Topic: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

The city has just released the 5th draft version of the ordinance regulating
medical marijuana collectives that will be discussed at Mondays joint
session (why not a bong session?) of the Public Safety and Planning and Land
Use Management (PLUM) committees.

The meeting starts at 8:30 at city hall, 200 No Spring Street and will be in
the council chambers. Only one hour is allotted for this meeting, the room
is booked at 9:30 for the regular Public Safety committee meeting.

5th revised draft of medical marijuana ordinance -
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/200 … -13-09.pdf

Report from the city attorney -
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/200 … -13-09.pdf

Monday meeting announcement/agenda -
http://ens.lacity.org/clk/committeeagen … 162009.pdf

Peace

brett

Re: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

The city has just released the 5th draft version of the ordinance regulating
medical marijuana collectives that will be discussed at Mondays joint
session (why not a bong session?) of the Public Safety and Planning and Land
Use Management (PLUM) committees.

The meeting starts at 8:30 at city hall, 200 No Spring Street and will be in
the council chambers. Only one hour is allotted for this meeting, the room
is booked at 9:30 for the regular Public Safety committee meeting.

5th revised draft of medical marijuana ordinance -
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/200 … -13-09.pdf

Report from the city attorney -
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/200 … -13-09.pdf

Monday meeting announcement/agenda -
http://ens.lacity.org/clk/committeeagen … 162009.pdf

Peace

brett

Los Angeles City Hall Information (213) 473-3231

District 1 - Ed Reyes
(213)-473-7001
Rm 410
councilmember.reyes@lacity.org

District 2 -
(213)-473-7002
Rm475
councildistrict2@lacity.org

District 3 - Dennis P. Zine
(213)-473-7003
Rm 450
councilmember.zine@lacity.org

District 4 - Tom LaBonge
(213)-473-7004
Rm 480
councilmember.Labonge@lacity.org

District 5 - Paul Koretz
(213)-473-7005
Rm 440
Paul.Koretz@lacity.org

District 6 - Tony Cardenas
(213) -473-7006
Rm 455
councilmember.cardenas@lacity.org

District 7 - Richard Alarcon
(213)-473-7007
Rm 425
councilmember.alarcon@lacity.org

District 8 - Bernard Parks
(213)-473-7008
Rm 460
councilmember.parks@lacity.org

District 9 - Jan Perry
(213)-473-7009
Rm 420
Jan.Perry@lacity.org

District 10 - Herb J. Wesson, Jr.
(213)-473-7010
Rm 430
councilmember.wesson@lacity.org

District 11 - Bill Rosendahl
(213)-473-7011
Rm 415
councilman.rosendahl@lacity.org

District 12 - Greig Smith
(213)-473-7012
Rm 405
councilmember.smith@lacity.org

District 13 - Eric Garcetti
(213)-473-7013
Rm 470
councilmember.garcetti@lacity.org

District 14 - Jose Huizar
(213)-473-7014
Rm 465
councilmember.huizar@lacity.org

District 15 - Janice Hahn
(213)-473-7015
Rm 435
councilmember.hahn@lacity.org

Re: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

lol, bong session.

Re: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

And why would it be relevant to cite to the Mentch case about CAREGIVERS when dispensaries are COOPS or COLLECTIVES?

And why would it be relevant to cite to PROP 215 when the collectives and coops derive their existence from SB 420?

How do sick people who need medicine now, say for pain or cancer, etc., get the medicine now?

Well, at least the initial privacy concerns of patients were addressed....but what about the LEGAL BRIEF justifying no sales? 

Are they referring to MENTCH?  It is not a LEGAL BRIEF supporting "no sales" in COOPS and COLLECTIVES it is an inapplicable DECISION of a court about CAREGIVERS.

Why not staple on excerpts from the MANSON case too, just to add to the REEFER MADNESS!!!!!!!!

/in this post, rage and capitalization abuse/

Last edited by 420lawoffice (2009-11-14 09:18:19)

Re: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

check out paragraph 8 of section B in the new ordinance: "No medical marijuana collective shall possess more than 5 pounds of dried marijuana or more than 100 plants of any size at the location. No collective shall possess or provide marijuana other than marijuana that was cultivated by the collective: (a) at the location or (b) at the collective's previous location if that previous location was registered and operated in strict accordance with this article;"

If that passes, it will drive prices through the roof!

Re: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

Our city attorney likes to bring up what the voter pamphlet in 1998 said on the pro side of 215 but no one ever mentions what the con side said. Here it is:
"Propositon 215 legalizes marijuana.
Vote no. It allows people to grow and
smoke marijuana for stress or ''any
other illness." No written prescription
or examination is required, even
children can smoke pot legally.

The American Cancer Society
rejects smoking marijuana for medical
purposes and no major doctor's
organization supports 215."

Re: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

We need to start saying safe and affordable access. If this passes, the supply will far outweigh the demand. Has anyone done a reliable study on that? How many patients are there in LA? How much medicine might they need in a year? How many collectives with the limits of 100 plants and 5 pounds be needed to serve those patients?

Re: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

About 2500 collectives.

Or

About 1000 gangs that sell drugs as an illegal enterprise. All the burden of this is going to make it a big payday for gangs.
WTG LA! Now that's a can of RAID for every patient. Or 100's of 9mm handguns and a few machine guns.

Take away all the angels and all that's left is devils. Such short sighted action. The rush to action creates foolish rules that just increase all the problem the city has been complaining about. sad

Re: Here's the 5th Draft Ordinance from the City Attorney

Los Angeles Times Blog from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2 … sales.html

L.A. City Council panels reject ban on medical marijuana sales
November 16, 2009 |  3:17 pm

Rejecting the advice of the city attorney, two Los Angeles City Council committees voted today to scrap a proposed provision that would have banned the sale of medical marijuana.

The controversial measure, first proposed a year and a half ago, delayed deliberations as council members debated the wisdom of ignoring the opinion of the city's top prosecutor. But about four hours into a raucous hearing, council members made it clear they were ready to move on.

"When can we finally stop the merry-go-round?" said Councilman Dennis Zine, who kicked off the City Council's consideration of the issue in 2005 when concerns about dispensaries first surfaced. He proposed an alternative provision that would allow dispensaries to accept cash for marijuana as long as they comply with state law.

William Carter, the chief deputy city attorney, repeatedly argued that state law and state court decisions make it clear that collectives can cultivate medical marijuana but not sell it. "We're stuck with the current law," he said.

But Zine urged the council members to adopt an interpretation of the law that would not upend how dispensaries operate in Los Angeles and most of the state. "I'm saying let's push that to the edge," he said.

After the members of the planning committee and Public Safety Committee voted, David Berger, a special assistant to City Atty. Carmen Trutanich, said it is up to the council to decide whether to accept the office's legal advice. "Our duty is to advise them on what the law allows for and not to go on a whim," he said. "They decided to go a different way."

Councilman Ed Reyes, who has overseen most of the council's consideration of the issue, expressed exasperation with the city attorney's office. "I think they are very, very narrow in that they're taking their prosecutorial perspective," he said.

The long-delayed measure could be taken up by the full council as soon as Wednesday. "We need something on the books now. There is no reason why we should delay," Reyes said.

Four years ago, when the City Council first began to look into regulating dispensaries, there were four. A year later, there were 98. In 2007, when the city adopted a moratorium, 186 dispensaries were allowed to remain in business. Now, the city attorney's office estimates there could be as many as a thousand spread throughout the city, and heavily concentrated in some neighborhoods.

At the hearing, scores of dispensary operators and marijuana users argued that the proposed ban would force them to close. "It simply won't work," said Don Duncan, a Los Angeles resident who is the California director of Americans for Safe Access.

A vote for a sales ban would have taken Los Angeles into uncharted legal territory. Duncan's organization and the Union of Medical Marijuana Patients threatened to sue the city if the council adopted the provision, arguing that the city attorney's opinion was flawed.

About 400 people crowded into the main council chamber for the hearing. Most of the speakers were supporters of medical marijuana who became increasingly rowdy. They repeatedly interrupted the handful of neighborhood activists who spoke, urging the adoption of an ordinance that would reduce the number of dispensaries and clamp down on operations that create nuisances.

"Do the right thing. Protect your community. You're going to get sued anyway," said James O'Sullivan with the Miracle Mile Residential Assn.

-- John Hoeffel at City Hall (c) Los Angeles Times