It’s easy to see that these two men are civil small-business owners who see an ever-growing niche selling medical marijuana to people who use the drug to relieve pain and nausea related to illness. They’ve busted stereotypes by being up-front and educated about their sales, and they are not “potheads” or “tweakers” looking for a quick buck.
But marijuana use is a sticky subject.
Despite the legality of selling medical marijuana, there is a bigger question at hand in our area: Does the community want a medical marijuana dispensary (or more than one) in its town or city?
We have two neighboring valleys that seem to have different mindsets on the issue. In much of the San Lorenzo Valley, people tend to tolerate marijuana smoking (and growing), more easily than folks inside Scotts Valley’s city limits. That’s not to say that all Scotts Valley residents dislike marijuana use or that all people in the Valley tolerate it, but generally speaking, there is a different attitude.
The numbers back up this assumption.
In 1996, California passed Proposition 215, which legalized marijuana for medical use. Voters passed the measure after learning how medical marijuana alleviates pain and symptoms for those with ongoing disease and illness.
In unincorporated Santa Cruz County — which includes the entire San Lorenzo Valley, the area that surrounds Scotts Valley’s city limits and Bonny Doon — 73 percent of voters passed Proposition 215. Inside the city, 61 percent voted yes.
Soon, that 1996 majority in Scotts Valley will be put to the test. In the upcoming months, the Scotts Valley City Council faces a proposal from Gates, a father and active community member, to open a medical marijuana dispensary in town.
In the past, Scotts Valley has leaned on federal law that outlaws marijuana, and there’s nothing to stop the council from dragging out this decision until after the November election, when a marijuana initiative of some form might be on California’s ballot.
There are several dispensaries along the Highway 9 corridor, and rarely are there complaints. However, Scotts Valley’s citizens were less inclined to legalize the drug for medical purposes and are perhaps less likely to allow a dispensary for the drug inside the city limits.
A large reason for that could be that Scotts Valley has a certain image it cultivates — child- and senior-friendly, community-minded, with low crime, oriented toward athletics and its schools, a Silicon Valley in miniature. Some of those goals are idealistic, and others are achievable.
Either way, a medical marijuana storefront doesn’t seem to fit Scotts Valley. Legal does not always mean right for a community.
It’s not unreasonable for those who need medical marijuana for pain relief to drive or ride the bus to SLV or Santa Cruz. Scotts Valley residents often travel to Watsonville to shop at Target and to Santa Cruz to visit Costco or one of the hospitals. The same should hold true for pot.
There are plenty of people in SLV who object to unfettered placement of dispenseries any place the owners can convince landlords to rent to them, but there are no laws in place in the County to restrict, control, or otherwise regulate these types of businesses.
I don't always agree with the civic leaders in Scotts Valley, but I admire the fact that they have enough stones to take up politically unpopular issues and let the public process decide the outcome, instead of looking the other way and hoping those opposed to unrestricted placement of these stores will eventually simmer down.
So build your shop outside the city limits, nothing stopping you.
I own close to a million dollar home in Scott's Valley. I own a business and have 3 exotic cars. My bank account is bigger than I ever thought it would be and I'm very blessed.
My friends are doing as good or better than I am in some cases.
I'm not gonna say we smoke pot everyday, but two times a month maybe.
We all have kids, we all go to school plays and soccer games.
None of us do coke, smack, crack or X.
We pay taxes and drive the speed limit.
So when I read this idiot under me talking about how pot lead him down the rocky rat hole of hard drugs and desperation, I just feel like he would have would up there anyway.
It's like someone telling me his comic book collection led him to a life of porn addiction.
A lot of you socially drink, even started at a young age, are you all alcoholics?
We are talking about medicine here,just like the prozac and ambien and depricote and whatever else helps you through the day.
This world is a harsh stressful place, we all need something to take the edge off once in a while...
I was very aware of the availability of pot from clinics and I had a number of friends who were excited, at age 15, whenever a new "source" would come into town. And WHAT? Then there were STORES (dispensaries), not a secretive meeting spot?! It made it much easier for us, Jr high then High schoolers, to score and get stoned.
My experience is absolutely not unique. I was smoking with some of your kids.
Every now and then we'd run into someone who acquired pot from dispensaries in Santa Cruz, someone who was willing to sell us some of his/her "chronic" and would charge us a premium because it came from the club.
Not long after, we discovered this was one of our best sources. We learned which "doctors" would, for a regular office fee, or a slightly increased one, give you a screening, usually for some hard-to-qualify problem like migraines or persistent back pain and would walk away with cards.
My 18 year old friends started to get cards, it was easy. We started to go to them for bud more often. It was easy, and "good stuff," and we started to smoke more. There was a store now.
I don't need to bore you with more details, but the convenience and reliability of a local source increased our usage, which got boring after a while, and led to all other sorts of drug usage.
Now some of my friends are getting off of heroin.
Luckily, we managed to make it to mid-20's without being in jail or dead, but I am sad to say, we were sorely set back developmentally in our lives in regards to educational pursuits, relational abilities, financial debts, and have a few (physical/emotional) scars to show along the way.
I wish I didn't have this experience. It is a cautionary tale. I have been clean for 2 1/2 years.
I'm not naive enough to assume that if this dispensary is "run right," i.e morally, cleanly, carefully, drug usage among teens (and their younger siblings) will not see an increase.
I GUARANTEE IT WILL.
...it did for us, it will for them.
Please consider what your asking for. Not for the sake of liberty, not for the sake of taxes, not because someone said they have the right and you support their right to choose. For the sake of family, potential, and youth.
I am a voice for them. I am them.
I have lived in Santa Cruz County for most of my life over 30 years of which 10 of those years I have lived in Ben Lomond. I find your claims of my residence and the views of my neighbors misrepresented by your paper.
On what facts do you base your claim that "In much of the San Lorenzo Valley, people tend to tolerate marijuana smoking (and growing), more easily than folks inside Scotts Valley's city limits." Where is your research to back up this claim? My favorite is your statement that, "A large reason (for SV not being in favor of a dispensary is)..that could be that Scotts Valley has a certain image it cultivates-child and senior friendly, community minded, with low crime, oriented toward athletics and its schools, a Silicon Valley miniature." (Whereas the San Lorenzo Valley does not?)
San Lorenzo Valley is community minded, and boasts one of the most beautiful redwood forests and State Parks in the world. We support our residents with great public and charter schools as well as rec. programs for all ages, 4-H clubs as well as the Valley Women's Club, Mountain Community Resources, Little People's Theater (Children's Performing Arts), Fine Arts and music and athletics. I am amazed at the differences between the two Valleys that are inferred by this article. I know residents of Scotts Valley that attend school in the San Lorenzo Valley and work in the San Lorenzo Valley. I know residents of the San Lorenzo Valley that work in Scotts Valley.
The Press-Banner continues to disappoint as it reinforces class based stereotypes of the San Lorenzo Valley which only goes to show that the Press-Banner serves one Valley and that is Scotts Valley and treats the citizens of the San Lorenzo Valley as second class citizen. I refuse to sit at the back of your proverbial buss Press-Banner. Your classism is in poor taste and I for one have had enough!
In your recent editorial the Press Banner suggested that Scotts Valley wasn't ready for a medical cannabis dispensary. I would suggest that any negative baggage that marijuana carries has nothing to do with lack of safety or effectiveness as a medicine, but rather to the concerted effort by a series of corporate and government agencies to paint it so. Even our own federal government, with their official statement that marijuana is not a medicine, filed for and was awarded a patent (#6,630,507) based upon the medical properties of cannabis, determined by research done at the National Institute of Health, and assigned to the US Dept. of Health and Human Services. This patent states unequivocally that cannabinoids are neuroprotective, and anti-oxidant, and as such are useful in the prevention and treatment of a wide variety of ailments including stroke, trauma, auto-immune disorders, HIV dementia, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's Disease.
Cannabis medicine is far reaching in it's beneficial effect, and has a safety record unmatched by conventional pharmaceuticals. It is impossible to overdose on it, and its negative side-effects pale when compared to many FDA approved drugs, which can and do cause liver damage and death.
There is nothing shady or wrong about a medical cannabis dispensary run with integrity and compassion. It is all about providing easy and safe access to a medicine with far-ranging benefits, and virtually no downside. It is time to step out of past conditioning and look at facts not fantasy.
As a Scotts Valley home owner for the past 27 years, I would welcome a medical cannabis dispensary in Scotts Valley, and I know that I am not alone.
Sincerely,
Tana Brinnand
Fear your big obsession in life?
Not everyone has a car. And a lot of medical marijuana patients are mobility challenged.
Not that you give a hoot, obviously.
However, if you allow one "CLUB" in town, where do you draw the line when other business applications follow seeking competition? Soon, SV could be added to the cities whose pot clubs out-number Starbuck stands. (In our case that would be FOUR!). Surely, you couldn't allow Scot Gates to become the sole-provider of Scotts Valley reidents.
I say "you can drive" to get your medicine once a MONTH! This crap about bus route schedules is rediculous.
Besides everyone knows that Prop 215 is a facade and really puts the drug into the hands of potheads not "medicinal means". They will give these cards to ANYONE!
Also, what an EXCELLENT source of much-needed CASH to grow your own crop? Afterall, the industry is unregulated! Don't have to work, pay taxes on it, etc, etc. Yeah, that will really help our economy. No POT in SV- it's plenty accessible where it is now!
p. 249: 400 chemicalss in the Hemp plant, 60 cannabinoids, two brain receptors for cannabinoids CB1, CB2.
Medicinal Uses:
Marinol is a Schedule III drug used as appetite stimulus for AIDS patients (legal, but sedates). Chemotherapy cancer patients take as anti-emetic (vomiting) about equal to Compazine,
but not as effective as Reglan. Oral THC called Dronabinol legal for chemo pts. In study, 35% pts. preferred oral Dronabinol, 20% preferred smoked MJ, remainder – no pref(p. 251). In a study of pts who stopped other anti-emetics and were given MJ to smoke:
25% dropped out due to dissatisfaction
24% rated cannabis as very effective
35% rated cannabis as moderately effective
16% rated cannabis as ineffective.
Almost all patients reported sedation, dry mouth, and dizziness.
Appetite stimulation: smoked MJ stimulates appetite. AIDS pts reported some weight gain,
but, some persons had reduced immune system function (not good for AIDS patients.)
Appetite effect caused by increased CB1 receptor action in Hypocampus where appetite is controlled.
Pain control – increases production of opioids made by body; effect = codeine at best, but also caused anxiety and dsyphoria (not feeling good).
Glaucoma – reduced inner eye pressure, synthetic THC “nabilone” marketed in Europe for
glaucoma. But, evidence is lacking that MJ can lower eye pressure sufficiently to
avoid optic nerve damage (with blindness). And, if smoked for glaucoma, must be
constantly used to keep eye pressure down.
Pharmacologic Actions:
Object distance and outlines may be distorted, ability to discriminate shapes and make rapid critical judgements. Slowed reaction times and information processing, impaired motor coordination, impaired short-term memory, attention, tracking ability, slowed time perception.
Additive effect when alcohol added.
p. 255: Cognitive Effects:
Poor memory, attention, lessened ability to deal with complex information. Decreases in short-term memory. The longer used, the more pronounced the effects on memory.
Behaviorial Effects:
Marijuana affects the peripheral and central nervous system. Low doses cause a mixture of
depression and stimulation, and higher doses mostly depression of nervous system. Decrease in learning and memory and decrease in spontaneous physical movement in rats. Also hypothermia (body temperature drop, immobility, some loss of pain sensation). Time and space perception are altered (brain clock loses time sense).
p. 258 Addiction Liability
Dependence develops with gradual increase in use. Tolerance occurs with larger amounts needed for high. As larger amounts used over a long period of time, paranoia, anxiety may develop. Clear link to reactivation of schizophrenia in persons with Hx of prior schizophrenia.
MJ smoke bad for lungs and MJ users also smoke cigarettes. Chronic bronchitis with coughing, sputum production, and wheezing (p. 261). Also, macrophages and killer cell production (used to fight infection) lessened, thus more colds and minor illnesses.
Tolerance: to pain-reducing effect, to anti-emetic effect, to movement slowing, to hypothermia effect, thought to occur because of receptor down-regulation (a decrease in number of THC-sensitive receptors), thus more must be smoked for same effect.
Human chronic heavy MJ users develop tolerance to MJ and experience withdrawal symptoms when abruptly stopping use. Psychological addiction to effects noticed when users will continue to use MJ even though they experience adverse personal effects (legal, social, etc.)
p. 261 Sudden Withdrawal Effects.
Insomnia, anorexia (lessened appetite), irritability, depression, tremor. (WHY? Natural anandamide (THC) in body regulates appetite, mood, sleep, body movement, when system is thrown out of whack by loss of receptors during use, then when stopping use, takes quite a while to up-regulate natural THC receptors to pre-use, normal levels. Sleep problems, anxiety,
mood issues can go on for months.
p. 263: Reproductive Effects:
In females: galactorrhea – “spontaneous flow of milk from nipple” If during pregnancy, low birth weights possibly due to earlier gestation rates. During nursing, THC can be passed to fetus through breast milk.
In males: disruption of reproductive function. Less testosterone secreted, fewer sperm, sperm
have less movement and viability.
Chestiness in males, loss of facial hair, developmental slowing.
--------------------------------------------
"Marijuana-Induced Psychosis May Foretell Future Episodes"
Joan Arehart-Treichel, December 2005, British Journal of Psychiatry.
Few individuals who smoke marijuana experience psychosis afterward. However, when marijuana-related psychosis does occur, it may be a warning sign that more psychotic episodes could occur.
Reports from various researchers have suggested that marijuana-induced psychosis is generally short-lived and that total remission can be expected. Such reports, however, have been based on case studies, not on long-term follow-up data, according to the authors of a new, long-term study.
The study found that an episode of marijuana-induced psychosis is not innocuous—it often presages subsequent psychotic episodes and a diagnosis of a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder.
Mikkel Arendt, Ph.D., a fellow at the Center for Basic Psychiatric Research at the University of Aarhus in Denmark, and coworkers used the Danish Psychiatric Central Register to identify patients treated for a first marijuana-induced psychotic episode between 1994 and 1999. There were 535 such patients. The researchers then followed those patients for at least three years to determine how many of them experienced subsequent psychotic episodes and how many could be diagnosed with a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder.
The researchers found that 77 percent of the subjects incurred subsequent psychotic episodes and that 45 percent could be diagnosed at some time within the next three years or more with a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder. Moreover, of the 45 percent who developed a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder after experiencing marijuana-induced psychosis, 37 percent received such a diagnosis within three years and the remaining eight after three years. Furthermore, those who developed such a disorder did so at an earlier age than did comparison subjects—individuals who developed such a disorder but who had no recorded history of marijuana-induced psychotic symptoms. This effect was most marked for paranoid schizophrenia.
"An episode of short-lived psychotic symptoms following cannabis use seems to have great prognostic value."
Thus, "for the majority of patients, cannabis-induced psychotic symptoms proved to be a first step in the development of a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder or other severe psychopathology," Arendt and his group concluded in their study report, which was published in the December 2005 British Journal of Psychiatry.
-----------------------------------------------
Writer's Comment. I regularly see 21 to 25 year males in a substance abuse clinic who have been smoking marijuana several times a day for an extended basis. It is very clear that they have experienced highly negative life events which have lead them to seek professional help with their marijuana addiction.
There is no good legal basis to deny this use, and the city attorney will be loath to find some quirky loophole they can hide behind. It's a legal retail use. It's not a question of what SV does or doesn't "want". If they're ready to allow Target, or at least give Target a fair hearing, how can they deny this? Make 'em do an EIR, if you think that's needed to evaluate the impacts. But don't be imposing your personal lifestyle choices on top of a legal business endeavor.
The "real" SV is filled with reasonable people who understand justice, understand compassion, and are willing to accommodate more diversity than we are given credit for. This is a more tolerant town now than it was in 1996. It's long past time to get past the stereotype that this is some right wing, christian-dominated republican stronghold within Santa Cruz county. If this business can make a go of it, tucked away in an industrial park, why on earth would anyone think that it represents the end of 'nice' SV? It's this ridiculous fear and intolerance that we should banish from our mysts.
Banner staff -- think about a retraction for next week. We'll forgive you for this slip of poor judgement if you'll step up and admit you didn't give the matter enough thought.