|
||||
City Council Moves Forward On Marijuana Tax & Ban On Smoking In Small Parks by Ryan ZumMallen | Archive | 07.07.10 |
+ 10:45am | The Long Beach City Council last night agreed to move forward with plans to ban smoking in the city's small parks, and to tax marijuana sales at local collectives. The smoking ban will affect small parks about five acres in size or smaller. The Council voted 8-1 with Val Lerch dissenting, and the Parks and Recreation Commission will draw up legislation and bring it back to the Council for approval in a few weeks. The Council also voted 8-1 to move forward with crafting a tax on marijuana, this time with Gerrie Schipske dissenting. The next step is a public hearing on August 3 to determine whether the issue will be placed on the ballot. If so, it will call for a 5-percent tax on medical marijuana and a 15-percent tax on recreational marijuana sales made in Long Beach. Long Beach is facing an $18.5 million deficit in this coming budget and has made no qualms about the fact that City staff is trying to boost revenue. The Council must vote to declare a Fiscal Emergency before they can place an item on the ballot that requires just 50% of the vote. There's no reason to think that there will be a problem with that, however, because the City Council did exactly that last year as well. Even if all goes as planned for the Council, voters will have the final say in November. How will you vote? Click here to read our policy on covering the Long Beach City Council.
Comments
Click Here to Join the Discussion on this Story
28 Comments so far.
nobody special so, if we tax medical mj at 5% (but not other prescription meds) and tax recreational mj at 15%, what happens when mj becomes legal and the difference of % becomes a moot point? will there still be medical and recreational mj? and what about the $ that will be spent to fund a special election in Nov? as i understand it, there are no other issues at hand and this will be a special election (at least for LB-$450,000 according to the LA Times). does it not seem that the wiser thing to do would be to wait until after the issue is voted up or down statewide before putting this to the LB voters and spending their $ aimlessly. i know the city is itching to wring more $ out of its citizens by enacting laws requiring new permits, fees and taxes, as well as big brother laws that allow for expensive citations to be issued but when they are spending $4000 plus for feel good solar sidewalk trash compactors one must really question their ethics and motivations not to mention their common sense. do you think that taxing medical mj alone and not other prescription meds will elicit a lawsuit or two that the city will then be forced to spend even more $ defending? just because other cities are doing it doesn't mean LB has to, can, or should. these are the questions i was asking myself as i watched last nights meeting. it's my town, LB, but i am loving it less and less every day. Resident This whole thing really irritates me because the company I work for has a zero tolerance policy for drug use that is mandated through federal contracts. If I happened to be in one of the parks that allow smoking marijuana, at a reserved picnic area, you know, for a family party or something, and someone is at a site upwind, smoking marijuana, I could be exposed to second hand marijuana smoke. Will I be able to have the person move or will I have to leave my family party for fear of losing my job due to a random drug test!!! Reeverse Overall, I think its a good idea. I mean, what other options do we have to raise money? I suppose, we could go back and say, we wouldn't even need to entertain this if City leaders were doing their jobs from the beginning. So, would this be considered drug money or a windfall tax base for the City? I suppose that depends on which side of the fence you're on. But you know the saying, "The grass is always greener..." smoke it if you have it drug testing for pot will be moot if it is legal. all pot smoking is recreational, let's face it. I think it is good, let's see how it all plays out! We may be buying pot in Seal beach instead of Long Beach! Pigeon Nobody special is exactly right! We don't want a special election for this kind of stuff. It's nuts! accuracy woman You guys have to do better with your headlines. The one we received by email was misleading and inaccurate. The Council did not "approve[] Marijuana Tax & Ban On Smoking In Small Parks". No. Not at all. What the Council approved was directing the Park and Rec Commission to consider a ban smoking in such parks. And it approved holding a hearing about a ballot initiative that would give voters the chance to approve a tax on both/either medical and/or recreational marijuana (should prop 19 pass with State voters). Very. Different. From your headline. come on, get it right. Ryan ZumMallen, Editor accuracy woman, we noticed the error and have since corrected the mistake. Thank you for your help and we apologize for any misunderstanding. Thank you for reading and commenting. advocate resident: no, second hand pot smoke will never cause you to fail a drug test. Get real. Smoke it if you have it: Wrong. Not all marijuana use is recreational. You are displaying tremendous, mindboggling ignorance in saying that. Please go visit some people with AIDS wasting who can only eat because of cannabis. Or chemo patients who need it to avoid constant vomiting. Or MS patients who cope with pain using cannabis. Etc etc etc. If you want to be ignorant, go for it, but please keep your ignorance to yourself. advocate nobody, pigeon: It wouldnt be a special election, it would be part of the state wide in november. Man, doesnt anyone bother to do a lick of research before just shooting off their mouth? Birdman of long beach It has always seemed to me that people do less wrong on marijuana than they do on other drugs and booze. I have known many people with severe pain from cancer and other things and the only thing that ever really helped any of them for pain was marijuana. Einstein Heh Nobody Special. You are Special. God don't make no junk - SMILE Sandolla Am I missin' something? How does one legally obtain 'recreational' marijuana...? And moreseo, how will a 15% (let alone ANY) tax be imposed on recreational marijuana sales? I thought the only legal way to get marijuana was with a prescription at a dispensary. And as I stated yesterday, if it IS a prescribed drug (medication, pharmacutical, whatever...) why is it not distributed at a pharmacy when prescribed by a doctor? I don't pay tax on other prescribed medications, so why are the people who need marijuana for medical reasons being penalized? Resident Advocate: Get real, tremendous, mindboggling ignorance, its always nice to hear from the pro marijuana side, besides all the good things it does for some sick people it makes guys like you more colorful. Some simple facts would have been fine. Old Mizer Where do I start? 8^) @Sandolla That was my first thought when I read the article. A recreation Tax of 15%. If it is recreational I would assume it's legal. Does that mean I can purchase it at the local 7-11? If not, where are they going to collect the tax? @Resident I wasn't aware it was legal to smoke marijuana in parks. If this is true, all the people who are against it are a little two faced. No tobacco smoking in a park but smoking marijuana is ok? @Reeverse I agree with you. Just like any other government. Be it Federal, State or Local. The need is to cut back on foolish spending that does nothing for the people. Not get more money. Government at every level has become like someone shopping at Christmas Time. The answer is simple. Get more credit cards and more of them. We won't have to pay the bill. @smoke if if you have it I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. Even if it becomes legal these corporations could keep their policies for testing. The most hilarious part of all that is the most dangerous drugs like alcohol, crack and anything else is out of your system in 24 to 48 hours. THC sticks to the walls of the bladder for an average of 60 days. @Einstein Isn't that the interesting part? It is a plant that comes from God's green earth. If you want to know the real dangerous drugs that make a half trillion dollars for the industry each year, watch the next commercial and listen to all the side effects. "Possible DNA damage and in come cases can cause death." Who is dealing the dangerous drugs and making the big bucks? Not a marijuana pharmacy. THC has been proven to shrink tumors. Will they tell you that? No, the FDA won't allow it. They would rather kill you with chemo therapy and charge you thousands of dollars at the same time. Pardon the french, but let's get real here. Who's screwing who when it comes right down to it?? CHARLIE Well in either case, Accuracy Woman, a tax on medical marijuana, in my humble opinion, would be immoral; a ban on smoking outside in a windy park or on a windy beach is rather pointless don't you think? Old Mizer Ooops... "How will you vote?" I forgot to answer. I would vote no on taxing medicinal marijuana. Recreational would be left blank because I don't where to purchase any. That was back in the days of the "Hippie" for me. I am always tempted to walk up to one of these ice cream trucks going down the street, ..."Yeah, I'll take a dime bag." Sorry if this is off subject but, @nobody special: Where are these solar sidewalk trash compactors? Downtown? Haven't been there in years. One more question. @advocate: With all due respect. If all these ads that constantly tell you and show you how "second hand smoke" can get into your system, (with their little digital animations) wouldn't the same be true for other second hand smoke? You failed the drug test. Why? In all honesty the only reason that comes to mind was the party you were at a couple of nights ago where others were lighting up a joint here and there. *shrugging shoulders* metalbuoy Obama isn't going to legalize it unless he can have a cut of the $$$$ pie. He couldn't care less about personal rights, he is taking them away like Hitler did. If for any reason he would happen to legalize it and not tax it, I would be shocked. Its all about the $$$ not personal liberties. think first, then write 1. the tax on recreational use would only take effect if prop 19 passes the state in november, legalizing recreational use...2. medical marijuana does not require a prescription, it requires a recommendation...prescriptions and pharmacies are federal territory and medical marijuana cant be sold there until federal law changes...smoking in parks is certainly annoying to nonsmokers and banning it sounds like an idea at least worth discussing...hey everyone: this is the COMMENT page, not the COMPLAINT department for people with uninformed opinions lbrez smoke it if you have it wrote: drug testing for pot will be moot if it is legal. all pot smoking is recreational, let's face it. I think it is good, let's see how it all plays out! We may be buying pot in Seal beach instead of Long Beach! alcohol is legal but never on the job, this will stay true to businesses that have a no drug policy, as it includes no drinking on the job, or being intoxicated during work hours or on premisses. lbrez metalbuoy wrote: Obama isn't going to legalize it unless he can have a cut of the $$$$ pie. ... if ca. does legalize it for recreational use that will be enough for the fed to look at this as a possible $ maker. there is consenus that if it does go legal nationally that it could generate $50-70billion a year in taxes. we spend that alone fighting the green stuff. the only thing that will take time in getting there is all the rules/regs to make it legal. we can't govern ourselves so we have to have someone else come up with how to do it. ha! :) Resident Old Mizer: Did you read the article? Quote "The Long Beach City Council last night agreed to move forward with plans to ban smoking in the city's small parks" That was the first line. If it was going to be illegal in parks I dont think they would be talking about the size of parks at all. nobody special @advocate- i'll let the LA Times know you said they were just "shooting their mouth off" when they reported that it would require a special election at a cost of $450,000. Just because there will be a general election in Nov. doesn't mean there are no costs involved for LB if they add something to a local ballot- does it? Perhaps the LB Post can clear that point up for us. Thank you accuracy woman- i was just ignoring the inflammatory headline. @think first, then write-awfully nice of you to clear up some of the details. unfortunately, we can't all be as smart as you and are trying to understand the issues better ourselves. is it OK with you if we have some questions and want more clarity? and the solar recycle trash compactors were written about here on another article. i'd give you the link but it's not allowed here in the comment section. Old Mizer @Resident: I saw that part of the article. IMO, it is just another step in taking away the rights you were born with. @lbrez: The last thing we need are more rules and regulations from the federal government. Which was the very thing that drove so many companies off this continent to produce and manufacture their goods somewhere else. Which is why the unemployment rate is as high as it is today. The state should fight the federal government each step of the way standing behind the words in the 10th Amendment. Are you familiar with that? I take my hat off and bow to the Governor of Arizona. Who is doing just that. While the latest news shows that Obama is suing her for her action. Was that the "Change" you were looking for? They have done a poor job in the past and will continue to do so. What most people fail to see is those who make the decisions. The "Elite" or "Puppet Masters" who run every government around the world. The private bankers and the corporations they own. Which has been proven with the latest 911 that has struck this country and continent. Unlike the media that misleads everyone in their viewing audience, it is not the federal government making the calls on the oil that continues to gush into the water. The corporation of BP is making each and every call that takes place along the Gulf's coast and the water that surrounds it. It is clear that they have no intention of fixing the leak. Not for months to come. While it continues to put toxic chemicals in the atmosphere on a daily basis and is damaging the eco system in a way that can never be healed. Which is why BP has given the latest orders, even to the leader of our OWN coast gaurd, that journalists and photographers may not come within 60 feet of any wild life on the coast that is suffering from the leak. Along with anything else that will show the severe damage that is taking place. Those that do will face fines and felony charges. Is that the America we know? Believe me, this is another 911 of mega proportions and will take a hundred times more lives than the one in 2001. People just don't realize what is taking place because they don't live near it and it is becoming something they see night after night on the evening news. Becoming as disinterested in it as the latest news or rumors about Tiger Woods. These are truly sad days for this Nation and is why future generations will read about the USA in their history books. Telling them about what a great place it use to be. While it no longer exists. Since the oil is heading for the gulf stream along the Atlantic Coast, it will reach all the way up to NYC and across the water. I will be curious of the reactions from our neighbors when it makes it's way across the "Big Pond" and washes up on the shores of their Country. We may be citizens of a different country but we are ALL human beings who share time in this thing we know as "Life." Paul A @Brian. I'm not surprised. A lot of people have trouble supporting the rights of people or groups they don't like. I believe in personal freedom, even for smokers. Smokers are the PC public pariah, and they're always on the receiving end of a new opprtunity for politicians to grandstand on something that isn't a problem when they should be concentrating on real, more pressing problems. If someone's smoking next to you at the beach and it annoys you/ruins your day, employ some common sense, move, just as you would if the annoyance had been a screaming child, a panhandler, et cetera. Would you vote to ban obese people in thongs at the beach, screaming children, or smelly homeless folks because you found them annoying? No, it's not PC, but attacking smokers is. Life is full of things that one finds annoying or doesn't like, but it doesn't mean we should pass laws infringing on other people's rights. One of the excuses for passing the beach ban was that butts were unsightly litter; gee, let's ban fast food, coffee to go, and babies at the beach, because there's a lot more litter from dirty diapers, faxt food wrappers, and coffee cups than there is from cigarette butts. No, I don't really think we should ban these things at the beach, I'm just pointing out the silliness of one reason for banning cigarettest at the beach. I don't think we should tax fast food, or obesity either; I think the government should just leave us alone and stop trying to nanny us to death because it's "for our own good". Old Mizer *Stands up and appluads LOUDLY* for Paul A. Well said Paul and full of wisdom. Maybe you can help me. I see this acronym everywhere. I'm sure PC is not referring to Personal Computer. Can someone tell me what it does stand for? Old Mizer I realize I'm guilty of making long posts. Since I engaged in smoking a little cannabis now and then in my younger years, I have researched the history of it. So I am going to give you some of those facts I have collected. Which would take up to 10 pages so I will try to keep them small and hope they fit together to make some sense. Almsot a century ago,: February 1917: Henry Timken, the wealthy industrialist who invented the roller bearing, meets with inventor George Schlichten to discuss his brilliant yet simple new machine, the decorticator. Motivated by his desire to halt the destruction of forests for wood pulp. The decorticator was capable of stripping the fiber from any plant, leaving behind pulp -- making it the perfect tool to revolutionize the hemp fiber/paper industry. 1920 - 1940: Economic power in the United States begins to consolidate in the hands of a small number of steel, oil and munitions companies, laying the foundation of the national security state. DuPont becomes the U.S. government's primary manufacturer of munitions. 1925: Concerned by the high number of "Goof Butts" (joints) being smoked by off-duty servicemen in Panama, the U.S. government sponsors the Panama Canal Zone Report. The report concludes that marijuana does not pose a problem, and recommends that no criminal penalties be applied to its use or sale. 1936 - 1938: William Randolph Hearst's newspaper empire fuels a tabloid journalism propaganda campaign against marijuana. Articles with headlines such as, "Marijuana Makes Fiends of Boys in 30 Days; Hasheesh Goads Users to Blood-Lust create terror of the killer weed from Mexico." In addition to fueling racist attitudes toward Hispanics, Hearst papers run articles about marijuana-crazed Negroes raping white women and playing voodoo-satanic jazz music. 1937: The year the federal government outlawed cannabis. April 14, 1937: The Treasury Department secretly introduces its marijuana tax bill through the House Ways and Means Committee, bypassing more appropriate venues. Spring 1937: Congress holds hearings on the Marijuana Tax Act. Dr. James Woodward, representing the American Medical Association, testifies that the law could deny the world a potential medicine. Cannabis was already prescribed for dozens of common ailments, and medical researchers were just beginning to explore the therapeutic benefits of the numerous active ingredients in marijuana. 1937 - 1939: Under Harry Anslinger, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics prosecutes 3,000 doctors for illegally prescribing cannabis-derived medications. February 1938: Popular Mechanics describes hemp as the new billion dollar crop. The article was actually written in the spring of 1937, before cannabis was criminalized. Also in February 1938, Mechanical Engineering calls hemp the most profitable and desirable crop that can be grown. 1941: Popular Mechanics introduces Henry Ford's plastic car, manufactured from and fueled by cannabis. Hoping to free his company from the grasp of the petroleum industry, Ford illegally grew cannabis for years after the federal ban. ...and it goes on and on. Cannabis is definitely not a substance that was discovered over the last 5 decades. It's use goes well back into the 1600s before this Nation was ever found. (Sorry, I tried to keep it short) Brian @ everyone, I a new kick these days on how most people have the inability to thin objectively, rationally and logically, and many of these comments reflect that. We need to start with the fundamentals. For one, alcohol is a drug and last time I checked, it is legal, caffeine is a drug and it is legal, cigarets have been certified to cause cancer since the late 60's and guess what my friends...it is legal. So while everyone wants to climb up on their high horse and preach from the mountain top about how and why weed is a gateway drug think about all the things that you are doing in your life that are just as harmful to your body. The fact that weed is still illegal and that people try to argue against it has become one big joke. If we go back to thinking objectively, logically and rationally, then the reasons to make it legal become obvious. Old Mizer Excellent points Brian. It all boils down to what the mainstream media has brainwashed their audience into believing what are acceptable drugs and others that should be illegal. ___ Here is a little more history. It gets even better. ___ William R. Hearst, Sr. and the DuPont brothers. Hearst owned a chain of newspapers across the U.S. as well as a large lumber company. These included newspapers in San Francisco, Chicago, Washington DC and New York. So here's where the two come together. The DuPont family had just patented a paper making process using wood pulp some years earlier. As well, they had a new invention, a kind of synthetic cotton called nylon. Hearst didn't want any competition from hemp in the process of making paper. Because they were aware that one acre of hemp could produce 4 times as much paper as an acre of trees. The DuPont Brothers didn't want any competition with their process of making paper from wood pulp as well as their new invention of nylon. Many things can be produced from the fibers of hemp, ...including fabric. So Hearst had articles printed in his newspapers that marijuana, ...the delicate part of cannabis sativa was an illicit drug that could cause crime as well as misbehavior in an average individual. What was beyond their reach, ...which money could not buy, ...was the simple fact that cannabis is a plant. They knew that you couldn't patent a plant. So if they couldn't make money off it they were going to do everything in their power to spread false rumors amongst the public. Even back then in history, we see that the Main Street Media as well as the people behind it that own them are the real criminals. 1942: The Japanese invasion of the Philippines cuts off the U.S. supply of Manila hemp. The U.S. government immediately distributes 400,000 pounds of cannabis seeds to farmers from Wisconsin to Kentucky. Just four short years after cannabis was outlawed as the assassin of youth, the government requires farmers to attend showings of the USDA pro-cannabis classic, "Hemp for Victory". Also in 1942: Harry Anslinger is appointed to a top-secret committee charged with finding a truth serum for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), precursor of the Central Intelligence Agency (which, in later years, investigated the applications of psychedelic drugs for mind control purposes). The group picks a cannabis-derived form of hashish oil as their truth serum of choice. In 1943, the committee abandoned the idea because test subjects tended to laugh hysterically and get the munchies rather than spill the beans. Hemp was already growing in North America when the first European colonist arrived and European Hemp was brought over in 1606, with the first crop being planted in Nova Scotia. Hemp cultivation in Virginia began in 1611. The Pilgrims introduced cultivation to New England as early as 1632, they learned about the cultivation of hemp from the Native American People. Get this, ...Henry VIII required the cultivation of one quarter acre of hemp for every sixty acres of land under tillage. Mandatory cultivation of hemp continued throughout the New World. The General Court in 1637 at Hartford Connecticut, and the Massachusetts courts in 1639 ordered all families to plant one teaspoon of hemp seed. Several colonies passed legal tender laws. Hemp was so valued it was used to pay taxes. Now, that would be cool. I have room in my back yard so let me grow some hemp and I'll pay my taxes with it. Hand over the crop when it's ready, saying, ..."Here ya go Obama. I hope this helps pay for that Stimulus Package, ...a little" Until 1776, many colonies passed laws to encourage farmers to produce hemp, with some, ...fining those who did not comply. Lobbyists were hired to educate the public about the importance of hemp. Hmm... now imagine that. That evil we refer to as a lobbyist existed even back then during the time of the birth of this Nation. They wanted to establish hemp as America's trademark product.
Archive
LBPOST.com Managing Editor Ryan ZumMallen keeps up on all the current and breaking Long Beach news.
Ryan ZumMallen has served as the managing editor of the LBPOST.com since 2007. He graduated from CSULB with a degree in Print Journalism in 2008 and is a member of the 2009 class of Leadership Long Beach. You can find him on various basketball courts around the city.
Ryan's Community
 
Ryan's Archives
Show All Archives |
||||
| About Us | Contact Us | Policies | ||||
