Lit_Match

State relents on fee for marijuana card
03.02.07|CONTRA COSTA TIMES|By John Simerman

Under pressure from state lawmakers and threats of mutiny from some counties, the agency that oversees the state's medical marijuana identification card program late Wednesday backed off a tenfold increase in its fee for the cards, which was set to take effect Thursday.

The state Department of Health Services told counties in late December that it would raise its fee for the cards from $13 to $142 beginning March 1, citing state law that requires the fees to fully cover the cost of the card program.

Counties also charge a fee to process the applications, and most medical marijuana users would have paid about $200 -- more than seven times the price of a California driver's license -- for simple, laminated cards that must be renewed each year.

In response, some counties threatened to institute local card systems. Among them was San Francisco, by far the leader in state medical marijuana cardholders, with more than 3,600. Those departures threatened to gut a state program that has floundered since it began 19 months ago.

The state agency sent after-hours letters Wednesday to each of the 24 counties that now participate in the program, saying it would raise the fees instead to a more modest $66, or $33 for Medi-Cal patients, starting April 1.

A spokesman for the agency acknowledged that the county threats influenced the decision.

"This would have devastated the program even further," said Mike Bowman. "We took a hard look. We're trying to balance keeping the needs of the program consistent with keeping these folks in."

Pot advocates feared that the higher fees would price many users out of the cards designed to shield them from arrest or seizure of their marijuana under Proposition 215, the 1996 state ballot measure that legalized marijuana for medical uses.

One state lawmaker who pressured the agency claimed victory but also cautioned that the state program faces obstacles. State law requires all counties to participate in the program, but 34 counties still remain no-shows, including some of the state's largest.

Los Angeles County was key to swaying the state agency to reduce the fee increases, said Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco. Los Angeles plans to launch its program by June 1. That alone could bring in some 8,000 applicants, nearly doubling the number of state cardholders.

"That will exponentially increase the number of participants," Leno said. "We were very certain the $142 could be the last straw, the death knell. Now full implementation of the program is very possible."

State health officials had argued that the tenfold fee increase was needed to keep the program afloat, saying demand for the cards lagged far behind what officials expected, largely because so many counties have failed to come on board. Some counties, led by San Diego, have waged a legal battle to opt out of the state card program.

The state agency had expected more than 100,000 card holders, with all counties participating. As of Feb. 5, it had issued fewer than 9,500 cards.

State officials said the fee increase would make the program solvent and help the agency start paying off a $1.5 million startup loan from another state health fund. Its budget for the current fiscal year is $852,000, down from $1.2 million last year. Along with issuing the cards, the state runs a database that police or marijuana clubs can use to verify them.

But internal e-mails and budget documents show that officials with the state agency never considered whether the tenfold fee increase would price out many medical users and gut the state program instead of rescuing it.

The documents, which the Times obtained through a state Public Records Act request, show that state health services officials were most concerned with getting the program in the black for the coming fiscal year, and considered a fee as high as $250 before settling on $142.

Their calculations ignored a likely rise in revenue as new counties joined the program, the documents show.

Even without them, the agency expected to build a surplus of nearly $1.4 million from the fees over five years -- enough to run the program for nearly three years, the documents show.

E-mails show that agency officials were loathe to share their calculations with county health officials. In one exchange in January, a top state health official derided a county employee who requested a written justification for the new fee to show her board of supervisors.

"The lady's out of line and her tone has it all wrong!" wrote Nancy Hayward, chief of the state Office of County Health Services. Hayward directed another state official to "draft a very general response" and later said: "If she doesn't like general answers, then oh so sad."

By law, medical marijuana patients need only a doctor's note, but advocates say law enforcement agencies more clearly recognize a "hands-off" policy toward cardholders. Also, San Francisco's policy on marijuana clubs requires them to accept only patients with cards.

"If you want to know why people want to have an ID card, it's so they can go into a cannabis club and lay down a card so they're instantly recognized," said Dale Gieringer, California coordinator for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML. "People like that."

Sec

How hard is it and how much more would it cost to make an additional endorsement on a drivers licence or State issued ID card? Why did the State of California burn 1.5 million dollars to invent a whole new card system. Just put the endorsement on the back side of a drivers license or State issued ID card. Minimal cost, instant recognizability, the counterfit prevention measures are already built in. DUH!!!

__________________
Guidelines.
Search
http://www.marijuana.com/drug-test/index

kinghelwig

sec3, your answer to the problem is too simple,and people who aren't quite there who are running our offices,is one reason the system will not work,I dont want cops having access to me as a mm user I feel its none of their business,I dont need somebody telling me their store policy is to serve people only with cards,that sounds descriminatory,and it's happened to me already,so you find another place that wont descriminate and get your meds there,the place I go to hired a temp. laborer to input information into the computer,I went back there a week later only to find that my and others information was not in their computer's because the temp. didn't put them in, oh how nice it must be to play the blame game,the guy that called my doctor the second time,was so rude to not only my dr.'s secretary,but called me back,gave me a ration of S---,and hung up on me.It took me about 20 mins. to straighten this out,I faxed a copy to my Dr. came to find out they didnt put it in my file,so I could have been busted anytime,they put a copy in my file then faxed a copy to the store,this clown calls me back and tells me in a nicer tone,your cool again come on back,now I figure for the price it's not worth the hassle,so I from now on will use the other option open to us and thats growing it,I have in the past,I will again,but i'll still need more paper work,no problem,grow your own,yes it's nice to be able to walk in or have it delivered,but free sounds best,peace to you all,good day.