Homeless in Arizona

Beverly Hills High principal a target of complaint to D.A.

Source

Beverly Hills High principal a target of complaint to D.A.

By Stephen Ceasar

September 24, 2013, 9:10 p.m.

The Los Angeles County district attorney's office has opened an investigation into Beverly Hills High School Principal Carter Paysinger and the for-profit summer sports camp he owns, according to several people with knowledge of the inquiry.

The district attorney's office would not confirm the investigation, but acknowledged that the public integrity division had received a complaint about Paysinger and the sports program.

The investigation comes six weeks after The Times reported that the Beverly Hills Sports Academy, held on campus, is owned by Paysinger and operated by two school employees. The article found that none of the camp's fees — which range from $200 to $385 for the monthlong training session — goes toward the athletic teams at Beverly Hills High. The camp brings in $60,000 to $70,000 a summer, according to the district.

Parents say they were led to believe that the academy was a mandatory, school-sanctioned camp for athletes and that fees would help fund sports teams. Others say that they were strongly encouraged by the principal and other administrators to enroll their children to give them a better chance at making teams.

Parents also contend that it is a conflict of interest for public school officials to operate a business catering solely to their students. The school board last month approved a review of the program by an outside law firm.

Beverly Hills Unified School District spokeswoman Tracy Balsz said the system was made aware of the investigation by the district attorney's office.

Supt. Gary Woods declined to comment.

Paysinger's attorney, Reed Aljian, said in a statement: "Carter Paysinger has dedicated his entire career to the service of this community as a respected educator and administrator. He has not been informed of any criminal inquiry. However, he looks forward to fully cooperating with any investigation, which will prove that he did not engage in any improper conduct."

According to a letter to the district obtained by The Times, the public integrity division "is conducting an investigation which requires access to certain documents." The letter, from Lou Costanza, the supervising investigator, goes on to ask for Paysinger's economic conflict-of-interest statements from 2008 to the present.

Paysinger, however, was only required to complete the statements once he became principal in 2010, Balsz said. He was previously the school's athletic director.

In those statements — for 2010 to 2012 — Paysinger declared no possible conflicts of interest, according to the documents provided by the district.

When interviewed by investigators, two people said they were asked what they knew about the sports program and Paysinger's involvement. One person provided investigators with checks cashed by the Beverly Hills Sports Academy.

In 1997, the district asked Paysinger to run a summer sports program at the school — which previously had been operated by a local university, according to Aljian.

That year, Paysinger registered the business name Beverly Hills Sports Academy, and he listed himself as owner as recently as 2012. Once Paysinger became an administrator, he gave up day-to-day involvement, Aljian said.

A business tax application — a requirement to do business in Beverly Hills — has never been filed for the academy, according to the city.

The Beverly Hills Sports Academy takes place each June and is "designed to provide a comprehensive summer conditioning program for the Beverly Hills High School student athletes," its pamphlet and program application say.

stephen.ceasar@latimes.com

Times staff writer Jack Leonard contributed to this report.

Valley school buses get security upgrade

Source

Valley school buses get security upgrade

By Amy B Wang The Republic | azcentral.com Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:31 AM

On a sweltering summer day, Eric Kissel switched off the engine of a school bus. An intermittent beeping, just loud and frequent enough to be mildly irritating, began.

Within about 10 seconds, the bus horn started blaring, jumping to a deafening decibel and reverberating through the parking lot. At last, Kissel walked to the back of the bus, pushed a button and deactivated the alarm.

It was just a drill, but it is one example of new security technology many school buses now have, said Kissel, transportation director for Laveen Elementary School District. The alarm system is designed to force the driver to the back of the vehicle any time the bus powers off — theoretically eliminating the odds a child is left on board.

Across the Valley, school districts are installing similar alarm systems, as well as video cameras, digital sensors and other technology, to try to improve bus safety. Though the technology is not foolproof, officials hope it adds another layer of security that will reduce incidents.

Whether school-bus safety has improved across the Valley or the nation because of new technology is hard to measure. The U.S. Department of Transportation tracks school-bus fatalities and says school buses are still the safest mode of transporting kids to and from school, compared with traveling in a car.

However, school districts don’t collect data on non-fatal school-bus-related incidents in a uniform way. Infractions run the gamut from general rowdiness to all-out fights.

Most incidents are minor, but in severe cases, students have been forgotten on buses, dropped off at the wrong locations or struck at intersections.

New technology

At a glance, school buses are still remarkably similar to how they have looked for decades. They are still painted National School Bus Glossy Yellow, a color formulated in 1939 for its easy visual detection — even by sleep-deprived parents and children in post-dawn pickup hours. Most seats are still drab-green or brown vinyl.

A closer look, however, reveals very different vehicles than those from 20 years ago. Video cameras throughout the buses record both driver and students. Many districts installed sophisticated alarms, similar to Laveen’s Child Check-Mate System, and real-time GPS tracking.

A GPS system might allow a dispatcher to flag a bus if it went over a certain speed or monitor any unplanned stops.

Before, a driver could mindlessly check things off a clipboard during “pre-trip” safety inspections, Kissel said. Now, buses with digital sensors can force drivers to scan all inspection points before the bus leaves the lot.

“That now takes even the newest driver through a comprehensive safety check,” Kissel said. “Have you looked at your wheels? Lug nuts? Suspension? Tires?”

Last year, the Deer Valley Unified School District outfitted all 82 of its full-size buses with new digital video-camera systems. Officials hoped students would curb bad behavior if they knew they were being recorded.

Scottsdale Unified School District officials are mulling whether to require students to scan identification cards each time they board and get off buses, though the idea is still in its infancy.

New technology also may improve safety off the bus.

Phoenix-based Redflex Traffic Systems developed cameras that can be mounted on the left side of a school bus, with a view of the stop arm that comes out whenever the bus stops. These cameras can capture video of drivers running the buses’ stop signs, and the company can issue tickets.

Arizona law doesn’t allow the cameras, but officials expect that to change soon.

Bert Herzog, transportation director for the Scottsdale district, is pushing for the new technology. “It’s an accountability piece, as far as our school district is concerned,” he said.

At another district where Herzog previously worked, a driver once left a child on a bus for 45 minutes. Though the student was unharmed, he said, one occurrence was enough to convince him that things like the Child Check-Mate System of alarms were worth it.

“One of the worst feelings in the world is to get that call and know that we left a student on a bus,” Herzog said.

“We’re supposed to go back and make sure we don’t have anybody (left on the bus), but having that switch at the back of the bus ensures that we walk that bus every day when we’re done with our routes.”

Limitations

Neither the federal nor state government mandates the new technology, and, because of the cost, it is not evenly distributed throughout Phoenix-area districts.

The Laveen district spent nearly $57,000 upgrading its technology: about $31,000 on GPS tracking, $20,700 on video cameras and $5,000 on the alarm system.

“Here’s the reality of it: It’s expensive,” Kissel said. “It’s like any business. You’re talking about often saving what’s called soft costs. You’re preventing incidents that may cost a lot of money or a lot of emotion.”

It’s tough to go into schools, many already underfunded for curriculum and other student programs, and make the case for spending money on bus technology to prevent incidents that might not happen, he said.

And there is no guarantee technology eliminates incidents on buses. With any device, there are always going to be potential technical issues. Kissel has seen cameras overheat and fail. GPS systems can lag in transmission if a bus travels to an area with poor cellular reception. Then, there’s human error.

“Foolproof? Absolutely not,” Kissel said. “All those are decisions that people have to make to do their job and do it well.”

Still, Kissel said the district invested in technology because district officials made bus safety a priority.

“They were very clear that student safety is paramount and that they want to do this as well as it can be done,” Kissel said.

But it is hard to draw definitive conclusions based on records about whether technological upgrades significantly improve school-bus safety. Part of the difficulty lies in how varied these incidents are and in the different ways school districts record and categorize student infractions.

Records requested by The Arizona Republic show thousands of student disciplinary incidents on board Valley school buses each year.

In the Tempe Elementary School District, which has 66 bus drivers and 79 buses, the number of student bus incidents has remained in the 700s over the past three years, ranging from “negative attitude and questioning driver” to “vandalizing school property.”

Mesa Public Schools, the state’s largest public school district, with 545 bus drivers and 517 buses, has gradually improved its technology. All its special-education buses have cameras, and about 40 to 50 percent of its regular buses have cameras, district spokeswoman Helen Hollands said.

Those numbers are constantly changing, as new buses — which all include GPS and video cameras — replace older ones.

However, the number of student incidents on school buses recorded in the Mesa district has remained relatively steady over the past three years, ranging from “inappropriate language” to “defiance/disrespect of authority” or worse. In one case, a student was accidentally hit by a bus.

In April, a preschool-age boy in Laveen fell asleep and was left behind on a school bus. He later was discovered, unhurt, by a mechanic at the district’s transportation yard.

Cultural changes

The technology is only as effective as the people using it, some say.

In August, three teens severely beat a Florida child on a school bus while the driver called 911 but did nothing to intervene.

Caught on video, the beating and the driver’s response went viral, prompting outrage and debate about what the driver’s involvement, legally and ethically, should have been.

It’s not just students who misbehave.

In February 2008, a bus driver in the Higley Unified School District got into a quarrel with a 14-year-old Williams Field High School student.

A bus camera captured a fight that escalated over 15 minutes, until the driver and student began pulling each other’s hair and pushing one another, prompting a boy on the bus to call 911.

The Scottsdale district has cameras on most of its buses, and they grant a measure of peace of mind for Joe Blare, who has been a school-bus driver there for five years.

“I always try to tell my students, ‘Hey, guys, I know what you’re doing,’ ” Blare said. “The cameras are there for our benefit and for the kids’ benefit. They’re to keep them safe, and a lot of kids, quite frankly, have made accusations toward drivers that are completely unfounded.”

Blare said he often drives a bus at full capacity — 80-plus students, no bus monitors — and inevitably the kids will become rowdy.

“I honestly think the human element enters in quite a bit with the kids. You can only have so much technology,” Blare said.

“I know the name of almost every one of my elementary kids, only because it’s easier to discipline. Most of my high-school kids ... I always tell them, you don’t want me to know your name.”

Allison Dillon, a mother in the Tempe Union High School District, said her daughter experienced months of abuse that allegedly included name-calling and inappropriate touching while riding a school bus.

“There were some boys on the bus that just constantly bullied her,” Dillon said. “When I reported that to the bus monitor ... his answer to her was, ‘Well, boys will be boys.’ ”

After basically throwing “a bit of a tantrum” to get the district’s attention, Dillon got her daughter switched to another route. Though the school buses had cameras, that didn’t help their case, she said.

“At one point,” Dillon said, “when I asked would they go back and look at some of the (recorded) history, they said, ‘Look, we would literally have to pull footage for every day going back. Unless you can give us a specific day for a specific incident, we can’t really do it. We don’t have the manpower.’ ”

No amount of technology could have replaced more parental involvement, she said.

Kissel and other transportation directors said these incidents are rare, given the thousands of students transported every day.

However, he said, the ultimate goal is to work toward eliminating these incidents — and to do so, the technology has to come with a culture change.

“I’m not trying to hide and sneak around and try to put these kids in a situation to fail,” he said. “I truly want the behaviors to change. I want them to learn how to ride safely on the bus.

“As we move forward and populations grow, we have to learn how to safely conduct ourselves in those environments.”

Schools criticized for bans on dreadlocks, afros

Source

Schools criticized for bans on dreadlocks, afros

AP 2 a.m. EDT September 26, 2013

"Why are you so sad?" a TV reporter asked the little girl with a bright pink bow in her hair.

"Because they didn't like my dreads," she sobbed, wiping her tears. "I think that they should let me have my dreads."

With those words, second-grader Tiana Parker of Tulsa, Oklahoma, found herself, at age 7, at the center of decades of debate over standards of black beauty, cultural pride and freedom of expression.

It was no isolated incident at the predominantly black Deborah Brown Community School, which in the face of outrage in late August apologized and rescinded language banning dreadlocks, Afros, mohawks and other "faddish" hairstyles it had called unacceptable and potential health hazards.

A few weeks earlier, another charter school, the Horizon Science Academy in Lorain, Ohio, sent a draft policy home to parents that proposed a ban on "Afro-puffs and small twisted braids." It, too, quickly apologized and withdrew the wording.

But at historically black Hampton University in Hampton, Virginia, the dean of the business school has defended and left in place a 12-year-old prohibition on dreadlocks and cornrows for male students in a leadership seminar for MBA candidates, saying the look is not businesslike.

Tiana's father, barber student Terrance Parker, said he and his wife chose not to change her style and moved the straight-A student to a different public school, where she now happily sings songs about her hair with friends.

"I think it stills hurts her. But the way I teach my kids is regardless of what people say, you be yourself and you be happy with who you are and how God made you," he said.

Tiana added: "I like my new school better." As for the thousands of emails and phone calls of support the family has received from around the world, she said she feels "cared about."

Deborah Brown, the school's founder, did not return a call from The Associated Press. Jayson Bendik, dean of students at Horizon in Lorain, said in an email that "our word choice was a mistake."

In New York City, the dress code at 16-year-old Dante de Blasio's large public high school in Brooklyn includes no such hair restrictions. Good thing for Dante, whose large Afro is hard to miss at campaign stops and in a TV spot for his father, Bill de Blasio, who is running for mayor.

There is no central clearinghouse for local school board policies on hairstyles, or surveys indicating whether such rules are widespread. Regardless, mothers of color and black beauty experts consider the controversies business as usual.

"Our girls are always getting messages that tell them that they are not good enough, that they don't look pretty enough, that their skin isn't light enough, that their hair isn't long enough, that their hair isn't blond enough," said Beverly Bond of the New York-based esteem-building group Black Girls Rock.

"The public banning of our hair or anything about us that looks like we look, it feels like it's such a step backward."

Bond founded the organization in response to an episode in 2007 when radio host Don Imus called members of the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hos." He later apologized.

In Chicago, Leila Noelliste has been blogging about natural hair at Blackgirllonghair.com for about five years. She has followed the school cases closely. The 28-year-old mother with a natural hairstyle and two daughters who also wear their hair that way said it is a touchy issue among African-Americans and others.

"This is the way the hair grows out of my head, yet it's even shocking in some black communities, because we've kind of been told culturally that to be acceptable and to make other people kind of comfortable with the way that we look, we should straighten our hair, whether through heat or chemicals," she said. "So whether we're in non-black communities or black communities, with our natural hair, we stand out. It evokes a lot of reaction."

Particularly painful, said Noelliste and others, is the notion that natural styles are not hygienic.

"Historically natural hair has been viewed as dirty, unclean, unkempt, messy," she said. "An older black generation, there's this idea of African-American exceptionalism, that the way for us to get ahead is to work twice as hard as any white person and to prove that if we just work hard and we look presentable we'll get ahead, and that's very entrenched. My generation, we're saying that that's not fair. We should be able to show up as we are and based on our individual merit and effort be judged on that."

Ryan Kiesel, executive director of the Oklahoma chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said legal rulings on hair and other issues pertaining to school dress codes have been fairly clear.

"For decades now, Supreme Court precedent has reaffirmed that clothing, including hairstyle, is part of a student's speech, and if you're going to interfere with that, then the school district has to make some findings beforehand demonstrating that there is an immediate threat to the academic environment," he said. "That wasn't the case here and in most dress-code cases."

Denene Millner in Atlanta created a blog, Mybrownbaby.com, for other African-American moms and also followed the school hair controversies. She went natural nearly 14 years ago for the sake of her daughters, now 11 and 14.

"I didn't want them to grow up with the same idea that I had when I was little, that there was something wrong with the way that my hair grew out of my head," said Millner, 45. "It's something that we've grappled with for a very, very long time. There's a whole lot of assumptions made about you that may not necessarily be true: that you're political, that you're Afro-centric, that you might be vegetarian, that you're kind of a hipster."

She said watching Tiana sob on camera "about these grown-ups, black folks, who are supposed to not just educate her but show her how to love herself, it tore my heart to shreds."

Arizona DUI tests are no longer required by law!!!!!!!

Arizona Mandatory DUI Breathalyzer tests ruled unconstitutional - Don't take the !!!!

Arizona Mandatory DUI tests unconstitutional????

Arizona Supreme Court bars DUI blood tests without warrant

HOWARD FISCHER Capitol Media Services

PHOENIX -- Police cannot use the state's traffic laws to draw blood from suspected drunk drivers without a warrant absent their specific permission at the time of the test, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

In a unanimous decision, the justices rejected the contention by the Pima County Attorney's Office that all Arizona motorists give "implied consent" to having blood, breath or urine tests as a condition to be licensed to drive. They said that means, absent a clear -- and voluntary -- consent immediately prior to the blood draw, it is an illegal search without a warrant.

In a wide-ranging ruling, the high court also said that the ability of juveniles to give that voluntary consent is not absolute -- and not the same as an adult. Justice Scott Bales, writing for the court, said a trial judge must consider all the factors, including the age of the suspect and the failure to notify parents.

But the justices refused to rule that the absence of a juvenile's parents automatically means any consent is not voluntary.

Thursday's ruling most immediately means that charges of driving under the influence of drugs will be dropped against the youth, identified in court records only as Tyler B. because he was 16 at the time of the arrest.

But he is not out of the legal woods yet. Deputy County Attorney Nicolette Kneut said Tyler, who has since turned 18, still faces charges of possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia in justice court as an adult.

Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall said Thursday's ruling will complicate the job that police statewide are required to do. She said the high court has provided no guidance.

"How is the officer supposed to know whether or not it's been an express consent," she said. "It just makes it really, really tough because there isn't any bright line." [Duh, the 4th Amendment you idiot!!!!]

LaWall said the ruling means that her office will advise police to get a court-ordered warrant whenever possible before drawing blood, even when a motorist -- and now, especially a juvenile -- gives approval for a blood draw. That, she said, eliminates any possibility of having that consent later ruled involuntary.

According to court records, Tyler and two friends arrived late to school. A school monitor smelled marijuana on the boys and also saw drug paraphernalia in Tyler's car.

The boys were detained in separate rooms while sheriff's deputies were contacted.

A deputy read Tyler his Miranda warnings against self-incrimination and the right to an attorney. But the court files said that Tyler, in the presence of several school officials, admitted he had driven his car to school after smoking marijuana and that he owned some of the paraphernalia in the car.

When the deputy placed Tyler under arrested, the youth became agitated and was placed in handcuffs while the deputy retrieved a blood-draw kit from his car.

On returning, he saw Tyler had calmed down and he removed the cuffs. He then read Tyler from the law which says that Arizona motorists must consent to blood or other tests and that refusal will result in automatic suspension of driving privileges.

Tyler agreed verbally and in writing to the blood draw. But when the case went to court, Tyler argued his consent was not voluntary and that, as a minor, he lacked capacity to consent.

When the court commissioner agreed and suppressed the evidence, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Bales said the issue has never been decided in Arizona.

Bales rejected arguments by prosecutors that "implied consent" law means there is no need to determine whether a consent at the time of the blood draw is voluntary.

"A compelled blood draw, even when administered pursuant to (the implied consent law) is a search subject to the Fourth Amendment's constraints," he wrote for the court. "Such an invasion of bodily integrity implicates an individual's most personal and deep-rooted expectations of privacy."

He said the law says only that an officer must ask a suspect to submit to the test -- and that if a person refuses, a warrant is needed and the suspect's licenses is suspended.

Bales said a motorist can allow a warrantless search "provided the consent is voluntary." But that, he said has to be decided by a court based on all the circumstances, including the suspect's age -- and even whether a parent is present.

In this case, Bales wrote, the court commissioner was correct in ruling that, based on the evidence she had, Tyler's consent was not voluntary.

He said Tyler was detained for about two hours in a room in the presence of school officials and a deputy, without his parents.

"Tyler initially was shaking and visibly nervous," Bales wrote, and placed in handcuffs until he calmed down. And he said that the law read to him about "implied consent" ended with the statement, "You are, therefore, required to submit to the specified tests."

It was only then, Bales said, Tyler consented to the blood draw.

Thursday's ruling drew a special comment from Justice John Pelander. He said his own review of the evidence leads him to believe Tyler did voluntarily consent.

But Pelander said Arizona law requires he and the other justices not to reweigh the evidence but only to consider whether the court commissioner abused her discretion in suppressing the evidence.

School board won't probe into $1.3 million loan to superintendent

Of course I bet that doesn't surprise you!!! Of course when us serfs are accused of crimes we are often assumed be guilty until proven innocent, and we routinely get draconian prison sentences for trivial crimes. But hey, who needs to investigate government employees who are accused of committing crimes when we know it is impossible for our government masters to commit crimes. Well at least that's what they want us to think.

Source

San Carlos school board won't probe into district's $1.3 million housing loan to superintendent

By Bonnie Eslinger

Daily News Staff Writer

Posted: 09/27/2013 08:12:33 PM PDT

Although a $1.3 million housing loan the San Carlos School District made to its new superintendent has caught some public flak, the school board balked Thursday from ordering an investigation.

Instead, board trustees called for a training session to review how the short-term transaction was handled before they got to vote on it.

Board President Beth Hunkapiller and Vice President Adam Rak sought a formal investigation but were rebuffed by their colleagues, particularly Trustee Seth Rosenblatt, who asserted that would be an overreaction to a simple mistake.

"If we had a board action or audit for every mistake we made, we'd run into a grinding halt," Rosenblatt said. "The action has to be proportionate to the mistake."

Hunkapiller said that despite believing the premature loan was an "anomaly," she thinks it's important to set the record straight for the public.

"I think it's a trust issue. And if we think it's OK to make mistakes, I think we have a problem," Hunkapiller said. "We have a lot of people thinking there's more to this than what may be."

According to district officials, the board agreed to give Superintendent Craig Baker the loan during a recent closed-session performance review so he could move from his Redwood City home into the San Carlos district.

Last week, district Chief Operations Office Robert Porter told The Daily News that staff made arrangements for the loan and scheduled a vote for the school board's Sept. 12 meeting after receiving a copy of Hunkapiller's July 12 letter telling prospective house sellers that the board intends to approve the loan.

Although escrow on the San Carlos home Baker bought was scheduled to close Sept. 13, the date was moved up and Porter wired the money on Sept. 11. One day later, the board unanimously voted in open session to approve the loan.

During Thursday night's discussion, Trustee Carol Elliott said there needs to be a balance between "accountability" and "moving forward."

When Hunkapiller suggested the board didn't know exactly how the loan was moved, Rosenblatt replied that he felt comfortable with the transaction and she should speak directly to Porter.

"I would like to make that public ... that you don't care to know," Hunkapiller said.

When Rosenblatt later said he trusts the school administrators, Hunkapiller interjected: " 'Trust me,' that's what I hear from adolescent boys and I'm beyond that, I'm an adult."

"To figure out what everyone did wrong is not frankly, terribly productive," Rosenblatt answered.

Some trustees expressed concern that public perception of how the loan was handled could cast a shadow on how they later to decide to spend bonds.

In the end, the board voted 4-1, with Rosenblatt dissenting, to have the County Counsel's Office -- which handles the district's legal affairs -- set up a training session for it and staff on how district funds are dispersed and the financial controls in place. The session is to include a chronological review of the loan, from June to September, as well as a discussion about district communications.

Last week, Baker told The Daily News he had already sold his Redwood City home and escrow was set to close around the first week of October. Although the promissory note approved by the board gives Baker up to a year to pay off the loan, the superintendent said as soon as his Redwood City home closes escrow, the district will get its money back with interest.

Email Bonnie Eslinger at beslinger@dailynewsgroup.com; follow her at twitter.com/ bonnieeslinger.

Court to debate right to grow own medicinal marijuana

They want to remove the 25 mile limit for growing medical marijuana!!!

Court to debate right to grow own medicinal marijuana

Posted: Wednesday, October 2, 2013 5:30 pm

By Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services

PHOENIX — Medical marijuana patients could learn later this month if they have a constitutional right to grow their own weed.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Katherine Cooper said Wednesday she will consider on Oct. 18 a bid by the Department of Health Services to have the lawsuit thrown out. Assistant Attorney General Gregory Falls hopes to convince her that nothing in the Arizona Constitution about the rights of patients to choose their own health care extends to making their own drugs.

If Cooper doesn't buy that argument, she is ready for the next step: She scheduled an Oct. 21 hearing to allow Michael Walz, the attorney for two medical marijuana patients, to tell her why she should order state Health Director Will Humble to let them have their plants.

If Walz ultimately succeeds, the implications go far beyond these two men. It would pave the way for similar rights for the approximately 40,000 individuals who already have been granted permits to possess the drug but now are required to purchase their supply from one of the state's nearly 100 state-regulated dispensaries.

At issue is what Walz said is a conflict between the Medical Marijuana Act that voters enacted in 2010 and a separate constitutional amendment, also approved by voters, two years later.

The 2010 law allows those with a doctor's recommendation to obtain up to 2 1/2 ounces of marijuana every two weeks. It also envisioned dispensaries around the state.

That law also allows anyone not within 25 miles of a dispensary to grow up to 12 plants at any one time. And since no dispensaries were operating, every cardholder initially got that right.

But Humble said that now virtually all Arizonans are within that 25-mile radius. So he is denying grow rights to individuals as they renew their annual permits.

Walz, however, points to a 2012 constitutional amendment which overrules any law that requires anyone to “participate in any health care system.” And that, he argued, means individuals can't be forced to give up the cheaper option of growing their own plants.

“People are legally entitled, if their doctor gives them certification, to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes,” Walz said Wednesday.

“Many people cannot afford the prices that are charged by dispensaries,” he continued.”Therefore, they need to be able to grow their marijuana for themselves.”

And Walz said that, for some patients, the strain of marijuana is crucial.

“A particular strain may be effective to treat their specific condition and they need that strain,” Walz argued. “They can't depend on a dispensary to make the effort of providing a specific strain for any particular person.”

Humble isn't buying the argument — and not only because he rejects the idea that the Arizona Constitution guarantees individuals the right to make their own regulated medicine. He pointed out that voters themselves approved the provision in the 2010 law, which says the right to grow disappears once there is an available dispensary.

Walz dismissed that as irrelevant.

“I don't know that the voters were aware of that specific provision,” he said.

“They clearly were aware that some patients would be able to grow,” Walz said. “As far as when and how many of those rights would be extinguished, I don't think the voters had a clue.”

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

Previous articles on the government schools or public schools as our government masters like to call them.

More articles on the government schools or public schools as our government masters like to call them.