The following is an article that appeared in the local paper last month:
From what I understand the James Kennedy mentioned in the piece has withdrawn his suit for personal reasons. That’s too bad. He might have had a shot at clarifying the situation. Shit happens, I guess.
I know the guy. With his permission I thought I’d make an attempt at clarifying his position. Following is my letter:
“City IDs possible areas for pot collectives.” There it was at the head of the Columbian _Clark County Section_ (10-18-12). The headline isn’t disingenuous, but if one closely reads the article – is the city’s intent? Industrial zoning, closed between the hours of… no signs or symbols…
Now wait a minute. I was under the impression the purpose of the recently enacted law allowing individuals holding a medical professional’s recommendation for the use of cannabis was nothing more than a mechanism whereby “patients” could legally support one another.
You know, those individuals for whom cannabis is a last-resort treatment for their malady; folks for whom standard procedures didn’t prove effective, the sick, lame, and possibly dying.
And the city would turn that communal effort into a business? And further, a business that couldn’t possibly exist under the proposed unattainable zoning requirements!
Why would my city government purposely deprive a particularly vulnerable sub-set of our community the means to provide a treatment for themselves? I’m at a loss.
Perhaps you would care to ask them? I would encourage you to do so. I can’t seem to be able to get a reasonable answer.
The citizens of the city don’t seem to care if their governing body would prohibit a humanitarian act passed by the state legislature. After all, who gives a fat rat’s about a few pot heads, right?
“First they came for…”