Berkeley City Council Mandates Free Pot for the Poor

[garbon]

http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/07/14/2014/Free_Marijuana_Berkeley

Berkeley's medical marijuana dispensaries must provide 2 percent of their cannabis free of charge to very low-income residents under a law passed unanimously by the City Council earlier this month.

Individual patients who make under $32,000, or families that earn less than $46,000, qualify for the complimentary cannabis. The law further requires that the free marijuana "be the same quality on average as medical cannabis that is dispensed to other members."

"We were happy with that," said Charley Pappas, a member of the city's Medical Cannabis Commission. "It gets the council and the mayor focusing on patients. There should be access to the best medicine and the poorest people shouldn't be excluded."

Following the decision, national media proclaimed, "Berkeley out-Berkeleys Berkeley" and declared the arrival of "weed welfare." Many of the articles were long on hyperbole and short of the facts, since the new law may not force dispensaries to radically alter their business models. Many of them already give away free medical cannabis.

"It's not an uncommon practice" to voluntarily provide free cannabis to needy patients, said Pappas, who used to own a dispensary in San Francisco.

Berkeley Patients Group (BPG) on San Pablo Avenue and Cannabis Buyers Club of Berkeley (CBCB) on Shattuck Avenue, two of the city's three dispensaries, previously had programs that distributed free marijuana to low-income clients. Furthermore, the law only applies to Berkeley residents, who typically make up only 25 percent of a dispensary's clientele.

"We do this on our own, so we certainly welcome the city mandating that all dispensaries create these sorts of programs," said Sean Luse, chief operating officer of BPG.

Luse estimated that the dispensary, which has hosted a program for low-income patients since it opened in 1999, typically gives away 1 percent of its cannabis. He questioned whether the 2 percent requirement was appropriate.

"I do think there could be problems if we're oversupplying demand and giving away more cannabis than is legitimately needed," he said. "We'll see how this plays out."

The commission's initial proposal asked dispensaries to give away 1 percent of their marijuana, but the council decided to double the amount, Pappas said.

The 2 percent, by weight, is determined by mandatory half-yearly calculations of the amount of marijuana distributed to all members.

In the same July 1 vote, the council approved a fourth dispensary for the city, three and a half years after residents voted on Measure T in support of the additional dispensary.

Pappas applauded the council's approval of a fourth dispensary.

"They perpetuated the status quo for years when they put a moratorium on additional dispensaries," he said. "It displays their attention, finally, to medical cannabis distribution in Berkeley. With another dispensary, [medical marijuana] will be cheaper, because there will be more competition."

The Medical Cannabis Commission had recommended approval of up to six dispensaries in Berkeley, but the council decided to revisit the request next year.

At a previous council meeting on June 17, council members praised the commission's work on recommending revisions to the cannabis ordinance.

"The work you've done here is thorough and honorable — but ongoing," Councilman Max Anderson said.

[Monoriu]

I have no idea that I lived in such a crazy place for 4 months. 

US$32k is very low income?  That's more than double the median income for individuals. 

[jimmy olsen]

US$32k is very low income?  That's more than double the median income for individuals.

In Hong Kong maybe, not in the U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States#Median_income

EDIT: Hmm that's household income, here's personal income. Still not as low as Mono said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States#By_educational_attainment

[Eddie Teach]

It's not much, especially when adjusted for the absurd real estate prices in the Bay Area.

[Monoriu]

It's not much, especially when adjusted for the absurd real estate prices in the Bay Area.

I think HK's real estate prices are at least as bad. 

[garbon]

It's not much, especially when adjusted for the absurd real estate prices in the Bay Area.

But we're talking the East Bay. Apart from maybe some parts around San Jose, that's probably the section of the bay with lowest real estate prices (though not Berkeley specifically though Berkeley/Oakland are where are my academic friends who make squat seem to be ending up).

[Eddie Teach]

I wouldn't want to live in HK on $32k either.

[Grinning_Colossus]

It's not much, especially when adjusted for the absurd real estate prices in the Bay Area.

But we're talking the East Bay. Apart from maybe some parts around San Jose, that's probably the section of the bay with lowest real estate prices (though not Berkeley specifically though Berkeley/Oakland are where are my academic friends who make squat seem to be ending up).

From what I've heard, the real estate contagion is spreading rapidly to Oakland, Berkeley, and Alameda.

[garbon]

Well that makes sense. There's only so much space.

[Monoriu]

I wouldn't want to live in HK on $32k either.

US$32k is quite solid middle class here.  Median income is around US$15k. 

[celedhring]

You can live very comfortably in Barcelona with 32,000$ a year.  Very.

Heck, I was able to lead the usual "I'm penniless but I party every week" student life in NYC with $30k a year.

[Josquius]

32k sounds rather good to me too. I could live very comfortably on that

[Eddie Teach]

I think "very comfortably" requires at least a thousand sq. ft.

[Maladict]

Cue fat Americans joke.

[CountDeMoney]

$32K is entry level peanuts here.  It's nice if you're, say, a fresh college graduate with a shitty apartment.

Re the topic:  good for the homeless;  everybody else in Berkeley has been smoking their socks since 1958, why not includ the poor.

Just don't do it on campus.