Council Looks at Pot Law
Council, Public Safety Officials Consider Options for Fines, Penalties Under New Law
– Allison Goldsberry
After Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly voted to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana last fall, local officials have grappled with how to enforce the new law.
Under a new law approved by voters, possession of one ounce or less of marijuana is no longer a criminal offense, and a new system of civil penalties is being put into place.
City Councilor Paul Camuso, chair of the Council’s Public Safety Committee, has called a meeting wtih Medford Police Chief Leo Sacco, Superior Officers Union President Lieutenant Mike O’Brien, Patrolmen’s Union President Officer Harold McGilvary, City Solicitor Mark Rumley and Health Director Karen Rose to discuss potential fines and other penalties for using marijuana in public.
“I respect the right of the voters, but I don’t think they intended for people to be able to use [marijuana] at the public pools, the pond and all sorts of areas where seniors and families congregate,” Councilor Camuso told the Medford Daily Mercury.
The meeting will take place before the Council’s regular 7PM meeting on Tuesday. The meeting is at 6PM in the Council’s office, Room 207, at Medford City Hall. The meeting is open to the public.
Councilor Michael Marks and Council President Breanna Lungo-Koehn are also on the Public Safety Committee.
In January the School Committee reviewed the law and its potential impact on possessing or using marijuana in the city’s public schools. School Superintendent Roy Belson said the new law does not affect the discretion of school administrators in determining the appropriate punishment for students possessing small amounts of marijuana on school property.
According to current school policy, no student is allowed to possess, sell, distribute, purchase, or be under the influence of drugs or alcohol on school grounds. Violators will be suspended and reported to the Medford Police.
“I respect the right of the voters, but I don’t think they intended for people to be able to use [marijuana] at the public pools, the pond and all sorts of areas where seniors and families congregate,” Councilor Camuso told the Medford Daily Mercury.
I am a senior, and I voted for this with the intention of being free from harassment wherever I, and my family choose to use it, and I know other seniors and their families who feel the same way.
Dixon George,
Spencer, MA
“City Councilor Paul Camuso, chair of the Council’s Public Safety Committee, has called a meeting wtih Medford Police Chief Leo Sacco, Superior Officers Union President Lieutenant Mike O’Brien, Patrolmen’s Union President Officer Harold McGilvary, City Solicitor Mark Rumley and Health Director Karen Rose to discuss potential fines and other penalties for using marijuana in public.”
The voters overwhelmingly agreed that a $100 civil fine was the proper punishment for marijuana possession (this would presumably include use, but not vice-vera–one may possess without using). So is the law enforcement brain-trust assembled going to note the difference–I would doubt it.
Will the majority of voters in Medford see through this ruse–probably not.
This is the essence of our problem. When it comes to drug policy, knee-jerk reactions by law enforcement convince people that police know best how to control the presence of drugs in society.
Next time your diabetes or M.S. is acting up, why don’t you go to the police???
Because they cannot help you.
Why do we insist on thinking the police can help us make better marijuana policies? There is no evidence they can, and there is no evidence that arresting people was reducing marijuana use.
It would have been nice, rational even, to have a physician, a substance abuse counselor or social worker, and/or an admitted marijuana user on the Advisory Board.
Here’s what they are going to do: they will raise the fine for possession (not use) of marijuana to an additional $300. This is not because there has been a sudden increase in public use, it is not because there is more marijuana available, and it is not because that dollar amount will eliminate one instance of marijuana possession in Medford.
It is because that is what the Attorney General told your Advisory Board they should do.
Thank goodness the AG and the police “only enforce the law”, they don’t make them.
Except when an undereducated minority begins to march in lockstep against the will of the voters.
If the voters don’t know what they are doing, perhaps they never intended to vote for the City Council they now have.
Keith Saunders, Ph.D.
Sociologist/Drug Policy Expert
Northeastern University & UMass-Lowell