Judge upholds new pot law

BY COLBY FRAZIER
DAILY SOUND STAFF WRITER

A lawsuit filed by the city of Santa Barbara that contested the constitutionality of Measure P -- a ballot initiative passed by city voters last November that made marijuana related offenses the lowest law enforcement priority -- was thrown out by Superior Court Judge Thomas Anderle.
The lawsuit was filed on Feb. 27 and listed Heather Poet, a proponent of the Measure P initiative, as the defendant. According Anderle’s ruling, the city’s decision to sue Poet was based on its inability to sue itself, or the majority of the city’s voters, and to probe the constitutionality of telling police what they can and cannot enforce.

But constitutionality ended up being the reason Anderle dismissed the suite.
“...The court will not permit this suit arising out of an individual’s exercise of her constitutional right to participate in the process of formulating laws to go forward,” Anderle said in his ruling.
Since Measure P circumvents state and federal law on the enforcement of marijuana related offenses, City Attorney Steve Wiley said the city wanted to make sure the measure was legal.
“Essentially the city got what it was looking for in terms of the constitutionality of Measure P,” Wiley said. “We suspected it was unconstitutional and still suspect it might be, but Judge Anderle didn’t see it that way.”
Wiley said the big question for the city was whether or not they could tell police they had to do “XYZ about marijuana possession when the state law says otherwise.”
Proponents of Measure P hope making marijuana a lower priority will allow police to focus on more serious offenses. It passed with 66 percent of the vote -- a number Adam Wolf, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union’s Drug Law Reform Project who represented Poet, said is “an astounding majority for an initiative.”
Santa Barbara Mayor Marty Blum also noted the city’s desire to find out about the measure’s constitutionality.
Blum said she’s not only pleased with Anderle’s ruling, but said it will strengthen the legitimacy of other measures throughout the state and country.
“We were trying to find out if it was constitutional or not,” Blum said. “[The ruling] gives more strengths to the people who are trying to pass measures throughout the state and maybe throughout the country... It gives them more ammunition. It shows that it’s a constitutional matter and I think that’s really great.”
Wolf called the ruling “a significant decision for Santa Barbara’s voters.”
“It’s an important victory for free speech and the democratic process and about respecting the safety of the residents of Santa Barbara.”
The ruling essentially means the citizens of any city have the right to formulate laws through ballot initiatives despite state and federal laws.
It says the city is free to decline to enforce federal criminal statutes, and that it is the responsibility of the federal government to enforce its laws.
Wolf said the ruling protects two important ideas.
“The first is that people are free to participate in the democratic process and secondly that communities can make fundamental policy decisions that police should focus on serious crimes not petty drug offenses,” he said.
What Measure P does not do is decriminalize marijuana possession, it simply redirects law enforcement's priority.
“Police officers can still arrest those who violate drug possession laws in their presence,” Anderle wrote in the ruling. “The voters have simply instructed them that they have higher priority work to do.”
Poet, 30, who helped get the measure on the ballot through her work with the group Sensible Santa Barbara, said she’s relieved to no longer be the center of a lawsuit.
“I feel like justice prevailed and it’s a good feeling to have it over,” Poet said. “I know that we have a really intelligent group of people here and I was pretty confident that it would be OK.”
Despite the lawsuit, Measure P was implemented months ago. Councilman Brian Barnwell said an oversight board, who’s function is to “monitor any police activity associated with marijuana,” has already met twice.
Last December the council voted 4-3 during closed session to file the lawsuit.
Wiley said the council will consider filing an appeal to the decision sometime in August.
But Barnwell said he won’t support an appeal when the topic appears on the council’s agenda.
“As far as I’m concerned that’s it,” Barnwell said. “I’d be absolutely shocked [if there is an appeal]. I’m going to vote against appealing the decision.”
Though Poet said it was frustrating and upsetting when she saw her name at the top of a lawsuit, she said “it felt wonderful to do it and be part of the democratic process.”