patients in Olympia, has committed to continued efforts in clarifying Washington's medical cannabis law during the 2012 legislative session. Until federal reforms begin to unfold, Senator Kohl-Welles expects to produce a bill this year which is very “narrow and focused,” granting and delegating more authority to counties and municipalities. 27

Furthermore, Governor Christine Gregoire and Governor Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island submitted a petition to DEA Administrator Michelle Leonhart on November 30, 2011, requesting that marijuana be removed from Schedule I status on the CSA and placed into Schedule II status; making it available under federal law to be used as medicine and for research purposes.28 Although this process may take some time, the outcome would mean more autonomy to states in developing appropriate regulations.

Finally, a group called New Approach Washington has placed a measure on the 2012 statewide ballot which would allow for the possession of up to one ounce of usable cannabis by adults, twenty-one and older, if approved by voters. Production, processing, and distribution of marijuana will be regulated and taxed by the liquor control board and revenues will be earmarked for drug abuse and treatment programs. A blood concentration limit for driving under the influence of cannabis will also be established.29

4

Recommendations for Spokane

Based on the information submitted in this report, it is the recommendation of Spokane Designated Provider that the Spokane City Council and the City of Spokane create or enact the following as soon as possible:

Policy Review and Development Task-Force

Communities such as Seattle and Tacoma have created task-forces and committees to discuss local policy proposals, synthesize research, and make specific policy recommendations to city officials.

The creation of a similar committee in Spokane is warranted considering the fact that authority over cannabis will increasingly be delegated to local governments as reforms progress. Activity from the committee must be transparent and all local stakeholders mentioned in this report should have a seat at the table in order to arrive at conclusions which best reflect the region's demographic.

Lowest Enforcement Priority Policy

In 2007, Seattle's Marijuana Policy Review Panel reported no significant increase in marijuana related crimes or marijuana abuse among youth and adults. 30

Lowest enforcement priority policies free up scarce resources to fight more serious crimes while acknowledging the reality that traditional methods for addressing drug related problems in our society are failing.

Regulations

Cannabis regulations in Spokane should be developed transparently, in a deliberative manner, and with substantial input from local stakeholders. Clarification from the state legislature this Spring coupled with recommendations from a local task-force should allow Spokane to arrive at appropriate regulations by the end of the year, if not sooner.

As one of the largest municipalities in the state, it is the responsibility of the city to create an environment which allows for safe access to medicine for qualified cannabis patients through timely policy reform.

State & Federal Reform

Local reforms are less effective if changes are not made to state and federal marijuana laws. Therefore, the City of Spokane should adopt policies and take actions advocating for cannabis reforms on the state and federal level, beginning with endorsing Governor Gregoire's petition to reclassify marijuana and adding cannabis to the city's 2013 legislative priorities next fall.

5

Proposals

Option 1: Cannabis Regulation Ordinance (Draft)

See appendix A

Option 2: Medical Cannabis Task-Force Resolution (Draft)

See appendix B

Resolution in Support of Reclassification (Draft)

See appendix C

Lowest Enforcement Priority Policy Resolution (Draft)

See appendix D

____________

6

Appendix A

AN ORDINANCE REGARDING CANNABIS REGULATIONS

WHEREAS, in 1998 the State of Washington approved the medical use of cannabis by patients with certain medical conditions and now several other states allow for the medical use of cannabis; and

WHEREAS, Washington law also permits patients to grow medical cannabis for their own use or to designate a provider to grow medical cannabis for them; and

WHEREAS, on December 10, 2010, Spokane marijuana providers received notification from the Washington State Department of Revenue regarding their obligation to pay retail sales and business and operating taxes; and

WHEREAS, in 2011 the Washington State Legislature passed ESSSB5073 which permits collective gardens by qualified patients and/or their designated providers whereby they may, consistent with state law, collectively grow cannabis for their own medical use; and

WHEREAS, in 2011 the Washington State Legislature passed ESSSB5073 which permits cities to regulate and license the production, processing, or dispensing of cannabis or cannabis products within their jurisdiction; and

WHEREAS, in 2011 Governor Christine Gregoire signed into law some portions of ESSSB5073, described above, taking effect on July 22, 2011; and

WHEREAS, until recent action on behalf of the Spokane Police Department and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, numerous medical cannabis dispensaries within the City of Spokane were peacefully providing care to qualified patients; and

WHEREAS, the City of Seattle has benefited from the adoption of Initiative 75 in 2003, relating to making enforcement of marijuana-related offenses the lowest priority for their police department and prosecutor’s offices; and

WHERAS, law enforcement resources can be better spent fighting more serious and violent crimes; and

WHEREAS, in 2011 the Seattle City Council passed an ordinance regulating medical cannabis within city limits, allowing providers to continue assisting patients in a safe, consistent, and reliable manner; and

WHEREAS, based on an estimate that four to five percent of Spokane residents, like in other jurisdictions, are medical cannabis users, Spokane may have over 10,000 patients using medical cannabis; and

WHEREAS, the City of Spokane believes that the medical use of cannabis should be conducted in a safe and fair manner for the health, safety and welfare of the community; and

7

WHEREAS, the City of Spokane acknowledges federal prohibition but wants to respond to the changes in state law in a responsible manner that will minimize impacts on patients, providers, and the health, safety, and welfare of the community;

Chapter 10.15BCannabis Regulation

10.15B.010 Title

This chapter shall be known as the Cannabis Regulation Ordinance.

10.15B.020 Cannabis Regulation

The City of Spokane shall establish a system to regulate cannabis as soon as possible under Washington State law.

10.15B.030 Lowest Enforcement Priority Policy

A. As a matter of conserving scarce resources, the police chief and city attorney may adopt a policy making the investigation, arrest, and prosecution of adult cannabis (a/k/a “marijuana”) offenses their lowest enforcement priority.

B. The lowest enforcement priority policy shall not apply to the following: 1. distribution or sale to minors;2. possession, use, distribution, sale or cultivation by minors;3. distribution, sale, cultivation, or use on public property;4. driving under the influence.

C. The lowest enforcement priority policy may apply to cooperating with federal agent to arrest, cite, investigate, prosecute, or seize property from authorized cannabis patients and their providers, as defined under RCW 69.51A.

10.15B.040 Community Oversight Committee

A. A Community Oversight Committee shall be appointed to oversee the implementation of this chapter and shall serve voluntarily. The committee shall be formed and begin meeting within ninety days after the enactment of this chapter, even if some of its members have not been appointed. The committee will be composed of one city council member; one city resident from each district; one authorized cannabis patient; one cannabis policy reform advocate; and one drug abuse, treatment and prevention counselor, each of whom will be appointed by the Spokane city mayor and confirmed by the city council. The committee members shall serve at the pleasure of the mayor, who shall appoint replacement members on an as needed basis with confirmation by the city council. The Spokane Police Department and the Spokane City Attorney shall each send one representative as a nonvoting liaison to each of the committee meetings.

8

B. Responsibilities of the committee shall include:

1. make recommendations to the Spokane city council regarding appropriate regulations; 2. ensure timely implementation of this chapter.

10.15B.050 Severability

If any provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the chapter and the application of such provisions to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

___________

9

Appendix B

A resolution relating to medical cannabis; creating a Medical Cannabis Task Force.

WHEREAS, in 1998 the State of Washington approved the medical use of cannabis by patients with certain medical conditions and now several other states allow for the medical use of cannabis; and

WHEREAS, Washington law also permits patients to grow medical cannabis for their own use or to designate a provider to grow medical cannabis for them; and

WHEREAS, on December 10, 2010, Spokane marijuana providers received notification from the Washington State Department of Revenue regarding their obligation to pay retail sales and business and operating taxes; and

WHEREAS, in 2011 the Washington State Legislature passed ESSSB5073 which permits collective gardens by qualified patients and/or their designated providers whereby they may, consistent with state law, collectively grow cannabis for their own medical use; and

WHEREAS, in 2011 the Washington State Legislature passed ESSSB5073 which permits cities to regulate and license the production, processing, or dispensing of cannabis or cannabis products within their jurisdiction; and

WHEREAS, in 2011 Governor Christine Gregoire signed into law some portions of ESSSB5073, described above, taking effect on July 22, 2011; and

WHEREAS, until recent action on behalf of the Spokane Police Department and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, numerous medical cannabis dispensaries within the City of Spokane were operating openly, without regulation; and

WHEREAS, as the largest municipality in the region, Spokane has a responsibility to create an environment which allows for safe access to cannabis for qualified patients while considering the well-being, health, and safety of the public at large;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE,

Section 1.

That a medical cannabis task force is hereby created to provide feedback and recommendations regarding medical cannabis regulations to the city council and other appropriate commissions, committees, and agencies.

Section 2.

That the City Council will consider, but not be limited to, representatives from the following areas to serve on the Medical Cannabis Task Force:

10

• Medical cannabis collective garden/dispensary operator• Physician/MD/Nurse Practitioner/Naturopathic Doctor• Neighborhood representative • Anti-drug organization representative • Non-profit organization serving patients with chronic illness • Patient with a chronic illness • Former law enforcement employee • Private individual with legal experience • Business community representative • Representative of the Spokane County Regional Health District• Cannabis policy reform advocate • Community Member or Small Business Owner

Section 3.

That the Mayor is authorized to appoint members and a Task Force Chair to the Medical Cannabis Task Force with confirmation by the City Council.

______________

11

Appendix C

A resolution supporting the Governor's rulemaking petition to reclassify cannabis for medical use from a Schedule I controlled substance to a Schedule II.

WHEREAS, in 1998, the State of Washington approved the medical use of cannabis by patients with certain medical conditions and now several other states allow for the medical use of cannabis; and

WHEREAS, RCW 69.51A allows for the medical use of cannabis for residents suffering from:(a)Cancer, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), multiple sclerosis, epilepsy or other seizure disorder, or spasticity disorders; or(b) Intractable pain, limited for the purpose of this chapter to mean pain unrelieved by standard medical treatments and medications; or(c) Glaucoma, either acute or chronic, limited for the purpose of this chapter to mean increased intraocular pressure unrelieved by standard treatments and medications; or(d) Crohn's disease with debilitating symptoms unrelieved by standard treatments or medications; or(e) Hepatitis C with debilitating nausea or intractable pain unrelieved by standard treatments or medications; or(f) Diseases, including anorexia, which result in nausea, vomiting, wasting, appetite loss, cramping, seizures, muscle spasms, or spasticity, when these symptoms are unrelieved by standard treatments or medications; or(g) Any other medical condition duly approved by the Washington state medical quality assurance commission in consultation with the board of osteopathic medicine and surgery as directed in this chapter.

WHEREAS, Washington law also permits patients to grow medical cannabis for their own use or to designate a provider to grow medical cannabis for them; and

WHEREAS, in 2010, the American Medical Association recommended that cannabis be rescheduled for medical use and research; and

WHEREAS, discrepancies between state and federal marijuana laws have put law enforcement and local patents and providers at odds; and

WHEREAS, on November 30, 2011, Governor's Christine Gregoire of Washington and Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island petitioned the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to reclassify medical cannabis from a Schedule I to a Schedule II on the Controlled Substance Act;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE that the City Council supports Governor Gregoire's rulemaking petition* to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to reclassify medical cannabis from a Schedule I to a Schedule II on the Controlled Substance Act.

____________

*See: http://www.governor.wa.gov/priorities/healthcare/petition/combined_document.pdf

12

Appendix D

A resolution urging local law enforcement to make adult cannabis (a/k/a “marijuana”) offenses their lowest enforcement priority.

WHEREAS, in 2003, Seattle adopted Initiative 75 relating to making enforcement of cannabis-related offenses the lowest priority for their police department and prosecutor; and

WHEREAS, in 2007, Seattle's Marijuana Policy Review Panel released the following conclusions:

I. I-75 was implemented and following its implementation there were reductions both in the number of Seattle Police Department marijuana incident referrals and in the number of Seattle City Attorney filings of marijuana charges, although it is impossible to say whether these reductions were the result of I-75;II. There is no evidence of any adverse effect of the implementation of I-75, including specifically

1. no evident increase in marijuana use among youth and young adults:2. no evident increase in crime; and3. no adverse impact on public health.

III. There is some evidence of arguably positive effects from I-75 in the following substantive areas examined:

1. Fewer adults experiencing the consequences of involvement in the criminal justice system due to their personal use of marijuana; and,

2. A small reduction in the amount of public safety resources dedicated to marijuana possession cases and a corresponding slight increase in availability of these resources for other public safety priorities.

WHEREAS, in 2011, Tacoma adopted Initiative 1 relating to making enforcement of cannabis-related offenses the lowest priority for their police chief and city attorney; and

WHEREAS, in 2011, local law enforcement participated in federal raids on area medical cannabis patients and providers; and

WHEREAS, law enforcement resources could be better utilized fighting more serious and violent crime;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE that the City Council urges the police chief, city attorney, county sheriff and county prosecutor to make adult cannabis (a/k/a “marijuana”) offenses the lowest enforcement priority, as this term may be defined in their policy and procedure manuals.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council requests that the police chief, city attorney, county sheriff, and county prosecutor refrain from cooperating with state or federal agent to arrest, cite, investigate, prosecute, or seize property from medical cannabis patients, designated providers and collective gardens as defined under RCW 69.51A.

13

Appendix E

Full Legalization Advocates in the News

Deshais, Nicholas, “The Association,” The Inlander, August 27, 2009, http://www.inlander.com/spokane/article-15216-the-association.html , accessed January 9, 2012.

*It's important to note that subsequent articles chronicling many of the players cited in the above reference have been removed from The Inlander's website.

Deshais, Nicholas, “Reefer rights,” The Inlander, February 19, 2010, http://www.inlander.com/spokane/article-14645-reefer-rights.html , accessed January 9, 2012.

Martin, Johnathan, “Lawsuite filled over Seattle's medical marijuana ordinance,” Seattle Times, December 15, 2011, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017017879_marijuana15m.html , accessed January 9, 2012.

Graman, Kevin, “Advocates disagree on best way to regulate medical pot,” The Spokesman-Review, December 27, 2011, http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/dec/27/marijuana-schism/ , accessed January 9, 2012.

Useful Links

Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington“Regulating medical marijuana” http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/legal/medmarireg.aspx

Washington State Department of Health “Medical Marijuana” http://www.doh.wa.gov/hsqa/medical-marijuana/

Association of Washington Cities “Legislative Advocacy: Medical Marijuana” http://www.awcnet.org/LegislativeAdvocacy/KeyIssues/medicalmarijuana.aspx

*The references on this page, as well as the end-notes bellow, make up the bibliography for this publication.

14

1 Section 2 http://www.eventure.com/i692/ 2 Ibid3 Section 3 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Law%202007/6032-S.SL.pdf 4 Ibid5 Parts VI & VII http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2011-12/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Law%202011/5073-S2.SL.pdf 6 Governor Christine Gregoire to WA State House & Senate, Veto Message on E2SSB 5073, April 29, 2011, Office of the

Governor from http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2011-12/Pdf/Bills/Vetoes/5073-S2.VTO.pdf, accessed on January 4, 2012.

7 Section 4038 Section 404 (2) 9 "Marijuana Stores Violate Federal Law” U.S. Attorney's Office: Eastern District of Washington press release, April 6,

2011 On U.S. D.O.J. website, http://www.justice.gov/usao/wae/news/2011/2011_04_06_Marijuana_Enforcement.html, accessed January 4, 2012.

10 Thomas Clouse, “Feds raid more marijuana dispensaries,” The Spokesman Review, May 18, 2011, http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/may/18/feds-raid-spokane-marijuana-dispensaries/ , accessed January 4, 2012.

11 Meghann M. Cuniff, “Grand jury indicts Spokane medical marijuana dispensers,” The Spokesman Review, July 20, 2011, http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/jul/20/grand-jury-indicts-spokane-medical-marijuana-dispe/ , accessed January 4, 2012.

12 Gene Johnson, “ U.S. Attorney: Only flagrant pot shops targeted,” Seattle Times, November 16, 2011, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016783876_apwamedicalmarijuanasearches2ndldwritethru.html , accessed January 4, 2012.

13 “Search Warrants Served In Investigation Of Marijuana Trafficking And Money Laundering,” United States Attorney Jenny A. Durkan Western District Of Washington press release, November 15, 2011, on U.S. D.O.J. website, http://www.justice.gov/usao/waw/press/2011/nov/mjsearch.html , accessed January 4, 2012.

14 Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden to Selected U.S. Attorney's, Investigations and Prosecutions in States Authorizing the Use of Medical Marijuana, U.S. D.O.J., from http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192 , accessed January 4, 2012.

15 Chelsea Bannach, “Pot dispensers enter pleas,” The Spokesman Review, August 12, 2011, http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/aug/10/pot-dispensers-enter-pleas/ , accessed January 4, 2012.

16 See appendix E17 See appendix E18 Section 110219 Seattle, Washington, Municipal Code, SMC 12A.20.060 from, http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/nph-brs.exe?

s1&s2=marijuana&S3&Sect4=AND&l=20&Sect3=PLURON&Sect5=CODE1&d=CODE&p=1&u=%2F~public%2Fcode1.htm&r=2&Sect6=HITOFF&f=G , retrieved January 4, 2012.

20 Seattle, Washington, ORD No. 123661 from, http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/nph-brs.exe?s1=cannabis&s3&s4&s2&s5&Sect4=AND&l=20&Sect2=THESON&Sect3=PLURON&Sect5=CBORY&Sect6=HITOFF&d=ORDF&p=1&u=%2F%7Epublic%2Fcbory.htm&r=1&f=G , accessed January 5, 2012.

21 Ellensburg, Washington, Municipal Code, ORD No. 4595 from, http://www.mrsc.org/ords/e43o4595.pdf , accessed January 5, 2011.

22 Lewis Kamb, “Voters resoundingly approve Tacoma's pot-priority initiative,” The News Tribune, November 8, 2011, http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/11/08/1898229/voters-resoundingly-approve-tacomas.html#storylink=misearch , accessed January 5, 2012.

23 Tacoma, Washington, Resolution No. 38318 from, http://cms.cityoftacoma.org/cityclerk/Files/CityCouncil/RecentLegislation/2011/RL20110823.pdf , accessed January 5, 2012.

24 Tacoma, Washington, “2011 City of Tacoma State Legislative Agenda,” December 7, 2010 from, http://cms.cityoftacoma.org/cityclerk/files/documents/LegislativePriorities.pdf , accessed January 5, 2012.

25 Arlington, Washington, ORD No. 2011-023 from, http://www.mrsc.org/ords/a7o2011-023.pdf , accessed January 5, 2012.

26 Spokane, Washington, ORD No. C34741 from, http://publicdocs.spokanecity.org/cityclerkrecords/tempimages/ctcqt445wl13hemddabrjt55/86424.pdf , accessed Janurary 5, 2011.

27 Jeanne Kohl-Welles interviewed by Jessica Gao, The Impact, TVW, November 16, 2011, http://tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwplayer&eventID=2011110071 , accessed January 5, 2012.

28 Governor Christine Gregoire to DEA Administrator Michelle Leonhart, Rulemaking petition to reclassify cannabis for medical use from a Schedule I controlled substance to a Schedule II, November 30, 2011 from, http://www.governor.wa.gov/priorities/healthcare/petition/combined_document.pdf , accessed January 5, 2012.

29 See http://www.newapproachwa.org/content/initiative 30 Anonymous, “Seattle marijuana policy review panel concludes I-75 working as intended,” News releases, NORML.org,

January 3, 2008, http://norml.org/news/2008/01/03/seattle-marijuana-policy-review-panel-concludes-i-75-working-as-intended , accessed January 5, 2012.