Please work to exclude cannabis smoking and vaping from San Jose’s proposed ban on smoking and vaping tobacco in apartments. While tobacco causes 480,000 deaths per year in the U.S., cannabis use hasn’t been shown to cause increased mortality, lung cancer, or COPD even in firsthand users. The claims that thirdhand cannabis smoke and vaping pose a serious danger to individuals in other residences is not supported by the evidence. Because cannabis use is forbidden in public, this ban would make it impossible for renters to smoke or vaporize cannabis anywhere. Some may claim edibles are an adequate alternative. But many cannabis consumers are uncomfortable with edibles, which are slow acting and can be too intoxicating. And for those in the midst of a spasm, stricken by nausea, needing immediate pain relief, or who have an aura of a seizure, edibles’ relief often comes too late. And, unlike inhaled cannabis, edibles’ dosage cannot be precisely titrated. West Hollywood rightly exempted cannabis from a similar smoking ban, and San Francisco defeated a proposed ban on smoking at one’s own apartment or condo due to the disproportionate impact on low-income individuals and minorities. Can I count on you to work to exempt cannabis from this ordinance?

I was shocked to learn San Jose is considering banning tenants from vaping or smoking cannabis in their own homes. This, despite the fact that a rigorous UCLA study found cannabis isn’t linked to lung cancer even in firsthand users. This seems to be driven by misrepresentations of the risks. Cannabis smoke is not a serious health risk to people in completely different residences. What’s next, banning tenants from cooking foods their neighbors don't like the smell of? Fifty-seven percent of San Jose voters opted to legalize cannabis in 2016, and support has surely grown since then. This ordinance would maintain legalization, but only for those wealthy enough to own their homes. For renters, we can anticipate the same racially biased enforcement that was hallmark of cannabis prohibition. One of the enforcement provisions under consideration would result in the eviction of renters. It is shocking that the city would put people out of their homes for using a legal substance that is safer than alcohol. Will the city also evict people for using any of the myriad of products listed on the Prop 65 warning list? Charcoal grills? Burnt toast? French fries? Will you please work to remove cannabis from the ban?