Olive Branch to decide on smoking law

Olive Branch citizens may not be able to smoke in restaurants after tonight's board of aldermen meeting but they may be able to smoke after 9 p.m.

Aldermen will vote on one of two smoking ordinances that are less comprehensive than the ordinance previously voted down by the city officials.

Olive Branch Aldermen voted 5-2 against a comprehensive ban that would ban smoking in all Olive Branch businesses except bars.
The two laws aldermen will choose from tonight focus only on city facilities and restaurants.

The first proposed law will ban smoking in city facilities and restaurants but will allow restaurants where alcohol is served to choose if they want to allow smoking from 9 p.m. until midnight.

The second proposed law will ban smoking in city facilities and restaurants completely.

Both ordinances will allow bars restricted to anyone under 21 years of age to permit smoking.

Both ordinances ban smoking within 25 feet of an entrance or exit of an area where smoking is prohibited.

The main concern of the opposing aldermen at the previous meeting was the restrictions a comprehensive law put on businesses, especially small business owners and manufacturing facilities.

Alderman George Collins said his main concern is pushing the ban on manufacturers whose workers would have to leave the facility instead of smoking in an on site break room.

Alderman David Wallace read a prepared statement saying businesses should have the right to choose whether or not to ban smoking.

Alderman Harold Henderson said he has quit smoking but can't tell someone else if they can or can't smoke.

Alderman Dale Dickerson said he would be willing to look at a less restrictive rule.

"All the talk I have heard about smoking bans concerns restaurants," Dickerson said. "It took away every smoking area except outside, bars that allowed on people over 21 or your home. It took away every other spot left to smoke."

County to Discuss Proposal to Put Smoking Ban on 2012 Ballot

One County Councilman wants to see a smoking ban proposal go before voters in 2012, but hasn't been able to discuss the issue with the rest of the council.

Councilman Joe Cronin, R-District 1, said he submitted a bill about a month ago that would ban smoking in most public places, but the bill has not been placed on the County Council agenda. The bill would put the smoking ban proposal on the Aug. 7, 2012 ballot.

“That’s going to brought up at this meeting,” Cronin said.

The work session begins at 5 p.m. Monday in the St. Charles County Executive Building on Third Street.

When asked if he has enough support to pass the bill, Cronin said, “I guess we’ll see on Monday.”

Council Chairman Joe Brazil, R-District 2, said he opposes bringing the issue to a vote.

“I’m still against it,” Brazil said. “In Cronin’s ordinance, he excludes the casino, and that’s totally unfair.”

Cronin said the exemption applies only to the gambling floor where gambling takes place. It does not include bars and restaurants within a casino.

“Supposedly, when Illinois banned smoking from casinos, it cost them about $800 million in lost revenue to St. Louis County,” Cronin said. “People are afraid if there’s a smoking ban in the St. Charles casino, people will go across the river to gamble. There’s 1,600 jobs in that casino.”

Casinos in St. Louis County are exempt from the smoking ban.

“There was not enough support on the council to get this done without an exemption for the casino,” Cronin said.

The bill, as it currently is written, also allows exemptions for private clubs with no paid employees, tobacco stores or cigar bars.

A cigar bar is defined as a place that generates 60 percent of its revenue from selling alcohol and 25 percent of its revenue from cigar sales; has a humidor on the premises, and is not otherwise subject to the ban.

New public smoking ban need more specified regulations

A new national smoking ban has gone into effect, which extends to all enclosed public areas. Our reporter Zhang Ni finds out how the new rules are working in the capital.

"Is the announcement in Chinese or in English? If in Chinese, it makes no sense to viewers."

"Dear passengers, for your health and safety, it is prohibited to smoke anywhere in the station."

In the busiest railway station in Beijing, the smoking ban seems effective. The station has been a non-smoking area since 1996. The official says they have their own control measures.

Song Jianguo, Spokesman of Beijing West Railway Station said "Inside the station, if our staff see someone smoking and do not stop them, there will be some punishment for our staff, from a spoken reprimand to penalties."

"But no penalties for smokers?"

"We have no right to impose fines."

Then who does impose fines? The official didn't give an answer.

Just outside the entrance, there are smokers everywhere. It's also listed as a public area, but during the one hour when we film, no one stops them.

Song Jianguo said "The public square in front of the station is not in our jurisdiction. The local government should be in charge."

The regulation hasn't reached far. These restaurants just across the street are all unfamiliar with the new smoking ban.

"Do you know there's a new smoking ban in public areas?"

"No."

"Has anyone inspected here?"

"No, no one."

"Are you the boss here?"

"No, I only work here."

"Do you know there's a new smoking ban in public areas?"

"No, I don't."

"So we can just smoke here and no one ever says anything about it?"

"I'm only here to eat."

A smoking ban is nothing new in China. Since China joined the WHO's Framework Convention on tobacco control 5 years ago, local authorities have introduced the ban in public areas. Beijing was the first city to do so. But there's no specific law or any strict regulation in the country.

Wang Yuqing, President of Chinese Society for Environmental Science said "At most of the sites I inspected, even when there is a "No Smoking" sign, people are still amoking. And there is seldom any punishment."

China has the world's largest number of smokers, as well as the biggest revenue from tobacco taxes. Some provinces like Yunnan depend on tobacco industry, which provides over 45 percent of government receipts.

Ying Songnian, President of Admin. Law Research, China Law Society said "If they do their work from the tobacco control aspect, they would try to reduce the volume of cigarettes or take measures to make people not want to smoke. But this also has a contradictory aspect: to make tobacco a highly profitable business. Of course they want more and more people to smoke."

The new regulation still does not specify punishments for business owners who defy the ban nor specify penalties for smokers in public areas.

Given the high profits of the tobacco industry, how to specify the punishment for smokers in public areas and how to manage the penalties are turning into a hot potato for the departments concerned. And without specified punishment, the new regulation risks remaining on paper.

Progressive Chairman Peter B. Lewis aims to put medical marijuana issue

The movement to legalize medical marijuana in Ohio has been reignited.
Peter B. Lewis -- the billionaire chairman of Progressive Corp. and well-known medical marijuana advocate -- is seeking proposals to run a campaign to legalize medical marijuana in Ohio. The issue would go on the ballot in 2012.
"We want to see what kind of proposals that come in and we'll proceed from there," said Graham Boyd, the former director of the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project and an adviser to Lewis.
While Democratic lawmakers have tried and failed in recent years to pass medical a marijuana law in Ohio, Lewis' latest inquiry represents a different tack.
By going directly to voters through a ballot initiative, Lewis and his supporters could circumvent a GOP-controlled legislature and a Republican governor who likely would oppose such a law.
"Obviously with his backing, and more importantly his dollars, that's the only way getting passage of this bill is going to happen in the state of Ohio," said Rep. Kenny Yuko, a Democrat from Richmond Heights who has introduced bills to legalize medical marijuana.
Lewis, whose company is based in Mayfield Village, is among the most wealthy, high-profile supporters of medical marijuana legalization. Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, estimates that Lewis has contributed between $40 million and $60 million to the cause since the 1980s.
"No person on the face of this Earth has donated more money to reform marijuana laws than Peter B. Lewis," St. Pierre said.

The ballot initiative campaign Lewis is pursuing would include grassroots organizing, opinion research and advertising, according to a copy of his request for proposals. The campaign also would be designed to be a model for similar efforts in other states.
"Of the states that continue to prohibit medical use of marijuana, Ohio stands out as having particularly high levels of voter support," the request for proposals reads.
Indeed, an April 2009 Ohio Poll, conducted by the Institute for Policy Research at the University of Cincinnati, found that 73 percent of Ohio adults favored allowing medical marijuana.
And putting the issue on the fall 2012 ballot, when President Obama runs for re-election, would be an advantage.
"It's more of a Democratic issue than a Republican issue and I think the Democrats are going to come out in full force" in 2012, Yuko said. "It's going to be a good position for our medical marijuana supporters to be in."
Medical marijuana is legal for qualified patients in 15 states, according to Lewis' request for proposals.
Legislation introduced last month in Ohio would permit medical marijuana use to treat diseases such as cancer, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis and sickle cell anemia.
A spokesman for House Speaker William G. Batchelder, a Republican from Medina, said the bill is not a high priority.
Boyd, Lewis' advisor, would not say whether similar proposals were being sought in other states. He said the proposals for a campaign in Ohio were sent to people who realistically would submit responses, which are due by May 15.
St. Pierre, of NORML, said the outcome of a ballot initiative in Ohio could reverberate throughout the Midwest.
"It's definitely a bellwether state -- both politically and culturally," St. Pierre said. "Whatever passes in Ohio will probably serve as a pretty good benchmark for the rest of middle America."

Pilot program would limit medical marijuana use

A two-year pilot program to establish a medical marijuana distribution center aims to treat patients and crack down on abuses that have led to more than 500 people under age 21 receiving marijuana prescriptions in Hawaii County alone, a state senator said.

Senate Health Chairman Sen. Josh Green (D, Milolii-Waimea) added that as many as half of the prescriptions on the Big Island were going to recipients under the age of 30.

“As a physician I find (it) pretty hard to wrap my mind around,” said Green, who also is an emergency room doctor. “I’m not talking about someone who’s born with a terrible degenerative condition and just had to have any kind of medical solution. I’m talking about people with common injuries.”

Under the pilot program proposed in Senate Bill 1458, medical marijuana prescriptions would be limited to patients suffering from multiple sclerosis, cancer, HIV, AIDS and/or glaucoma. It would establish a “compassion center” for distribution on an island where the Department of Health determines there is the greatest need, based on the number of prescriptions.

The proposal is scheduled for a vote in a joint House-Senate conference committee tomorrow. Both sides must agree on the bill before it can advance to a final floor vote.

Rep. Ryan Yamane, lead negotiator for the House on the bill, said members have expressed concerns on not specifying the location site for the distribution center.

“We do feel that there are certain areas that probably would be able to enhance the success of that facility,” said Yamane (D, Waipahu-Mililani). “If we’re going to actually look at this as a true pilot program, we want to make sure we get accurate and valid information.”

Under current law, qualifying patients may possess an “adequate” supply of marijuana limited to a total of three mature plants, four immature plants and one ounce of usable marijuana per each mature plant.

Medical marijuana: City leaders subpoenaed over farm

Folks in this dusty little delta town have never shied away from a fight.

They've got a doozy on their hands right now.

Sacramento County District Attorney Jan Scully has subpoenaed the entire city brass, from the police chief, mayor and city manager on down to former planning commissioners, to testify today before a grand jury - or possibly face jailing.

The reason? Isleton's leaders are being summoned because they approved a medical marijuana farm on the edge of town that Scully thinks in some way could violate state law, which would in essence make them a bunch of dope dealers.

At least that's how the city brass is reading the subpoenas.

This is a city that last drew headlines for liberally issuing concealed-weapons permits to anyone who asked. Over the past 16 years, it has also managed to rebuff seven scathing grand jury reports, including one in 2008 that called for the city to disband on the grounds that it was in "a state of perpetual crisis."

The district attorney's latest insinuations have residents spitting mad.

"I guess you couldn't print the kinds of words some people are using around here, but let's just say I have never seen anything like how the district attorney is treating us - it's over the top, downright hostile," said City Manager Bruce Pope. "We're not going to just take it lying down."

He said he and the other dozen people ordered to testify today in Sacramento intend to refuse to talk.

Taking the Fifth

"Oh, we'll show up because we legally have to, but we are going to plead the Fifth," Pope said, referring to the Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which protects citizens from testifying on matters that incriminate themselves. "If the district attorney has a problem with medical marijuana, maybe she should just arrest herself, because the county already has dispensaries it's collecting money on, and the county pays her salary."

Scully's spokeswoman, Shelly Orio, said her office has no comment. But a curt letter to the City Council that preceded the April 13 subpoenas said Isleton's decision to establish the pot farm probably "violates state and federal statutes" and could lead to charges against all local officials associated with it.

Orio wouldn't say how many subpoenas were issued, but townsfolk guess at least a dozen went out.

'We want to remain a town'

The flap is the biggest thing in years to hit this low-income city of 800 people.

Isleton - about 15 miles northeast of Antioch, alongside the Sacramento River - is happily known for its annual crawdad/Cajun festival, great striped bass fishing, Old West Chinese heritage, and a quaint main street of 1920s-era buildings, several of which used to be whorehouses and gambling halls. But it's also drawn an outsize number of headlines, considering the city's size, for unpleasantries, including five recall elections and the grand jury probes for everything from the weapons permits to financial irregularities at City Hall.

The city's budget is balanced today only because Pope - hired four years ago to clean up the sloppy books that led to the '08 probe - laid off nine people, which was most of the municipal staff. That brought the City Hall workforce to five full-time employees, including Pope.

One of those is the city's lone police officer, hired last week. The Fire Department is all volunteer. Two-thirds of the businesses on Main Street are shuttered.

"We are one of the smallest towns left, and we want to remain a town, so we need this money from that marijuana farm," said lifelong resident Christine Lubner, 45. "We've all asked around, and nobody can tell me what the problem is.

"We are anything but dull here, sure, but why can't they leave us alone?"

MT lawmakers OK marijuana bill in initial votes

The state House and Senate gave initial approval Tuesday to a bill that would overhaul Montana's medical marijuana industry -- spelling the likely demise of the state's multimillion-dollar pot industry.

The measure negotiated by a conference committee appears to be on track for passage after Tuesday's 34-16 vote in the Senate and 72-28 vote in the House. If it passes a final vote, Senate Bill 423 will then head to Gov. Brian Schweitzer's desk.

Schweitzer hasn't indicated whether he would sign or veto the overhaul measure, but has suggested something could be done to control the marijuana industry. In a budget deal with Republican leaders reached Friday, Schweitzer added funds to the state budget for medical marijuana contingent on the passage of the overhaul bill.

The measure carried by Senate Majority Leader Jeff Essmann, R-Billings, aims to do away with the state's profitable marijuana industry and replace it with a grow-your-own system. Under the bill, the drug would be given to patients free of charge on compassionate grounds and it would limit a provider to three patients. There is no limit now.

The proposal would likely lead to a significant reduction of the state's overall users, which was nearly 30,000 people at the end of March.

Schweitzer already has vetoed the Republican-backed plan to repeal medical marijuana use in the state, saying it went against the will of the voters who approved the law in 2004 to help seriously ill Montanans.

Montana's number of marijuana users has grown by nearly 10 times since 2009. The growth has some worried that the large marijuana use will attract federal action against the drug the U.S. government deems addictive, dangerous and illegal.

Several medical marijuana businesses were the target of federal raids last month, and a letter from U.S. Attorney for Montana Michael Cotter issued last week said the prosecution of businesses that sell marijuana is a core priority of the Department of Justice.

But lawmakers disagree on the best way to control such a growth industry.

Supporters say the overhaul bill reins in massive marijuana grow operations that are endangering the state's public safety by attracting gang activity and youth use.

Opponents say the proposed system is too restrictive, would deny the drug to patients in need and may force both buyers and sellers to dealing on the black market.

During the debate of the issue Tuesday, many supporters said the bill was a compromise measure to significantly reduce the pot industry without doing away with it entirely, many Republican lawmakers' preference.

"If we let this go any longer we will have 50-, 60-, 70,000 people on it," said Sen. John Brenden, R-Scobey, about the fast growth rate of marijuana users.

Sen. Jim Shockley, R-Victor, agreed, saying the bill was a necessary harness on an out of control industry, acknowledging opponents' criticisms of how strict the measure could be.

"Are people not going to get treatment that need it? Yes. But on the other hand people who shouldn't be using it aren't going to get it," Shockley said.

Opponents of the bill took issue with the feasibility of the proposed system that requires goods to be grown and transferred to consumers for free. A number of lawmakers said the drug trade would be driven to the black market or leave the elderly without a provider to turn to.

"In the final analysis, I don't think this is an open enough system to really help the people that I think are out there who really, truly are benefiting from medical marijuana," said Sen. Cliff Larsen, D-Missoula.

Sen. Mary Caffero, D-Helena, said the bill rules on producing marijuana products and powers given to law enforcement were "disconnected from reality" and the bill was "riddled with absurd provisions" that could put patients at risk.

"This bill is aimed at making it less legitimate, less safe and therefore less quality," said Caffero.