Council to discuss marijuana, livestock

Advertisement

The Craig City Council plans to vote on an emergency moratorium of all medical marijuana dispensaries at its meeting tonight, which begins at 7:30 p.m.

The possible ordinance was placed on the agenda after it became known that a resident was interested in opening a dispensary in Craig.

The ordinance would prevent the operation of any and all dispensaries, as well as preclude the city from accepting or approving any building documents for proposed dispensaries.

In addition, the ordinance would repeal any other ordinances conflicting with the moratorium and give a date for when the moratorium would end.

Before the council's vote, city officials expect to hear a presentation from Craig resident Shaun Hadley and his business partner, Larry Hill, of Longmont, who plan to open a local dispensary under the name Craig Apothecary.

Marijuana was legalized in Colorado for medicinal purposes after voters approved a constitutional amendment in November 2000. However, its sale and use remain illegal under federal law.

The council will have a public workshop on medical marijuana and other issues at 5:30 p.m.

The council also plans to discuss zoning regulations regarding livestock within city limits and a change to noise ordinances.

The livestock issue surfaced at the council's last meeting, Aug. 11, when resident Lex Burton approached the city about keeping horses on his property at the north end of Colorado Street.

Burton said he has kept horses there since before the city annexed the property. He said he had a verbal agreement with officials at the time that he could keep horses as long as he was alive.

Comments

Wapitipoker 5 years, 3 months ago

Good old compassionate Craig Colorado. Worried that your neighbor may be smoking pot in the privacy of their own house to ease their pain or help them eat? I am not at all surprised by this but I applaude Mr Hadley for fighting for it.

0

A_Happy_Lawyer 5 years, 3 months ago

I would like to note a minor, but material misstatement in this article. There is no Citizen "interested" in opening a medical marijuana dispensary in Craig that I am aware of. There is Craig Apothecary, which is already open, and lawfully so, under the laws of Colorado.

What exactly is the "Emergency" the City is using as an excuse to hastily enact legislation? Generally speaking, "Emergency" legislative powers should not be used unless there is a genuine emergency, and certainly not to harass lawful private business owners. Article II Section 12 of the Craig City Charter states "To meet a public emergency affecting life, health, property or the public peace, the Council may adopt one or more emergency ordinances. . ." If there is such an emergency in Craig, I am unaware of it, and the City has yet to define it.

Does the City intend to pass an Ex Post Facto law? See, for example, the U.S. Constitution, Sec. 10, Clause 1 ("No State shall . . . pass any Bill of Attainder, or ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligations of Contracts), or the Colorado Constitution, Article II, Section 10 ("No ex post facto law, nor law impairing the obligation of contracts, or retrospective in its operation . . . shall be passed by the general assembly.")

At the very heart of this prohibition is the notion that citizens cannot be deprived of life, liberty, property, or reputation for an act which, at the time it was committed, did not violate any law. The Ex Post Facto clause serves three main purposes; First, it provides notice to the public to assure that legislative acts give fair warning of their effect. Second, it protects the right of citizens to reasonably rely on existing laws in choosing what actions to take, without fear that the laws will be changed capriciously or maliciously. Third, it preserves the principle of separation of powers by ensuring that legislatures do not meddle with the judiciary's task of adjudicating guilt and innocence in individual cases.

The fact that any proposed ordinance restricting the lawful operation of a dispensary in Craig would appear, on its face, to be specifically tailored to affect one specific private business owner, and nobody else, is further cause for concern.

Unless of course, it is not the intention of the City to make this Ordinance retro-active, but only to prevent more dispensaries from opening in Craig. That would not be an Ex Post Facto law. It would simply be granting an exclusive monopoly to Craig Apothecary.

The Craig City Council has decided to invoke its "Emergency" powers specifically to deprive any citizen from being able to read the exact language of the proposed Ordinance until after it is passed. If not for this so-called and as-yet-undefined "Emergency" the City Council would have to abide by the Craig City Charter under which it operates, (specifically Article II, Section 13) which requires publication and availability for public inspection.

0

Henry_Round_Bottom 5 years, 3 months ago

The Criag Daily press needs to get their facts right. From what I know, the Craig Apothecary has been open since saturday, and had its grand opening yesterday. So to state that it is a proposed business is false. It IS a beyond that point and is actually open and serving customers from what I'm aware of. Medical marijuana will help people and is an asset to the community. If city council 'outlaws' it, they are going against the state laws that they are sworn to uphold, and I wouldnt be suprised if someone callled the ACLU on the Craig city council.....Again.

0

GreyStone 5 years, 3 months ago

@ A_Happy_Lawyer

In just a FEW words, can you explain to me how the federal Controlled Substances Act makes medicinal marijuana illegal and then Under the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, does federal law supersede Colorado state law when the two conflict on the use of marijuana ?

0

A_Happy_Lawyer 5 years, 3 months ago

@ GreyStone. Very good question. There is no doubt that Federal law trumps State law, if they are in conflict. However, two things to note:

  1. Neither the Craig City Council, the City Police, County Sheriff, The Colorado State Patrol, nor the Colorado Attorney General, have any authority or jurisdiction to prosecute violations of Federal Law.

  2. The U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, is the "top cop" in America, and ultimately, in charge of all Federal Prosecution conducted by all U.S. agencies, nationwide. He has publicly stated, in February 2009, unequivocally, that the Federal Government will no longer seek to raid or shut down or prosecute ANY medical marijuana dispensary, unless there has been a violation of BOTH Federal and State law. The Feds have not abolished laws against medical marijuana, but they have made it clear that from now on, they will defer to State law on the matter.

Here is a video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjZeW2...

It's not the best one, the audio is terrible, I apologize, but at the moment I don't have time to look for a better one. You can Google for more info regarding Mr. Holder's position on this subject, if you'd like, I know much has been written about it.

Btw, I would like add that I am NOT a medical marijuana user, Craig Apothecary is not a client of my practice, I have never met Mr. Hadley or his partner, and I have no financial interest in the matter whatsoever. I simply chose to speak out on this subject because I believe in responsible marijuana reform, and I felt that this was a topic worthy of conversation.

0

GreyStone 5 years, 3 months ago

@ A_Happy_Lawyer

Thank You. Just wondering about a previous comment made by the Craig Police Chief concerning the Federal law. This helped clear up a perceived conflict on my part of Federal and State law.

0

GreyStone 5 years, 3 months ago

Looks like The Craig City Council plans to step in it again:.might be wise to stick with the livestock issue and let someone else, like the lawyer they never listen to, sort out the medical marijuana dispensaries issue.

0

Sumarjn 5 years, 3 months ago

Happy Lawyer says:

Btw, I would like add that I am NOT a medical marijuana user, /> I simply chose to speak out on this subject because I believe in responsible marijuana reform, ...

Sounds like the Happy Lawyer supports pot heads in general. (criminals) And, of course, a first step for pot heads is to hide behind the medical pot ruse. The Happy Lawyer may not be a medical pot user, but he/she certainly sounds like a typical pot head.

[responsible marijuana reform] > Happy Lawyer

Pot is a gateway drug which DESTROYS> the lives of many of our youth. +Young people who do not smoke marijuana end up with a better quality of life and higher levels of educational achievement than their peers who do smoke marijuana. Those who do smoke pot early in life have lower incomes and greater health problems later in life, according to a study. Dr. Phyllis Ellickson, of the Rand Corporation's Drug Policy Research Center, and her colleagues analyzed survey data from 5,833 California and Oregon middle school students. The participants completed surveys six times over a 10-year period between the ages of 13 and 23. Later, 44 percent of them responded to survey questions at age 29.

Of the 5,833 participants, 3,185 identified themselves as marijuana users, while 2,648 reported they did not use marijuana. The scientists divided the marijuana smokers into four groups, based on the age at which they began using and their subsequent level of use.

Pot Smokers Have Lower Incomes Compared responses from the marijuana users at age 29 with data from age-matched abstainers, researchers found that abstainers had an overall higher level of educational attainment, better health, greater life satisfaction, and a lower rate of other drug use.

In contrast, those who had reported a relatively high level of marijuana use at age 13 fared significantly worse than all other groups on overall health and yearly earnings.

People underestimate the harm marijuana can cause on many aspects of their lives, the study authors said.+

How can you ever "responsibly reform" those stats?

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.