D.A. Faces Recall Vote for Stance on Medical Pot

Pot politics have invaded upscale Marin County, with the top prosecutor facing recall amid claims she’s trampling on California’s new medical marijuana law.

The May 22 election forced on Marin County Dist. Atty. Paula Kamena is the latest salvo in the war over pharmaceutical pot and one that may be repeated; organizers have a list of five other county prosecutors they would like to turn out of office.

“This could be the start of something,” says Chuck Thomas, spokesman for the Washington D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project, which is not involved in the Kamena recall but is interested in seeing how it turns out.

At issue is Proposition 215, the law approved by California voters in 1996 that allows people to use marijuana for pain relief and other medical purposes provided they have a note from a doctor saying it will help their condition.

Advocates say pot has a host of medical uses, including stimulating appetite, crucial for AIDS patients afflicted with wasting syndrome.

Nine states, including California, have authorized the use of medical marijuana.

The federal government, however, remains adamant that marijuana has no medical use, creating a conflict that has gone all the way to the Supreme Court, where justices are considering whether medical necessity trumps the federal bans.

Meanwhile, although Proposition 215 clearly allows use of medical marijuana, it is vague on where patients can get it, setting no limits and saying that individuals or their primary caregivers can grow it.

That has launched spirited debates over how much is too much, and who qualifies as a caregiver.

County officials have varied widely in how they approach the issue, with some working closely with distribution clubs that sprang up after Proposition 215 passed and others taking a harder line.

Kamena said she has been unfairly painted as a pot prosecutor. During her first three years as Marin County district attorney, medical marijuana cases made up a tiny percentage of her office caseload--73 out of 30,000--and most were dismissed or ended in plea bargains.

Kamena said she has made her intentions clear by declaring she won’t prosecute if individuals have no more than six mature or 12 immature plants and half a pound of dry marijuana.

But opponents say that, far from being lenient, Kamena’s guidelines note that federal law makes marijuana contraband and effectively give police a license to confiscate whether or not they make arrests.

“Every joint, every gram, every leaf, anything they can get their hands on, it’s, ‘Ha, ha, ha, the D.A. says this is all against federal law,’ ” says Lynette Shaw, director of the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana and a leader in the recall campaign. “It’s been really mean, and it’s hurt the health of hundreds of people.”

The Marin Alliance, based in the small town of Fairfax, still is dispensing marijuana under an agreement with town officials, Shaw said.

Kamena says the problem is that Proposition 215 is “very convoluted and very complex. It is, in short, a mess. The idea of people who are ill who can benefit from marijuana--I don’t have an issue with that at all.”

“The only people who have any trouble understanding the law is the cops and the district attorneys,” responds Dennis Peron, who wrote Proposition 215. “What it is they don’t understand is compassion.”

In Marin County, a liberal enclave of stunning views and breathtaking home prices just north of the Golden Gate Bridge, Proposition 215 passed with 73% of the vote.

The recall petition against Kamena was started by parents angry about child-custody cases in Marin courts. That drive fizzled, but medical marijuana advocates later took up the cause, getting enough signatures to force the election, which is expected to cost $500,000.

The wording of the petition remains limited to the child-custody complaint, and Tom Van Zandt, a patent attorney and brother of the parent who spearheaded the initial drive, is running for the job if Kamena is turned out of office.