Oakland, Berkeley, And East Bay News, Events, Restaurants, Music, & Arts
@DankDave the Deceiver
lol - It's so easy to debunk your lies. - You should take your own advice. From BallotPedia:
>>>"Revenue from the two taxes would be deposited in a new California Marijuana Tax Fund. First, the revenue would be used to cover costs of administrating and enforcing the measure. Next, it would be distributed to drug research, treatment, and enforcement, including:
$2 million per year to the UC San Diego Center for Medical Cannabis Research to study medical marijuana.
$10 million per year for 11 years for public California universities to research and evaluate the implementation and impact of Proposition 64. Researchers would make policy-change recommendations to the California Legislature and California Governor.
$3 million annually for five years to the Department of the California Highway Patrol for developing protocols to determine whether a vehicle driver is impaired due to marijuana consumption.
$10 million, increasing each year by $10 million until settling at $50 million in 2022, for grants to local health departments and community-based nonprofits supporting "job placement, mental health treatment, substance use disorder treatment, system navigation services, legal services to address barriers to reentry, and linkages to medical care for communities disproportionately affected by past federal and state drug policies."
The remaining revenue would be distributed as follows:
60 percent to youth programs, including drug education, prevention, and treatment.
20 percent to prevent and alleviate environmental damage from illegal marijuana producers.
20 percent to programs designed to reduce driving under the influence of marijuana and a grant program designed to reduce negative impacts on health or safety resulting from the proposition.
@Deborah Tharp: Name one offense--just *one*--that's a felony or misdemeanor under Prop 64 that isn't already now, because we can name *several* offenses that are felonies or misdemeanors now that are completely legal under 64!
@Dave Armstrong: Your "most federally conforming law in the nation" didn't prevent over 15,000 people, disproportionally black and brown--which you're *not*, right Dave?--from being arrested for weed related felonies and misdemeanors in California last year; Prop 64 will cut that number in *at least* half, based on the experience of the other legal states and DC, not to mention that the mere *claim* "I smell marijuana" by a cop will no longer give him carte blanche to detain, search, seize suspected drug money, etc, etc.
Its where the people go--not to jail anymore--that matters; where the money goes--not *your* pockets anymore, right Dave?--is a distant second, at best.
Stop calling prop 64 legalization. It's criminalization, fees and fines
Does anyone know when the next meeting is when we can help support the preservation of the site?
OPD has been a mess for years. Even though it is improving, without structural improvement in the oversight of OPD, it could easily slide backwards once the Federal monitors leave sometime in the next year or two.
Measure LL was crafted to make sure OPD gets better and stays better.
LL moves the current civilian police review board out from under the control of the City Administrator and renames it the Police Commission. Under the current system, the same City Administrator who oversees OPD, also oversees the current civilian review board.
LL gives the new Commission and its investigatory arm, the authority to investigate and discipline police officers, participate in the hiring and firing of police chiefs, and make recommendations to improve OPD policies and procedures.
The Commission members are selected by a combination of methods. But all will get tenure and have staggered terms so they will be insulated from political influence. Similar to the new City Ethics Commission.
Over the years and many different mayors, the City Administrators have often rejected the decisions of the civilian review board. They get too close to the police they oversee and they take civilian review board decisions as criticisms of their own oversight of OPD. The current system also allows the Oakland police union, OPOA, to exert their political influence over the City Administrator. Measure LL eliminates the inherent conflict of interest having the same City Administrator both run OPD and have veto power over the civilian review board. It removes much of the opportunity for OPOA to influence discipline decisions.
The only organized opposition to LL has been the Oakland Police Officers Association PAC paid for attacks on two early sponsors of LL: Council Members Dan Kalb and Noel Gallo.
There is no opposing argument in the election booklet.
LL is endorsed by a broad spectrum of elected officials and former officials including Congresswoman Barbara Lee, Mayor Libby Schaaf, State Assemblyman Rob Bonta, and former State Assembly members Nancy Skinner and Sandre Swanson, 6 out of 8 Oakland City Council Members.
Organizations supporting LL include the League of Women's Voters, the Democratic Party of Alameda County, California Nurses Association, MOBN, ACLU, NAACP, SEIU 1021, and the Oakland Teachers Association
On Sunday Oct 230 930am to noon at the Temescal Farmers Market come by for a free balloon and ask your questions about LL .
East Bay Express All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation