a reader's journal & virtual public artspace for poz platinum points of view, lgbt political & cultural activism & other metaphoric narratives of the struggle for social justice

Sarah Armstrong, GLACA, to LA City Council: Why two motions to ban medical cannabis?

To LA City Council: Why two motions to ban medical cannabis?
by Sarah Armstrong, November 23, 2011

Good morning.

[My name is Sarah Armstrong.] I’m here today in my capacity as legal laiason to the Greater Los Angeles Collective Alliance, GLACA, which represents exclusively the pre-ICO collectives in this city.

Please oppose any motion to ban [medical cannabis in the city of Los Angeles]. A rush to judgment may well mean years of expensive litigation and voter referrendums.

We don’t understand why two motions to ban collectives are necessary. On October 12th, councilpersons Parks and Perry introduced a motion to ban. Is it really necessary to have two motions? We are sorry that councilmember Huizar has chosen to turn his back on the sick and dying in Los Angeles — people like Richard Kearns.

I hope you will not join him but rather work with the stakeholders to craft sensible regulations. Recent court decisions such as the Pack case simply mean you must regulate in a different manner, not that you cannot regulate.

GLACA has contacted lawyers representing the stakeholders and they would be glad to come down and talk to you about how to regulate in a post-Pack environment.We hope you will avail yourselves of their counsel.

Other city councils have succeeded in regulating medical cannabis, cities such as San Sebastabol, Berkeley, Oakland, West Hollywood and Palm Springs. Los Angeles can do the same. And a well-crafted ordinance will not only eliminate the need to ban, [but] it [also] may well end existing litigation, since all those suing did so because they were seeking a sensible regulation. I would very much like to bring a delegation oflawyers to meet with you in open session to discuss how to regulate.

We are not trying to cause difficulties for the city attorney’s office. any meeting would include their personnel and would take place only if they apprive such a meeting.

You’ve just heard from Richard Kearns, a frind of mine and a long-time activist. It’s for him and people like him that we get up every morning and open collectives, though we do so at great risk to ourselves. Please don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. It is more than possible to regulate in a post-Pack environment and we stand ready to help you with that.

Thank you.

[time index 42:05 – 44:15]


Filed under: Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s




dictionaries & glossaries

elder links

fourth estate --- journalism, politics, storytelling & watchdoggery

HIV/AIDS specific

lgbt specific

medical cannabis

rhetoric, grammar & logic


%d bloggers like this: