California Proposition 64, the popular Adult Use of Marijuana Act, would protect medical marijuana and reduce or eliminate penalties for non-medical possession, home cultivation and sharing. AUMA has a comfortable lead in the polls. Any number of people have reasonable concerns about its implementation, but the ballot measure has been subjected to an escalating barrage of false claims and unfounded attacks over social media from the few but vocal Stoners Against Legalization, including Kevin Saunders and Dragonfly de la Luz.

For months now there has been speculation as to whether the group is actually a front for law enforcement, given its use of provocation, disruption, disinformation and character assassination — four hallmarks of government infiltration of progressive political movements. Law enforcement groups dominate the opposition to Prop. 64 and have appeared to be coordinating efforts with the Stoners. There is ample evidence that the Stoners have been financially supported by some elements within the so-called “grower” community and a handful of medical marijuana retail outlets that have a financial conflict of interest with legalization.

But could law enforcement agencies really be funding them, as well? And how many of them? At least one, apparently.

A ‘Stoner’ admits to being paid to smear Prop. 64 on Facebook

New evidence regarding a hoax meme has reinforced that fear with a direct admission by one of the group’s most prominent spokespersons that it is “political funny season” and he is being paid by law enforcement to disrupt the legalization initiative campaign.

“The DA’s, Chiefs and ‘powers that be’ have put me ‘out front’ and are paying well during the last push. They also put me in charge of the October Surprise. In this case, it’s gonna be a November one,” Kevin Saunders recently admitted on a Facebook post. “It’s a devastating meme and will move the numbers a percent or two,” he added. “And that’s all I need to win this and do the job I am paid to do.”

Saunders is an outspoken promoter of the law enforcement-driven AB 266, alternatively known as MMRSA or MCRSA, the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act. The 2015 law protects retail dispensaries and licensed growers but also dismantled the legal protections on medical marijuana collectives and restored felonies for patients who grow for one another and misdemeanors for patients who share cannabis. That followed the Maral v. Live Oak court ruling that allows patient home cannabis gardens to be banned by local governments, so the only remaining source of medical marijuana will be from a limited number of regional providers who stand to profit handily. Saunders plans to get state licenses and recently has been offering to sell people shares in his corporation.

Updated Nixonian “dirty tricks” campaign against legalization

Saunders and other Stoners use tactics such as disrupting events by shouting at speakers on stage, staging protests at events, attacking the initiative online, posting fake meme information and trolling AUMA supporters with personal attacks. The most common falsehood which has been repeatedly debunked is to insist that Prop. 64 would “destroy” Prop. 215 medical marijuana rights. Here is a list of 46 attorneys who agree that Prop. 64 does not undo Prop. 215.

Things began to unravel, however, with the two memes discussed below. The first one directly below this paragraph was posted by Friends of Prop. 64 and includes a direct quote from Bernie Sanders.

[[{“type”:”media”,”view_mode”:”full”,”fid”:”617933″,”attributes”:{“alt”:””,”class”:”media-image”,”height”:”320″,”typeof”:”foaf:Image”,”width”:”480″}}]]

Hoax meme led to unravelling of secret dealings

Reproduced below is part of an actual Facebook thread including the hoax meme from Saunders, who manipulated the Friends of Prop. 64 meme and replaced the actual quote from with a false statement he made up. The graphic falsely suggests that AUMA, which contains numerous anti-monopoly provisions, would instead create a monopoly and has been circulated via social media, as seen in the graphic below.

[[{“type”:”media”,”view_mode”:”full”,”fid”:”617934″,”attributes”:{“alt”:””,”class”:”media-image”,”height”:”480″,”typeof”:”foaf:Image”,”width”:”270″}}]]

[[{“type”:”media”,”view_mode”:”full”,”fid”:”617935″,”attributes”:{“alt”:””,”class”:”media-image”,”height”:”480″,”typeof”:”foaf:Image”,”width”:”270″}}]]

So far, there is no direct evidence of any others of the Stoners being on the law enforcement payroll. They are, however, known to be working with the forced-rehab lobby that considers marijuana so dangerous that it cannot be safely legalized. So, while claiming to support legalization, the Stoners have been advancing prohibitionist policies and attitudes.

Dragonfly de la Luz, another face of Stoners Against Legalization

This follows a series of other discoveries about the hoaxes perpetrated against the initiative by this group of self-described “legalizers” who have opposed the past two efforts in California to legalize marijuana, Prop. 19 in 2010 and Prop. 64 this year. Online journalist and commentator ‘Radical‘ Russ Bellville has repeatedly refuted their bogus claims., such as “new felonies” (the initiative eliminates or reduces penalties), “warrantless searches” (the initiative disallows police searches) and on and on.

Another example of the group being caught putting out false information includes a series of postings from around the web in which the writing of a woman using the pen name of Dragonfly de la Luz posted a number of articles derived from a convoluted misrepresentation of the text of the initiative, comparisons to other states that are not applicable and general distortions of the effects, which are exposed in the attached link. In fact opponents of the Washington I-502 initiative have since come to appreciate it and to support Prop. 64.

Part of her polemic included a personal attack against the author of this report. She posted a blog August 27, 2016, in which she wrote, “When I met up with Chris Conrad in June, a long-time patient advocate and spokesperson for Prop. 64 who often represents the initiative in panel discussions, he assured me multiple times that the initiative would not affect patients’ current right to grow an unlimited number of plants, or impact Prop. 215 at all. He even pulled up the text of Prop. 64 on his phone to prove it to me… yet he could not. He scrolled and scrolled as I patiently waited, but proof never came. He finally admitted that he couldn’t find it – not at all surprising, considering that it isn’t there – and promised to email me when he came across proof. Needless to say, I’m still waiting for that email.”

Since I am Chris Conrad, I know that I also told her that my cell phone does not have a search option, so I could not locate the text of the initiative but I then sent her the information by email a month before she posted her blog. Below is a screen capture of the email she claims not to have received.

[[{“type”:”media”,”view_mode”:”full”,”fid”:”617936″,”attributes”:{“alt”:””,”class”:”media-image”,”height”:”480″,”typeof”:”foaf:Image”,”width”:”348″}}]]

I have likewise refuted numerous articles that Dragonfly has posted, for example, follow this link. Other parts of the Stoners Against Legalization come from San Diego and Riverside counties, a Sacramento dispensary, holdovers from failed initiative efforts, conspiracy theorists and disaffected groups and individuals.

Police, rehab industries and powers that be oppose legalization

A list of backers of the No on Prop. 64 campaign includes California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California Police Chiefs Association, Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs, California College and University Police Chiefs Association, California Correctional Supervisors Association, California District Attorneys Association, California Narcotic Officers Association, California Peace Officers Association [Prison Guards Union], California State Sheriffs’ Association, Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers, Los Angeles Police Protective League, Peace Officers Research Association of California, Riverside County Law Enforcement Administrators Association – RCLEAA, Riverside Deputy Sheriffs Association and the San Diego Police Officers Association.

Others include U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, who campaigned against the 1996 Prop. 215 Compassionate Use Act medical marijuana initiative and supports the federal ban on dispensaries, the prohibitionist group Citizens Against Legalizing Marijuana – CALM and Smart Approaches to Marijuana of Northern California – SAM Action, a group that advocates forced rehab for marijuana users backed up by felony penalties.