Los Angeles City Council Members Proposing Medical Marijuana Collective Bans

 by lucy

Los Angeles City Council members are presenting two different proposals for medical marijuana collective bans.  Councilman Paul Koretz wants to allow 100 approved collectives in the city, banning the rest.  Councilman Jose Huizar wants to take a more conservative approach, banning all dispensaries in the city of LA.

While their proposals differ, both of the councilmen agree that the city’s 2010  medical marijuana ordinance is not working.  The ordinance requires collectives to have specific hours of operation, not advertise, have security staff, not be in a residential area, and more.  While the ordinance is good in theory, it has proven very difficult for the city to regulate and enforce.

Speaking to Huffington Post, Councilman Huizar’s director of communications, Rick Coca, explained that an outright ban of collectives is the “cleanest and easiest way” to deal with the city’s current problem.  Huizar’s proposal would ban collectives, but would still allow patients to grow their own medicine or have a caregiver grow medical marijuana for them.

Councilman Koretz, however, has called the outright ban “vicious” and “heartless” in a letter to Huffington Post.  Koretz’s planning deputy, Chris Koontz, has explained that there are a number of collectives that have been in compliance since 2005, and as such those collectives deserve to keep their doors open.  He wants to ban all dispensaries that have not been in compliance since the start.  Aside from fairness to collective owners who have diligently followed the regulations, Koretz also acknowledges that expecting patients to grow their own quality medicine is unrealistic.

Los Angeles’ current ordinance remains in a gray area, due to the fact that it is very similar to Long Beach’s ordinance, which was deemed to not be legally sound.  Last year, an appeals court struck down aspects of Long Beach’s 5.87 ordinance that aimed to regulate collectives, including their lottery system for providing permits.  The Long Beach ordinance is now set to be reviewed by the California Supreme Court, and the Los Angeles City Council essentially is in limbo until that decision comes through.

ARTICLE: CA Supreme Court Takes Long Beach MMJ Case, But No Temporary Start of Ban Granted

Last year Huizar stated, “Because Long Beach’s ordinance is very similar to LA’s ordinance, the Long Beach ruling deems our ordinance unenforceable.”

Both of the councilman’s proposed bans have been sent back to committee, but they hope that they will be voted on by other council members in a matter of weeks.  Should either proposal pass, it will take almost one month to go into effect in the city.

 

[Source]

3 Responses so far | Have Your Say!

  1. 0

    jibsnmoney said on May 18, 2012

    Damn cali is having mad issues with their med scene

  2. 0

    Shining_Soul said on May 18, 2012

    That's the price of being the one in the front. You get to experience all the mistake that others learn from… hopefully.

  3. 0

    Tebin said on May 23, 2012

    Honestly MOST collectives are more in it for the money than the patients. That sadly being the case I actually agree with the collective ban. It would force a closer grower/client relationship AND there would be no reason to still be paying 50+ an 8th for good medicine. Look at Washington,Colorado,Oregon,and Montana. Their collectives charge 25-40 an 8th and I've seen some meds from all those states that are just as good as California's. These states also have stricter zoning ordinances and collective guidelines which makes it hard for money hungry businesses to be established but making it easier for a personal care provider to thrive. It's just an opinion and I know I'll catch shit for it but it's the truth. Collectives pay ~8/gram or less and charge way more but it's because they have to pay the staff,the bills,rent,etc. Why should I have to pay for that stuff in the form of a price increase just so they get a bigger profit margin when I could go straight to Mr.Dudeman and pay the $8 or less a gram? People will say it's for the convenience, but what's so convenient about paying double, sometimes triple,the original cost just so I can hang out with people I don't know and who often give terrible recommendations?

Leave a Comment

You need to be logged in to leave a Comment. LOGIN below or REGISTER
remember me
Forgot USERNAME or PASSWORD?