Janet Suthers, a Planning Commission member who ignited a firestorm of controversy in September when she urged religious leaders to weigh in on zoning regulations for medical marijuana businesses, called today’s recommendation to City Council a “fair and balanced zoning policy.”
The commission is recommending a 1,000-foot buffer zone between medical marijuana dispensaries and a wide range of schools, from preschools to colleges and universities.
The commission is also recommending the same setback between dispensaries and residential child care facilities and drug and/or alcohol treatment facilities.
“Every planning commissioner brings life experiences to their position and their decisions,” Suthers said in a prepared statement. “I am a mother, a businesswoman and a former school board president. I am very concerned that the proliferation of centers will increase drug usage among our youth and undermine all the work that our community is doing to increase high school graduation rates. No amount of tax revenue will make up for that societal cost.”
Suthers, who is considering running for the City Council in April, is married to state Attorney General John Suthers.
In her prepared statement, Suthers also said that “already we are seeing an increase in student expulsions for marijuana use and an increase in arrests for driving under the influence of marijuana.”
However, she didn’t provide the data to back up that claim or cite her source. The Gazette sent Suthers an e-mail requesting that information.
Here is the full text of Suthers’ statement:
This is a very important issue for our entire community that could define our city for years to come. I recognize that the Cannabis Council is an important stakeholder in this issue and I thank them for their valuable input. However, they are not the only ones impacted by this policy. The Planning Commission is a level playing field in which all community members can express their views. It is the Planning Commission and not the Cannabis Council who is in the best position to recommend zoning and land use policy to City Council. I am proud of our efforts to reach out to all institutions in our city and to invite everyone to participate. Some institutions gave considerable input. Others chose not to participate. What I learned during these hearings was that there is a strong desire from our educational institutions for a buffer around schools. This applies to early learning centers, pre-schools, K-12 education, colleges and universities.
Every Planning Commissioner brings life experiences to their position and their decisions. I am a mother, a businesswoman and a former school board president. I am very concerned that the proliferation of centers will increase drug usage among our youth and undermine all the work that our community is doing to increase high school graduation rates. No amount of tax revenue will make up for that societal cost. Already we are seeing an increase in student expulsions for marijuana use and an increase in arrests for driving under the influence of marijuana. A recent Harvard study confirmed the negative changes to the brain caused by smoking marijuana regularly before the age of sixteen.
As a planning commissioner, I am also very uncomfortable approving ordinances for businesses that I know are in violation of federal law. This is a major disconnect for me and has made my decision difficult. The Denver Post has reported that legitimate medical marijuana users are less that 4% of the total market, yet we are going to extraordinary lengths to accommodate them.
I have listened to the Cannabis Council and I understand that our zoning recommendation will impact some businesses. However it is not the responsibility of the Planning Commission to manage risk for business owners. Every one of these marijuana businesses knew that they were an illegal land use when they opened and they all knew that they were making financial investments before zoning and licensing regulations were developed. There were no guarantees. It was their choice and their risk assumption. Additionally, If the federal government changes its enforcement policies, they could all still be shut down. The risks and the rewards are theirs.
I support this motion because the zoning makes sense to me, because the 1000 foot buffer around schools is consistent with the federal No Child Left Behind legislation for 1000 foot drug free zones around schools, because 1000 feet is the recommended buffer in Colorado HB 1284 which legalized dispensaries in Colorado and because our educational institutions have asked for it. I also support 1000 foot buffers around drug treatment facilities because I respect their work and want to support their efforts. I know that the entire Planning Commission listened carefully to all the testimony and gave this issue their best thinking. Given our many constraints as a land use review board, I believe that we are recommending to City Council a fair and balanced zoning policy.
“Fair and balanced” eh? I wonder what channel Janet watches.
Idiot.
She’d say anything to promote her agenda. Facts be damned.
In her prepared statement, Suthers also said that “already we are seeing an increase in student expulsions for marijuana use and an increase in arrests for driving under the influence of marijuana.”
However, she didn’t provide the data to back up that claim or cite her source.
——————————————–
Because its made up crap, much like the “boogeyman”, used to scare and influence those in power.
“I am a mother” -
You’re right, but you’re hardly a parent. A parent teaches their children what is acceptable and what is not and doesn’t depend on government to enforce that. A parent enforces his or her will on the children through discipline and respect.
You’re nothing more than pro-nannyism and I don’t think you’ll find many willing to vote for you so long as you maintain that flawed outlook.
I’m amazed by her confidence in her flimsy arguements. So high school drug usage is because of MMJ? Ridiculous. High schoolers were using drugs long before MMJ. The assertion that MMj users are only 4 percent of some illusive “market” shows her reliance on anything but fact. I believe the council will take a more reasonable stance. .
I am a Colorado Springs native, and am in my mid 20′s. I medicate for chronic pain due to cysts and bone masses. Had I not started medicating in my youth, I would most definitely be addicted to pain pills by now. I am a functioning member of society, I am a single mommy who cares for my child (single because his father has substance abuse problems), I work hard 40+ hours a week, and there has been no way in which marijuana has ever negatively impacted my life. I am also an educated member of society, with a degree in Criminal Justice. The thought that youths should be prescribed narcotic and even opiate pain medication before the age of 18 is disgusting, and is even more incomprehensible when you add the fact that there is a non-harmful natural substance that can provide the relief needed. I think I was 15 the first time I was prescribed vicodin… I also suffer from severe asthma, which you would think you be a problem when medicating with marijuana, but since the allowance of dispensaries, I can now purchase edible products from certified kitchens and don’t have to smoke at all. If elderly patients are often prescribed Marinol for cancer symptom management, why then would a five year old not be given the same relief options? Times change and we view things differently. In the 50′s, smoking tobacco was viewed A LOT differently than it is now. Janet should take the time to catch up to the rest of the ever-changing world. I just thought I would pass this along. This is the true voice amongst our community.
surfergal prove it! I want to see your medical records from a ligit Doctor, not from a man who is a doctor that is paid from The Drug Policy Alliance.
School officials see rise in expulsions
By Colin Gustafson Connecticut Post, Bridgeport
Publication: LexisNexis
Date: Friday, February 26 2010
Feb. 26–Expulsions are up at public schools so far this school year, driven primarily by an increase in drug-related incidents.
Over the first six months of this school year, the number of expulsions is more than double the total from the same period last year, according to preliminary data provided by the school district.
Under state statute, an expulsion hearing must be called for drug- or weapon-related incidents.
As of Feb. 12, the board had conducted 12 hearings, all resulting in expulsions, including 11 related to drugs or alcohol, preliminary data show. This time last year, there had been six hearings and five expulsions, all of which were related to drugs or alcohol.
And here is some information for Colorado:
Data reflects total drug offenses reported by school districts to the Colorado Department of Education.
District 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 Change from ’08-09 to ’09-10 Change from ’07-08 to ’09-10
Jefferson County 541 466 562 21% 4%
Denver 341 344 385 12% 13%
Douglas County 130 161 198 23% 52%
Cherry Creek 262 342 418 22% 60%
Adams 12 347 381 473 24% 36%
Aurora 220 193 277 44% 26%
Colorado Springs 25 41 67 63% 168%
Boulder 91 108 133 23% 46%
St. Vrain 67 91 147 62% 119%
Poudre 219 273 405 48% 85%
Mesa County 385 367 456 24% 18%
Pueblo City 244 151 179 19% – 27%
Littleton 93 79 80 1% – 14%
Thompson 391 455 466 2% 19%
Brighton 71 104 123 18% 73%
Westminster 131 76 124 63% – 5%
Pueblo County 60 76 75 – 1% 25%
Adams 14 79 50 61 22% – 23%
Mapleton 46 43 80 86% 74%
Englewood 5 10 13 30% 160%
Sheridan 10 8 15 88% 50%
Statewide 3,809 3,779 5,048 34% 33%
I would say a jump from 63% to 168% of drug offense in CS schools is a big deal.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Bill-Smith-MMJ-rights/145013932226770 please take a look and like