LA City Council denies hardships
Wednesday, June 10th, 2009The Los Angeles City Council quickly denied fourteen hardship applications today for medical cannabis collectives that opened or relocated since the city adopted a moratorium on new facilities in September of 2007. Observers expected a hard line from Councilmembers, who have come under increasing pressure from neighborhood groups and media in light of the proliferation and clustering of new collectives under the moratorium.
I joined five Councilmembers at a press conference before the meeting, where they reiterated their commitment to protecting safe access and enforcing local law. Councilmembers Zine, Hahn, Huizar, Reyes, and Garcetti all answered pointed questions from media and promised an aggressive response to the neighborhood concerns. Councilmember Zine also acknowledged the work of Americans for Safe Access (ASA) by name, thanking them for diligent work in promoting sensible regulations.
The City Council later approved a motion by Councilmember Huizar to remove the controversial hardship provision, and surprised advocates by extending the city’s moratorium on new facilities for another six months. The provisions will take effect when the City Council votes on a new ordinance next week. Councilmember Huizar said that staff needs more time to craft permanent regulations. City staff reassured concerned advocates that the extension was legal – despite the fact that it exceeds the usual two-year limit for urgency ordinances.
Observers were surprised to hear strong words of support for medical cannabis and cannabis law reform from Councilmember Alarcon, who has so far been silent on the topic. Councilmembers Zine, Rosendahl, Huizar, Reyes, LaBonge, and Hahn also rose in vigorous support of medical cannabis – and all worried aloud about abuse of the system. Councilmember-elect Paul Koretz will replace outgoing Councilmember Weiss, an opponent of safe access, as a solid pro-access vote in July. The growing cadre of medical cannabis supporters on the City Council means sensible regulations are almost certain to be adopted (when they are finally finished). Only Councilmembers Smith and Parks rose today to oppose the Council’s pro-medical cannabis agenda.
Hardship applicants would fare no better in hearings before the Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee later this afternoon. The committee denied one application after cursory testimony. Chairman Reyes continued a second hearing so that Councilmember Rosendahl’s office could confirm the applicant’s claim that the collective was not already open, and therefore, not in violation of the moratorium.
Today’s press conference and 15-0 scorecard make it clear that the City Council and PLUM Committee sent a message to hundreds of hardship applicants awaiting hearings. The rapid proliferation and anecdotal reports of bad behavior have generated a backlash against which applicants must fight. For most, the outcome is likely to be bad. This is especially unfortunate for the unknown number of collectives that registered with the City Clerk before the moratorium, but later relocated as a result of federal intimidation.
The City of Sacramento is the latest in California to see a proliferation of new storefronts maintained by legal medical cannabis collectives and cooperatives. More than twenty are reportedly operating there now – most of which opened within the last six months. The expansion of safe access is good news for patients suffering from HIV/AIDS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, and other serious conditions. But advocates and elected officials there worry that the rapid expansion in safe access may lead to public ambivalence, possibly even a backlash, in a city where medical cannabis collectives have thus far operated without much controversy.