11/03/09
Colorado Board of Health Emergency Rulemaking Meeting Provides a New Caregiver Definition
Denver, CO - The John Doe Radio Show – Tim Martin -
JohnDoe@johndoeradio.com
The Colorado Board of Health has decided to overturn a clarification of the State's Medical Marijuana Caregiver definition. A previous hearing by the Board of Health was held in July to clarify and make changes to the Medical Marijuana program in Colorado. The only change the Board of Health made then was a clarification to the definition of “Primary Caregiver” as it pertains to Medical Marijuana. In the clarification, the definition of a Caregiver was understood as someone who solely provides Marijuana to a patient in the State program. It was a definition everyone could agree on considering the Board of Health was also trying to limit a Caregiver to five patients, thus eliminating dispensaries. The decision made by the Board of Health in the latest “Emergency Rule Change Meeting” on November 3 to revert to the original wording in the State Constitution on Medical Marijuana means Caregivers will be responsible for more than just providing Marijuana. They will also have to offer “other” services like grocery shopping, transportation, physical therapy (where qualified I assume), and generally assist with a patient and their “every day” activities. The decision was made to change this definition because the Colorado Appeals Court ruled on October 29th Caregivers needed to provide more care than just providing Marijuana, despite what the Board of Health decided in July. In my and others opinion it was a decision we thought would surely be sent and was set up to be made by the Colorado Supreme Court. The Board of Health stated the Supreme Court was not guaranteed to take up the case, and a decision on clarification needed to be made now. The decision to re-define “Caregiver” is a temporary one though, and will be discussed more in depth at a Public Hearing in December. The Board stated this change was needed because the clarification they gave in July to the “Caregiver” definition was in direct conflict with the Appeals Court decision to convict the Caregiver not assisting with anything but providing Marijuana.
The adventure today started with trying to find a parking space near the Colorado Department of Health building, which turned out to be impossible courtesy of a high turnout of people angry at the “Emergency Meeting” the board had called. I cant be mad at that, just made for a hurry to get to the meeting. When I arrived in the building there was a long line of people already waiting to get into the room. Most were fired up and ready to give their opinion on the proposed rule change, even though no one would be allowed to speak. Not even the lawyers. After about ten minutes of standing in line we were told the room was full and nobody else would be let in. I was also told by multiple sources the phone conference line to monitor the meeting was full and no one else was being allowed to join it unless another caller dropped off. The combination of the two issues was an outrageous situation to be in as an American citizen, and I made it a point to move towards the front of the line and towards the doors to the meeting. I approached the people standing in front of the door and asked if I could be let in to cover the meeting as a journalist and a member of independent media. Five people told me No, the room was full. I could see through the window all the local news station cameras and personnel were lined up against the wall and there was also plenty of room available to sit next to them, or anyone else. I insisted that I be allowed in and there would be a problem if I was not allowed in. I was asked for credentials and I gave my business card to one of the people at the door and they told me they would go talk with the “powers that be''. I assumed this meant nothing and I also knew I didn't have any “real” credentials to hand them and continued to argue with the 'door-guardians' about how it was silly the other media was allowed in and I wasn't. I have owned credentials before, for many events and organizations including the Associated Press. But have never, ever needed them for a public meeting held by our Government. Its just not something that should be required. The only reason they require credentials in the first place anywhere is so no one can just sneak their way into private areas and situations. Not public meetings. I was surprisingly escorted inside the room finally after much protest on my part and others who knew who I was around me by the older gentleman I gave my business card to. He asked why I didn't have any recording device or notebook. I then showed him my phone and told him “This baby can do all that.” After I sat down and the meeting started it became quite clear the Board of Health was going to make changes and move on re-defining “caregiver”. The only problem they saw was how to do it with the least resistance possible. Discussion got heated when Rob Corry attempted to clarify information for the Board and information on the Colorado Appeals Court case that triggered this emergency meeting. (A case in which Rob wrote and provided most of the information for.) The Board of Health President Jim Martin would not allow Rob Corry to clarify or speak, even though they read into record a paragraph from someone outside the Board. In my understanding of rule and law, if you read one public comment you have to read or allow them all. By this point multiple people in the room were speaking over each other and trying to get Rob to stop talking. Voices continued to rise, and it became a very uncomfortable situation. Board of Health President Jim Martin called Rob Corry out of line at one point, while a Police Officer and Security started to make their way over to Mr. Corry in order to escort him out of the room. By the time they got to him, Rob had sat down and was telling President Martin very intently that “We will see you in court.” It was one of those moments that only happens in the movies or on TV. Something right out of Law and Order. It was quite incredible to feel the confidence that I feel towards Rob Corry as an attorney in Colorado and defense of Medical Marijuana. Rob assures others and myself that what the Board of Health has done is unconstitutional, and will be overturned. And, I believe him. Because there is no reason not to. Precedent has been set on these type of cases long ago, and any change to the program that is significant like this rule change is, would have to go to a vote of the people. Colorado has one of the strongest State Constitutions in the nation. And, allowing any change to it can only be decided by a public vote of The People. The act the Board of Health has continually taken to try and change the rules concerning Medical Marijuana in Colorado is obviously unconstitutional and has been ruled so before. (Not to mention underhanded.) Rob Corry successfully defended the program in its inception after the Colorado Board of Health ruled caregivers were only allowed five patients each. It was ruled any change to the Constitution needed to be made by a vote of The People. I would follow this lead and assume any changes are unconstitutional. I also wouldn't worry too much about the program when it comes to the people defending it. We are strong as a Medical Marijuana community in Colorado, and I or anyone else I know close to the program think any public vote would pass to limit the current law any more than it was written in the first place. If any changes are made to the program by the Board of Health or State legislature, it will be one of those moments in history where you sit back and sadly say “There is nothing we could have done.” Because the other side completely muffled and sat on the American system.
Special Offers
Linear Mode
