Councilwoman Debbie Stone weighed in on the medical marijuana dispensary issue. She states her personal belief that Upland does not need medical marijuana dispensaries. The remainder of her comments, however, could be construed as lobbying for the proponents. Her pro reasoning is the proponents presented a valid petition sanctioned by the California Election Code. Yet, she mentions nothing of what is contained in the questionable petition — why doesn’t she put this petition on her website for all to read?
Another obvious question to Debbie is why do Ontario, Rancho, Pomona, Montclair and Claremont ban pot shops and enforce their ban? Residents are asking who and why was Upland chosen to become the “Pot Hub of the Inland Empire.”
Why did Councilwoman Stone ignore the city attorney’s case law cited, stating the $75,000 fee would constitute a tax according to the California Constitution, thus requiring the initiative to be put to the voters in the 2016 general election. Ms. Stone seems determined to persuade the public that the city would save money by agreeing to the proponents’ petition and a June 2015 special election with no regard to the $180,000 cost to the city, knowing that costs associated with a general election would be significantly lower. It’s not difficult to conclude that a special election would have been advantageous for the proponents.
Councilwoman Stone neglected to mention that the Cannabis Coalition president threatened City Council members with a recall if they didn’t capitulate to their petition and vote for a June special election. Ms. Stone dismissed many petition signers’ concerns over the less than forthright petition as irrelevant. She was concerned about the tragic death of a child hit by a motorist on the way to school. Yet she ignored the robbery and shootings at an illegal medical marijuana dispensary and the tragic death of a dispensary security guard.
The proponents’ petition supersedes Upland’s ordinance banning pot. The proponents’ petition is set in stone; it cannot be altered. The proponent’s petition gives almost no oversight to the city, its leaders and police. There are no background checks for permit holders; the permits cannot be revoked. These shops will allow vaping and ingesting on site.
According to the petition, Upland will be forced to use our police to close all other pot shop competition. The petition is threatening, warning the city of lawsuits if their rules and regulations are not totally complied with. Upland must play by their rules. Councilwoman Stone’s commentary avoided these important points.
The monies derived from medical marijuana dispensaries are not a panacea for Upland’s financial state. In fact, these shops could prove to be extremely costly. Upland’s crime rate and accidents will rise. Upland’s excellent reputation and home equity are at stake. Our youth stands to be exploited. Their young minds are at greatest risk. Unlike tobacco and alcohol, pot is unregulated, it’s potent and dangerous! Our youth deserve Upland’s best protection.
Patricia Almazan is a member of the Upland City Council Advisory Committee.
