Photo by clarissa.stark.

To date, the District’s medical marijuana program has largely existed on paper, a product of 113 pages of regulations without an actual cultivation center, dispensary or qualifying patient in existence. But as the city gets closer to awarding licenses for the 10 cultivation centers and five dispensaries that will form the backbone of the program, it’ll have to contend with residents that are unhappy with where they end up.

Yesterday evening may have provided a teaser of what’s to come. During a lengthy meeting of the Woodridge Civic Association, Ward 5 residents peppered three applicants — two cultivators and one dispenser — with questions about the merits of medical marijuana and how the actual program will function once it kicks off in 2012.

But beyond information seeking, many residents expressed righteous indignation that all but two of the 28 current applicants for cultivation center licenses were clustered in Ward 5 — most within less than a mile of each other, and five within a few blocks of the Washington Center for Aging Services, where the meeting was held.

Despite promises of profit-sharing and local hiring from hopeful cultivators Corey Barnette and Robert Riggs and potential dispenser Mike Cuthriell, a large number of the 60 residents that attended the meeting expressed concerns over the value of their real estate and the proximity of the cultivation centers and dispensaries to schools, churches and playgrounds. (By law, they have to be at least 300 feet away from schools and recreation centers.) Others warned of security, saying that the promised state-of-the-art security systems were of little match to the ward’s state-of-the-art criminals and drug addicts.

More broadly, though, an undercurrent of frustration emerged during the questioning, hinting that as much as Ward 5 has become a destination for the city’s strip clubs, so too would the city’s medical marijuana facilities be hoisted upon the ward’s skeptical residents.

“It’s very strange that you didn’t seek out any other community in the city,” said Jacqueline Manning, the vice-chair of ANC 5B, where the majority of the proposed cultivation centers may be located.

Despite protests from Barnette, Riggs and Cuthriell that zoning restrictions and space requirements largely made other parts of the city unworkable, the crowd regularly cheered when someone implied that this was merely another part of a plan to keep Ward 5 down. (Even personal admissions of family experiences with cancer fell victim to the implication that Ward 5 was being screwed.)

The complaints certainly aren’t idle, even less so when coming from a member of an ANC. Under the existing rules of the program, 50 of 250 points that are used to judge applications by a six-person panel are set aside for ANC input — one provision of which specifically addresses concerns of “overconcentration” of facilities in one area. A thumbs down from an ANC won’t sink an application, but it will also put pressure on the Department of Health, which has the final say in which licenses are awarded and which aren’t.

The pressure already seems to be on. Janet Reid, a member of the association, said she had already turned in a petition to the Department of Health with the signatures of 160 residents opposed to medical marijuana in Ward 5.

Many of the complaints did misunderstand how the program will function, though, and few residents even seemed to remember that medical marijuana was approved by 69 percent of the District’s voters in a 1998 vote. (Not one voting precinct sided against it.) Still, the lack of information and the toxic brand attached to illegal drugs in the ward proved that advocates have an uphill educational — and emotional — battle in front of them.

“ANC 5B has a responsibility to educate themselves on the issue,” said Albrette “Gigi” Ransom, an ANC 5C commissioner and supporter of the city’s medical marijuana program. (She was briefly affiliated with a cultivation center applicant.) “They need to understand that their role and the decision that they make and is going to carry great weight must be based on law and fact, not wishful thinking.”

Councilmember Harry Thomas, Jr. (D-Ward 5) similarly argued that while he did not personally support medical marijuana, the program had been approved by voters and it was his job to help Ward 5 neighbors become more aware of it and organize to best benefit from it.

“People should be educated on the information that is before them, because there has been more information that is misinformation about this issue being presented to this community. I’ve heard things being said here that are absolutely incorrect,” Thomas said.

Despite what could be limited, if vocal opposition to medical marijuana facilities in Ward 5, Ransom argued that advocates may have to devise a Community Benefits Agreement with ANCs to smooth over any tensions. Similarly, Regina James, chair of ANC 5B, proposed that they consider reimbursable police details for additional security.

Even more broadly, though, advocates and applicants will have to stress that the District won’t be another California, nor has marijuana been legalized in the city — a claim repeated by many participants in the meeting. They’ll also have to better explain that medical marijuana isn’t meant to cure the four severe conditions for which it can be recommended — cancer, HIV/AIDS, glaucoma and multiple sclerosis — but is rather a means to ease pain.

Seeing how some Ward 5 residents responded yesterday, it won’t be an easy sell.

Applications for the five dispensaries are due in to the Department of Health by November 15. ANCs will be asked to offer comments on the proposed cultivation centers through the end of the year, and will then follow up with dispensary applications. By March, the 15 licenses are expected to be awarded, and the city’s medical marijuana program is expected to be up and running by mid-2012.