Oakland, Macomb counties among few to get grants for medical marijuana enforcement

Oakland, Macomb counties among few to get grants for medical marijuana enforcement

DETROIT (AP) — Michigan sheriffs are paying for overtime and buying vests, guns, Tasers and vehicles with a little-known pot of state money that was set aside for medical marijuana enforcement.

They’re also leaving a lot of cash on the table, as only 18 of 83 counties this year applied for a slice of the $3 million.

“It’s mind-blowing to think they had this money out there and we had no clue about it,” said Sgt. James Every of the Ingham County sheriff’s office, which was eligible for $114,000 but didn’t apply.

Kent County, which is home to the western Michigan city of Grand Rapids, was eligible for $121,000 but also was unaware, Undersheriff Michelle Young said.

Advertisement

“We could absolutely use it for compliance and enforcement,” she said.

Michigan voters in 2008 approved the use of marijuana to treat certain illnesses. Nearly 225,000 people have state-issued cards, but the law has confused many and has led to significant legal disputes, including over how to obtain and store the drug. Large illegal growing operations have been busted around the state.

Since 2015, lawmakers have set aside money for sheriffs for medical marijuana enforcement and education. It’s administered by the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs. Every county was eligible this year for a portion of the $3 million, based on the number of new cards or renewals in that county.

Seventeen counties spent $823,000 in 2016, according to a state report. The largest, Wayne and Oakland, spent a combined 67 percent of that figure.

Oakland spent $282,661, much of it on training and investigation overtime. The sheriff’s office bought a $31,000 van, a $30,000 pickup truck and a $6,800 cargo trailer.

“We didn’t have equipment,” Sheriff Mike Bouchard said. “We’d come across huge illegal grow operations — hundreds and hundreds of plants — and we’d have to rent trucks or trailers. … The grant helps alleviate some of the costs necessary to do these activities, but it’s just a sliver.”

According to the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office Sept. 1, 2016, submission to the state report, the department:

  • Executed 59 search warrants,
  • Executed 19 “knock and talks” with 13 found to be compliant, 2 had no evidence located and 4 found to be non-compliant.
  • Initiated 19 educational contacts this year, with on criminal actions taken,
  • Seized 2,961 marijuana plants — or 1,122 pounds — since Jan. 1.

Macomb County has spent about $100,000 over two years, much of it related to investigations and training. The sheriff’s office also bought laptops, vehicles and raid vests.

“I want the guys as protected as they can be,” Det. Sgt. Gary Wiegand said of vests.

Wayne County said it spent $171,618 on wages for dozens of officers conducting surveillance from January through September on 32 marijuana dispensaries in Detroit. More than 600 vehicles were stopped.

The grants were used in smaller counties, too. Sanilac spent $2,850 on five semi-automatic weapons. Antrim spent $479 on night vision binoculars. Cheboygan purchased Tasers.

Young, the Kent County undersheriff, believes the grants haven’t been promoted enough. The Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs declined to be interviewed.

“We have not been surprised by the participation rate as this was and still is a new program,” spokesman Michael Loepp said.

The deadline to apply for the next round of funding is Jan. 1.

Wiegand said Macomb County bought a trailer to haul and store illegal marijuana plants.

“We took more than 100 plants out of a person’s house,” he said. “It’s hard to put all that in the property room.”

One issue reported by the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office is that patients or caregivers are becoming better at cultivating marijuana and the plants are growing big enough to provide one pound of marijuana. With 12 plants per patient, they are going over the 2.5 ounces, the office reports.

“The MMMA does not provide a legal remedy for the patient or the caregiver to address this issue,” Oakland County Sheriff’s Lt. Brent Miles wrote.

Read the full state report online.

Read The State of Michigan Statistics and Report

Cannabis shops in Colorado are not selling to underage individuals

Cannabis shops in Colorado are not selling to underage individuals

Cannabis shops in Colorado are not selling to underage individuals, according to a study recently published in the Journal of Studies of Alcohol and Drugs. In Colorado it is illegal for minors under the age of 21 to use, purchase, or possess marijuana. With the risk of losing a license to sell cannabis, 19 out of 20 retailers evaluated in this study did not sell cannabis to individuals who failed to identify themselves as being 21 years or older.

In addition, the study concluded that the rate of compliance to underage marijuana laws was potentially higher than that of retailers selling alcohol.

To record their findings, the researchers simply had a “observer” and a “buyer” enter a store once between the hours of 11 am and 5 pm on four weekdays in August of 2015. The observer would walk in first and subtly take a look at the surroundings inside. Then the underage looking “buyer” would enter the store and try to buy cannabis. The buyer did not produce identification if asked. And the buyer would say he or she did not have enough money and leave the store, if the attendant was willing to sell cannabis. The observer would document everything that happened.

One of the researchers, Senior Scientist at the Prevention Research Center, Robert F. Saltz, Ph.D., stated that neither the observer or the buyer were underage.

“Everyone was over 21 but judged by others to appear younger than 21,” Dr. Saltz wrote in a email. “We couldn’t send in actual underage people because that would be unlawful in many places.”

Only one out of the 20 outlets (5 percent) was willing to sell cannabis to a individual who did not produce identification. All of the store clerks asked for identification, nonetheless. And every store had posted signs reading that identification was required for entry.

“[A]pproximately half had signs that only individuals 21 years of age or older could enter (55%) and how to properly use marijuana edibles (50%),” the report reads.

Dr. Saltz recommends that while law enforcement agencies ensure that retailers comply with underage restrictions, retail clerks should be trained to keep cannabis out of the possession of minors and children.

“Regular and routine enforcement alongside staff training (with occasional “boosters”),” Dr. Saltz wrote. “One of the reasons we are developing online, web-based training is that staff turnover may be very high (it is for alcohol servers) and so training should be available continually as new staff come on line.”

The researchers went on to conclude that minors may not be buying cannabis directly from retailers; however, further research should be conducted to determine whether minors are accessing marijuana by having people who are of legal age buy it for them.

“This is an entirely new market and I don’t think we know yet how it may evolve and what kind of products or promotions might appear in the near future,” Dr. Saltz wrote. “For some time, research on marijuana/cannabis was difficult, so we’re playing a bit of “catch up” at this point.”

Read more at http://housely.com/colorado-cannabis-retailers-dont-sell-to-minors-study-finds/#PGpKrIvf2sHBaMys.99

Ballot measures aim to limit police forfeitures

Ballot measures aim to limit police forfeitures

Orchard Lake and Sylvan Lake have two of the smallest police forces in Michigan, but voters there will be asked to curb their powers to confiscate property associated with crime.

 

Ballot measures in both communities would require a criminal conviction before police could pursue a civil forfeiture of property related to the crime. Any money seized from criminals also would have to be used to fund local road repairs, under the proposal.

 

Police across Michigan and around the country have used civil forfeiture to seize the assets of drug dealers and other criminals. Critics argue the standards are so lax that police can take property without ever charging its owner with a crime.

 

“It’s really counter to what the United States stands for, innocent until proven guilty,” said Scott Tillman, national field director for the Liberty Initiative Fund, a nonprofit group that claims as its mission “holding government accountable, fighting crony capitalism and protecting civil liberties.”

 

► VOTER GUIDE: See where candidates stand on issues important to Michigan

 

Tillman said he targeted the two communities not because of abuses there, but to raise awareness of the issue.

 

“Once people know about it, they have hard a time believing it happens in the U.S.,” he said.

Orchard Lake Mayor Norm Finkelstein said his city hasn’t pursued any civil forfeitures in recent years.

 

“If passed, it would be meaningless because it conflicts with state law,” Finkelstein said. “Forfeiture proceeds can only be used as the law allows.”

 

Tillman acknowledges that state law may prevent seized money from going toward road repairs, but said the rest of the proposal, especially the requirement of a criminal conviction, can stand.

Other ballot measures in Oakland County include:

 

Franklin Village: Voters are asked to approve a $15-million bond proposal for street repairs. It would cost the owner of a $200,000 home about $320 a year for a maximum of 15 years. Voters also face 10 ballot questions related to charter amendments, including one that would require a vote to connect to a municipal water system. One measure would amend the charter to say that the village records are subject to the Michigan Freedom of Information Act, though that law already applies to all communities in Michigan.

 

Lake Orion Village: Voters are asked to approve a measure that would allow the village to levy up to 1.4 mills in additional taxes for police service. The measure would override the Headlee Amendment and would cost the owner of a $200,000 house about $140 per year.

 

Oxford Village: Voters are asked to amend the village charter to make all village records subject to disclosure under the Michigan Freedom of Information Act. All municipal records are already subject to the FOIA, whether local charters acknowledge it or not.

 

Pontiac: Voters are asked to approved a 1.5-mill tax increase to fund youth centers. The measure would cost the owner of a $100,000 house about $75 annually.

 

Wixom: Voters are asked to approve a new 3.5-mill tax to fund police, fire, public works and parks and recreation. The tax would cost the owner of a $200,000 home $350 annually.

 

Contact John Wisely: 313-222-6825 or jwisely@freepress.com. On Twitter @jwisely.