Truth Seeker
New Member
Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery is alleging that an attorney who represents a proposed medical-marijuana dispensary violated ethics rules by attempting to dissuade the Board of Supervisors, Montgomery's client, from taking his advice.
Acting on that advice, the Board of Supervisors declined to follow the state's medical-marijuana law and has disallowed medical-marijuana dispensaries or cultivation sites within the county's jurisdiction. Montgomery had warned the board that county employees who carry out the state law may be subject to federal prosecution because marijuana is not a federally approved drug.
But Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Gordon rejected that claim earlier this month. He ruled that county officials must give the White Mountain Health Center paperwork showing whether it complies with dispensary zoning rules.
The center last week applied for zoning clearance for five location options near Sun City. The county did not verify any of the proposed locations because they would not comply with zoning ordinances.
Jeffrey Kaufman, attorney for the center, had accused the county of purposely stalling action on the center's application to prevent it from obtaining a state operating license. The center became embroiled in a legal controversy over the state's medical-marijuana law and whether it contradicts the federal Controlled Substances Act.
Voters in 2010 approved the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act, which allows qualifying patients with certain debilitating medical conditions to use marijuana.
After Gordon's ruling rejecting Montgomery's arguments, Kaufman wrote a Dec.14 letter to the Board of Supervisors asking its cooperation for the center to open a dispensary near Sun City at a "location that is acceptable to all of us."
Since the ruling, at least two dispensaries – one in Glendale and another in Tucson – have opened their doors. The Board of Supervisors last week unanimously approved Montgomery's request to appeal the ruling.
"Frankly, we have continuously reached out to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, hoping to agree upon a mutually-acceptable location for our client's medical marijuana dispensary. ... Unfortunately, Mr. Montgomery's response has never changed. He continues to insist that marijuana is against federal law and that the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act is unenforceable," Kaufman wrote.
"We are writing this letter to you because we know that you are not required to follow Mr. Montgomery's advice," Kaufman wrote.
Montgomery responded to Kaufman's letter about a week later, chiding Kaufman for attempting to sidestep him and contacting his clients without consent from him or his office. He said Kaufman failed to attend last week's board meeting, when Kaufman could have spoken during a public-comment period on Gordon's ruling.
Montgomery accused Kaufman of an ethical violation as a lawyer and said his office is preparing a state Bar complaint against him.
"This letter is not intended to invite a discussion, debate or negotiation over your behavior. It is to advise you" of the pending Bar complaint, Montgomery wrote.
"Your attempts to circumvent my role as advisor to the Board and supplant my advice with your own also irresponsibly places Board members in the precarious position of acting contrary to a written opinion of a county attorney," Montgomery wrote.
The County Attorney's Office declined to comment further. The complaint had not been filed Monday.
In an interview, Kaufman said, "I didn't realize I wasn't allowed to contact the Board of Supervisors. I'm still not sure that I wasn't allowed to contact them. They aren't a party to the lawsuit, but if I'd done something wrong I'm sincerely sorry about it."
He added: "Why would there be a need to publicly chastise me when all he had to do was report my conduct to the state Bar? I'm just totally perplexed why they would make a letter chastising me public record."
News Hawk- TruthSeekr420 420 MAGAZINE
Source: azcentral.com
Author: Michelle Ye Hee Lee
Acting on that advice, the Board of Supervisors declined to follow the state's medical-marijuana law and has disallowed medical-marijuana dispensaries or cultivation sites within the county's jurisdiction. Montgomery had warned the board that county employees who carry out the state law may be subject to federal prosecution because marijuana is not a federally approved drug.
But Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Gordon rejected that claim earlier this month. He ruled that county officials must give the White Mountain Health Center paperwork showing whether it complies with dispensary zoning rules.
The center last week applied for zoning clearance for five location options near Sun City. The county did not verify any of the proposed locations because they would not comply with zoning ordinances.
Jeffrey Kaufman, attorney for the center, had accused the county of purposely stalling action on the center's application to prevent it from obtaining a state operating license. The center became embroiled in a legal controversy over the state's medical-marijuana law and whether it contradicts the federal Controlled Substances Act.
Voters in 2010 approved the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act, which allows qualifying patients with certain debilitating medical conditions to use marijuana.
After Gordon's ruling rejecting Montgomery's arguments, Kaufman wrote a Dec.14 letter to the Board of Supervisors asking its cooperation for the center to open a dispensary near Sun City at a "location that is acceptable to all of us."
Since the ruling, at least two dispensaries – one in Glendale and another in Tucson – have opened their doors. The Board of Supervisors last week unanimously approved Montgomery's request to appeal the ruling.
"Frankly, we have continuously reached out to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, hoping to agree upon a mutually-acceptable location for our client's medical marijuana dispensary. ... Unfortunately, Mr. Montgomery's response has never changed. He continues to insist that marijuana is against federal law and that the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act is unenforceable," Kaufman wrote.
"We are writing this letter to you because we know that you are not required to follow Mr. Montgomery's advice," Kaufman wrote.
Montgomery responded to Kaufman's letter about a week later, chiding Kaufman for attempting to sidestep him and contacting his clients without consent from him or his office. He said Kaufman failed to attend last week's board meeting, when Kaufman could have spoken during a public-comment period on Gordon's ruling.
Montgomery accused Kaufman of an ethical violation as a lawyer and said his office is preparing a state Bar complaint against him.
"This letter is not intended to invite a discussion, debate or negotiation over your behavior. It is to advise you" of the pending Bar complaint, Montgomery wrote.
"Your attempts to circumvent my role as advisor to the Board and supplant my advice with your own also irresponsibly places Board members in the precarious position of acting contrary to a written opinion of a county attorney," Montgomery wrote.
The County Attorney's Office declined to comment further. The complaint had not been filed Monday.
In an interview, Kaufman said, "I didn't realize I wasn't allowed to contact the Board of Supervisors. I'm still not sure that I wasn't allowed to contact them. They aren't a party to the lawsuit, but if I'd done something wrong I'm sincerely sorry about it."
He added: "Why would there be a need to publicly chastise me when all he had to do was report my conduct to the state Bar? I'm just totally perplexed why they would make a letter chastising me public record."
News Hawk- TruthSeekr420 420 MAGAZINE
Source: azcentral.com
Author: Michelle Ye Hee Lee
