Tulare Board expresses opposition to Props

The Foothills Sun-Gazette
By Paul Myers

While some voters may be wringing their hands over which way to vote, the leaders of Tulare County have firmly made up their mind on at least two propositions on the ballot this year. Last week the Board of Supervisors passed two resolutions voicing their concerns over proposition 64 and 57.

Proposition 64 decriminalizes the recreational use of marijuana. The proposition allows people aged 21 or older to possess, process, share or transport no more than one ounce of marijuana for personal consumption and not for sale. As well, it allows for people to grow no more than six plants indoors or on private property, again for personal use, and subject to reasonable local regulations.

And while the language allows for local governments the option and ability to ban commercial marijuana activities, that is not what stands in the way of the board. A Tulare County board report noted that, “The safety and well-being of Tulare County residents is of the upmost priority to the Tulare County Board of Supervisors. Studies have suggested that the legalization of medical marijuana can lead to an increase in youth addiction, impaired driving while under the influence of marijuana, respiratory issues, emergency room and hospital marijuana related admissions, and a possible increase for the underground black market distribution and sales of marijuana.”

Read More


El Dorado County Board of Supervisors oppose Proposition 64, marijuana legalization initiative

Yuba Net.com
By El Dorado County

El Dorado County Board of Supervisors meeting, the Board voted unanimously in favor of a resolution opposing the passage of California Proposition 64. Proposition 64 would legalize the recreational use of marijuana for adults aged 21 years or older in the State of California.

In opposing the proposition, the Board of Supervisors cited, in a resolution, evidence that marijuana use and secondhand exposure pose health risks, including increased risk for cancer, heart attack, stroke, reproductive toxicity, respiratory impairment, long-lasting detrimental changes in brain function, and increased risk of addiction. In addition, the Board has concerns about the accessibility to teens, as the full effects of marijuana use on their short and long term health are still unknown.

The Board of Supervisors follows the American Academy of Pediatrics in its opposition to the proposition due to the potential harm marijuana could have to children and adolescents. In addition, the California State Sheriffs’ Association has issued a position statement opposing efforts to legalize recreational marijuana. Marijuana remains a Schedule I drug under the federal Controlled Substances Act and is defined as having a high potential for abuse.

Read More


Propositions galore on statewide ballot

Daily Republic
By Daily Republic

California voters face 17 statewide initiatives on the Nov. 8 ballot, a whopping number of measure that cover the gamut of governmental affairs.

Proposition 64 – Marijuana Legalization. Initiative Statute: NO. California is barely getting its feet wet in terms of medicinal marijuana. Let’s work though that process first. A delay will also allow Californians to see how full legalization works in those states where recreational marijuana use is newly legal.

Read More


AAA – Auto Club of Southern California recommends a ‘No’ on Prop 64

Westways
AAA of Southern California

The Auto Club opposes Proposition 64. We have a genuine traffic-safety concern related to the legalization of recreational marijuana use, including marijuana candies, foods, an concentrates. It has taken generations to educate the driving public about drinking and driving and to strengthen laws to reduce drunk driving. Proposition 64 would create new traffic-safety issues and increase the problem of impaired driving.

Read More


Slick Proposition 64 is bad for public health

The Sacramento Bee
BY THE EDITORIAL BOARD

The War on Drugs has been a quagmire. Far too many marijuana users – particularly people of color and poor people – have been arrested and jailed.

But voters should be wary of Proposition 64, the well-funded, slickly marketed initiative on the Nov. 8 ballot to fully legalize recreational marijuana in California. Despite our concerns for social justice, we recommend holding off on this measure.

Too much of it appears commercially, rather than socially driven. It backslides from California’s leadership in the war on another product that is generally smoked – tobacco. And from stoned drivers to potent edibles that, in other states, have endangered children, it poses too many public health risks that could be headed off if we just took our time and legalized in a way that isn’t so rushed.

Read More


Vote ‘no’ on half-baked Proposition 64

The Fresno Bee
BY THE EDITORIAL BOARD

When it comes to policy and social change, California often leads. We try new ways of tackling issues, enabling other states to see the results and then decide whether to follow, stay put or branch out on their own.

Of late, California has carried the flag forward on climate change, green energy and family leave. Our causes haven’t always been liberal, either. The Golden State was among the early adopters of three-strikes criminal sentencing laws in the 1990s.

But California should wait on legalizing marijuana for recreational use. Yes, polls show that Proposition 64 is favored by voters, especially millennials. Our recommendation is that people young and old dig deeper into this slick, well-funded initiative – and then vote “no” on their Nov. 8 ballot.

Read More


The California Association of Highway Patrolmen Reiterate Their Strong Opposition to Proposition 64

Press Release
September 14, 2016

The California Association of Highway Patrolmen – representing the 7,900 highway patrol officers who are the front line of defense against impaired drivers on our highways – released the following statement from Doug Villars, President of the California Association of Highway Patrolmen to clear up any confusion regarding their position on Prop 64:

“Recent numbers out of Colorado show that marijuana related traffic deaths have increased almost 50 percent since 2013 which is exactly why we strongly oppose Prop 64. For the proponents of Prop 64 to say that they worked with law enforcement to craft this measure is misleading and when you see Colorado law enforcement asking for a timeout to deal with the problems they are facing it should give us all pause on this important issue. We will continue to educate media, local and state leaders, but most importantly we tell California voters that Prop 64 did NOT get it right.”

Read More


Editorial: Vote no on Prop 64

St. Helena Star
Star Editorial Board

California needs to reform its marijuana laws, but Proposition 64 isn’t the right way to do so – at least not yet.
Prop 64, one of 18 propositions on the November ballot, would legalize marijuana for recreational purposes without regulations that are needed to shield kids from marijuana-related ads and protect all of us from drivers who are under the influence of marijuana.

Read More