The coalition, which sought to challenge city pot ordinance that would cap the number of stores at 70, is seeking a deadline extension after saying it failed to collect enough valid signatures.
A group of Los Angeles medical marijuana dispensaries appeared to have failed to collect enough signatures by Monday's deadline to force a referendum on the city's new pot ordinance but asked for an extension to continue circulating the petition.
Dan Halbert, operator of Rainforest Collective in Mar Vista and the principal organizer, said the coalition of collectives gathered about 30,000 signatures but determined that only about 14,200 appeared valid. The collectives need at least 27,425 signatures for the referendum to qualify.
An exhausted Halbert, accompanied by his lawyer and a friend who said he has never smoked marijuana, wheeled eight boxes of petitions into the city's elections division office, lining them up on the counter.
Election officials will count the signatures and, if the number meets the minimum required, they will check a random sample to see if enough are valid. If the referendum qualifies, the City Council must rescind the law or put it on a ballot.
Halbert and his lawyer, Nathan V. Hoffman, handed a letter to Arleen P. Taylor, chief of the elections division, requesting a 10-day extension. They said it took city officials that long to approve the petition, cutting into the 30 days allowed to file it. "They were slow, dragging their heels to my client's detriment," Hoffman said.
City officials, consulting their own timeline, said they approved the petition in six days, explaining that some of the delays occurred because pages of the petition were missing or out of order.
Taylor politely told Halbert she would reply to his request in writing, but election officials also said the City Charter has no provision that would allow them to grant such an extension.
"It's supposed to be a peoples referendum, but it's not. The average person would not be able to do it without big funding," said Halbert, citing the limited time he had to draft a petition, print it and circulate it. "It affects all of our rights as citizens of Los Angeles to stop something the City Council wants to do."
The city's medical marijuana ordinance will cap the number of stores at 70 but exempts those that registered with the city in 2007. City officials estimate that will allow no more than 128.
Halbert, who moved to Los Angeles from Phoenix to get into the business, is one of hundreds of operators who would be forced to close under the ordinance. Despite the threat to their businesses, many operators were wary about becoming involved, concerned about drawing the attention of police and city enforcement inspectors.
Halbert, who said he spent between $20,000 and $30,000 on the effort, was discouraged that more collectives did not rally around the petition drive until the final days. "I'm disappointed in the process, and I'm disappointed in, obviously, the coalition," he said. "There were some players in it, but just not as many as needed."
Halbert said he did not expect the city to grant an extension and said he would review his legal options.
Source: Los Angeles Times
If you know of an event that you feel should be listed on our calendar, please send details to info@mjdispensaries.com ~Thank You
Showing posts with label la medical marijuana. Show all posts
Showing posts with label la medical marijuana. Show all posts
Monday, March 15, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
NEWS: L.A. officials propose fees for medical marijuana dispensaries
Filling in the last blank in the city's medical marijuana ordinance, Los Angeles officials Friday recommended a number of fees dispensaries would have to pay to operate. Although the City Council passed the law in January, it cannot take effect until the council approves the fees.
In addition to standard charges for inspections and research, officials have proposed special fees that would total about $1,200 for a manager registering an existing dispensary.
Councilman Ed Reyes said he hopes to send the proposal straight to the council to speed up the process.
Even so, the ordinance is unlikely to take effect until May, almost a year after the uncontrolled spread of pot shops outraged neighborhood activists and spurred the council to move on the languishing issue.
The ordinance is needed to give city officials the power to crack down on dispensaries, Reyes said, adding that the council's attention has shifted.
"The spotlight seems to have dimmed," he said.
Medical marijuana advocates said the proposed fees sounded reasonable.
"They got one thing right," said Yamileth Bolanos, a dispensary operator who is president of the Greater Los Angeles Collectives Alliance and who has sued the city over the controversial ordinance.
Reyes said he was surprised the amount was so low and promised to examine whether it reflects the city's costs, adding that employees may have to work overtime to register the dispensaries.
Under the proposal, applicants would pay the Los Angeles Police Department $151 each to perform criminal background checks to ensure they have not been convicted of a felony in the last 10 years.
Each would have to pay $324 to the city clerk to review the registration and $688 to the Building and Safety Department for pre-inspection. Every three months, each would be required to update the registration and pay $140 to the department.
The proposed fees are low compared to those in other major cities.
San Francisco, for example, charges $8,470 for an application permit and $3,933 for a license and reinspection.
The city report also recommends that the ordinance be revised to require dispensary managers to submit completed background checks at the same time as their registrations.
The report notes that it can take six to eight weeks to complete that process and recommends notifying dispensary operators to start right away.
Joe Elford, the chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access, a medical marijuana advocacy group that has sued Los Angeles over its ordinance, questioned how the council could require that before the law is in effect.
Reyes said he was puzzled by that proposal and promised to look into it.
Source: Los Angeles Times
In addition to standard charges for inspections and research, officials have proposed special fees that would total about $1,200 for a manager registering an existing dispensary.
Councilman Ed Reyes said he hopes to send the proposal straight to the council to speed up the process.
Even so, the ordinance is unlikely to take effect until May, almost a year after the uncontrolled spread of pot shops outraged neighborhood activists and spurred the council to move on the languishing issue.
The ordinance is needed to give city officials the power to crack down on dispensaries, Reyes said, adding that the council's attention has shifted.
"The spotlight seems to have dimmed," he said.
Medical marijuana advocates said the proposed fees sounded reasonable.
"They got one thing right," said Yamileth Bolanos, a dispensary operator who is president of the Greater Los Angeles Collectives Alliance and who has sued the city over the controversial ordinance.
Reyes said he was surprised the amount was so low and promised to examine whether it reflects the city's costs, adding that employees may have to work overtime to register the dispensaries.
Under the proposal, applicants would pay the Los Angeles Police Department $151 each to perform criminal background checks to ensure they have not been convicted of a felony in the last 10 years.
Each would have to pay $324 to the city clerk to review the registration and $688 to the Building and Safety Department for pre-inspection. Every three months, each would be required to update the registration and pay $140 to the department.
The proposed fees are low compared to those in other major cities.
San Francisco, for example, charges $8,470 for an application permit and $3,933 for a license and reinspection.
The city report also recommends that the ordinance be revised to require dispensary managers to submit completed background checks at the same time as their registrations.
The report notes that it can take six to eight weeks to complete that process and recommends notifying dispensary operators to start right away.
Joe Elford, the chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access, a medical marijuana advocacy group that has sued Los Angeles over its ordinance, questioned how the council could require that before the law is in effect.
Reyes said he was puzzled by that proposal and promised to look into it.
Source: Los Angeles Times
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
NEWS: Medical Marijuana Faces Obstacles In LA
Despite sharp criticism and the threat of litigation on Tuesday, the LA City Council formally approved an ordinance that will close an estimated 800 medical marijuana collectives in the city.
Between 70 and 186 dispensaries would be allowed to remain open under new restrictions, though more than 75% of those would have to relocate. Opponents of the ordinance say these restrictions infringe on the right to the safe access afforded medical marijuana patients under the Compassionate Use Act of 1996
"Clearly you all don't understand," attorney Jennifer Sores told the City Council, "This is medicine. So treat it like medicine."
The new restrictions require dispensaries to locate far from churches, public schools, rehab centers and other "sensitive use" areas. Other stipulations in the ordinance include that dispensaries keep security footage on file for long periods, confine patients to membership at a single collective, require specific ID cards and offer patients' contact information to law enforcement without a subpoena.
Graham Berry, an attorney representing several of the dispensaries that may be forced to close, suggested that these restrictions imply that marijuana is being regulated as a dangerous or criminal substance rather than something with genuine medical uses.
"The needs of this particular medical group and patients should not be treated like gambling, sex, and liquor stores," said Berry. "Please stop playing politics with patients' rights and health."
While the ordinance ostensibly clarifies the use of marijuana as a medical substance under California state law, its provisions take more from the federal stance on marijuana as a criminal substance. There appears to be real confusion as to whether the city is regulating marijuana as medicine or a controlled substance and some ambiguity in the ordinance as to whether its users (as recommended by MDs) ought to be considered real patients or potential criminals.
One of the major problems with the ordinance, according to City Councilman Bill Rosenthal and others, is that it may not even help to reduce marijuana's role in criminal activity.
"Somewhere in the '80s," Rosendahl said, "the federal government turned [marijuana] into this thing worse than any other drug out there and then they began filling the jails. We saw gangs go from community neighborhood interactions into a serious territory marijuana distribution operation, and so funds would come in and they would enhance one's gang membership. What do they do? They fight with each other over territory in the selling of drugs."
Other LA residents agreed with Rosenthal's sentiment.
"If you want to keep crime off the streets," said Los Angeles resident Karen Elizabeth during public comment. "Keep the dispensaries open."
Mark Herd, a member of the Westwood neighborhood council, also urged the council to consider medical marijuana in the same way as other medicines, and protested that the ordinance's location restrictions would leave no dispensaries in Brentwood, the Pacific Palisades, Westwood and many other areas of the City.
"Bill Rosendahl," Herd said, "understands that we need more than one Walgreen's in Venice."
Source: The Huffington Post
Between 70 and 186 dispensaries would be allowed to remain open under new restrictions, though more than 75% of those would have to relocate. Opponents of the ordinance say these restrictions infringe on the right to the safe access afforded medical marijuana patients under the Compassionate Use Act of 1996
"Clearly you all don't understand," attorney Jennifer Sores told the City Council, "This is medicine. So treat it like medicine."
The new restrictions require dispensaries to locate far from churches, public schools, rehab centers and other "sensitive use" areas. Other stipulations in the ordinance include that dispensaries keep security footage on file for long periods, confine patients to membership at a single collective, require specific ID cards and offer patients' contact information to law enforcement without a subpoena.
Graham Berry, an attorney representing several of the dispensaries that may be forced to close, suggested that these restrictions imply that marijuana is being regulated as a dangerous or criminal substance rather than something with genuine medical uses.
"The needs of this particular medical group and patients should not be treated like gambling, sex, and liquor stores," said Berry. "Please stop playing politics with patients' rights and health."
While the ordinance ostensibly clarifies the use of marijuana as a medical substance under California state law, its provisions take more from the federal stance on marijuana as a criminal substance. There appears to be real confusion as to whether the city is regulating marijuana as medicine or a controlled substance and some ambiguity in the ordinance as to whether its users (as recommended by MDs) ought to be considered real patients or potential criminals.
One of the major problems with the ordinance, according to City Councilman Bill Rosenthal and others, is that it may not even help to reduce marijuana's role in criminal activity.
"Somewhere in the '80s," Rosendahl said, "the federal government turned [marijuana] into this thing worse than any other drug out there and then they began filling the jails. We saw gangs go from community neighborhood interactions into a serious territory marijuana distribution operation, and so funds would come in and they would enhance one's gang membership. What do they do? They fight with each other over territory in the selling of drugs."
Other LA residents agreed with Rosenthal's sentiment.
"If you want to keep crime off the streets," said Los Angeles resident Karen Elizabeth during public comment. "Keep the dispensaries open."
Mark Herd, a member of the Westwood neighborhood council, also urged the council to consider medical marijuana in the same way as other medicines, and protested that the ordinance's location restrictions would leave no dispensaries in Brentwood, the Pacific Palisades, Westwood and many other areas of the City.
"Bill Rosendahl," Herd said, "understands that we need more than one Walgreen's in Venice."
Source: The Huffington Post
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Los Angeles and Long Beach to continue talks on medical marijuana dispensaries
Tuesday, January 19, 2010, looks to be a busy day in Southern California for the medical marijuana community and local government as two cities continue discussions on their medical marijuana ordinances.
First stop, Los Angeles:
City Council Meeting at 10:00am
200 North Spring St. [map]
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(213) 485-2121
Followed by, Long Beach:
City Council Meeting at 4:00pm
Council Chamber/Lounge
333 W. Ocean Blvd. [map]
Long Beach, CA 90802
Safe access to alternative medicine needs to become a reality, not just something that is talked about. There are too many people that suffer, while a minority gets to decide how much suffering they will inflict.
It is good to know, however, that both Long Beach and Los Angeles have some open minded individuals on their councils who recognize this challenge and are a voice of reason and a mouthpiece for the sick and the suffering.
Show your support for your family, friends and community by attending one or both events.
If there is anything on your mind that you may want to share with the council, then be sure to fill out a speaker/comment card before the meeting and speak your mind "respectfully" when your time comes.
First stop, Los Angeles:
City Council Meeting at 10:00am
200 North Spring St. [map]
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(213) 485-2121
Followed by, Long Beach:
City Council Meeting at 4:00pm
Council Chamber/Lounge
333 W. Ocean Blvd. [map]
Long Beach, CA 90802
Safe access to alternative medicine needs to become a reality, not just something that is talked about. There are too many people that suffer, while a minority gets to decide how much suffering they will inflict.
It is good to know, however, that both Long Beach and Los Angeles have some open minded individuals on their councils who recognize this challenge and are a voice of reason and a mouthpiece for the sick and the suffering.
Show your support for your family, friends and community by attending one or both events.
If there is anything on your mind that you may want to share with the council, then be sure to fill out a speaker/comment card before the meeting and speak your mind "respectfully" when your time comes.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
URGENT: All available LA activists should be at the LA City Council tomorrow -- Wednesday -- at 10:00 am - 200 N. Spring St., Room 340.
In a seven hour session, on Tuesday, the full council reviewed all the current amendments to the proposed regulations for medical marijuana dispenaries. Everything was going very well --
Then at literally the last minute, two councilmembers from the south side complained about proposed zoning that called for dispensary locations to be at least 500 feet from any residential area. They wanted to change that to 1000 feet -- which in Los Angeles makes locating anywhere other than a steel mill or railroad yard almost impossible.
Councilmen Bill Rosendahl said if this measure was included it would mean almost every dispenary in the city would be shut down. The business districts in Los Angeles are scattered throughout residential areas -- often separated from houses by a single street. He said there was not a single dispenary in his District that could remain open under that rule.
Councilman Koretz said the amendment would destroy all the work that we've done on this issue over the last 5 years. He said the regulations would not function and would throw the whole business back into the black market.
Councilman Garcetti agreed.
Then for reasons yet to be determined, everyone else suddenly deserted us. The 1000 foot rule was adopted by the majority and it's now officially in the proposed final regulations.
THE PROPOSAL WILL BE VOTED ON TODAY!
We must defeat this amendment. If you're in town, whatever else you're doing, forget it. Come to City Hall, 200 N. Spring St., Room 340 at 10:00 am. If we fill the Council Chambers like we did two weeks ago we may have an impact. Nothing impresses skittish politicians like a full house.
This one counts. Please be there!
Mike Gray
Common Sense for Drug Policy
Then at literally the last minute, two councilmembers from the south side complained about proposed zoning that called for dispensary locations to be at least 500 feet from any residential area. They wanted to change that to 1000 feet -- which in Los Angeles makes locating anywhere other than a steel mill or railroad yard almost impossible.
Councilmen Bill Rosendahl said if this measure was included it would mean almost every dispenary in the city would be shut down. The business districts in Los Angeles are scattered throughout residential areas -- often separated from houses by a single street. He said there was not a single dispenary in his District that could remain open under that rule.
Councilman Koretz said the amendment would destroy all the work that we've done on this issue over the last 5 years. He said the regulations would not function and would throw the whole business back into the black market.
Councilman Garcetti agreed.
Then for reasons yet to be determined, everyone else suddenly deserted us. The 1000 foot rule was adopted by the majority and it's now officially in the proposed final regulations.
THE PROPOSAL WILL BE VOTED ON TODAY!
We must defeat this amendment. If you're in town, whatever else you're doing, forget it. Come to City Hall, 200 N. Spring St., Room 340 at 10:00 am. If we fill the Council Chambers like we did two weeks ago we may have an impact. Nothing impresses skittish politicians like a full house.
This one counts. Please be there!
Mike Gray
Common Sense for Drug Policy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
