http://newcapitolweekly.disqus.com/Capitol WeeklyenFri, 27 Jan 2012 19:01:03 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10b7g0u1untx25m&xid=10b7eu7lutf1n4k&done=#comment-422654457A few facts are in disorder, it seems, starting with Proposition 215 being the appropriate reference to the Compassionate Use Act. No such thing as a "prescription," either, but this is a part of the learning curve for journalists just as it is for politicians and soccer moms. Let's put a band-aid on those perennial boo-boos and move on to the bigger news.<br><br>The MMRCT was not written as a lark, but as an urgent response to the federal crackdown on dispensaries and continuing apathy and contempt for marijuana regulation in the state Legislature. That's too bad, for while their last effort in 2003 with the Medical Marijuana Program Act has added to the legal confusion, it also expanded some patient protections and authorized collective cultivation. There is more work to be done, more than can be done with a single legislative act, so MMRCT calls for the formation of a state commission AND the pre-emption of the local dispensary bans that have swept the state in recent years. There won't be nearly as many dispensaries as in years past, due to a numerical formula, but most people won't have to drive to neighboring cities or counties to find safe access.<br><br>As for the legalization proposals, I wish them well, because full legalization is the only ultimate answer to fed-proofing the state's medical cannabis regulations. The point with MMRCT is that we don't have ANY effective regulations now, and that cannabis regulation should not be left entirely in the hands of the local yokels. That's what got us where we are today, and it's not a tenable option any more.Bud GreenFri, 27 Jan 2012 19:01:03 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10b7g0u1untx25m&xid=10b7eu7lutf1n4k&done=#comment-422443230Talk about irresponsible reporting. There are 3 other initiatives in California and NONE of them are backed by the people that backed Prop 19. None of them fit the description the author gave. I wonder if he did any research except to have the story dictated for him.<br><br><br>The only initiative in the entire country with the forethought to address federal interference in state law is California's Regulate Marijuana Like Wine. The rest are like parasites, ill conceived and designed for little more than to raise funds for someone's coffers.Matthew BarnesFri, 27 Jan 2012 13:27:55 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=10b1b8w3k4e1co2#comment-422422549Why not round up to 55mpg.concernedAmericanFri, 27 Jan 2012 13:00:29 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10b7g0u1untx25m&xid=10b7eu7lutf1n4k&done=#comment-422030998We have read the proposed initiative and feel it is far too vague on all the details. What specific regulations are they proposing? Who can operate and who cannot operate under their program? If their proposed control board chooses to shut you down what are your options for appealing that decision?  With such a nebulous law how do we end up with fair and impartial rule making?See my whole critique at <a href="http://www.marijuana.org" rel="nofollow">www.marijuana.org</a>Dennis PeronFri, 27 Jan 2012 01:31:52 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=10b1b8w3k4e1co2#comment-421815701If you are wanting to invest money in California because of this outrageous and unattainable standard of 54 MPG, then it is pretty clear to me that you are NOT using YOUR money.ExPFCWintergreenThu, 26 Jan 2012 18:45:59 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10b7g0u1untx25m&xid=10b7eu7lutf1n4k&done=#comment-421716137<a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Show-Me-Cannabis-RegulationColumbia-Missouri/282766801777250" rel="nofollow">http://www.facebook.com/pages/...</a>Gary ChronisterThu, 26 Jan 2012 16:15:23 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10b7g0u1untx25m&xid=10b7eu7lutf1n4k&done=#comment-421650230Increase tax revenues without raising taxes.<br>Use Law Enforcement to target real criminals like murderers &amp; rapists.<br><br>Support these proposals<br>Live &amp; Let Live.ReilleyfamThu, 26 Jan 2012 15:02:15 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10b7g0u1untx25m&xid=10b7eu7lutf1n4k&done=#comment-421598092This farce about tightly regulating medical cannabis collectives in the hopes that the feds will see how well run it is, and decide to back off, is a total fantasy.  The feds have demonstrated recently that they won't tolerate ANY medical cannabis, well run or not.  I won't be voting for that one.<br><br>But I will be voting for Regulate Marijuana Like Wine, which will allow California to be the first state to solve this problem once and for all by re-legalizing cannabis possession and sales.  If the feds want to enforce cannabis laws, we can't stop them, but we can make sure that our law enforcement people are not involved, and that we aren't spending any money on this nonsense.ZZardozzThu, 26 Jan 2012 13:53:56 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10b7g0u1untx25m&xid=10b7eu7lutf1n4k&done=#comment-421534211I will vote for regulate like wine, to release the unjustly imprisoned victims of what should have been found to be an unconstitutional war against citizensIriebrightstarThu, 26 Jan 2012 12:36:58 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10b480daglc5zhn&xid=10b4769dfegpr3c&done=.10b480jz92p7zkg#comment-421196171Nice article Tony. I'm so excited for this film's success and what it will mean for Joe.  He is one of our heroes in the local film community and we are cheering loudly... and rest assured Joe - that while we do not YET have a fulltime film commissioner - we are working hard to build a better moviemaking 'mousetrap' and would love for Joe to work closely with the Mayor's For Arts Sake initiative and the Capital Film Arts Alliance to improve the film landscape here in Sacramento.  Changes are coming, and we are working hard to get our city on track.Laurie_pedersonThu, 26 Jan 2012 02:16:10 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=109ymcho5z75dj8#comment-418996009Vending machines can offer 24/7/365 healthy products including fresh fruits and vegetables.  It is ridiculous to single out one retail channel for censure when in fact the vending channel can offer the solution - what the consumer wants vending delivers.  The CMA trying to put small businesses out of business is shameful.DmathewsMon, 23 Jan 2012 16:33:53 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10agik2a0p9p2u7&xid=10agghuwf9a5bh9&done=.10agik2a0p9z2u7#comment-418420225Sorry to see the print edition go.  Long live the online version!BradSun, 22 Jan 2012 22:22:48 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z87538wj9emt&1=1&xid=109ycvnjlqely64&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326351293&_c=109z87538wj9emt#comment-414901386I worked for a large county mental health division for 12 years in mental health administration and also had a lot of contact with the mental health staff in the field, in our conservator's office, and our county hospital psych unit as well as the behavioral health court.  Has Prop. 63 helped create new supported, supervised housing in the community in our county?  No, it has not.  They are still relying on the same housing as before Prop. 63 because it is very hard to open any housing for the mentally ill in the community because of NIMY's.  Are less people on the street?  No they are under the bridges, near the bay, in the foothills, around rivers and streams.  They are still there and many are too paranoid to seek help.  My family lived in California for over 40 years but we couldn't find the appropriate residential programs for our son who became diagnosed with a serious mental illness when he was almost 19.  We found a really good program in central Florida.  He moved here and 8 months later we decided to move closer to support him.  He and many others were never helped by Prop. 63 but many non profits agencies are raking in the money to pay their salaries and not doing direct services like CIMH, NAMI CA and Mental Health America.  Yes some people are benefitting but many of them are officers and staff for non profits that have large contracts to run community forums that are not really attended by families or consumers who really need help because they are unaware of these planning sessions and community forums.  <br><br>I am still getting many calls from desperate families and consumers who are not getting the mental health services they need.  I have been gone for just over one year.  I cannot see much of a change after having the Prop. 63 funding for over 6 years.  The Dept. of Mental Health is mostly to blame for creating a paper work nightmare and taking such a long time to tell the county mental health divisions what they needed to do to get the funding.  Of course some consumers have been helped but not nearly as many as we had hoped would benefit.  If there had been specific rules about how the funding was to be spent that would actually benefit those untreated seriously mentally ill on the street, things would have gone in a better direction.  <br><br>Strangely Florida has had no such special funding and yet most larger counties here have 1/3 of their law enforcement CIT trained and mobile crisis buses I never saw in California.  So it is time to stop paying expensive consultants to facilitate meetings that mainly the same staff and non profit attend, and actually put line staff on the streets to actually help the mentally ill people that need the treatment.GloriaWed, 18 Jan 2012 21:09:32 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10aiquue5tytyjc&1=1&xid=10aipkc3f2ltmgd&done=.10aiqd2x4wwfu6j&_credir=1326901879&_c=10aiquue5tytyjc#comment-414690552Movie<br><a href="http://vimeo.com/33854206" rel="nofollow">http://vimeo.com/33854206</a>VasWed, 18 Jan 2012 15:57:11 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z87538wj9emt&1=1&xid=109ycvnjlqely64&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326351293&_c=109z87538wj9emt#comment-414068627<br><br><br><br><br>I am not a critic of Prop 63 but I<br>am highly critical of the implementation, oversight and lack of accountability<br>of the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA). My 35 years of experience as a family<br>member and advocate has provided me with more than anecdotes to support my<br>outrage at the failure to properly implement MHSA. It’s provided me with facts <br><br><br> <br><br><br>Mr. Poaster’s op ed ignores the very<br>clear evidence of waste, special interests and the moral and ethical failure to<br>serve those who require involuntary services unless they are among the Full<br>Service Partnership (FSP) tier. Aaron Bassler, Kelly Thomas and my son would<br>not qualify for the FSP tier because they were/are too sick to volunteer for<br>services. Those aren’t single anecdotes but real facts and why the co-author of<br>Prop 63, Rose King, filed a Whistleblower complaint two years ago to implore<br>the state to address the ongoing chaos in MHSA implementation.  <br><br><br> <br><br><br>Mr. Poaster’s defense is not a<br>surprising. As Chair of the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability<br>Commission (MHSOAC) Mr. Poaster is partially responsible for the failure and<br>repeats the talking points of the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funded PR<br>firm, Pashael and Roth. As the Chair<br>of the CiMH Board of Directors, a non profit who receives the majority of its<br>funding from “the state”, Mr. Poaster is hardly objective. He is an example of<br>Ms. King’s and many other advocates complaint of overwhelming interlocking<br>conflicts of interest. <br><br><br> <br><br><br> Mr. Poaster cites data out of context. Without<br>a baseline in each county, the Petris study he quotes is meaningless. Without<br>knowing if a county system has improved services and access for all children,<br>youth, adults and older adults in the systems of care, the UCLA study is<br>distorted. Have we expanded access to appropriate, qualitative services or just<br>moved the numbers around?  Are the<br>numbers and percentages fact or misleading data?<br><br><br> <br><br><br>Only a handful of Full Service<br>Partnerships exist in each county. Those in FSPs may be better off than before<br>but nobody would know because the consumers who are speaking up are not those<br>with the most serious psychiatric disorders: FSPs, conservatees or the<br>indigent. They are paid staff with private insurance and pensions who parrot<br>the ‘all is well’ mantra of the PR agency, their county administration and the<br>state oversight committee leaders out of fear, not ill intentions. <br><br><br> <br><br><br>The facts are that the law was<br>corrupted by regulations created by paid lobbyists. Rather than serving those<br>with the most serious psychiatric illnesses, MHSA funds are being diverted to<br>‘mental anything’. There is poor quality oversight and self-reports of<br>greatness by executive directors, politicians, beneficiaries of funding<br>including members of non-profit boards. Even the organizations that support the<br>very consumers and families that this law was intended to serve have lost their<br>moral compass and nod their heads in unison like bobble head dolls for fear of<br>losing their own funding.<br><br><br> <br><br><br> Mr. Poaster states that 75% of MHSA must<br>“address the needs of those with serious mental illness.” How has that 75% been<br>spent throughout California? Have we added public conservators and guardians in<br>each county to protect the most vulnerable of the homeless, incarcerated and psychiatrically<br>disabled living in institutions? How much of the 75% has gone to direct<br>services for LPS conservatees who are not FSPs? Has access increased to<br>psychiatric appointments, therapy, primary care, dual diagnosis treatment and<br>supported housing for those in the System of Care? No one knows. Has the<br>evidence-based Laura’s Law been considered for Prevention and Early<br>Intervention over the untested “access strategies?” Is my son getting “Whatever<br>is Takes” after being permanently conserved for 11years? The answers are “no”. <br><br><br> <br><br><br>While endless facilitated meetings<br>and visioning parties continue to take place, the majority of those with<br>serious and persistent mental illnesses are still failing first, second and<br>third and they are dying while recipients of funding and those who have failed<br>to implement the law as written continue congratulating themselves.  <br><br><br> <br><br><br>The Governor and the Legislature<br>must restore sanity to the process if real progress is to be achieved.  They must end the impact of lobbyist<br>tampering and take strong steps to insure those with severe mental illness get<br>priority access, not tertiary or no access to MHSA funded services. The buzz is<br>all about integration; collaboration and efficiency, while people who don’t<br>know that they need help can’t even get the right medicines. After seven years<br>and seven billion dollars, those “stakeholders” who are beating the success<br>drum the loudest seem to only have a “stake” in “holding” the funding for their<br>organizations. <br><br><br>tcpasquiniWed, 18 Jan 2012 01:22:43 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=10adv2y1yijdx64&1=1&xid=10adtk11z0mthk7&done=.10aduliksdt3s9h&_credir=1326764135&_c=10adv2y1yijdx64#comment-413682349Anti-Mitt opponent will ride pro-worker/anti-international banker movement. Mitt won't politically survive. He's never done an honest day's work in his life. Paul wins.Matt McLaughlinTue, 17 Jan 2012 15:29:15 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=109ymcho5z75dj8#comment-410697271Experts agree the key to healthy eating is the time-tested advice of balance, variety and moderation. In short, that means eating a wide variety of foods without getting too many calories or too much of any one nutrient.Health and wellbeingSat, 14 Jan 2012 06:02:53 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e&1=1&xid=109yczgz62dxzgj&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326348699&_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e#comment-410492629Let him worry about it then.  He does not need a commenter, on a blog, to tell him what's what.  He will get that information from his Pension Plan.  You just go about your own business--your taxes will go on, as they do in life.SAWZSat, 14 Jan 2012 04:24:54 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e&1=1&xid=109yczgz62dxzgj&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326348699&_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e#comment-410412204Please get back to me when (not if) your pension check is in the form of IOU's that nobody will honor.Fed-UpSat, 14 Jan 2012 01:33:02 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z4z4xxijpart&1=1&xid=109ymg935pedeqj&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326348722&_c=109z4z4xxijpart#comment-410306286Governor Brown decided to closed off the CCF's, that put atleast 1,000 or more people in the state out of a job. That means that he is the one who put all of the worker on unemployment I was making $3,000 a month until I got the notice saying that I was getting laid off because governor Brown was closing the facility. I am now barley making ends meet and I have down sized as much as I could. I know am only making $1,200 a month. Governor brown is who put me in this position and other of my co-workers. So we have the incentive to work but governor brown doesn't want it that way.Out of workFri, 13 Jan 2012 21:42:15 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z4z4xxijpart&1=1&xid=109ymg935pedeqj&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326348722&_c=109z4z4xxijpart#comment-410094854Shame on you!  You are retired, and have the gaul, to look down on those who cannot find work!SAWZFri, 13 Jan 2012 15:50:33 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e&1=1&xid=109yczgz62dxzgj&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326348699&_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e#comment-410065136No funding, no support, no initiative. Not to mention that half the proposal would be stuck down in court. You simply are not going to get anything from existing employees or retirees. Imagine if you put all this focus and time and money where you COULD get results = new hires. The longer you engage in disengenous attacks on existing employees the more time you lose for fixing what you can = new hires. Stop wasting time on a lost cause.ReilleyfamFri, 13 Jan 2012 15:07:34 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e&1=1&xid=109yczgz62dxzgj&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326348699&_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e#comment-410058130Not if you raise taxes....which you are legally required to do. <br><br>Shut up &amp; pay up.ReilleyfamFri, 13 Jan 2012 15:04:14 -0000http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e&1=1&xid=109yczgz62dxzgj&done=.109z4dex7y1z367&_credir=1326348699&_c=109z4y2w17qpa2e#comment-410057377Coming from the King of hypocrites.ReilleyfamFri, 13 Jan 2012 15:03:17 -0000http://capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=109ymcho5z75dj8#comment-409946441My company offers the "healthy" food vending machines, but the cost makes purchases prohibitive. They still offer the junk food machines. I say get rid of all sources of junk food!<br><br>The also used to offer the Farm Fresh To You, but it was cancelled...perhaps due to lack of demand. The company also used to sponsor a Farmers Market on the property, but that too has been cancelled, and the lone vendor parks on the public street...and there are no announcements that he is there....sad. <br><br>I think we were just doing it to meet some healthy appearing criteria so we could claim we are a healthy company. SadCali GirlzFri, 13 Jan 2012 12:44:43 -0000