This story is from the Lassen County Times web site and can be found here: www.lassennews.com
Supes extend marijuana moratoria
June 22, 2010 — Those who profit from medical marijuana cultivation and distribution should not expect a friendly welcome in Lassen County.
Lassen County’s Board of Supervisors held a public hearing, received a staff report and unanimously approved extending the moratoria prohibiting medical marijuana cultivation and dispensaries in the unincorporated areas of Lassen County for another 10 months and 15 days on Tuesday, June 15.
The board originally approved the 45-day moratoria following a study session held at Jensen Hall on Tuesday, May 11. The board also discussed the issue at its meetings on Tuesday, April 11 and Tuesday, April 27.
The public hearing was required to extend the moratoria, and the board could extend the moratoria for another year as long as the total length of time does not exceed two years.
According to the staff report, “Extension of these moratoria will allow staff an opportunity to continue review of regulatory policies/procedures. In addition, this hearing will provide feedback from the board and the public in regard to various options staff has analyzed. It is also anticipated that some of the options under review can be eliminated as a result of this hearing, thus saving staff time and money analyzing options that are not viable.”
County staff claims the cultivation and distribution of medical marijuana within the county is a “land use issue” that should be regulated through the appropriate zoning process.
According to the staff report, “ … even prior to the adoption of the urgency ordinances, medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation were not allowed in Lassen County because they are not defined in Lassen County Code Title 18 (Ordinance 467), and have never been an allowed use, by right or by use permit in Lassen County. As such, existing dispensaries/cultivation are not considered nonconforming (e.g are not ‘grandfathered in’) because they were not legally established.
“Lassen County Code Chapter 18.20 (non-conforming uses) states that only the ‘lawful use of land existing on the effective date of an ordinance’ is considered non-conforming and may be allowed to continue. Staff is working with the appropriate departments/agencies to determine if there were medical marijuana dispensaries and/or cultivation operations in place prior to the establishment of the moratoria and to determine the appropriate action if operations were established illegally.”
Differing opinions
A number of different opinions arose during a public hearing on the moratoria that lasted nearly an hour.
Both District 4 Supervisor Brian Dahle and District 2 Supervisor Jim Chapman thought county staff was going to investigate the Los Angeles municipal ordinance regulating marijuana dispensaries because it apparently is the one experts say will most likely withstand challenges in court.
That ordinance went into effect on Monday, June 7 and permits only 100 medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles and regulates locations where they can be located.
Chapman said during his research, he’s discovered the city of Los Angeles’s model seemed to be the best one around.
Dahle said he had even provided county staff with a copy of the Los Angeles ordinance.
Maurice Anderson, director of the Lassen County Department of Planning and Building Services, said county staff was studying other counties and legal cases as they moved forward, especially those that deal with zoning issues, but it was not looking at Los Angeles.
According to Chapman, based on his research during the past two or three months, the city of Los Angeles is “the best model in addressing the issue of providing for fairness, protection and you name it.”
Despite its strengths, the Los Angeles model has come under attack in the courts.
According to NORML, a nonprofit lobbying organization working to legalize marijuana, “To date, more than 20 lawsuits have been filed against the city (of Los Angeles) arguing that the ordinance is unconstitutional because it prohibits patients' access and infringes upon state law. Under the ordinance, unlicensed facilities determined to be dispensing medical marijuana could face daily fines, a $1,000 penalty and six months in jail.”
Local medical marijuana users also allege the county’s moratoria infringe upon their rights.
Anne Westerbeck asked the board to make a reasonable consideration for medical marijuana users so she and other medical marijuana users could cultivate their own marijuana.
“I still do not understand, nor do I have answers,” Westerbeck said. “I have called at least three times to staff and no one can give me a definitive answer if I, as a medical marijuana patient, can continue to have the right in Lassen County to grow my medical marijuana which I am doing currently with a small collective. So there’s still no definitive answer from staff although we say we have a moratorium on cultivation … I’m appealing to the council to consider a reasonable regulation to satisfy everyone’s need … ”
Westerbeck asked if she had a right to cultivate her medical marijuana.
“Will somebody on staff answer that?” said District 1 Supervisor and Chairman Bob Pyle.
“With the moratoria in place, you would not be in compliance to cultivate marijuana or to distribute marijuana for medical purposes,” said Craig Settlemire, Lassen County counsel.
“I guess your answer’s no, that’s what I’m hearing,” Pyle said.
“Perhaps it is no from a staff member,” Westerbeck said, “but I don’t know if that’s a no from the supervisors because at the last meeting at Jensen Hall, that was not the answer I got.”
“I wrote down her question,” Settlemire said. “Her question was, ‘Do you have the right to grow medical marijuana for your own use in Lassen County?’ The answer to that, under the moratoria that’s currently in place, no you do not.”
“Well, maybe you should come out and arrest me,” Westerbeck said. “I’ve got them, and I’m willing to go to jail over it, but I think that’s against my 215 rights.”
Chapman said the board’s intent during the Jensen Hall meeting was not to restrict individuals from growing their own personal medical marijuana.
“The issue before the board is whether Proposition 215 or Senate Bill 420 have any validity as far as state law is concerned. Obviously there’s inconsistencies with federal law in terms of how they relate to both of those actions … ”
Chapman noted the federal attorney general, Eric Holder, has decided not to enforce federal marijuana laws in states that have approved medical marijuana if the users comply with state law.
“In this case, Prop 215 makes it very clear the voters have said medical marijuana use and the growing of medical marijuana for your own personal use is kind of a permitted activity under that context.”
But Chapman said the collectives and co-ops that did “large scale growing” were a different issue.
“That’s a lot different than personal use under Prop 215,” Chapman said. “So in that particular context, I think the moratoria we’re acting on, at least my understanding of it, if for group action as opposed to individual action. So if somebody asked me if the moratoria affected somebody doing something on their own, for themselves, by themselves, I don’t see that as being the effect of the moratoria. That’s not so much a land use issue as the collective activity might otherwise be … ”
District 3 Supervisor Lloyd Keefer said he agreed there was a difference between commercial use and personal use.
“I don’t think it was our intent to restrict the permitted use under Prop 215, and I don’t sense from the community out there that that’s a real big issue. If somebody has a legitimate need, a legitimate reason for medical use of marijuana, that’s a personal thing. They ought to be able to grow their plants and do that. But once they step beyond that and it becomes a commercial issue, then that’s where I think we tread on the zoning issue.”
“Our issue is how do we take the newly defined rights the state has granted and blend them with all the existing rights everybody else has,” Chapman said. “Just because the state says you can have medical marijuana doesn’t mean that those rights can trample the peace, safety, comfort, morals and happiness of everybody else’s rights.”
“The pros and cons (of medial marijuana) are over,” said Dahle. “We need to do is zoning.”
Craig Newton reminded the supervisors of the problems created by marijuana, especially among high school aged users.
“The illegal, illicit production of it is so lucrative, if you allow it in this county it’s going to be controlled by huge, enormous drug cartels,” Newton said. “Yeah, you’re going to be sued. And guess who’s going to fund the lawsuits against you? Drug cartels. Illicit sales of marijuana. That’s whom you’re fighting against. But if you don’t fight it, what happens to us? Do we end up like Afghanistan growing marijuana and winding up in stark poverty because the morals in our community will just plummet into the dust? That’s the problem. The problem is the illicit use. If you can’t control it, you can’t allow it. And we don’t have the resources to control it.”
Lassen County Sheriff Steve Warren continued his opposition to all types of marijuana.
“At the risk of getting beat up again on these long narratives on the marijuana blogs and letters from Mr. Heinz, there are a few things I’d like to say,” Warren said. “You’re here for the zoning issues, the enforcement of the zoning laws. You’re here for the collectives, the cooperatives and the distribution of marijuana in the county. We can’t ignore the idea that it is medical marijuana we’re talking about.”
But Warren said The Compassionate Use Act is totally different than commercial operations. And he said the attorney general’s opinions are simply opinions until they’re tested in a court of law.
“Clearly I have an opinion on marijuana use,” Warren said. “I’m not biased at all. It’s an absolutely illegal substance, and it will be until the Supreme Court tells me different, and as long as I’m the sheriff, it’s still going to be illegal. That’s not bias. That is a fact … It’s going to be a nuisance, it’s a nuisance right now, it’s enforceable right now, and the moratorium should be approved and then entertain whatever the ordinance is going to be. You guys can probably guess from what I’m saying right now where I’m going to stand on that.”
Warren said his department has never kicked anyone’s door down and arrested someone for using medical marijuana under Prop 215. He said the moratoria under consideration do not affect the medical marijuana users who grow plants for themselves.
“Cultivation, whether it’s commercial or mass or volume or collective or dispensary — that’s what this is about,” Warren said. “There’s no place for that here.”
Warren said he’s concerned about “the profiteers” who are making money on marijuana in Lassen County.
Six options
County staff presented six options to the board: Do nothing after the moratorium expires; allow dispensaries to operate under the current zoning ordinance; amend the zoning ordinance to define medical marijuana; amend the zoning ordinance and adopt a regulatory ordinance to define where and how medical marijuana would be allowed; establish a new combining district; and, ban all medical marijuana dispensaries and/or cultivation as an activity that is not a permitted use.
The board did not approve any of these options and directed county staff to review the way Los Angeles County is dealing with medical marijuana.
Supes extend marijuana moratoria
June 22, 2010 — Those who profit from medical marijuana cultivation and distribution should not expect a friendly welcome in Lassen County.
Lassen County’s Board of Supervisors held a public hearing, received a staff report and unanimously approved extending the moratoria prohibiting medical marijuana cultivation and dispensaries in the unincorporated areas of Lassen County for another 10 months and 15 days on Tuesday, June 15.
The board originally approved the 45-day moratoria following a study session held at Jensen Hall on Tuesday, May 11. The board also discussed the issue at its meetings on Tuesday, April 11 and Tuesday, April 27.
The public hearing was required to extend the moratoria, and the board could extend the moratoria for another year as long as the total length of time does not exceed two years.
According to the staff report, “Extension of these moratoria will allow staff an opportunity to continue review of regulatory policies/procedures. In addition, this hearing will provide feedback from the board and the public in regard to various options staff has analyzed. It is also anticipated that some of the options under review can be eliminated as a result of this hearing, thus saving staff time and money analyzing options that are not viable.”
County staff claims the cultivation and distribution of medical marijuana within the county is a “land use issue” that should be regulated through the appropriate zoning process.
According to the staff report, “ … even prior to the adoption of the urgency ordinances, medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation were not allowed in Lassen County because they are not defined in Lassen County Code Title 18 (Ordinance 467), and have never been an allowed use, by right or by use permit in Lassen County. As such, existing dispensaries/cultivation are not considered nonconforming (e.g are not ‘grandfathered in’) because they were not legally established.
“Lassen County Code Chapter 18.20 (non-conforming uses) states that only the ‘lawful use of land existing on the effective date of an ordinance’ is considered non-conforming and may be allowed to continue. Staff is working with the appropriate departments/agencies to determine if there were medical marijuana dispensaries and/or cultivation operations in place prior to the establishment of the moratoria and to determine the appropriate action if operations were established illegally.”
Differing opinions
A number of different opinions arose during a public hearing on the moratoria that lasted nearly an hour.
Both District 4 Supervisor Brian Dahle and District 2 Supervisor Jim Chapman thought county staff was going to investigate the Los Angeles municipal ordinance regulating marijuana dispensaries because it apparently is the one experts say will most likely withstand challenges in court.
That ordinance went into effect on Monday, June 7 and permits only 100 medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles and regulates locations where they can be located.
Chapman said during his research, he’s discovered the city of Los Angeles’s model seemed to be the best one around.
Dahle said he had even provided county staff with a copy of the Los Angeles ordinance.
Maurice Anderson, director of the Lassen County Department of Planning and Building Services, said county staff was studying other counties and legal cases as they moved forward, especially those that deal with zoning issues, but it was not looking at Los Angeles.
According to Chapman, based on his research during the past two or three months, the city of Los Angeles is “the best model in addressing the issue of providing for fairness, protection and you name it.”
Despite its strengths, the Los Angeles model has come under attack in the courts.
According to NORML, a nonprofit lobbying organization working to legalize marijuana, “To date, more than 20 lawsuits have been filed against the city (of Los Angeles) arguing that the ordinance is unconstitutional because it prohibits patients' access and infringes upon state law. Under the ordinance, unlicensed facilities determined to be dispensing medical marijuana could face daily fines, a $1,000 penalty and six months in jail.”
Local medical marijuana users also allege the county’s moratoria infringe upon their rights.
Anne Westerbeck asked the board to make a reasonable consideration for medical marijuana users so she and other medical marijuana users could cultivate their own marijuana.
“I still do not understand, nor do I have answers,” Westerbeck said. “I have called at least three times to staff and no one can give me a definitive answer if I, as a medical marijuana patient, can continue to have the right in Lassen County to grow my medical marijuana which I am doing currently with a small collective. So there’s still no definitive answer from staff although we say we have a moratorium on cultivation … I’m appealing to the council to consider a reasonable regulation to satisfy everyone’s need … ”
Westerbeck asked if she had a right to cultivate her medical marijuana.
“Will somebody on staff answer that?” said District 1 Supervisor and Chairman Bob Pyle.
“With the moratoria in place, you would not be in compliance to cultivate marijuana or to distribute marijuana for medical purposes,” said Craig Settlemire, Lassen County counsel.
“I guess your answer’s no, that’s what I’m hearing,” Pyle said.
“Perhaps it is no from a staff member,” Westerbeck said, “but I don’t know if that’s a no from the supervisors because at the last meeting at Jensen Hall, that was not the answer I got.”
“I wrote down her question,” Settlemire said. “Her question was, ‘Do you have the right to grow medical marijuana for your own use in Lassen County?’ The answer to that, under the moratoria that’s currently in place, no you do not.”
“Well, maybe you should come out and arrest me,” Westerbeck said. “I’ve got them, and I’m willing to go to jail over it, but I think that’s against my 215 rights.”
Chapman said the board’s intent during the Jensen Hall meeting was not to restrict individuals from growing their own personal medical marijuana.
“The issue before the board is whether Proposition 215 or Senate Bill 420 have any validity as far as state law is concerned. Obviously there’s inconsistencies with federal law in terms of how they relate to both of those actions … ”
Chapman noted the federal attorney general, Eric Holder, has decided not to enforce federal marijuana laws in states that have approved medical marijuana if the users comply with state law.
“In this case, Prop 215 makes it very clear the voters have said medical marijuana use and the growing of medical marijuana for your own personal use is kind of a permitted activity under that context.”
But Chapman said the collectives and co-ops that did “large scale growing” were a different issue.
“That’s a lot different than personal use under Prop 215,” Chapman said. “So in that particular context, I think the moratoria we’re acting on, at least my understanding of it, if for group action as opposed to individual action. So if somebody asked me if the moratoria affected somebody doing something on their own, for themselves, by themselves, I don’t see that as being the effect of the moratoria. That’s not so much a land use issue as the collective activity might otherwise be … ”
District 3 Supervisor Lloyd Keefer said he agreed there was a difference between commercial use and personal use.
“I don’t think it was our intent to restrict the permitted use under Prop 215, and I don’t sense from the community out there that that’s a real big issue. If somebody has a legitimate need, a legitimate reason for medical use of marijuana, that’s a personal thing. They ought to be able to grow their plants and do that. But once they step beyond that and it becomes a commercial issue, then that’s where I think we tread on the zoning issue.”
“Our issue is how do we take the newly defined rights the state has granted and blend them with all the existing rights everybody else has,” Chapman said. “Just because the state says you can have medical marijuana doesn’t mean that those rights can trample the peace, safety, comfort, morals and happiness of everybody else’s rights.”
“The pros and cons (of medial marijuana) are over,” said Dahle. “We need to do is zoning.”
Craig Newton reminded the supervisors of the problems created by marijuana, especially among high school aged users.
“The illegal, illicit production of it is so lucrative, if you allow it in this county it’s going to be controlled by huge, enormous drug cartels,” Newton said. “Yeah, you’re going to be sued. And guess who’s going to fund the lawsuits against you? Drug cartels. Illicit sales of marijuana. That’s whom you’re fighting against. But if you don’t fight it, what happens to us? Do we end up like Afghanistan growing marijuana and winding up in stark poverty because the morals in our community will just plummet into the dust? That’s the problem. The problem is the illicit use. If you can’t control it, you can’t allow it. And we don’t have the resources to control it.”
Lassen County Sheriff Steve Warren continued his opposition to all types of marijuana.
“At the risk of getting beat up again on these long narratives on the marijuana blogs and letters from Mr. Heinz, there are a few things I’d like to say,” Warren said. “You’re here for the zoning issues, the enforcement of the zoning laws. You’re here for the collectives, the cooperatives and the distribution of marijuana in the county. We can’t ignore the idea that it is medical marijuana we’re talking about.”
But Warren said The Compassionate Use Act is totally different than commercial operations. And he said the attorney general’s opinions are simply opinions until they’re tested in a court of law.
“Clearly I have an opinion on marijuana use,” Warren said. “I’m not biased at all. It’s an absolutely illegal substance, and it will be until the Supreme Court tells me different, and as long as I’m the sheriff, it’s still going to be illegal. That’s not bias. That is a fact … It’s going to be a nuisance, it’s a nuisance right now, it’s enforceable right now, and the moratorium should be approved and then entertain whatever the ordinance is going to be. You guys can probably guess from what I’m saying right now where I’m going to stand on that.”
Warren said his department has never kicked anyone’s door down and arrested someone for using medical marijuana under Prop 215. He said the moratoria under consideration do not affect the medical marijuana users who grow plants for themselves.
“Cultivation, whether it’s commercial or mass or volume or collective or dispensary — that’s what this is about,” Warren said. “There’s no place for that here.”
Warren said he’s concerned about “the profiteers” who are making money on marijuana in Lassen County.
Six options
County staff presented six options to the board: Do nothing after the moratorium expires; allow dispensaries to operate under the current zoning ordinance; amend the zoning ordinance to define medical marijuana; amend the zoning ordinance and adopt a regulatory ordinance to define where and how medical marijuana would be allowed; establish a new combining district; and, ban all medical marijuana dispensaries and/or cultivation as an activity that is not a permitted use.
The board did not approve any of these options and directed county staff to review the way Los Angeles County is dealing with medical marijuana.
