Jump to content
  • entries
  • comments
  • views


Bob Heflin



In the battle for implementation of the MMMAct, I disagree with those who say that Judge O'Connell's rantings are irrelevant. Schuette, Judge O'Connell, Sheriff Bouchard, PA Cooper, and the Municipal League are all using the same talking points. Editors and journalists are spreading these 'blowback arguments' in the mainstream press. The major issue being discussed is the confusion about what is allowed by the MMMAct. In an attempt to 'clarify' the law, the public is being told that it needs to pass all of this Republican legislation to gut the MMMAct. Is it 5 new bills being proposed?


Continuing to ignore the extremely bad publicity suffered by the medical marijuana movement in the past few weeks will not solve the issue related to abuses in the system by 'bad actors' in the medical marijuana movement.


So how does all of this downstate activity and negative publicity affect Northern MI patients 180 miles away?


TC Record Eagle editorial today:


Editorial: Medical-marijuana law needs some tweaking

The issue: Judge said law is unclear; Our view: He's right.


Sep 17, 2010 7:24 am



"Our legislative and administrative officials must make a choice: They can either clarify the law with legislative refinements and a comprehensive set of administrative rules, or they can do nothing," O'Connell wrote. "In this situation, no decision is, in fact, a decision to do nothing."


The lack of precedent was apparent as Traverse City worked to adopt an ordinance regulating land-use issues tied to the act. A committee that included medical marijuana patients and caregivers, the city planner and the city attorney had to make decisions about where marijuana cultivation and distribution was appropriate.


The Michigan Medical Marijuana act allows patients to possess up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana and 12 plants, and designated caregivers to grow and distribute plants to up to five patients. That could mean as many as 72 marijuana plants in a single-family home.


It became clear there were few guidelines; the committee also worried an ordinance could expose the city to potential litigation if it prevented residents from exercising a right afforded by state law.


Fixes won't be easy. Because the act was a ballot initiative, administrative rules also may have to go before voters or get approval from 75 percent of the Legislature.


Voters showed compassion for those suffering chronic pain or from the effects of chemotherapy.


The state now must ensure that act of empathy doesn't have a dark side.



Today's paper (in a city that had 67% vote yes on the MMMAct and passed the most progressive mm ordinance in MI ) also had a poll asking respondents:


Poll: Does medical-marijuana law need tweaking?


Yes 67.68% (111 votes)

No 21.95% (36 votes)

Not sure 3.05% (5 votes)

Don't care 7.32% (12 votes)

Total Votes: 164



Recommended Comments

There are no comments to display.

Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...