Resources and Information for the Medical Marijuana Movement
Medical cannabis cooperatives and collectives in Los Angeles should already be paying a “sin tax” of 5% of their gross receipts. The tax was created by Measure M, a voter initiative proposed by the City Council last year. Tax is due effective April 18, 2011. Patients associations can download forms to pay the tax from the city’s web page.
From John Hoeffel in the Los Angeles Times – Judge bars city of L.A. from taking legal action against lanlord of medical marijuana dispensary
“A judge barred Los Angeles officials Monday from taking legal action against the landlord of a medical marijuana dispensary that is part of a lawsuit challenging the city’s ordinance. The temporary restraining order came after the city attorney’s office sent letters last month to 45 landlords warning that they were renting to illegal dispensaries and threatening them with an escalating list of penalties, including daily fines, jail time and loss of the occupancy permit…”
Read the entire story online.
Lloyd Pilchen, Esq.
New Litigation Will Challenge LA’s Flawed Medical Marijuana Regulations
From Llyod Pilchen on CALawBlog.com -
“Bewildered and angry describes the reactions of medical marijuana advocates and dispensary operators to the city’s eligibility list, released on August 25, 2010, indicating that only one in four dispensaries will be allowed to move forward in the approval process in the City of Los Angeles. The lopsided result raises profound questions about the city’s medical marijuana ordinance and its implementation, and is sure to multiply the many lawsuits against the city…”
Almost one hundred medical cannabis collective operators and patients protested in front of the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office on Tuesday morning, before going into City Hall to speak to the City Council. Advocates are outraged by the City Attorney’s decision to sue 135 collectives deemed ineligible to register under the new ordinance by the City Clerk’s office. Collective operators hold that the decision to exclude more than 75% of the legal collectives is based on a narrow interpretation of the law and incorrect facts.
The City Clerk maintains that there is no appeal process for administrative decisions about eligibility, and City Attorney Carmen Trutanich moved quickly to file suit against every ineligible collective – without regards to the individual facts of each case. Lawyers are lining up on both sides. Expect confusion and high legal bills for operators and taxpayers alike. A political solution looks unlikely. Councilmembers Huizar and Reyes told the LA Times they plan to sit this one out.
The City of Los Angles may be moving into the final stages of the four-year-old debate about permanent regulations for medical cannabis facilities in the city. Americans for Safe Access (ASA) expects the City Attorney’s office will send recommendations for the final ordinance to the Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee later this month. The draft ordinance was prepared by city staff after Councilmember Zine joined advocates in rejecting an ordinance submitted by former City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo in February. That measure regarded all sales of cannabis as illegal, and would have required every collective in the city to close.
Patients and advocates worry that newly-elected City Attorney Carmen Trutanich has yet to make any public comment repudiating his processor’s anti-medical cannabis position. In fact, Trutanich’s Senior Advisor Jane Usher told the Los Angeles Neighborhood Council Committee on August 1 that staff in her office could find no legal protection for sales of cannabis, even inside the membership of a legally organized and operated patients’ association.
On August 10, ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford and I joined representatives of the Greater Los Angeles Collective Alliance (GLACA) in an unprecedented meeting with Ms. Usher and two of the other top eight managers in Trutanich’s office to discuss regulatory solutions for the city. We presented the staff with a new White Paper published by ASA and GLACA and a draft ordinance based on input from the city’s defunct medical cannabis working group. The White Paper explains the justification for storefront collectives and sales of medicine within their membership. It also makes policy recommendations for the city’s final ordinance. Trutanich’s staff listened attentively and asked hard questions – both good signs, but the outcome is uncertain.
It is possible that Carmen Trutanich will disappoint the medical cannabis community, which rallied around his campaign earlier this year, when he returns recommendations to the PLUM Committee this month. If so, patients and advocates will have to work hard persuade committee members to reject his advice and stay the course on developing sensible regulations for Los Angeles. This is important not just because regulations are proven to reduce crime and complaints in communities, but also because they will finally set some standards in a city that has grappled for too long with how best to regulate access to medicine.
