Received AUG 5 2005 QInuufu nf ~au lBiegn Walter F. Ekard Received Chiefadministrative Officer

Notwithstanding the uncertainty surrounding the medicinal value of marijuana, California voters decided that it is appropriate for seriously ill Californians to have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medicinal purposes if certain conditions are met. Agree. California voters approved thepassage ofProposition 215, which "exempts patients and defined caregivers who possess or cultivate marijuana for medical treatment recommended by aphysician from criminal laws which otherwise prohibit possession or cultivation of marijuana."

The San Diego County Board of Supervisors has been blinded by its prejudices against medical marijuana use and has failed to implement the will of California voters. Disagree. On October 1,2002, the SanDiego County Board of Supervisors voted to oppose the City of San Diego's Medicinal Marijuana Task Force's proposed program. InMay 2003, the Board voted to oppose the passage of Proposition 215. Reasons for opposition related to existing legal conflicts between State and federal law. To date, legal issues remain unresolved. It isthe County's position that implementing theprogram, without knowing the full legal implications andpotential liabilities to the County, isnot inthe best interest ofthe citizens and taxpayers.

San Diego County needs to set an example for all California with respect to implementation of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 and S.B. 420. Agree. The County of San Diego is setting an example for allCalifornians by thorough and thoughtful investigation of all aspects of thisprogram in order to protect the safety of San Diego County citizens.

The City of San Diego took prompt and continual action to attempt to implement the Compassionate UseAct of 1996 and S.B. 420. Disagree. The City of San Diego did nottake any action to address the Compassionate Use Act of 1996until 1998. Further, the City has discontinued actions toimplement the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 and S.B. 420. Implementation ofthe City Verification Card Program was suspended after the passage of S.B.420.

Uniform enforcement guidelines are necessary to balance the rights and needs of legitimate patients and caregivers with the interest of law enforcement to protect San Diegans from illegal use, cultivation, possession and sale of marijuana. Agree. Uniform enforcement guidelines areimportant for the success ofthe program. Since there still remains aconflict between federal and State law, the resolution ofthis key issueis imperative before uniform enforcement guidelines can be established. However, once the uniform enforcement guidelines are established and distributed among lawenforcement agencies, the County of San Diego Board of Supervisors has no authority over the manner in which local and federal law enforcement agenciesinterpret or enforce laws.

Failure of all law enforcement agencies within San Diego County to implement uniform consistent guidelines has resulted in inconsistency and a failure to fulfill the mandate of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. Disagree. There currently areno uniform guidelines forthe implementation of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.

A medical marijuana identification card would not be a drain on the County treasury. Disagree. The implementation of anynewprogram without adequate financial resources would forcethe County of San Diego to redirect funds to that program. Prior topassage of S.B.420, which allows for collection of fees, this program would have been anunfunded, state-mandated program.