banned it and the more liberal ones put in place really strict regulatory schemes. Most of them had regulatory schemes that provided that a dispensary was treated like an adult bookstore or liquor store. They had stuff like they couldn’t be within 500 ft of a school. So based on that, a whole bunch of dispensaries got licensed, got set up and started operating in Boulder very safely. THC: Which leads us to the feds being “annoying.” DA Garnett: Well, the U.S. Attorney in Colorado, John Walsh, who is a very conservative law enforcement guy, decent guy, but conservative, totally out of the blue about a year ago, sent out a letter to any dispensary that was within 1000 ft of a school saying that that violated federal law and they were going to be prosecuted for felony or be forced to shut down under federal nuisance laws. I responded quite publicly in a series of letters with him, saying I thought that was very heavy handed and interfered with local decision making and when did the federal government of all people, decide they were going to get involved in local land use decisions? We had a rather lively entertaining discussion about the issue.
“Boulder County is probably one of the most liberal in the state on the issue of marijuana and our crime rates are going down dramatically.”
THC: A discussion in which you both never saw eye to eye. Your letter states clearly that the U.S. Attorney’s office should focus on other crimes, specifically on “terrorism, serious economic crime, organized crime and serious drug dealing (involving significant amounts of heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine).” Given that this disagreement will continue, what, if any, are the most dangerous elements of legalizing recreational marijuana?
DA Garnett: I think the biggest concern with marijuana is there are legitimate societal interests in controlling it. You want to make sure people are not driving under the influence of marijuana. You want to make sure children do not have access to it, because heavy marijuana use in teenagers can be very destructive to them. So the question is, how do you best manage it? And a lot of people find it offensive like adult bookstores. So how do you manage the distribution of it in a community that regulates it, taxes it, keeps it away from kids and keeps it discreet enough so those who prefer to not be confronted with it are not confronted with it? I don’t believe the criminalization of marijuana use accomplishes any of those things very well. But I do think the heavy land use program, like we put in place in Colorado, does do a pretty good job. THC: What are the positive aspects of legalization? DA Garnett: Well the most important one is it lets law enforcement focus on other issues that actually have an impact on public safety. Second, it avoids the enormous injustice of random heavy-handed prosecutions of people
34 June/July
for marijuana trafficking and third it permits us to obtain significant tax revenues once it’s legalized and regulated. One of the reasons I’ve enjoyed talking about the issue is that it lets me go around the rotary club circuit and church club circuit to talk about what it is that the DA does and what is the goal of the DA’s office and why would enforcement of marijuana laws really not have much to do with what our goals are. THC: As the day draws nearer for full legalization, what will be the challenges for law enforcement when these laws go into effect?
DA Garnett: The first step is to make sure there are laws that can be enforced. To make sure that you have laws that make sense, that they are clearly written and that you can go to court and know how to have a judge and jury know how to apply them. The next issue will be to figure out where the role is for law enforcement. What I’ve talked to our folks about is I want to treat marijuana enforcement sort of like we treat white-collar crime. People are free to have banks and lend money and buy and sell things to each other but if they do it in a way that takes advantage of people or if it is intended to be money laundering or evading the tax laws then we will come down on them pretty hard no matter what business they are involved in. That’s why going forward most of our marijuana enforcement will be - people who are buying and selling marijuana outside the legal framework that will be established by Amendment 20 and Amendment 64. THC: Obama said enforcement of marijuana users would not be a focus for his administration. Other than Boulder, have you seen that they’ve kept their word? DA Garnett: Pretty much. I mean they keep pounding the table, like these letters, which I find annoying, but yeah by and large the U.S. Attorney in Colorado has not made aggressive marijuana enforcement a priority. I don’t know if they are keeping their word or if they can’t figure out what to do. THC: What’s your best guess as to what they might do when Amendment 64 comes into effect later this year? DA Garnett: I’m on the National Board of Directors of the National DA Attorney’s Association and we had a big meeting in February in DC and we heard from a lot of people with the Justice Department and elsewhere. I think the president himself is paying a lot of attention to this and I think he’s going to do probably what I would do if I was in his position, which is to avoid the issue as long as possible. And that’s great for states like Colorado because it allows us to get our regulatory systems set and helps everyone kinda relax about it. But I don’t think you’re going to see any sort of aggressive enforcement even though there’s been a lot of pressure on the president to go that direction. But I also don’t think you