Arizona’s top health official has a warning for cities and counties: Get your zoning regulations in order — and soon.
State Health Director Will Humble said Friday if voters approve Proposition 203 next month it falls to him to approve the license requests for the approximately 120 marijuana dispensaries that will be allowed to open up around the state as well as the sites each of them is using to cultivate the crop.
Humble said the only restriction in the voter initiative is that these facilities can’t be within 500 feet of a school. Other than that, he said he has to give the go-ahead if the proposed site meets other legal requirements.
“If the city or town doesn’t have the zoning restriction in place at the time we receive our application, I’ve got no choice but to approve that marijuana dispensary,’’ he said. “It might be next to a playground or a church or a park or someplace that the city’s like, ‘Are you kidding me, Department of Health Services, you let them have the dispensary right next to our playground or our public pool?’ ”
Humble said many of the larger communities already have started the zoning review process. But they may not be moving fast enough.
He pointed out that Proposition 203 directs him to have the program up and running four months after the Secretary of State’s Office certifies the ballot results.
That, he said, puts the deadline sometime in March. And Humble said cities not only need to craft the new zoning regulations by then but also have the legally necessary public hearings and have the changes adopted by elected officials.
Humble said he also fears that officials in many smaller communities are oblivious to the measure and may not have even started thinking about the zoning issues.
The initiative, if approved, would allow anyone with a doctor’s recommendation to obtain up to 2 1/2 ounces of marijuana every two weeks from one of the state-regulated dispensaries.
Proponents of the measure, backed financially by the national Marijuana Policy Project, say there are people with many medical conditions that could benefit from being able to obtain and use the drug. At the moment, though, that is not an option — at least not legally — as possession of any amount of marijuana remains a felony.
That list includes glaucoma.
But that argument has taken a hit from the American Glaucoma Society which issued a warning in its newsletters against sufferers from treating their condition with marijuana.
On one hand, the warning concedes that marijuana does lower the pressure within the eye. But the problem is that effect lasts for only several hours, meaning that patients would need to use the drug day and night.
“Failing to do so can lead to a rebound spike in eye pressure, which can be damaging,’’ the warning states. It also says that marijuana lowers blood pressure, possibly leading to optic nerve damage.
Andrew Myers, who is coordinating the pro-203 campaign, said that should not deter voters from approving the measure.
“A very small percentage of medical marijuana patients are glaucoma patients,’’ he said. And he said there are studies showing marijuana is effective at treating the disease, with glaucoma patients benefitting in other states where the drug already is legal.
Anyway, Myers said, there is no reason that marijuana “should be available as a tool in a physician’s tool kit’’ to deal with not just glaucoma but other diseases.
The initiative also is taking hits from people like Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall. She said other states where marijuana has been made legal for medical purposes have shown an increase in crime. And much of that, she said, is related to the distribution system.
“Its primary effect will be to establish a system where drug seekers, including addicts, can easily obtain recreational drugs and where commercial marijuana dispensaries will become storefronts for dope dealers,’’ she said.
Myers countered that the Arizona law is different than the system in other states, including California. Aside from the limit on the number of dispensaries, he said they have to be non-profit operations and there are background checks required on those who work there.
Humble’s concerns go to the other end of the equation. He worries about the creation of “marijuana medical mills ... where physicians are handing out a marijuana recommendation in 15 minutes in exchange for $150.’’
The health director said he is exploring whether he has the legal authority to put some constraints on physicians, perhaps with an overall monthly limit on the number of recommendations they can issue.
One side issue in the debate is how the change in law will affect employers.
A provision in the initiative makes it illegal for an employer to discipline or fire a worker who has a medical marijuana recommendation solely because of a positive test result for the drug.
Myers said this provision was inserted because the test for marijuana is different than for alcohol and most other drugs: It indicates only residue in the body, not that someone is impaired. He said there is no reason that someone who uses the drug on Sunday should be fired because a test days later shows positive.
It does allow a worker to be disciplined for smoking on the job or for being actually impaired.
But several attorneys who specialize in labor law said that latter option would be difficult for employers to prove, leaving them powerless to run drug-free workplaces.
At this point, the campaign for Proposition 203 is better financed than any opposition. At last report it had $640,523 in donations, most of that from the Marijuana Policy Project. Foes operating as Keep Arizona Drug Free had collected just $6,685.
Soozan posted at 4:01 pm on Sun, Oct 3, 2010.
Does anyone know about the zoning regulations on pharmacies in general? Seems like there is one on every corner and in every grocery store nowadays. They dispense drugs, many of which are far more harmful than mj. People die from prescription drug abuse and overdoses, but no one has ever died from od-ing on mj. Ever. Given it is a safer drug than much of what is regularly prescribed for depression, pain, etc etc, and safer to use than alcohol, another legal drug, I don't see why there has to be different zoning regulations than for a regular pharmacy. (Unless there are tougher zoning regs on pharmacies than it seems.)
TrDaPo posted at 4:26 pm on Sun, Oct 3, 2010.
It is sad to see state after state fall stupidly for the scam of medical marijuana. It isn't about medicine at all, just a bunch of folks who want to smoke pot and people who foolishly believe their lies. If it IS a medicine, then it SHOULD be passed and managed in exactly the same way that all medications are. I'd be the first to say that our FDA isn't ideal but meds by popular vote is such a horribly bad/inappropriate idea. With all the push to lower impaired driving accidents/deaths, this will only increase them. Arizona will regret this if it passes. California started it all and it's a complete joke there.
TrDaPo posted at 4:29 pm on Sun, Oct 3, 2010.
It is sad to see state after state fall for the scam of medical marijuana. It isn't about medicine at all, just a bunch of folks who want to smoke pot and people who foolishly believe their lies. If it IS a medicine, then it SHOULD be passed and managed in exactly the same way that all medications are. I'd be the first to say that our FDA isn't ideal but meds by popular vote is such a bad idea. With all the push to lower impaired driving accidents/deaths, this will only increase them. Arizona will regret this if it passes. California started it all and it's a complete joke there.
PeacefulCat posted at 4:46 pm on Sun, Oct 3, 2010.
Mr. Humble seems to be vieing for the star role in the new "Reefer Madness" movie...
The Arizona Supreme Court when hearing argument on Hardesty v Arizona stated that the medical argument that there is no medical value to marijuana could not be used by the state. There was too much evidence that it does have medical value.
Rich posted at 6:45 pm on Sun, Oct 3, 2010.
Placebos have medical value. If someone is in pain and it helps whether mentally or physically who is being hurt? Personally I think denying it to people is just a bit sick and demented. All you're really saying is 'live in pain, because I've been fed a bunch of prejudices about it.' If they think it helps, that's enough, stop being sadistic, ignorant horse's behinds.
OldLehiLady posted at 7:50 pm on Tue, Oct 5, 2010.
After reading about positive results for some medical problems I voted for medical marijuana twice. Now after seeing what has happened in CA (which was already insane) I'm voting no.
If this should pass again any zoning should place dispensaries and crops atop high peaks with no vehicular passage possible. We don't need even more peril on our roads and highways.