Do Our Elected Officials Serve Us or Themselves? (Part II)

Dear Friends & Neighbors,

For Part II of this blog, we would like to take a closer look at the city's vision of widespread and uniform distribution of cannabis retailers, and how our officials are claiming this is helping the city when it is actually hurting it. Again, we do not have a problem with the legalization or sale of cannabis, but our city is obviously going about it the wrong way. This is inevitably what happens when government ignores the welfare of its citizens and carries out agendas and policies for its own political and financial gain instead.

In order to achieve their vision for the cannabis industry, the city reduced the buffer distance from K-12 schools from 1,000 feet to 600 feet. At the same time, the city failed to include pre-schools in the buffer zone, which unfairly excludes 3 and 4 years and does not offer them the same safety measures and protections as older children.

As a result, it would make sense to reconsider the 600-foot buffer rule, which we are pressuring our city officials to do. Unfortunately, they won't budge. Planning refuses to listen to us, because they justify dispensaries the same way they do bars and liquor stores. For example, if it's ok for folks to buy and consume alcohol in a bar along with food, then why can't we do the same with cannabis? It's not fair to treat cannabis dispensaries different from bars and liquor stores. (Yet they ignore their own logic when applied to children: they treat 5 year olds and up differently than 3 and 4 year olds. How convenient.)

Having said that, the city's comparison may sound sensible at first, but if you dig deeper you begin to see the cracks and flaws in their argument.

First, like alcohol, cannabis may offer a way for us to relax and unwind, or in the case of cannabis, even manage our physical pain symptoms. But this is not a long-term or permanent coping mechanism for our emotional traumas, anxiety, depression, etc. As with alcohol use, drug use can quickly become addictive and destructive, depending on a user's personality, emotional and mental health, and propensity toward substance abuse.

For example, everyone who drinks alcohol does not necessary become an alcoholic, just as everyone who tries cannabis does not become addicted to it, nor do they gravitate toward the harder drugs, such as meth, heroin, or fetanyl. Nonetheless, the potential for addiction is still there. So why take the risk? Why, during a mental health crisis of the scope and size we have never seen, increasingly and repeatedly expose our residents, particularly our vulnerable, younger population, with more cannabis, when this will invariably increase the odds that more people will become addicted?

Second, each day we all witness the disturbing effects of our mental health crisis on our city: homelessness, crime, gun violence, drug addiction, etc. It baffles us that bringing more drugs to the table is somehow going to help the situation. But our city is different, because in the spirit of "social and racial equity," our officials are convinced that the systematic and uniform distribution of dispensaries across our city is somehow going to "better activate our streets and help surrounding businesses thrive."

Our city is failing to understand that the mental health crisis is a complex issue, and cannot be remedied by simply rolling out more dispensaries. This is no more productive than opening more bars and liquor stores across our city, and hoping that by intoxicating people they will somehow flourish and experience more well-being, which in turn, will cause our city to thrive. This is a fallacy, because after the effects of the drugs or alcohol wear off, most people are back to where they started, and some will crave the experience again, more deeply even, hence the potential for abuse and addiction. So contrary to what our own Planning Dept. would have us believe, instead of thriving, our streets and businesses are actually dying. That's the reality. Besides, where is the data on either liquor stores or dispensaries that demonstrates they actually revitalize our streets and surrounding businesses. Where's the proof?

Third, like any other product or market, it's necessary to have a balance between supply and demand, however the cannabis industry in both our state and city is clearly out of balance and out of touch with reality. Since the decriminalization of cannabis in San Francisco in 2016, supply has quickly outstripped demand, particularly with the flooding of the market from illegal growers, and so dispensary owners are struggling to compete. In addition, dispensaries are already showing signs of saturation.

In light of the shortcomings and broken promises made by our city, it would make sense to perhaps consider abstinence from drugs or non-drug approaches for dealing with our mental health issues, such as psychotherapy, behavioral and lifestyle changes, diet and exercise, stress reduction, prayer and meditation, social interaction, etc. This would be an adjunct to the drug-based approaches, which again, we are not opposed to by any means. For example, you can engage with your neighbors, do something positive for your community, and feel good about yourself by simply volunteering for a neighborhood cleanup. They are available all over our city through RefuseRefuseSF.

Finally, what type of message are we sending to our children when they see their parents, teachers, coaches, or other role models buy and use drugs everyday to deal with life? If you have a bad day at school, fail a test, or do not make the soccer team, do you turn to a weed vape or take an edible? Are they acceptable examples to set for our children? We hope not. Like alcohol, cannabis is here to stay; it is not going anywhere. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that drugs or alcohol are some sort of panacea for our problems. They are not. Instead, let's also give non-drug options a try, no matter how uncool, corny, or boring this may sound, and teach our children that it's ok to turn to these options when they are having a bad day.

Having said that, our appeal for the Gold Mirror dispensary is a few days away on April 18th, and we need your support now more than ever. Therefore, if you have not already done so, please do the following:

1) Write to the Board of Supervisors by sending an email to: bos@sfgov.org and say no to the Gold Mirror cannabis dispensary.

2) Sign our online petition.

3) Attend our public hearing on April 18th, 2023 and oppose the dispensary, in-person or via phone, before our Board of Supervisors.