« Ruminations - 19feb13 | Main | When laws become lawless »

20 February 2013


Gerry Fedor

I am reposting this from RL Crabb's blog as it's too important to not ask this question here too!

My question is specially about the recently passed Medical Marijuana ordinance.

Our Sheriff claimed that his office was receiving 30-50 calls per day starting the 1st of June and going thru the end of November (which is 214 days) and based upon these numbers that would mean that his office received 6,500-10,400 calls.

When the Americans for Safe Access filed a freedom of information request for a copy of these complaints they were told that the Sheriff’s office did not “write them down”….. Now have worked for year as a Police Cadet (just out of High School) I know that this is not accurate as we spent @2 hours every day documenting everything that happened.

This is also illegal as there are laws requiring documentation of all complaints and calls to the Police Department, so again I wonder about the accuracy of our Sheriff?

I went to a local town hall meeting and our Sheriff reported that his office typically receives @102,000 call per year so based upon his information I was in favor of handling this issue as it seemed to be a real problem with it being @7-10% of the total complaints.

This past year the Sheriff reported that his office received 300 complaints, and my reaction was what happened to the thousands of complaints that he was receiving?

The ASA group filed a second Freedom of Information request and received 157 total redacted complaints. Again what happened to the thousands of complaints that we’re supposed to be called in, as this is less than 1 per day? The Sheriff’s office receives more complaints about barking dogs than they do about the whole MMJ issue, and if you consider that the County has supposedly spent $1,000,000 on this issue so far (which is both your and my money) with no end insight. A million dollars to answer .0015% of the complaints in this county! I could never support this restriction on peoples property rights!

The courts have already issued a ruling on this urgency ordinance stating that you cannot file a urgency measure on a state granted right, and even Allison Barret-Green, county counsel (from what I heard) wants this gone as Nevada County has lost the basis for this ordinance, but Sheriff Royal insists that it needs to continue moving forward thru the court system.

I could never support our Sheriff on this issue as he seems to be the problem and not the solution to this issue.

I have now heard that the Sheriff is preventing any type of medication (which could easily handle this issue, much like what was done in Yuba County saving them millions of dollars), so again when I look at his actions I have to wonder when the re-election comes up, will I be able to support the Leader of the California Sheriff’s Association, when it’s pretty obvious that he fabricated the information to eliminate patients rights as granted by a voter pasted law.

I’m saying that I could never support his re-election as would you support a police official that fabricates information to get what he wants?

I would be scared this this is not the first time that this type of fabrication has happened with our Sheriff, and it will not be the last time either. When he get caught doing this, it will be the county residents who will end up holding the financial bag for his actions.

Let’s settle this now and medicate a reasonable solution, saving us all lots of money and insuring that the people who were granted this right move on with their lives.

George Rebane

GerryF 606pm - you enthusiasm and interest in this issue notwithstanding, I'd appreciate that your comments here relate some way to the topic I post on. Please take this as a friendly nudge not to use RR as a town bulletin board for any and all matters of concern. Such comments divert or even destroy the discussion threads that the posting is intended to invite.

Gerry Fedor

I tend to disagree George as this issue is a property right issue and I'm very surprised that the people that stood tall on the NH2020 issue, will not stand with the Patients group as how can the supposed leadership in our county take away a property right for many of those in our community?

I'd like to get your views on this!


George Rebane

GerryF 1124pm - Well enough. Upon reread of your 606pm I do see a property rights connection, but perhaps not the same one that you see. The "Patients group" has a dodgy reputation re MJ, and may actually fog the property rights aspect of the debate, confounding it with the legalization of drugs issue.

Let me request that you first draw your own connection to property rights so I can respond properly. Thanks for asking.

Gerry Fedor

I will try to so in the future, thanks!

I would tend to disagree as this is a local issue, and not a Federal issues not matter how much our Sheriff wants to try to make this a Federal issue(and didn't our Sheriff take an oath to support the laws of the State of California, but he has seemed to forget this fact, and I guess that we all should still "respect" our Law Enforcement officials if they do not follow the oath they've given - I'd like to get your take on this not following the oath they've sworn to uphold...?).

George Rebane

GerryF 738pm - Were it so simple, the sorting out of which constitution prevails where. My own position on the legalization of drugs is a matter of record, much to the chagrin of many of my friends.

But implementing the ability to grow MJ on small private plots (and sell it from there) in developed areas within an environment of conflicting state and federal laws is tough duty for local law enforcement I would not be too tough on Sheriff Royal, he is truly caught between a rock and a hard place both politically and legally.

The comments to this entry are closed.