CHAPTER 96B:
POLICY MAKING MARIJUANA OFFENSES THE LOWEST LAW ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY

Sec. 96B.1.	Title.
Sec. 96B.2.	Purpose.
Sec. 96B.3.	Findings.
Sec. 96B.4.	Definitions.
Sec. 96B.5.	Lowest Law Enforcement Priority.
Sec. 96B.7.	Cannabis Policy Reform.
Sec. 96B.8.	General Welfare Clause.
Sec. 96B.9.	Severability.

––––––––

*Editor’s note:

   Ord. 189-16, approved October 14, 2016, effective November 13, 2016, and becoming operative February 11, 2017, added provisions designated as a new Ch. 12X, Prohibiting City Travel and Contracting in States That Allow Discrimination Against LGBT Individuals, and redesignated former Ch. 12X, Policy Making Marijuana Offenses the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority, as Ch. 96B.

SEC. 96B.1. TITLE.

   This chapter shall be known as the Policy Making Marijuana Offenses the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority.

(Added as Sec. 12X.1 by Ord. 297-06, File No. 061295, App. 11/29/2006; redesignated by Ord. 189-16, File No. 160425, App. 10/14/2016, Eff. 11/13/2016, Oper. 2/11/2017)

SEC. 96B.2. PURPOSE.

   The purpose of this chapter is to:

   (a)   Make investigation, citations, arrests, and property seizures from adults for marijuana offenses the City and County of San Francisco’s lowest law enforcement priority;

   (b)   Establish a City and County policy supporting changes in state and federal laws that support a system of taxation and regulation for adult use of marijuana; and

   (c)   Transmit notification of the enactment of this chapter to State and Federal elected officials who represent the City and County of San Francisco.

(Added as Sec. 12X.2 by Ord. 297-06, File No. 061295, App. 11/29/2006; redesignated by Ord. 189-16, File No. 160425, App. 10/14/2016, Eff. 11/13/2016, Oper. 2/11/2017)

SEC. 96B.3. FINDINGS.

   (a)   The federal government’s war on drugs has failed. Otherwise law-abiding adults are being arrested and imprisoned for nonviolent marijuana offenses, which is clogging courts and jails in California. Each year California spends over $150 million of taxpayer money enforcing marijuana laws. Decades of arresting millions of marijuana users have failed to control marijuana use or reduce its availability. Minorities are disproportionately impacted by marijuana laws, with African Americans five times more likely to be arrested for marijuana offenses.

   (b)   San Francisco should determine its marijuana policies locally, not hand them over to the federal Drug Enforcement Administration. Many recreational marijuana users are productive citizens who work and pay taxes. Current marijuana policies continue to needlessly harm medical marijuana patients. Law enforcement resources would be better spent fighting serious and violent crimes. Making adult marijuana offenses San Francisco’s lowest law enforcement priority will reduce expenditures on law enforcement and punishment of these offenses.

   (c)   It is the hope of the citizens of San Francisco that the Federal and California State governments will change the laws to tax and regulate marijuana, so as to eliminate costs and problems of prohibition, keep marijuana off the streets and away from children, and raise tax revenues for vital public services.

(Added as Sec. 12X.3 by Ord. 297-06, File No. 061295, App. 11/29/2006; redesignated by Ord. 189-16, File No. 160425, App. 10/14/2016, Eff. 11/13/2016, Oper. 2/11/2017)