We could follow the lead of Oakland, where 80 percent of voters in July said yes to a special landmark measure to tax sales of marijuana at the city’s four licensed medical cannabis dispensaries. Walnut Creek could become the second city in the United States to tax proceeds on medical marijuana. It could tax its new dispensary, the C3 Collective on Oakland Boulevard.
Walnut Creek could become another West Coast trend setter!
The Oakland measure imposes a 1.8-percent gross receipts tax, which amounts to about $18 for every 1,000 in marijuana sales. One Oakland dispensary, whose owner celebrated the measure, will have to pay more than $350,000 from the new tax next year. “It is important because the city of Oakland is facing a massive deficit like many jurisdictions in California," said the owner, Steve DeAngelo.
Hey, Walnut Creek is facing a major budget deficit. That’s one reason why the City Council and business and community leaders want Neiman Marcus to come to town: the potential sales tax revenues.
Okay, I can just hear the cries of outrage. How dare I compare posh Neiman Marcus and its posh patrons to a not-so-posh pot club and its maybe-not-so posh patrons?
To borrow a term from the great American capitalist Michael Corleone, I’m right now, for the sake of an argument, looking at this medical marijuana issue from a “strictly business” standpoint. Perhaps, the potential economic benefits revenues from having a medical marijuana dispensary in town could be one of the issues the city looks at as it studies the issue, after instituting its 45-day ban on C3 Collective's operations.
Fellow Walnut Creek blogger, the DUBC, touches on the economic motives of the medical marijuana business and has a very good debate going about the arrival of this dispensary in town. The DUBC also provides some interesting background on Brian Hyman, the owner of the C3 Collective, and of the club’s renowned, pro-marijuana supporters. You can read it here. Actually, the DUBC uses more harsh language in referring to these economic motives. He calls it a “medical marijuana sham.” The DUBC writes: “Let’s get real about this. It's about making money and getting high.”
(Making money and getting high? Gee, couldn’t you say the same thing about the liquor and wine industry and the bars around town. For liquor and wine makers and bar owners, isn’t it all about them making money to help us get high?)
The DUBC continues: “The legislation started with people that had ‘serious medical conditions.’ Now for every cancer patient there are a hundred 18- to 20-year-olds getting prescriptions for insomnia, back pain and stress. They pay $100 for a ten minute "consultation" and can go get their medicine. … If the people vote for legalization then we are all for it. Until then, keep this stuff out of our city.”
I agree that we as a society need to get this marijuana legalization question settled. For the record, I would probably be in favor of legalizing marijuana, not because I myself would partake—I tried it a couple times in high school and college and didn’t like it. I would be in favor because I like to drink wine, and not just for the flavor. I drink wine because, at the end of the day, it makes me feel nice. I don’t think I—or anyone else who seeks that “nice” feeling from a glass of wine or a lemondrop or apple-tini—is in the position to judge someone who prefers to smoke marijuana as their path to feeling "nice."
Also I voted for Proposition 215, but I agree with the point the DUBC is raising about the real motives of many in the medical marijuana world. These pot growers, distributors, and dealers, as well as producers of paraphernalia and pot candy, didn’t entirely get into the business to ease the suffering of cancer and AIDS patients. Oh, sure, some might genuinely view themselves as healers, and some might do some good for very sick people.
But, it’s also about money. Lots and lots of money.
And speaking of money, in my post yesterday, arguing that Wallnut Creek is not all that conservative, one reader correctly pointed out that our non-partisan city government generally leads towards retail, real estate and other business concerns. Such as Neiman Marcus, and urban-style mixed-use developments, and bars and restaurants. So, if that’s how our city council leans, why not throw the C3 Collective into this mix of potential local revenue generators?
As for the DUBC’s statement about keeping “this stuff out of our city.” Well, I’m sure he knows that this stuff is already in our city, whether it comes from C3 Collective or some dealer peddling in a parking lot.
Contra Costa
Aug 24, 2009
A Great Blog Post from A Reasonable Soccer Mom in WC
This informative and sensible blog post comes from the blog of a self proclaimed "soccer mom" who runs a blog called crazyinsuburbia. Her other informative psts can be found at http://crazyinsuburbia.blogspot.com/. Check them out, especially if you are in the area.
Why doesn’t Walnut Creek vote to tax its new pot club?
Aug 20, 2009
My Letter to the Editor of the Contra Costa Times
Mickey Martin Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 510-377-1990 Contra Costa Times Attention: Kevin Keane, Executive Editor 2640 Shadelands Dr. Walnut Creek, CA 94598 Greetings, I am writing you to express concern over your coverage of the Walnut Creek City Council meeting that was held Tuesday. August 18th regarding a moratorium on medical cannabis dispensing collectives. I think your piece was informative but failed to honestly represent the needs of patients in your community. I would strongly encourage your news outlet to follow up your piece with some informative and truthful information regarding the need for safe access in the area. I would be happy to do an in-depth interview on this matter and represent the patient base in the area. I have dedicated over a decade of my life to medical cannabis activism and am a resident of Contra Costa County who believes greatly in the need for a safe and well-lit facility for patients to access these therapies. Too many misconceptions arise from sensationalism that has been experienced in the media surrounding the hot button topic of cannabis medicines. I would be happy to begin dispelling these myths and misinformation. I believe your news organization has an obligation to its readership to give a clear and honest picture of the reality that medical cannabis is safe and that most of the organizations that provide medicine are well-run and outgoing groups of patients that practice safe handling, safe community, and responsible accounting practices in their daily operations. Cannabis dispensing collectives provide a unique environment for support and healing. Most improve patient’s quality of life by providing not just safe and effective cannabis medicines, but a positive psychosocial health benefit through the collective structure. Medical cannabis collectives can be a positive part of the community when properly controlled and regulated, as they provide economic, health, social and political benefits to the communities they serve. They prevent legally qualified patients in the area from having to obtain these medicines in otherwise illegal and dangerous situations. There is no evidence of medical cannabis dispensing collectives creating a disproportionate amount of crime in the communities they serve. A collective has better security presence than most banks and often neighborhoods, such as Oakland, report much less crime in the areas collectives are located due to their security culture. A collective carries far less inventory than a store like Target, generates far less income that the local grocery store, and has much more rigid access procedures than any liquor store or pharmacy. In a tough economy there will always be desperate people willing to commit crimes to gain monetary value, but medical cannabis patients should not be singled out as nuisance or crime attractors, as the evidence simply does not support that. Any representation to the contrary is simply dishonest. I encourage you to contact me directly to dig deeper into this matter, as it is an important and relevant discussion that we must have in the community and begin to dispel the sensationalist rhetoric that often plagues medical cannabis patients and providers. Your news organization is a valuable resource of information to the Contra Costa community and I hope that you see the need to address the matter in a genuine and well-thought manner. I would encourage you to meet with myself and other patients in the area to discuss the true benefits of cannabis therapies and understand more clearly what is at stake in this public debate. To illustrate more clearly the need in the community, I work closely with a patient in the area who is a breast cancer survivor and suffers from an unknown gastrointestinal disorder that has hospitalized her in John Muir Hospital over 300 times in the past few years. She is a mother of three children and an active member of the community. Currently she has to drive long distances to access her medicine and often goes without due to lack of transportation or time to get to the nearest collective. She experiences uncontrollable vomiting and severe nausea regularly. Cannabis is the only medicine she has found to safely and effectively mange her condition and help her to lead a more regular life. Her condition has seen her weight drop to 89 pounds at times and cannabis helps her to eat and consume protein-based supplements more regularly to avoid making her condition much more serious. She is no criminal. She is a taxpaying, responsible, and upstanding member of this community and it is inexcusable to continue to make her suffer to enable some irrational fear of what a dispensing collective does. Please contact me to discuss this matter further and to work together to provide real and honest dialogue about this matter to the communities your news organization serve. I look forward to your response and offer my services as a liaison to the medical cannabis movement and the tens of thousands of patients in the area. Thank you for your time and I hope we can discuss mutual goals and share valuable information in the near future. Kind Regards, Mickey Martin
ATTENTION: Contra Costa County Patients Needed
P.O. Box 22222
Oakland, CA 94623
Phone: (510) 834-1212
24 hour newsroom number
Tel: 415-474-KCBS (5227)
Fax: 415-765-4080
Mickey Martin
T-Comp Consulting Director
www.freetainted.com
www.tcompconsulting.com
mickey@tcompconsulting.com
510-377-1990
http://twitter.com/CANNABISconsult
Your support is greatly appreciated as we fight for the rights of patients and providers to operate safely and effectively in medical cannabis states. We will win this war!
***The views expressed in this communication are not necessarily the views of T-Comp Consulting, Tainted Compassion, The MCSC, West Coast Cannabis, or any other group I am affiliated with.***
