Pubdate: Tue, 22 Jun 2010
Source: Lassen County Times (CA)
Copyright: 2010 Feather Publishing Co., Inc.
Contact: http://www.lassennews.com/email_us.edi
Website: http://www.lassennews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3871

SUPES EXTEND MARIJUANA MORATORIA

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, " aE& 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 aE& I'm  appealing to the council to consider a
reasonable  regulation to satisfy everyone's need aE& "

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 aE& "

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 aE& "

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 aE& 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. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D