Pubdate: Wed, 07 Mar 2007
Source: Lompoc Record (CA)
Copyright: 2007 Lee Central Coast Newspapers
Contact: http://www.lompocrecord.com/contact/letter/
Website: http://www.lompocrecord.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/242
Author: Neil Nisperos, Staff Writer
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)

MEDICAL POT DISPENSARIES BANNED

The Lompoc City Council voted Tuesday night to prohibit medicinal 
marijuana dispensaries, or "cannabis clubs," from operating in town.

Because the council had approved the ordinance on first reading Feb. 
20, it was passed this time without comment.

City leaders say they believe the operation of such dispensaries is 
contrary to the public's health, safety and welfare, and violates federal law.

Councilmembers approved the ordinance on the recommendation of Police 
Chief Tim Dabney, who said last month that dispensaries in other 
California cities has led to an increase in loitering and more serious crimes.

City leaders in 2005 put a moratorium on marijuana dispensaries 
because Lompoc had no zoning law to control their location. A 
dispensary could have been opened in any location zoned for retail, a 
drug store, commercial enterprises or medical uses. The moratorium 
was extended for two years.

In the past, city officials had received inquiries regarding business 
licenses for medicinal marijuana dispensaries, according to a city 
staff report.

Marijuana remains a controlled substance under federal law, and 
persons who act in accordance with Proposition 215 are subject to 
federal prosecution.

Santa Barbara County began issuing medicinal marijuana identification 
cards in 2004, as required by SB 420.

In other action, the council late Tuesday was discussing revising the 
city's zoning map to make it legally consistent with the General Plan 
Land Use Designation Map.

Making the maps consistent would mean rezoning about 600 parcels in 
the city - an action that concerns some property owners, who 
complained that the possible "down-zoning" of parcels would devalue 
property and result in the loss of equity.

The discussion was not concluded in time for publication.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman