Pubdate: Tue, 11 Oct 2011
Source: Chico Enterprise-Record (CA)
Copyright: 2011 Chico Enterprise-Record
Contact:  http://www.chicoer.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/861
Author: Katy Sweeny
Note: Letters from newspaper's circulation area receive publishing priority

CITIES, INCLUDING CHICO, CHALLENGED BY "EVOLVING" MEDICAL POT LAWS

CHICO -- The drought of medical marijuana dispensaries in Chico could 
drag on after a California appeals court ruled against Long Beach's ordinance.

The judges said Oct. 4 cities can do no more than outline where and 
how collectives and cooperatives operate, decriminalizing it, but 
they cannot issue permits because that would violate federal law, 
Chico city attorney Lori Barker said Monday.

"Until the California Supreme Court takes this case or another case 
like it, this is going to be very confusing on what cities can do," 
Barker said.

The Chico City Council voted 5-1 Sept. 6 to repeal its ordinance that 
would have permitted two dispensaries of 10,000 square feet each in 
the city limits. Councilman Scott Gruendl dissented and Councilwoman 
Mary Flynn was absent.

U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner told city administration the ordinance 
would expose city employees and council members to prosecution for 
facilitating dispensaries in violation of federal drug laws.

Council members directed staff to bring them a new ordinance with a 
permitting process.

"The Long Beach case seems to preclude that," Barker said.

Barker plans to wait to see if Long Beach appeals the ruling, she 
said. Then she will consult with the council and draft an ordinance.

"I think that's the best we can do - move forward knowing it might 
change," she said.

She thinks it might be difficult to write an ordinance restricting 
dispensaries without going too far to permit them, she said.

In another medical marijuana ruling, a Riverside County trial court 
judge said Oct. 3 Rancho Mirage's ban on dispensaries violates 
California's laws.

Barker thinks the inconsistencies in rulings show the need for the 
state Supreme Court to address the issue, she said.

Gruendl thinks the city has a lot of work to do, but the court action 
will help, he said.

"It's good that we're finally going down this road to define what's 
going to be allowed," Gruendl said.

Councilman Mark Sorensen, who voted to disallow dispensaries in the 
city, thinks there might be ways to work around the appellate court 
decision, but that's still unclear.

"Of course, I don't think there's any way to work around the 
Department of Justice," Sorensen said of the department that includes 
the U.S. Attorney's Office.

Regarding the U.S. attorneys in California targeting landlords of 
dispensaries and grows, Barker said the city's repealed ordinance 
requires property owners to give consent. Barker thinks that 
stipulation would likely remain in the city ordinance, unless the 
council directed otherwise.

She does not know if any dispensary landlords in Butte County 
received a letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office, she said.

In reaction to residential growers not following the 50-square-foot 
limitation on the grow size, Barker said she will likely ask the 
council to clarify the restrictions. Because it's the end of the 
growing season, Barker said she's not rushed on the issue and might 
ask the council to address it when they discuss dispensaries.

Barker said the law keeps "evolving" regarding medical marijuana, 
creating challenges.

"We just don't yet know what the final picture is going to be," she said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart