Pubdate: Thu, 18 Aug 2011
Source: Sacramento News & Review (CA)
Column: The 420
Copyright: 2011 Chico Community Publishing, Inc.
Contact:  http://newsreview.com/sacto/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/540
Author: Nick Miller
Bookmark: http://mapinc.org/topic/Dispensaries

MILLION-DOLLAR MAYBE

Sacramento County Rolls the Dice on a Ramped-Up, Seven-Figure 
Enforcement Strategy to Put Dozens of Medical-Cannabis Dispensaries 
Out of Business

Why is Sacramento County, instead of raking in millions via taxes and 
fees, spending millions to shut down its medical-cannabis dispensaries?

That's what attorney George Mull is wondering on the heels of last 
Wednesday's board of supervisors meeting, when staff recommended 
spending $1.1 million over the next nine months to ratchet up 
enforcement against its pot clubs.

"I think it's the biggest waste of resources I've seen in the county 
in a long time," he said, arguing that it will be "more expensive for 
them than they can possibly imagine."

Sacramento County says pot clubs are operating illegally, despite 
state law that permits the collective distribution of medical 
marijuana, and is threatening fines of up to $1,500 a day for zoning 
and building-code violations under the new plan, in addition to liens 
on property holders.

Mull, an attorney with the California Cannabis Association who's 
worked on drug-policy cases since 1993, calls this the 
"million-dollar switch": He says instead of spending millions, the 
county could collect upward of $4 million to $6 million annually via 
permit fees and taxation.

This money would go a long way, he points out. The county deficit 
this fiscal year was a click more than $90 million, and the county 
has laid off more than 1,300 employees since 2008.

Meanwhile, new pot-club-enforcement efforts will include hiring four 
more code-enforcement staff, plus another county counsel, and will be 
paid for with a combination of fines, loans and general-fund dollars.

County code-enforcement head Steve Pedretti says letters explaining 
the new approach will be sent out to dispensary operators and their 
landlords "in the next few weeks" and that enforcement will commence 
"very soon." The board of supervisors will approve the new 
expenditures in September.

It's a risky move-a million-dollar maybe, perhaps?-and one that many 
say might end up costing the county millions in wasted funds and litigation.

Mull, who represents a dozen or so local clubs as part of the 
Sacramento County Patients Collective alliance, explains that while 
the county estimates to fine some 56 pot clubs to the tune of 
$125,000 this year, in addition to thousands more in property liens 
down the road, club owners intend to contest and appeal each and every penalty.

"They're not going to get that, because none of us are going to pay," 
he assured.

For some county dispensaries, this appeals process already has been 
going for nearly two years. During these hearings, according to Mull, 
at least four county employees, including counsel and engineer 
Pedretti, have to take time off work to appear in court. In some 
cases, these proceedings are over a mere $100 fine.

Pedretti said, however, he only checks in on the occasional appeal 
hearing. "I like to go down and watch them," he said, "but I'm not an 
integral part of the process."

He also noted that, of his 24 code-enforcement staff, only two are 
working on marijuana cases.

The board of supervisors, who were unable to chat with SN&R for this 
story by deadline, directed staff last month to come up with 
different enforcement tactics. Supervisors Roberta MacGlashan, Jimmie 
Yee and Don Nottoli all praised this new approach.

Meanwhile, Max Del Real, a medical-cannabis lobbyist who was 
instrumental in working with the city of Sacramento to pass its 
ordinance last year, insists that not only will the county lose in 
court, but they'll also lose in the court of public opinion.

"Once the public starts to realize that the county is spending money 
that she doesn't have," he argued, "I think that' there's going to be 
a public backlash."

Kris Hermes, of medical-cannabis advocacy group Americans for Safe 
Access, says the situation here in Sacramento is sort of unique: The 
county hasn't banned clubs outright, as in Orange County burg Dana 
Point, or written a nonpermissive ordinance, as in Los Angeles. But 
its strategy invites similar legal entanglements as ones faced by 
these Southern California governments: Dozens upon dozens of clubs, 
for instance, have sued the city of Los Angeles over due process, he says.

Mull thinks the county and the board of supervisors-"especially in a 
time where we're laying off cops and teachers and [district 
attorneys]"-will quickly realize the folly of their ways.

"No matter how much they were saber rattling," he said of last week's 
meeting, "I think there are fiscal realities of government."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom