SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) — As SF city leaders remained deadlocked over what to do about recreational marijuana, Mayor Ed Lee on Wednesday finally broke his silence about the fight over pot.

While the question of how the city should legislate recreational pot dispensaries when Prop 64 goes into effect January 1 has been hotly debated, the mayor has remained quiet on the subject.

One key the sticking point has been how close pot stores should be to schools.

“I do think we need a buffer zone of 1,000 feet,” said Lee. “Maybe in the next couple of weeks, something will happen.”

San Francisco Supervisor Jeff Sheehy was not optimistic as about a decision being made.

“Sure. Pigs will fly,” said Sheehy.

Those contrasting comments underscore the deep divide over how and where recreational pot should be sold in San Francisco. For Sheehy, the pot deadlock is also the latest sign of the city’s inability to get things done.

“I’m not sure what it is all coming down to. I just know that we are not doing our job and we are not going to be ready January 1st.” explained Sheehy.

Supervisor Kane Kim agreed with the mayors concern over a buffer around schools.

“I don’t see what is unreasonable about saying we don’t want cannabis on the same block as schools or child care centers,” said Kim.

Sheehy on the other hand says the 1,000 foot ban is too much. He wants 600 feet.

“It won’t kill the industry, but it means the number of people who participate will be limited,” said Sheehy.

Another question is how much say neighborhoods should have on pot clubs moving in next door.

“Neighborhoods should have a say, just like they have a say on retail outlets or on how many bakeries and nail salons they want,” said Lee.

“I think we should negotiate that,” countered Sheehy.

There is also opposition from the Chinese-American community, which is a large and influential voter block in the city.

“I don’t know if it is cultural,” said Lee. “I do think with the Asian community that there are great concerns about public safety. We need address those.”

When asked how much of the debate was about money, Kim replied, “I think we are certainly seeing a lot of industry lobbyists coming in to make sure that owners are able to make as much money as they can on whatever corner they can.”

Sheehy was concerned with the income the city will lose if a plan isn’t in place.

“Right now there is cannabis everywhere- were not getting any of the money,” said Sheehy.

Comments (3)
  1. Brian Clarke says:

    the voters approved this on a state level. local civic leaders need to heed state law. too many are making it about money or an outdated bias against weed. there is no 1,000 foot buffer zone for liquor stores or pharmacies, why weed???? weed is harmless compared to alcohol. local city councils should not be able to thumb their nose at state law. we voted for it. institute it now! and stop the manipulations to make it all about profit. it is about “we the people” not some small minded greedy corrupt city council jerks. localities should not be able to snub and undermine state law to appease their sick little pet peeves..

  2. Danny Dechi says:

    Legalized marijuana. Isn’t bad enough already that we have to put up with other legalized stupid habits like tobacco, alcohol, and religion?!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s