DOCSLIB.ORG

On November 5, 1996, California Voters Passed Proposition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On November 5, 1996, California Voters Passed Proposition ORDINANCE NO. 1006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 14.60, PUBLIC NUISANCES, TO DECLARE MEDICAL CANNABIS DISPENSARIES AND CULTIVATION OUTSIDE THE CONTEXT OF A QUALIFIED PATIENT'S OR QUALIFIED CAREGIVER'S PERSONAL RESIDENCE A PUBLIC NUISANC~ CONDITION. WHEREAS, on November 5, 1996, California voters passed Proposition 215 (the "Compassionate Use Act"), which decriminalized the cultivation and use of cannabis by seriously ill individuals upon a physician's recommendation; and WHEREAS, The Compassionate Use Act which was codified as section 11362.5 of the California Health and Safety Code as attached hereto as Exhibit A, was enacted to "ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana," and to "ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction"; and WHEREAS, on January 1, 2004, Senate Bill No. 420, the Medical Marij uana Program Act, became law and was codified as sections 11362.7 to 11362.83 of the California Health and Safety Code, as attached hereto as Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the Medical Marijuana Program Act, among other things, requires the California Department of Public Health to establish and maintain a program for the voluntary registration of qualified medical cannabis patients and their primary caregivers through a statewide identification card system; and WHEREAS, the Federal Controlled Substances Act, which was adopted in 1970, established a federal regulatory system designed to combat recreational drug abuse by making it a federal criminal offense to manufacture, distribute', dispense, or possess any controlled substance which includes cannabis; and WHEREAS, the Department of Justice of the State of California in the August 2008 Guidelines for the Security and 1 Non-Diversion ,of Marijuana Grown for Medical Use, attached hereto as Exhibit C, has opined that neither Proposition 215, nor the Medical Marijuana Program Act conflict with Federal Controlled Substances Act, since "California did not 'legalize' medical marijuana, but instead exercised the state's reserved powers to not punish certain marijuana offenses under state law when a physician has recommended its use to treat a serious U medical condition ; and WHEREAS, the United States Department of Justice has provided in a Memorandum for Selected United States Attorneys, dated October 19, 2009, attached hereto as Exhibit D, that although the prosecution of significant traffickers of illegal drugs, including marijuana and the disruption of illegal drug manufacturing and trafficking networks continues to be a core priority in the Department's efforts against narcotics and dangerous drugs, as a general matter, pursuits of these priorities should not focus federal resources on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana; and WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Gonzalez v. Raich (2005) 545 U.S. 1 that pursuant to the commence clause, the federal government has the power to prohibit the local cuItivation and use of cannabis, even though such cuItivation and use complies with California law; and WHEREAS, the Second District Court of Appeal concluded in City of Claremont (2009) 177 Cal.App. 4th 1153, that Proposition 215 does not supersede a local moratorium on medical cannabis dispensaries enacted as an urgency measure for the immediate preservation of the public, health, safety and welfare and the Medical Marijuana Program Act does not preclude the adoption of a temporary moratorium on issuing permits and licenses to medical cannabis dispensaries, or a city's enforcement of licensing and zoning requirements against dispensaries; and WHEREAS, the Fourth District Court of Appeal, in which the City of Rancho Mirage is situated, ruled in Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim (2010)187 Cal.App.4th 734, that there is no conflict between state and federal law with respect to medical cannabis; and WHEREAS, In 2009, the California Police Chiefs Association's Task Force on Marij uana Dispensaries published a 2 White Paper on Marijuana Dispensaries, attached hereto as Exhibit E, which identified the following negative secondary effects of medical marijuana dispensaries operating in California: armed robberies; murders; burglaries; traffic; noise; drug dealing; organized crime; money laundering; firearms violations; poisonings; unjustified and fictitious physician recommendations; proliferations of grow houses in residential areas; life safety hazards (such as fire hazards) created by grow houses; increased organized gang activities; exposure of minors to marijuana; impaired public health; loss of business tax revenue; and decreased quality of life in deteriorating neighborhoods, both commercial and residential; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission after a duly noticed public hearing at which testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was presented and considered recommended approval of a zone text amendment that would prohibit cultivation of medical cannabis in all zones of the City, other than residential areas where cultivation is conducted by a qualified patient or qualified caregiver in or upon the premises of his or her private residence outside of plain view from public property; and WHEREAS, the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing at which testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was presented and considered introduced this ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council does not intend to affect the rights of qualified patients and caregivers to form and participate in medical cannabis cooperatives and collectives; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to enact regulations pursuant to its police powers declaring medical cannabis cuItivation not conducted in compliance with the City's Zoning Ordinance and medical cannabis dispensaries within the City to be public nuisance conditions subject to abatement and other remedies; and WHEREAS, the City Council intends to concurrently enact an ordinance permitting personal delivery of medical cannabis to any qualified patient or qualified caregiver residing in the City of Rancho Mirage from sources located outside the City. 3 NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. RECITALS The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as though fully set forth herein. Section 2. EXHIBITS The attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth at length. Section 3. EVIDENCE The City Council has considered all of the evidence submitted into the administrative record, which includes, but is not limited to, the following: (a) The City's General Plan, including updates; (b) The staff reports prepared by the City Attorney and presented for consideration by the City Council at its meeting on February 3, 2011, including all its attachments; and ( c) The public comments, both written and oral, received and/or submitted at, or prior to the City Council's consideration of this ordinance. Section 4. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 14.60. 040 - WEEDS AND OTHER VEGETATION Municipal Code Section 14.60.040, Weeds and other vegetation, is hereby amended to read as follows: 14.60.040. Weeds and other vegetation. A. It is unlawful and it shall be a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge or possession of any premises or property in the city to maintain such premises or property in a manner that has resulted in overgrown weeds or other vegetation to be present on any front and visible side or back yards and sidewalks. 4 B. It is unlawful, and it shall be a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge or possession of any premises or property in the city to maintain such premises or property with the presence of Russian Thistle, which is commonly known as "Tumble Weed" at any stage or growth. C. It is un~awfu~, and it sha~~ be a pub~ic nuisance for any person owning, ~easing, occupying or having charge or possession of any premises or property in the city to maintain or cu~tivate medica~ cannabis at any stage of growth on such premises or property except as express~y . pezmit ted in Ti t~e 17. Section 5. ADDITION OF SECTION 14.60.505 MEDICAL CANNABIS DISPENSARIES Section 14.60.505 is hereby added to the Municipal Code to read as follows: 14.60.040. Medica~ cannabis dispensaries. A. It is un~awfu~, and it sha~~ be a pub~ic nuisance for any person owning, ~easing, occupying or having charge or possession of any premises or property in the city to maintain a medica~ cannabis dispensary upon such premises or property. B. A medica~ cannabis dispensary is defined as any p~ace, ~ocation, bui~ding or estab~is1lment where medica~ cannabis is traded, exchanged, so~d, distributed or cu~tivated which wou~d otherwise require a business ~icense, home occsPation pezmit, or any other use pezmit to conduct simi~ar type activities. C. Notwithstanding the prohibition in subsection fA), medica~ cannabis co~~ectives and cooperatives formed in a manner consistent with Ca~ifornia ~aw and the Ca~ifornia Attorney Genera~'s Guide~ines for the Security and Non-Diversion of Marijuana Grown for Medica~ Use issued in August, 2008 sha~~ be pezmitted to operate provided they do not se~~, exchange, trade, distribute or cu~tivate medica~ cannabis in a manner prohibited by subsection fA). 5 Section 6. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS The City Council finds that adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061 subsection (b) (3), in that activity is not a proj ect. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Four-Day Perspective Series About Recreational and Medical Marijuana in Colorado
    CLEARING THE HAZE A four-day perspective series about recreational and medical marijuana in Colorado. EDITOR’S NOTE: This is a reprint of the series published in the Colorado Springs Gazette Sunday, March 22 through Wednesday, March 25, 2015 To order copies of this reprint (printed or digitally) visit gazette.com/clearingthehaze $2.49 2 GAZETTE.COM/CLEARINGTHEHAZE PUBLISHED SUNDAY, MARCH 22 - WEDNESDAY MARCH 25, 2015 A PERSPECTIVE SERIES BY THE GAZETTE CLEARING THE HAZE DAY ONE: REGULATION ABOUT THE SERIES Two important assumptions about successful legalization of marijuana in Colorado were: After the first year of recreational pot sales, The Gazette takes a comprehensive look at the 1.) Regulation would provide a safer solution to the state’s drug problems. unintended consequences of legalizing sales and use of recreational marijuana. 2.) By regulating the sale of marijuana, the state could make money otherwise locked up in the Day 1: Colorado has a fragile scheme for regulating legal marijuana and implementing a state black market. drug prevention strategy. Today’s stories suggest the net gain from taxes and fees related to marijuana sales will not be Day 2: One of the suppositions about legalizing pot was that underground sales would be known for a while, as costs are not known or tracked well, and there are many other un- curtailed, but officials say there is evidence of a thriving black market. knowns about pot’s effects on public health and safety. Day 3: One teen’s struggle to overcome his marijuana addiction shows how devastating the drug can be for younger, more vulnerable users.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Item 8.8
    AGENDA ITEM 8.8. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: January 5, 2016 TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Bryan Cook, City Manager By: Michael D. Forbes, Community Development Director~ SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 16-1008 AMENDING SECTION 9-1 T-7 OF THE TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA FACILITIES AND ACTIVITIES RECOMMENDATION: The City Council is requested to: a) Introduce Ordinance No. 16-1008 (Attachment "A") for first reading by title only, amending Section 9-1T-7 of the Temple City Municipal Code (TCMC) pertaining to medical marijuana facilities and activities; b) Waive further reading of Ordinance No. 16-1008 ; and c) Schedule the second reading of Ordinance No. 16-1 008 for January 19, 2016. BACKGROUND: 1. In 2011, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 11-942, which established TCMC Section 9-1T-7 to prohibit fixed and mobile medical marijuana dispensaries throughout the City. TCMC Section 9-1T-7(B) defines medical marijuana dispensaries broadly as any facility where medicinal marijuana is distributed in accordance with the Compassionate Use Act (Proposition 215) (CUA) and the Medical Marijuana Program Act of 2004 (MMPA). 2. In 2013, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously in City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wei/ness Center, Inc. (2013) 56 Cal.4th 729 that the CUA and the MMPA do not preempt local ordinances that completely and permanently ban medical marijuana dispensaries, collectives, and cooperatives. 3. On September 11, 2015, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill (AB) 243, AB 266, and Senate Bill (SB) 643.
    [Show full text]
  • Cannabis Capitalism in Colorado: an Ethnography of Il/Legal Production and Consumption
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School April 2021 Cannabis Capitalism in Colorado: An Ethnography of Il/legal Production and Consumption Lia Berman University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the Economics Commons, Political Science Commons, and the Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons Scholar Commons Citation Berman, Lia, "Cannabis Capitalism in Colorado: An Ethnography of Il/legal Production and Consumption" (2021). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/8735 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cannabis Capitalism in Colorado: An Ethnography of Il/legal Production and Consumption by Lia Berman A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Kevin A. Yelvington, D.Phil. Anand Kumar, Ph.D. Marty Otañez, Ph.D. E. Christian Wells, Ph.D. Rebecca K. Zarger, Ph.D. Date of Approval: April 1, 2021 Keywords: Economic Anthropology, Political Economy, Commodity Chain, Budtender Copyright © 2021, Lia Berman ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to first say a very big thank you to my supervisor, Dr. Kevin Yelvington, who provided guidance through each stage of the dissertation process. Without his patience and feedback, this Ph.D. would not have been achievable. Special thanks to Bárbara Cruz-Yelvington, who provided outstanding hospitality and comfort that will never be forgotten.
    [Show full text]
  • Colby Alumnus Vol. 64, No. 4: Summer 1975
    Colby College Digital Commons @ Colby Colby Alumnus Colby College Archives 1975 Colby Alumnus Vol. 64, No. 4: Summer 1975 Colby College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/alumnus Part of the Higher Education Commons Recommended Citation Colby College, "Colby Alumnus Vol. 64, No. 4: Summer 1975" (1975). Colby Alumnus. 84. https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/alumnus/84 This Other is brought to you for free and open access by the Colby College Archives at Digital Commons @ Colby. It has been accepted for inclusion in Colby Alumnus by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Colby. The President's Page In April, President Strider addressed the Council for There are conspicuous examples of public and Advancement and Support of Education at its confer­ private cooperation. A notable one is the organization ence in Hyannis, Mass. Following is a summary of his of Connecticut Valley Colleges in Massachusetts where remarks on ''Public/ Private Cooperation: Questions four private institutions work in harmony with the and Challenges." University of Massachusetts. An interesting organiza­ tion in Maine, the Research Institute of the Gulf of Maine (TRIGOM) is a cooperative enterprise between T HE FIRST POINT TO BE MADE IS THAT PUBLIC AND several private institutions, part of the University of private institutions of higher education should be re­ Maine, and the Southern Maine Vocational-Technical garded as in cooperation with each other, rather than Institute. Members of the administrations of a number in competition. Both kinds of institutions are engaged of private colleges have been of assistance of various in the same high enterprise, the education of young kinds to the University of Maine and to such entities men and young women in preparing them for a com­ as the Maine Public Broadcasting Network, which in plex world.
    [Show full text]
  • The Medical Marijuana Murder
    onderberry is a hybrid PLAYBOY strain of cannabis popular among medi- SPECIAL REPORT W cal marijuana patients who don’t want to get too stoned. Flowery-smelling and with a slight blueberry taste, it’s said to be an effective analgesic, strong enough to dull the pain but not so strong it gives the user “couch lock”—the sluggish high induced by more- potent marijuana. You can get up and do things on wonderberry. Plus, the product is reasonably priced: $250 to $300 an ounce, compared with $800 an ounce for high-grade weed. That’s an impor- tant consideration for patients who live on government assistance. On the morning of February 17, 2007 60-year-old marijuana activist Ken Gorman received a substantial consignment of wonder- berry—three or four grocery bags of it—at his modest one-story brick duplex on South Decatur Street on Denver’s west side. One of his regular growers had driven three hours to deliver the pot, which had been cultivated in a barn in the Colorado countryside. Gorman opened one of the bags and sniffed the contents to check the quality. The pot was cured and dry enough to smoke. Satisfied, he told the grower to come back that evening to pick up his money. Gorman needed a lot of pot. THE AVAILABILITY Under Colorado law he was a reg- istered caregiver. In 2000 54 per- OF MARIJUANA FOR cent of Colorado voters approved Amendment 20, which legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes. MEDICINAL PURPOSES Amendment 20 allows people diag- nosed with a serious illness to pos- WAS SUPPOSED TO BE sess up to two ounces of marijuana or grow as many as six plants.
    [Show full text]