Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca suggested the killings may be linked to drug cartels last week. At a Senate committee hearing on Tuesday, California Assemblymember Joan Buchanan (D-Alamo) used newspaper clippings of last week’s shootings to win support for a bill that will mandate a 600-foot buffer zone between collectives and schools statewide (AB 2650). And now, Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich is calling for a ban on collectives in unincorporated areas of the county. This would overturn the counties 2006 ordinance regulating the facilities.

The political fallout from the violence in Los Angeles will be significant for local efforts to regulate safe access this year, and may also be a factor in statewide legislation next year. The controversy will also be a part of the debate about Proposition 19, which will allow local jurisdictions to tax and regulate non-medical cannabis. Advocates will have to overcome normal emotional reactions to violence like this, as well as cynical efforts to use these tragedies for political ends, to be sure we do not lose important political ground.

“Annoyed by how medical marijuana clinics have abused the law, Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant on Friday denied a flurry of requests for temporary restraining orders to stop Los Angeles from enforcing its new medical marijuana ordinance on Monday…”

Read Tony Anderson’s entire story online.

Judge David P. Yaffe

The LA Times reports that Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe has denied a request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that would have blocked enforcement of the new medical cannabis ordinance against hundreds of collectives that opened after the Los Angeles city Council adopted a moratorium on new facilities in 2007. The plaintiffs hoped to stop the city from closing the post moratorium collectives when the city’s tough new ordinance takes effect on June 7.

The City Attorney’s office should not take too much comfort in today’s victory. This is probably one of many legal skirmishes that will result from implementation of the regulations. Americans for Safe Access (ASA) filed a lawsuit challenging due process violations in March, and an administrative appeal of parking and nonconforming use issues raised by the Zoning Administrator last week. Other individuals, collectives, and organizations vow additional challenges. Each side can expect to win and lose a few of these cases, but the City of Los Angeles will spend time and money fighting each at a time when city resources are scare. It remains to be seen how long the City Council will hold out before making reasonable concessions to patients and providers.

The legal confusion surrounding Los Angeles’ implementation should be a warning to other jurisdictions writing regulations right now. Some law enforcement and elected officials want to use the regulatory process as a way to roll back the Compassionate Use Act. That is the wrong approach. Cities and counties should heed the voters’ mandate “to implement a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana.”  Otherwise, they will also face a determined grassroots base committed to holding onto the progress we have made since 1996. Stirring up that constituency will mean more controversy, bad media, wasted resources, and even more legal challenges.

In Palm Springs, city staff addressed the same issue with a compromise. Collectives there can divide their square footage based on retail and manufacturing (cultivation) uses, and benefit from the lower parking requirement for manufacturing. That is a common sense solution that balances the needs of the collective with those of the neighborhood. Unfortunately, the Zoning Administrator’s interpretation for Los Angeles requires that the 1/200 ratio be applied to “all activities of the collective.”  

The interpretation also echoes Section 45.19.6.7 of the new ordinance in denying legal prior nonconforming use status to collectives that registered before the city’s moratorium took effect in 2007. This controversial provision of the ordinance may yet generate litigation from collectives unable to meet the city’s tight deadlines and tough restrictions.

Stakeholders have until May 21 to appeal the Zoning Administrator’s determination to the Planning Department.

Mayor Villaraigosa

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa  signed the final version of the city’s new medical cannabis ordinance on April 30. The state’s toughest regulations become effective on June 7. The City Attorney’s office sent letters to hundreds of collectives deemed in violation of the ordinance this week. The letters threaten civil and criminal penalties if the collectives remain open after the effective date. Time will tell if the city has the resources and political will to send in the police department to enforce its threats.

Collectives qualified to register under the ordinance are breathing only a little easier. Restrictions on where collectives can be located and on how many be in any one of the city’s thirty five Community Plan Areas mean that virtually all of the qualified collectives must relocate in short order. In response to a lawsuit filed by Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the city dropped a requirement that collectives provide their new address within seven days of the effective date. This is only a minor reprieve, however. All of the qualified collectives must complete a thorough (and expensive) pre-inspection process at their new address within thirty days after the city publishes the “priority list” of qualified candidates.

A handful of collectives will find suitable properties and jump through bureaucratic hoops in time to register under the ordinance, but it is unlikely that it will be the maximum number of seventy allowed. This is good news for compliance-minded collectives that are not qualified to register in the first round. Those that can wait six months to enter lotteries may still find an opening in one of the Community Plan Areas.

The Byzantine timelines and other restrictions in this ordinance have already generated litigation. Expect that to continue as qualified and un-qualified collectives run up against deadlines, unworkable restrictions, and regulations that violate their rights and common sense.