Neighborhood Advocates Question Park Liquor Policy

Larry Ambrose comments at the hearing.

By Dave Felice

Members of the Parks Advisory Board express concern that the general public perceives a change in the parks’ alcohol policy as a precursor to exclusive commercial events.

During the regular meeting following the hearing Thursday, Parks Administrative Manager Fred Weiss repeated his previous public statement that changing the alcohol policy is “separate issue” from admission based special events. But he did acknowledge that policy to allow selling and serving alcoholic beverages commercially in parks “does remove one of many obstacles” to staging events for which admission is charged.

Joe Mauro of Whittier neighborhood, contended the alcohol policy changes are “specifically designed to work with proposals to commercialize parks.” Mauro also questioned the already limited resources of Denver Police to provide effective law enforcement during events where alcohol is sold and served.

“I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine how the Parks Department will police the sale of alcoholic beverages (during commercial events),” said former city councilwoman Cathy Donohue of Cheesman neighborhood. “We have very difficult social problems with alcohol in the parks already.”

Donohue said she’s “appalled” that the issue of selling and serving alcoholic beverages in parks is even being brought up again after selling and serving was initially allowed last year. “I personally disagreed with the city attorney many times when I was working in city government, and this is another one of those times,” said Donohue. “This is a charter issue. Our parks are not for sale. We are opening a door that does not need to be opened.”
Donohue represented District 10 for nearly two decades before the advent of term limits.

John Hayden, a resident of Councilwoman Carla Madison’s District 8, spoke in favor of the proposal which would expand the locations where liquor could be sold and served. The proposed changes also require event organizers, both nonprofit and commercial, to hold “a liquor license from the appropriate governmental agency.”

“It makes me sad that parks are under-used and I am told there aren’t enough funds,” said Hayden. “It seems revenue from alcohol sales can help promote development (and) I expect responsible management of parks.”

Patty Paul of Park Hill expressed concern about the “privatization” of parks, noting that events would result in the closure of large areas. “This would be a violation of the intended purpose of (public) parks” she said.

Representing both Sloan’s Neighborhood and the Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation (INC) association, Larry Ambrose said selling and serving alcoholic beverages “needs to be treated with caution, care, and consideration.” If commercial entities want the privilege of selling and serving alcohol in the parks, Ambrose says the city needs to go back to the legislature for a proper revision of liquor laws.

“It’s a questionable issue at best and this policy is not really needed,” said Ambrose. “In addition, expanded sales would require a tremendous amount of energy for citizen advocates to monitor these (commercial) events.”

Karen Cuthbertson of INC said requests for commercial events are not valid and “proper land use takes priority over revenue generation.”

Echoing other complaints, Councilwoman Jeanne Robb said Parks and Recreation needs to do a better job of notifying Denver residents of changes. Even though Parks Manager Kim Bailey contends the department followed the letter of the law, the alcohol policy was not discussed at the INC meeting on April 12 and the admission policy task force was not notified.

The hearing notice was published in the Denver Daily Journal legal publication and erroneous information was posted on the Parks Department web site. As a result of the outcry over lack of notification, the city council’s Public Amenities Committee got Parks to agree to extend the public comment period to May 23.

Denver’s Director of Excise and Licenses Awilda Marquez explained that nonprofit organizations would still be able to use the Special Permits Liquor License as they have in the past. Commercial event operators would be required to obtain either a Tavern License or one of the other business use licenses.

According to Marquez, state law covering Tavern Licenses requires “possession” of defined premises, but, in her interpretation, does not specify “four walls and a roof.”

Marquez says commercial license applicants would be thoroughly investigated before a license was issued. She says her department has the authority to require a public hearing and determine the requirements for the hearing. For example, the law requires neighbors within 200 feet of the site of an application to be notified. If the proposed sales site were within one of the larger parks, the 200 foot limit would not extend to adjacent neighborhoods.

Marquez says nonprofit agencies do not go through the same scrutiny.

At one point, Denver resident Joe Henderson interrupted the meeting with a boisterous condemnation of alcohol abuse. Meeting Chairperson Heidi Loshbaugh stood up, confronted Henderson, and repeatedly asked him to be silent and leave the room. Under his breath, Assistant Manager of Parks Scott Robson used an unflattering anatomical reference to describe Henderson.

Outgoing Parks Manager Kim Bailey also said commercialization already occurs during events in parks, citing examples such as signage and uniforms. Bailey asked the Advisory Board to “help dispel the myth” that there would be a proliferation of commercial events.

Weiss said the Parks Department does not allow multiple events that would severely damage park lands and noted “there hasn’t been an overwhelming demand for commercial events.” He also clarified the rules about “Special Occasion Events,” where attendees are present by invitation only. Park lands or facilities are not actually closed to the public during these events, said Weiss.

The question of commercially selling and serving alcohol in parks was raised when Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG) proposed closing the western two-thirds of City Park for a two-day music festival. When the nearby Denver Zoo and area residents objected, the festival was moved to Commerce City.

The Parks Advisory Board plans to make its recommendation on the liquor policy revision by Tuesday, May 13. The Parks Department intends to use its “rules and regulations” authority to implement whatever decision is made.

District 8 Councilwoman Carla Madison, a member of the Public Amenities Committee, was the only representative of City Council at the hearing and meeting. There were no broadcast or print reporters attending, but the hearing portion was videotaped for later broadcast on Denver’s public access television on cable Channel 8.

For additional information on prudent park policy and the liquor proposal, see http://www.savecitypark.org/.

Parks Administrative Manager Fred Weiss (with tie) hears comments on alcohol policy changes.

Ruby Hill - A Jewel Of A Park Or A Crown Of Thorns?

Reprinted with permission

by Paul Kashmann

Washington Park Profile

Ruby Hill Park could become one of Denver’s most active performance venues under a plan supported by District 7 City Councilman Chris Nevitt, Denver’s First Lady Mary Louise Lee and several area non-profit agencies.

The proposal has drawn objections from those opposing the spread of alcohol sales in Denver parks as well as those who believe that public parks should remain open to all – not fenced off for fee-based events.

In 2010, seven Denver parks – City Park, Civic Center Park, Confluence Park, Parkfield Park, Ruby Hill Park, Skyline Park and Stapleton Central Park – were designated as “festival parks,” allowing portions of those green-spaces to be permitted for occasional fee-based events. All of the parks but Ruby Hill were also given a go-ahead for the sale of alcohol in such cases. “I blame myself for being asleep at the switch,” said Nevitt. “I actually don’t remember why Ruby Hill was passed as a festival park without liquor sales. It doesn’t make sense to me. It was a bad idea.

Read more »

Marijuana Advocates to Blast Former Booze-Dealing Gubernatorial Candidate Hickenlooper Over Hypocritical Opposition to Marijuana Reform

Thumbs down on Hick, thumbs up on Garnett and several state legislative candidates

DENVER -- Colorado's largest marijuana advocacy organization will hold a news conference in front of the Denver City-County Building on Wednesday, October 13, at 11 a.m., to discuss the results of the first-ever marijuana-specific Colorado voter guide. The event, which will occur just as voters begin receiving their mail-in ballots, is being coordinated by the SAFER Voter Education Fund (SVEF), the social welfare lobbying arm of Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER).

** Voter guides available on-line here.

At the news conference, advocates will blast gubernatorial frontrunner and former alcohol dealer John Hickenlooper for continuing to oppose the legalization and regulation of a far safer substance -- marijuana. The group will also praise attorney general Stan Garnett, as well as several other state lawmakers, for supporting a system of marijuana regulation similar to that of alcohol.

Read more »

Parks: Ruby Hill Alcohol Sales and Rules Revisions‏

by Dave Felice


Keep Parks for People, not Profit

The Denver Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) holds two important public hearings on Thursday, April 12. The first hearing is for a request to allow sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages at Ruby Hill Park. The original designation of Ruby Hill as a special events site makes no provision for alcoholic beverages.

Proponents, including event promoters, argue that alcohol sales are necessary to recoup the costs of events, are "part of the overall package" and "an essential part of the experience" of park events.
The Greenway Foundation proposes a free public concert at which alcoholic beverages can be sold and consumed. Swallow Hill Music Association contemplates closing a portion of the park and requiring an admission fee for entrance into the closed area where beer and wine would be sold.

Read more »

Denver Police to Confront Pot Celebration Lawbreakers on 4/20

from Robert Chase at (720) 213-6497 or copatientsandcaregivers@gmail.com

Denver Police will try to enforce total ban on public consumption of cannabis

Over a year after Denver voted two-to-one to “regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol”, the City Council still has not instituted a process to issue permits for the public consumption of cannabis and plans a crackdown on Denver’s annual 4/20 Rally against Prohibition instead.  “The Constitution does not protect the public use of cannabis, but it does not ban it, either” said Robert Chase of Team420,  “Councilor Charlie Brown and our so-called Marijuana Czar Ashley Kilroy, are pretending that the City cannot do what our Constitution says they should do and what a large majority of the People of Denver want them to do – treat cannabis like alcohol”.  Denver lets organizations applying for Festival permits also obtain special permits allowing the public to buy and use alcohol there, but maintains a total ban on the public use of cannabis.

While State law now prevents the outdoor sale of cannabis at the 4/20 Rally, there is no legal impediment to Denver issuing a permit for what most who will come, will come to the Rally to do – protest the Prohibition of cannabis by publicly enjoying some.  The collision between the reality of Denver’s general acceptance of cannabis and the dogged opposition of its government takes place this April 20, with the mass-citation of attendees at a City-permitted event under an ordinance (38-175(b) of the Municipal Code), which can stand legal review in any court except that of public opinion.  The City Administration plans a propaganda campaign to “educate” Denver that no one may so much as expose cannabis to public view in our parks based on the mistaken claim that the Constitution prohibits public use.

The City has gone so far as to demand that the Rally erect signs telling those in attendance not to use cannabis as a precondition of receiving a permit – a clear infringement of its First Amendment rights.  “City Council’s unconstitutional ordinance stands against the decision of two-thirds of Denver’s voters, and it cannot dictate what we say at the Rally” said Chase.  “The City Council’s intransigent opposition to the will of the voters on cannabis demonstrates just how unrepresentative Denver’s government is”.  Chase points to the timing of Denver’s municipal elections in May as one causative factor:  “If we change the City Charter to make municipal elections coincide with general elections, we can turn more of the people who live in Denver out to vote for those who will govern Denver, and force municipal politicians to be more accountable to their constituents”, he said.

Unless DPD mounts a major operation inside the Park during the Rally, it will limit itself to picking off those on the fringes – neither signs nor police are likely to deter rally-goers from using cannabis.  In an effort to forestall unnecessary confrontation and inappropriate enforcement, the Colorado Coalition for Patients and Caregivers and Team420 have enjoined public officials against enforcement of Municipal Ordinance 38-175(b) and urged them to abide by the stated purpose of Amendment 64, which legalized some use of cannabis in November, 2012.  “City Council has wasted an incredible amount of time on the subject of cannabis, yet because it has consistently disregarded the will of its constituents and the Constitution both, we are no closer to having comparable systems of regulations regarding the public use of cannabis and of alcohol than we were a year ago.  Do better, now”, he wrote to Denver’s Mayor, City Council, Police Chief, and Czar.

Jessica LeRoux reports on the first A64 (Legal Marijuana) Task Force Meeting

Hey Now,
Here is as full a review as I can possibly offer of today's Amendment 64 Task Force meeting, in light of the fact that the panelists seem to have been selected as much for their marble mouthed mumbling qualities as any other obvious qualification. Should be an interesting 8 weeks, I have the dates for pending meetings as well as Pix of important power point pages. I will try to condense this into as quick a read as I can, so I will go over the intro to the meeting and discussion points about the panel, post the pics, and below each picture i will elaborate about the topic in the photo, and give pointers on the panelists proposals and responses. When I want to interject my own thoughts I will *** and change fonts...

The meeting began with Jack Findlaw the Governors office and Barbara Brohl from DOR saying they would be the authority on A64, and going around the table to do introductions. Then Barbara Brohl laid down the basis for the day's session as being "issue Identification". Panel Members were given a binder of worksheets and info contacts etc... the binder contents were reviewed, including the fact that the MMED plans to assist with writing the rules in WA state as well as here. and for the record I am in the process of obtaining a copy of the Map (tab 12) contained in the Binder which shows the state MMJ bans by region.
The group proceeded to set the dates for meetings to occur after the new year, which again are open to you to attend and will also be at the gaming office building at
17301 W Colfax. Meeting dates are as follows.
Monday 1-7-13 12 1-5pm.
Tuesday 1-22-13 1-5pm
Tuesday 2-5-13 1-5pm
Tuesday 2-19-13 1-5pm
(and possibly if nesc 2-28-13)

Then Jack Findlaw started the session with the statement that the MMED is the standard, which alarmed me as I thought the voters wanted recreational to be regulated like alcohol, not over-regulated to death.
"Task force is intended to review legal & policy issues not debate legality of marijuana"
these two power point pages show the role and desired outcome of the task force... they also show some skull, to keep it sexy for ya!

what's cut off here is 'participate in work groups" and "review state law to identify and make recommendations for changes if applicable"


what is cut off here is "work groups will share their recommendations with the Task Force where the recommendations will be discussed and subject to approval"

*** This subject to approval aspect is going to complicate things i predict, based on the need for a "quorum". What that means is that a majority, of greater than 50% of the panel (at least 13 panelists) must agree " to a consensus" on an issue for it to move forward. This is alarming given that the panel only has 2 1/2 people who may represent "us" out of 24 people, thereby potentially disenfranchising patients.
and alarmingly when there is no Consensus the majority vote of the majority of workgroup members in attendance is the way they will move forward if there is a quorum. Also alarmingly we were told if a panelist is going to be absent they may send a proxy to vote on their behalf, but if a proxy is underinformed about previous materials debated or discussed they may cast an uninformed vote we all have to live by.
Also Task Force members must vote on issues, and only may abstain is there is a conflict of interest. WHO DECIDES what is a conflict?

We learned that the meetings will be open to the public, but you need to sign up to speak when you arrive not after the meeting.
The DOR will be taking minutes at meetings which will be posted to their webpage upon their approval at the next meeting (2 week time frame). The work group meetings and all Task force meetings will be posted to the public in compliance with CO open meetings act. ***There is no timeline for how many days in advance these meetings will be posted.

Then we got this powerpoint of the task force workgroups and who is in charge of em...

The grey back grounds make these hard to read, but we have the actual PDF of the real powerpoint attached here too...

Then they went through the groups one by one, in a session where panelists got to give feedback about each work group's agenda. so I will post each pic, share my personal observations and concerns, and give you the panelists comments....


***Ok, so things were going along weirdly enough, but when questions arose about #5 on this guideline, strangely nobody knew where that suggestion came from! State run Cannabis would only adhere to the intent of regulating like alcohol if we lived in Utah folks.

The panelists were asked to identify other issues that fall under this topic, I am presenting an edited version as I couldnt write it all verbatim.
Findlaw: we have choices, to regulate like alcohol, like MMJ, like gaming, MMED is model since it is working... **** really? who told him that?
CS: Alcohol is Model citizens voted for & the framework.
DB what is regulatory framework for WA state?
KB: which implimentation model gains favor will affect local control.
DP: banking issues and federal implications
CU: Define uses
KB: what does DOR envision looking at beyond licensing?
?: Public Consumption
CS: Banking, federal preemption not issue, unless we bring to table, should not be discussed or used at threat. *** Good point.
VM: Will insurance Co's cover MMJ patients, what effect will that have on medicaid funds?
RK: Ideally harmonized Medical & recreational, ***not at expense of patients please.
?: Grey Market sales?
RK: Emergency funding for regulatory, where, when how?
MS: Regulation for home grows...
CT: clarity on outdoor grows


*** here my main concern is that the chair person for this workgroup is Kevin Bommer from Municiple league, as you know I shared a document from his office 2 weeks ago where the CML ws already prioritizing Prohibition over regulation. The CML has also been instrumental in passing many regional bans. I question if the state plans to write a pretty set of rules while at the same time encouraging Kbomb to get the local municipalities to enact bans in every area retail sales might ever be eligible to occur.

main topics were:
BB Different rolls for different agencies state & local.
MS identify opportunities for retail?
DB: Local advertising regs?
CS: who binds local certification?


*** once again they seem to be very keen on finding ways to take money!
We learned a few things on this one, like that the co-chair of this workgroup also happens to be the co-chari of the CCJJ who decides about DUI laws. *** Cozy no? Most of these points centered on DUI no surprise. But there were some other shocking issues of topic...

*** the 1st speaker to chime in on this topic also made the news today for her other opinions... Tamara Ward is a panelist who also is primary signatory of the letter sent by CO business groups to the DOJ requesting that the federal government enforce the Controlled Substances Act. Read the link here, I think this person among about 5 others should be recused for conflict of interest. http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2012/12/marijuana_amendment_64_task_force_conflict_of_interest.php

TW: Concerns for employers
MS: 280 E tax issues on state level
CS: decouple state & fed taxes for industry
DP?: Student Aid issues, Housing, Contract enforcability???
CS: Where does money go once collected? **** Great Question!
CS: Define Excise tax v other taxes
BB: Where will excise taxes be collected?
CG: Child court issues Dui & juvie court for underage driving intoxicated
MS: (union) DUID in workplace in blood while not using... (nanogram level)
cs: redefine probable cause
kb: redefine muni code rules for misdemeanor


*** expect plenty of new laws to be passed to keep enforcement profitable! See items 2 through 6... and how to keep for profit jails filled long term,
see 7 & 8.

Topics here included:
BB: #6 define safe use, re child services & custody, home grows, and child abuse...
MS: labeling standards
DZ: Illegitimate vs criminal sales definitions... *** note this ass hat's language... this is the "citizen at large" member of the panel who also ironically works in the El Paso Cty DA's office under none other than MMJ hater Dan Maye... nothing to see here...
CU: Diversion to Minors?
DZ: comparrison to Gaming as well as liquor?


*** expect even more new stuff here, as they "think of the children" !

Topics spun out from this one like cheesewhiz from a can shoved up a chihuahua's ass! (sorry, needed to blow off some steam, this typing sucks).

JF: issues of medical vs recreational potency, proposed limit of 10% THC on recreational cannabis.
CT (kiddie drug cop nanny man) blathered on about: advertising to kids, using cartoons, sponsoring youth sports, exposure to smoke, expose to grows, drug culture, impact to drug free schools, duid, substance treatment facilities, mental illness facilities, community colleges? *** this was all one comment in like 20 seconds, the guy sounded all agitated, like he needed to smoke some weed or something.
MS: Responsible vendors- tamperproof package.
CS: re potency please use science vs conjecture.
BB: label & package to deter kids
Smalls: Prohibited chemicals and pesticides
RK: testing standards for potency and health safety
JS: Hashish advertising
RC: Size limits for retail grow operations, plant limit, who regulates?
DZ: community acceptance should be considered
VM: sunset these rules in 4 years in case some dont work out? **** changed my opinion of this woman right here, very sensible.
MS: industry needs a consumer watch dog agency.

Also as I typed this up I got a response from Mark Couch at MMED, he sent me a link to a PDF of all the power point slides so that is attached here, and will let you see the text behind the skulls and grimaces in the pics i took for you. It comes out sideways, but no biggie turn your head!


*** so there you have it... I think what we've learned is that many of these people have 0% of a clue on this topic, and no emotional investment in its success, in fact we seemed to find that in spite of our 3 or 4 years as an industry with a very very few bad apples the prevailing view of panelists was that cannabis users are criminals and addicts who can not be trusted to act responsibly without a nanny state to watch over them. Of course about 35% of these panelists careers depend on that belief system, how is that a conflict of interest? (sarcasm alert) We need to start an email bomb project to let these people know that patients still exist, the medical market is not the same as recreational, and the will of the people was to decrease the drug war and money spent on it, not find new ways to wring blood and money from the same old stoners.

THanks for reading,

Jessica LeRoux
Twirling Hippy Confections
2145 W Evans Denver CO
303 922 3661

Facts About Insane Pot Policy

From NORML.ORG: Marijuana Arrests For Year 2006 – 829,625 Tops Record High...Nearly 15 Percent Increase Over 2005 September 24, 2007 - Washington, DC, USA Washington, DC: Police arrested a record 829,625 persons for marijuana violations in 2006, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's annual Uniform Crime Report, released today. This is the largest total number of annual arrests for pot ever recorded by the FBI. Marijuana arrests now comprise nearly 44 percent of all drug arrests in the United States. "These numbers belie the myth that police do not target and arrest minor marijuana offenders," said NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre, who noted that at current rates, a marijuana smoker is arrested every 38 seconds in America. "This effort is a tremendous waste of criminal justice resources that diverts law enforcement personnel away from focusing on serious and violent crime, including the war on terrorism." Of those charged with marijuana violations, approximately 89 percent some 738,915 Americans were charged with possession only. The remaining 90,710 individuals were charged with "sale/manufacture," a category that includes all cultivation offenses even those where the marijuana was being grown for personal or medical use. In past years, roughly 30 percent of those arrested were age 19 or younger. "Present policies have done little if anything to decrease marijuana's availability or dissuade youth from trying it," St. Pierre said, noting young people in the U.S. now frequently report that they have easier access to pot than alcohol or tobacco. “Two other major points standout from today’s record marijuana arrests: Overall, there has been a dramatic 188 percent increase in marijuana arrests in the last 15 years -- yet the public's access to pot remains largely unfettered and the self-reported use of cannabis remains largely unchanged. Second, America’s Midwest is decidedly the hotbed for marijuana-related arrests with 57 percent of all marijuana-related arrests. The region of America with the least amount of marijuana-related arrests is the West with 30 percent. This latter result is arguably a testament to the passage of various state and local decriminalization efforts over the past several years.” The total number of marijuana arrests in the U.S. for 2006 far exceeded the total number of arrests in the U.S. for all violent crimes combined, including murder, manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault. Annual marijuana arrests have nearly tripled since the early 1990s. "Arresting hundreds of thousands of Americans who smoke marijuana responsibly needlessly destroys the lives of otherwise law abiding citizens," St. Pierre said, adding that over 8 million Americans have been arrested on marijuana charges in the past ten years. During this same time, arrests for cocaine and heroin have declined sharply, implying that increased enforcement of marijuana laws is being achieved at the expense of enforcing laws against the possession and trafficking of more dangerous drugs. St. Pierre concluded: "Enforcing marijuana prohibition costs taxpayers between $10 billion and $12 billion annually and has led to the arrest of nearly 20 million Americans. Nevertheless, some 94 million Americans acknowledge having used marijuana during their lives. It makes no sense to continue to treat nearly half of all Americans as criminals for their use of a substance that poses no greater - and arguably far fewer - health risks than alcohol or tobacco. A better and more sensible solution would be to tax and regulate cannabis in a manner similar to alcohol and tobacco."

From NORML

YOU Can Help Legalize Marijuana in Colorado

Join our allies from Colorado's "Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol" at their first ever activist bootcamp in Denver this month to learn how you can help put end marijuana prohibition.

• WHAT: 2012 Colorado Activist Bootcamp
• WHERE: Casselman's, 2620 Walnut St, Denver
• WHEN: Sunday, March 18th, 12pm - 5pm
• WHAT: Now that the initiative to regulate marijuana like alcohol has qualified for the ballot, the campaign has exactly eight months to get its message out to Colorado voters and make sure they are ready to vote YES on Amendment 64 this November. To get things rolling, the campaign is holding a huge volunteer boot camp where it will present its game plan, go over some of the resources that will be made available to supporters, and provide useful materials that can be taken back to communities around Colorado.

Registration is required and space is limited, so please register as soon as possible.

Attention women! Just prior to the boot camp there will be a one-hour women's seminar from 11 a.m. to 12 p.m., during which we will specifically address the importance of outreach to women voters and discuss some plans for moving forward. Sign up to attend this special session by checking the box at the bottom of the page here:

https://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/5559/signup_page/boot-camp

Space is limited. Register today!

Sincerely,
The NORML Team

Adult Beverage Alcohol Good, Stoner Reefer Marijuana Bad

Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper was a drug pusher before he became Mayor. Now don't get all bent. I mean “pusher” in a good way. The drug he pushed (sold) was alcohol, all legal and proper. Now he wants to expand the use of his drug in our Parks. (Read the whole alcohol-in-the-parks story at www.savecitypark.org, and below in Dave Felice’s report on Thursday’s “More Booze” hearing.) The People of Denver have twice voted to request that another drug, marijuana, be considered in a similar light. Not exactly made legal but at least considered as a lowest priority for the police. This has not been done. In fact the opposite has been done, as the number of arrests for petty marijuana possession went up after our first vote. Now it’s hard to hold Hickenlooper responsible for this, since these marijuana arrests (made by City police) are being done under State law. That would mean that District Attorney Mitch Morrissey is the person responsible for each and every decision (case-by-case they call it when they want to unevenly apply the law) to prosecute a marijuana arrest in Denver. The DA’s office representative has confirmed this at the Marijuana Commission meetings. But don’t these guys talk to each other? It is also easy to see that the Mayor is pushing to have the use of his favorite drug expanded in the parks, for commercial reasons I assume. It’s hard to image that he just wants more drunks around. This sends an interesting message to the citizens of Denver: Only the Mayor’s drug will be condoned, the line forms over there, $7.00 a hit. Get drunk responsibly! But how about this idea – Marijuana Beer! Call it 420 Lite, or Two Birds. Not a new idea. Google it and check out Brain Death. Now Hickenlooper can get on the band wagon! Let's ask Towelie: Now where were we? What?

Notice of Rule & Regulation Amendment To Parks and Recreation’s Alcohol Policy

CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER

Notice is hereby given that effective May 13, 2011, the Alcohol Policy adopted by Parks and Recreation is amended with regard to the addition of two sites and language changes to the “Manager’s Authority” section and the “Application Fee”. The sites added are Stapleton Central Park Pavilion and the Aqua Golf Event Facility. A copy of the full Alcohol Policy, as amended, is on file with the Manager of Parks and Recreation and is available for public inspection on the website. Click here to view or go to www.denvergov.org/parksandrecreation. Click on PRAB on the right. A public hearing will take place May 12, 2011 at 5:30 pm in the Wellington Webb Municipal Building Located at 201 W Colfax Ave., 4th floor room 4.F.6.

On OpenAir Cinema

As OpenAir Cinema goes forward with its plans to close a large section of City Park and charge admission to outdoor movies, the company is expected to seek a tavern liquor license to sell and serve alcoholic beverages.

Renowned Denver historian, author, and social critic Phil Goodstein has this commentary exclusively for Denver Direct:

The all-so-sophisticated arts crowd cannot think of having an event without alcohol, even as the righteous decry drinking by "undesirables," i.e., the poor who hang out in Civic Center. Affluent modern alcoholics cannot conceive of an activity without liquor. When attending a "cultural" event, many people head straight for the bar even before finding their seats.

When it comes to liquor, hypocrisy trumps everything. For example, thanks to the liquor interests led by John W. Hickenlooper, there is a hideously ugly fence on Colfax by East High School. The fence is supposed to assure that the liquor license at the converted Bonfils-Lowenstein theater does not violate the rule of no liquor too close to a school.

Read more »

All Things MJ with Jessica LeRoux - December 30, 2012

Hey Now,

Its time to be through with 2012, and 2013 should be a very educational and mind expanding year! I have big plans in the coming year to remain invested in the political process surrounding the cannabis industry, and to do my very best to keep you informed so that we can ensure that we all remain relevant in a rapidly changing regulatory system.
I have been out most of this past week with that wicked evil bad flu that has been going around, but Im fully recovered and ready to cook up some fun for your patients. Deliveries for next week will be delayed a day all the way around due to the Holiday on Monday/Tuesday but please feel free to let us know what you would like us to deliver and we will do it very happily. And as usual the savings are at the bottom of the news, and will be all year long in 2013! That said you shouldn't skip the homework, there are gonna be a lot of important issues that you will benefit from timely participation in.
Also about 5-6 of the Xmas cards we sent to all of you bounced back, so if you didnt get our card please lemme know so we can ensure you get our remembrance of our gratitude for your support in 2012! Thanks!

just a reminder that the legislative session in CO begins on January 9th, so if you can be at the capitol to kick off the session that is the day, more news on the opener next week! Also a reminder that the A-64 task force has their next general meeting on Monday 1-7-13.

Read more »

Draft Text of Retail Marijuana Local Licensing Ordinance, Preliminary draft (corrected) for discussion purposes only, 6-3-13

Preliminary draft (corrected) for discussion purposes only, 6-3-13
Prepared by: David W. Broadwell, Asst. City Attorney
1
2 Draft Text of Retail Marijuana Local Licensing Ordinance
3
4 Section 1. Amend the title of Chapter 6, D.R.M.C. by adding the language
5 underlined, to read as follows:
6 Chapter 6
7 Alcohol Beverages and Retail Marijuana
8
9 Section 2. Amend Chapter 6, D.R.M.C. by adding a new Article V, to read as
10 follows:
11 ARTICLE V
12 DENVER RETAIL MARIJUANA CODE
13 Sec. 6-200. Purpose and legislative intent.
14 Section 16 of Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution, also commonly known as
15 Amendment 64 of 2012, authorizes a system of state licensing for businesses engaging in the
16 cultivation, testing, manufacturing, and retail sale of marijuana, collectively referred to as
17 “marijuana establishments” by the constitution. Subsection 16 (5)(f) of Article XVIII allows
18 localities, within their respective jurisdictions: to prohibit state licensing of marijuana
19 establishments; to regulate the time, place, and manner in which marijuana establishments may
20 operate; and to limit the total number of marijuana establishments. The authority of localities to
21 prohibit or regulate marijuana establishments within their respective jurisdictions, including the
22 authority to engage in local licensing of marijuana establishments, is also reflected in various
23 provisions of the Colorado Retail Marijuana Code, Article 43.4 of Title 12, C.R.S. The purpose of
24 this article V is to exercise the authority of the City and County of Denver to allow state-licensed
25 marijuana establishments to exist in Denver in accordance with applicable state laws and
26 regulations as well as the additional local licensing requirements and other restrictions set forth
27 herein. This Article is adopted pursuant to the aforesaid constitutional and statutory authority, as
28 well as the city’s plenary authority as a home rule city and county to adopt and enforce
29 ordinances under its police power in order to preserve the public health, safety, and general
30 welfare.

Read more »

All Things A64 with Jessica LeRoux - February 3, 2013

Hey Now, 

Well we are 1/2 way through the 9 week A-64 task force process and i have personally witnessed some extremely encouraging developments and some that are so insanely punitive to the voters and industry members that my mind is permanently blown now. Each workgroup seems to be on its own agenda and under its own set of egos. I have some serious doubts that this bunch will be able to fabricate a meaningful and consensus building set of recommendations that actually pass the legislature and end up with Cannabis being regulated similarly to alcohol. Read all about the meetings for the final week of january 2013, and past week in CO cannabis news *** be sure to read the attached scans of meeting templates...  and of course if you want to show us some love, be our valentine... we think it would be really sweet of you to order some of our delicious Love Bites & Kissy Cakes, new valentine flavors to offer your patients! info is at the bottom with the sales data! 

Also a heads up Reminder that this month will be the 6th anniversary of the unresolved murder of my mentor Ken Gorman. Please take a minute to burn a joint in Ken's memory on the 17th, and offer a prayer of thanks, because not one bit of the changes to cannabis laws would have happened in CO with out the ground work Ken laid down...  learn more at kengorman.org

If you can attend the general Task Force meeting on Tuedsday the 5th at 1pm at the new Carr justice center 1300 Broadway please be there and give your two minutes of testimony against vertical integration because we know MMIG & CBA will make a last ditch effort to stack the attendees to defend their unworkable protectionist policy to allow them to continue to be viable businesses when the product the massive warehouses they've leased is mediocre at best. Point out if you can that nobody is taking anything away from these folks, but that if they truly had an amazing crop which everybody in the state was clamoring to stock their shelves with as some of my clients are, these people would be screaming bloody murder to be able to expand their wholesale and increase recognition of their brand rather than spinning their oversized grow down into a ton of cheap poisonous butane infusions. 

On monday there were no Task force meetings, but on Tuesday there was a legislative children's causus on marijuana. We went down to represent, but they did not let the public speak. the presenters were a grab bag of prohibitionists with an array of financial incentives to find new ways to criminalize the citizenry. the presentations included an exploitative slide show of dead abused children set to cheesy rock music sone about angels. a presentation of the risks of childhood exposure to the molds in home grows which the Dr presenting admitted that no known cases of children being hospitalized over were currently known but that is simply because the doctors arent sure which symptoms to look for and pin the blame on. Studies had been done of mold counts in grow operations that were quote "quasi legal" ie two operations were owned by alleged MMED licensed business owners who claimed the residence was their legal OPC??? these mold counts were only done inside the home, no comparative study of levels outside the home nor of homes in the neighborhood. Thus it was determined that these children are "drug enadngered children" and the proposed solution was to screen every family in the state and remove children "at risk" from their families.. there was some modest traction against this proposal, but Jim Gerhardt the Metro Denver Drug Task force cop says that the testimony rings true to him re the worries of discovering too late that a child should have been removed from the home before they were killed or worse... and that law enforcement needs an automatic triggering mechanism (ie cannabis use or cultivation which is now legal, but still a "big risk")  to report substance abuse  because they currently rely on officer discretion, but he would prefer that any officer called to the scene be forced to report cannabis in a home with kids.  If you can, please take a minute to call your representative to say that you support the rights of parents to safely use a substance approved by the voters. Try to mention this link where children in canadian investigations of grow homes were evaluated and determined to be healthy and well developed http://www.medizinkongress.com/iatdmct2011/ws/WS3_GideonKoren.PDF

Wednesday there was a meeting of the Criminal Working Group, (shockingly these cops and cronies are only the 2nd most offensive bunch of the workgroups)  they discussed a number of templates, but none was fully completed. The first up was a report from the definitions working group on what the parameters of enclosed locked space meant, and the parameters of Open & Public.  

proposed definition of enclosed/locked is fully enclosed permanent or semi permanent structure with walls and a ROOF, or ceiling and an engaged locking mechanism w a combo or key lock. with all access points locked allowing for ordinary time for egress and ingress. (that means coming and going with supplies etc) big debate about use of ordinary vs reasonable... why is a roof needed? locked fenced yard ok? dictionary says enclosed is within walls or a fence... does that include a split rail fence? from Chief Jackson. Larry Abrahamson says that due to "peculiar nature" of product being regulated they have the right to define encloure how ever they would like. This spilled to a discussion of how open and public applies to a grow, as in can it be visible to passers by in a fenced locked yard, can it be visible on a private balcony of a locked 3rd/4th floor apartment, can smoke drift from the apartment be reasonable grounds for child endangerment charge in cases of drifting to a nearby residence with kids,  can it be seen in a backyard from persons in a nearby apartment block or hot air balloon (alright i interjected the balloon comment, and it wont be my only insertion of hot air today) Rachel Obrien wants a total ban on outdoor grows, and double locks inside every home whether there are kids or not...Brian Conners good retort asking if the goal is to criminalize cultivation by statute to the point of making it prohibitively expensive? not one mention by all these front rangers that many parts of our state have residences on 2 to 200 acres and trespassing there is grounds to shoot a person... nor that any trespassing into a persons home is a greater crime than possessing a legal pain relieving substance in an unsecured manor in your residence.  

Read more »

Tavern Hospitality Group - Neighborhood Update (Next to Tattered Cover on Colfax)

Click to enlarge

From a flyer on my porch:

Dear Neighbors:
My name is Frank Schultz and I'm the owner of the Tavern Hospitality Group. We are currently under contract to redevelop and open our newest restaurant, at the former site of the Neighborhood Flix. We're very excited to be a part of the Congress Park neighborhood. We feel we have an opportunity to bring a business to the neighborhood that will assist in the continued revitalization of Colfax. There has been a great deal of misinformation spread about this project. I want to clarify our conceptual plans and reaffirm our commitment to work with the community.

TYPE OF VENUE - We plan to open a friendly neighborhood restaurant offering good food and service. It will be much like our Tavern Wash Park and Tavern Lowry locations, both in neighborhoods similar to Congress Park. The focus will be to bring the neighborhood a comfortable place to go for an enjoyable lunch or evening out (seating capacity of 100). The additional multi-use space will build off of the wonderful characteristics of the existing space. With a seating capacity of approximately 450, the new space will have a similar occupancy to the old Neighborhood Flix theatres. It will be a unique location for community events such as wedding receptions, bar/bat mitzvahs, fundraisers and movie screenings. We recognized there was a need in this area of Denver for an upscale venue for these types of events. Similar to our Soiled Dove Underground location, we will also feature music (jazz, blues, singer/songwriters and other adult contemporary artists) along with comedians and children's shows.

UNDER CONTRACT - We are under contract for this building. We are the only buyer whose proposal was accepted by the bank. Early this past summer, there were other offers on this property that did not qualify for the purchase.

LIQUOR LICENSE - There's been a great deal of confusion regarding this license. A liquor license already exists from the previous company that was in that space; therefore, we are already able to serve alcohol. We are merely adhering to Denver regulations which require a dance cabaret license in order to allow dancing for events. In addition, the all-ages classification will allow us open attendance at events. Examples of these events would be weddings receptions, bar/bat mitzvahs, fundraising galas and other similar events which might feature dancing and be attended by people of all ages. This modification request is for the multi-use space facility only and not for the benefit of the restaurant use.

IMPACT ON EAST HIGH SCHOOL - I don't feel we will negatively impact the school. In fact, having a healthy restaurant across the street for a lunch option will be an added benefit to both students and teachers. Additionally, the multi-use space might be a good option for school events (i.e., fundraisers, school performing arts, etc.). We have a no-tolerance policy when it comes to serving alcohol to underage patrons. We have been in business for 13 years with 6 different liquor licenses without a violation. We are proud of this, and feel it is a testament to our stringent policies.

As with all our businesses we approach each project with a long-term vision for success. It is important that you understand our company philosophy for establishing new locations within a neighborhood to become a fixture there for years to come. Additionally, we're very responsible restaurant operators and take a lot of pride in the way we run our business. It's of the utmost importance to us that we continue to operate in a respectable manner, which is why we've reached out to all the neighborhood associations in advance. We're are currently working on a neighborhood agreement like we've done with our other Tavern locations. We feel this is an important step in our process to let the neighborhood know our commitment to our new neighbors. In the past, there have been problems in this area of Colfax with drugs and other disagreeable elements. Our goal is to help make the neighborhood safer and more welcoming, thereby contributing to its growing vibrancy and revitalization. The Lowenstein Development has done a wonderful job so far with Twist & Shout and The Tattered Cover. We look forward to contributing to their continued success.

I would like to thank all of those who attended our neighborhood meeting on September 24th, it was encouraging to hear all of the positive feedback. It's important to me that we have a good relationship with all our neighbors. As with any project, there are always different points of views and opinions. During this period of the project I would appreciate any positive or negative comments, questions and concerns. Please feel free to e-mail me with any of these at 2510colfax@tavernhg.com.

Sincerely,

Frank Schultz
Owner, Tavern Hospitality Group

THC WEEKLY NEWS - with Jessica LeRoux - September 2, 2013

Hey Now, 

Jessica LeRoux at the Capitol

Its been a big holiday weekend and our community is going through a needless tragedy due to alcohol. As most of you already know Denver Moms for Marijuana founding member and cannabis activist was struck and killed saturday when a drunk driver going the wrong way in the HOV lane hit the car being driven by Jenny & Rev Jeremy head on. She is survived by 4 young children and her loving partner Rev Jeremy was also in the accident. Worst of all the young woman who killed Jenny had a history of repeat DUI even though she was only 27 years old. We must use this opportunity to educate people to the fact that Cannabis is much safer than Alcohol and easier to use responsibly. And because of the new DUID laws any incident where there is injury results in all parties having their blood tested, where there is strong probability THC will be found in both Jenny & Jeremy's blood. We must remain alert to any potential spin doctoring of this tragedy as being in any way related to Jenny and Jeremy's use of cannabis, we must set the record straight at every opportunity that Jenny's murder is 100% due to a drunk getting on the wrong side of the highway, period. Click here for Jenny's memorial fund,https://www.wepay.com/donations/jenny-kush-memorial-fund?utm_campaign=shops&utm_medium=link&utm_source=facebook

This Thursday the 5th is Juror Rights Day, please do your part to educate your patients on their rights to deny implementation of unjust laws. THe best way for "we the people" to change things is to push the expense of enforcement back to LEOs and off of the backs of citizens whose only "crime" is the choice of intoxicant they prefer by using juror nullification to point out the hypocrisy of the Drug war. 

    

Jury Rights Day 2013 Events | Fully Informed Jury Associationfija.orgJordan Elliot, Jessica Perkins, Mike Angelos, and Michael D. Elliot. Looking for a Jury Rights Day event? Check below! Are you hosting a Jury Rights

You can find out more about what I feel are serious concerns for the industry regarding the State's MITS or Marijuana Inventory Tracking Solution program as well as Intellectual Property Rights, Consolidation, and the november tax proposals...Video Media ‹ Clover Leaf www.cannabisbusinessinfo.com

and you get some opinionated quotes from me also in this Story from KUNC

Ahead Of Vote, Colorado Marijuana Taxes A Source Of Debatewww.kunc.orgThis fall voters across Colorado will decide how recreational marijuana should be taxed.

Read more »

Text of Colorado Amendment 64 as enacted

Editor: Many are writing about what effect our new Amendment will have, now that it has been passed by a majority vote of the people. I'll be writing about what I call the "6-plant loophole" in the near future, so I am publishing the Amendment here for future reference.

Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado

Article XVIII of the constitution of the state of Colorado is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION to read:

Section 16. Personal use and regulation of marijuana

(1) Purpose and findings.
               (a) IN THE INTEREST OF THE EFFICIENT USE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES, ENHANCING REVENUE FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES, AND INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO FIND AND DECLARE THAT THE USE OF MARIJUANA SHOULD BE LEGAL FOR PERSONS TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER AND TAXED IN A MANNER SIMILAR TO ALCOHOL.
              (b) IN THE INTEREST OF THE HEALTH AND PUBLIC SAFETY OF OUR CITIZENRY, THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO FURTHER FIND AND DECLARE THAT MARIJUANA SHOULD BE REGULATED IN A MANNER SIMILAR TO ALCOHOL SO THAT:
              (I) INDIVIDUALS WILL HAVE TO SHOW PROOF OF AGE BEFORE PURCHASING MARIJUANA;
              (II) SELLING, DISTRIBUTING, OR TRANSFERRING MARIJUANA TO MINORS AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS UNDER THE AGE OF TWENTY-ONE SHALL REMAIN ILLEGAL;
              (III) DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF MARIJUANA SHALL REMAIN ILLEGAL;
              (IV) LEGITIMATE, TAXPAYING BUSINESS PEOPLE, AND NOT CRIMINAL ACTORS, WILL CONDUCT SALES OF MARIJUANA; AND
              (V) MARIJUANA SOLD IN THIS STATE WILL BE LABELED AND SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS TO ENSURE THAT CONSUMERS ARE INFORMED AND PROTECTED.
              (c) IN THE INTEREST OF ENACTING RATIONAL POLICIES FOR THE TREATMENT OF ALL VARIATIONS OF THE CANNABIS PLANT, THE PEOPLE OF COLORADO FURTHER FIND AND DECLARE THAT INDUSTRIAL HEMP SHOULD BE REGULATED SEPARATELY FROM STRAINS OF CANNABIS WITH HIGHER DELTA-9 TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL (THC) CONCENTRATIONS.
              (d) THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO FURTHER FIND AND DECLARE THAT IT IS NECESSARY TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY AND FAIRNESS IN THE APPLICATION OF THIS SECTION THROUGHOUT THE STATE AND THAT, THEREFORE, THE MATTERS ADDRESSED BY THIS SECTION ARE, EXCEPT AS SPECIFIED HEREIN, MATTERS OF STATEWIDE CONCERN.

Read more »

HERE COMES THE 4/20 TRAIN - Jan 13, 2014

Opinion by Gerald Trumbule

Denver City Council's Special Issues Committee - Amendment 64  Marijuana, just adjourned. It was a doozy of a meeting and I'll be putting select clips from the Ch 8 coverage up here. In the meantime, here are some details.
After they took a recess for a swearing-in, Council reconvened to consider the upcoming annual 4/20 celebration, you know, the Civic Center Park get together where everyone lights up a joint at 4:20 to celebrate...that they can.
Theories abound as to the significance of the number 420, but the real purpose of the event has always been for the stoners to demonstrate to the world ...that they can. Yes, despite the irrational laws prohibiting this minor intoxicant, we are going to ingest it right in front of you! THIS IS A FORM OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE. When pot was illegal, but at the same time becoming more tolerated and the 4/20 Celebration grew to thousands, the cops had the sense to do nothing.
At this meeting, DPD Chief White seemed, as he usually does, to be the only adult in the room. He has a certain demeanor, not exactly a sly smile, but one that confirms that "we all know what we are talking about here folks: 100 cops are not going to do anything when 60,000 people light up, but our intent is to write citations when the law is broken". And you know what we mean by intent - we'd like to, but for public safety reasons, we can't. Jeanne Fats didn't seem satisfied with that and Jeanne Rob fixated on "the transfer" of pot to kids at the celebration - what?. Robin Kneich repeated made it clear that she trusts White to do the right thing.
Chris Nevitt, ever the realist, suggested that a permit be granted for pot smoking on that day and place. You know, like is done with alcohol? Duh! Seems like an obvious solution, but no! Charlie Brown says that if we do that then we'll have to start granting licenses "on Saint Patty's Day and Cinco de Mayo and..." Gee, that would be "like alcohol" wouldn't it.
I don't want to give everything away - you'll be able to see for your self here soon.

Denver Marijuana Prosecutions Plunged in 2008

from Mason Tvert at SAFER. Also see Westword article here.

Prosecutions dropped 21 percent in the year following voters' adoption of "lowest law enforcement priority" law and establishment of city review panel (pictured above)

DENVER -- Prosecutions for private adult marijuana possession plunged more than 21 percent in 2008, reaching the lowest rate since 2005, according to the Denver City Attorney's Office.

Director of Prosecution Vince DiCroce presented the 2008 statistics to the Denver Marijuana Policy Review Panel at its meeting Wednesday at 3:30 p.m. in the Denver City-County Building. The Denver City Attorney's Office is required to provide the Panel with marijuana possession statistics every six months.

Prosecutions fell from 2,105 in 2007, to 1,658 in 2008, the year following voters' adoption of a city ordinance designating adult possession the city's "lowest law enforcement priority" and Mayor John Hickenlooper's subsequent appointment of the Denver Marijuana Policy Review Panel. The Panel was established to implement, monitor and report on the new ordinance. In May 2008, it recommended the city halt prosecutions for adult marijuana possession, and in August it called on city police to refrain from citing adults during the Democratic National Convention.

The new trend in marijuana prosecutions is NOT the result of fewer arrests for other offenses, according to DiCroce, who speculated that the number of charges filed for all offenses in Denver likely increased or held steady in 2008.

"Our city punished far fewer adults for marijuana possession this year, yet the sky did not fall," said Mason Tvert, a member of the Panel and the executive director of Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER), the organization behind the successful marijuana initiative campaign. "Hopefully this is just the beginning of Denver's shift toward a more rational approach to marijuana."

"There are still far too many adults in Denver being needlessly punished simply for using a substance that is far less harmful than alcohol," Tvert said. "It's time to stop these prosecutions altogether and start allowing adults to make the safer choice to use marijuana instead of alcohol, if that's what they prefer."

STATISTICS

Cases of Private Adult Marijuana Possession: Jan. 1, 2005 - Jan. 1, 2009

(Possession of up to one ounce of marijuana by adults 21 and older)

Released by the Denver City Attorney's Office, February 4, 2009

Year Cases

2005 1,485

2006 1,841

2007 2,105

2008 1,658

TIMELINE

November 2005 -- more than 53 percent of Denver voters approved Initiated Question 100, amending city ordinances to remove ALL penalties for private adult marijuana possession under city ordinances. This was the first time in history that a city had voted to do so.

November 2006 -- approximately 55 percent of Denver voters approved Amendment 44, a statewide ballot initiative that would have removed all penalties for private adult marijuana possession under state statutes. The measure received more than 41 percent of the statewide vote.

November 2007 -- 57 percent of Denver voters approved Initiated Question 100, creating a new city ordinance designating adult marijuana possession the city's "lowest law enforcement priority" and calling for the creation of a city review panel.

December 2007 -- Mayor John Hickenlooper appoints the Denver Marijuana Policy Review Panel. See below for list of panel members.

May 2008 -- The Denver Marijuana Policy Review Panel adopts a formal recommendation that the Denver City Attorney's Office no longer prosecute cases of private adult marijuana possession. The Denver City Attorney's Office announces its plans to change its policy so that adults cited for marijuana possession are no longer required to appear in court and can pay a significantly reduced fine by mail -- this has yet to be implemented.

August 2008 -- The Denver Marijuana Policy Review Panel adopts a formal recommendation that the Denver Police Department refrain from citing, arresting or detaining adults for private marijuana possession during the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

February 2009 -- The Denver City Attorney's Office releases statistics showing that prosecutions for private adult marijuana possession in Denver plunged 21 percent in 2008, and are at the lowest rate since 2005.

Denver Marijuana Policy Review Panel

Doug Linkhart, Denver City Council, At-large

Lt. Ernie Martinez, Denver Police Dept., president of the Colorado Drug Investigators Association

Vincent DiCroce, Director of Prosecution, Denver City Attorney's Office

Phil Cherner, defense attorney and member of the Denver Crime Commission

Frank Moya, Denver public defender

Sandy Mullins, executive director,Colorado Criminal Defense Bar

Dora-Lee Larson, Denver Domestic Violence Coordinating Council

Crystal Noel, substance abuse counselor, Empowerment Program

Mason Tvert, executive director, Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER)

Brian Vicente, defense attorney and executive director of Sensible Colorado