COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

County Manager’s Office

DATE:

March 17, 2003

BOARD MEETING DATE:

March 25, 2003

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

John Maltbie, County Manager

SUBJECT:

SB 420 (Vasconcellos)—Medical Marijuana

Recommendation

Adopt a resolution in support of SB 420 (Vasconcellos) regarding the development of a uniform statewide identification card program for the distribution of medical marijuana.

Background

California voters approved Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act, in 1996. The act allowed for the use of marijuana for medical purposes. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, Prop 215 amended state law to allow persons to grow or possess marijuana for medical use when recommended by a physician. The measure provides for the use of marijuana when a physician has determined that a person’s health would benefit from its use in the treatment of illnesses including cancer, anorexia and AIDS. No prescriptions or other record-keeping is required by the measure. The measure also allows caregivers to grow and possess marijuana for a person for whom the marijuana is recommended. The measure states that no physician shall be punished for having recommended marijuana for medical purposes.

Senator Vasconcellos introduced SB 187 in 2001 as implementing legislation to Prop 215. While the policy direction from Prop 215 was clear, several questions regarding implementation remain. According to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee analysis in 2001, SB 187 was needed to address a number of structural questions created by the proposition—most notably the criteria to become a state-approved patient or primary caregiver.

SB 420 is nearly identical to SB 187, which was abandoned after the Governor’s office indicated a lack of interest in the bill during 2001. SB 420 would require the State Department of Health to create a voluntary identification program that would allow qualified patients and their primary caregivers to use marijuana for medical purposes. County health departments would be required to operate the program locally. County duties would include providing applications to the public, receiving and processing (such as verifying the accuracy of the information and contacting the recommending physician) the applications within 30 days of receipt and maintaining records of the identification card program participants.

The bill would require the State Department of Health to establish application and renewal fees that are sufficient to cover the expenses incurred by the state and counties administering the identification card program. The department would also be required to reimburse each county for its costs of administering the program.

Discussion

The Board of Supervisors has supported medical marijuana efforts in the past. The Board approved a $500,000 study of medical marijuana with Dr. Dennis Israelski. After many years of work and discussion with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the County Health Services Agency began research on the use of medical marijuana. In August 2001, the Board supported SB 187 (2001, Vasconcellos), which is nearly identical to SB 420.

The District Attorney’s office and the California District Attorney’s Association have not yet taken positions on SB 420. Despite legislative language assuring cost recovery, the San Mateo County Health Services Agency recognizes the risk of incurring costs related to this program. Regardless, the Health Services Agency staff believes the benefits of the bill outweigh the potential risk of costs.

The Legislative Committee has not reviewed this item. This bill will be heard in the Senate Health and Human Services Committee March 26, 2003.

Vision Alignment

Support of SB 420 (Vasconcellos) helps the county ensure basic health and safety for all and works toward Goal #8—to help vulnerable people achieve a better quality of life.

Fiscal Impact

Unknown, staff time and resources would be required to administer the program on the county level. The bill requires the State Department of Health to reimburse each county health department for the cost of administering the program from the revenue generated by fees charged to participants.