Council Makes Changes, Most of Which Reduce or Eliminate Restrictions In City Attorney's Initial Draft Med Marijuana Ordinance; Council Directs 2nd Draft For Possible Add'l Changes Before "First Reading" And Possible Enactment
If your ad were here, people like you all over Long Beach would see it now.
Don't settle for imitations. There's only one LBReport.com. Email us.
(Nov. 11, 2009) -- After roughly three hours of discussion, the City Council voted on Nov. 10 to make changes -- most of which reduce or eliminate restrictions -- in a City Attorney initial draft ordinance to regulate medical marijuana collectives...and directed the City Attorney's office to bring a revised draft back to the Council for possible additional changes before a formal "first reading" for enactment.
City Council webcast
Supporters of medical marijuana collectives urged sending the draft regulatory measure to a Council committee to discuss removing some of the more restrictive provisions...but the Council did so on its own.
On a 9-0 vote, Councilmembers approved a substitute motion by Councilman Robert Garcia that echoed basically all the points of a motion by Councilman Gary DeLong...but also removed a cap of 18 medical marijuana outlets citywide proposed by DeLong that Garcia called "arbitrary." Councilman Garcia's substitute motion asked the City Attorney's office to come up with recommendations on a number after examining the issue.
DeLong's motion and Garcia's substitute motion both proposed easing restrictions in the City Attorney's draft text.
The Garcia (DeLong) motions removed restrictions that included prohibiting medical marijuana operations within 1,000 feet of libraries and parks.
For accuracy, LBReport.com provides on-demand audio detailing exactly what the Council motions did, beginning with Councilman DeLong's proposed changes to the City Attorney's initial draft text. LBReport.com has compiled salient audio portions for easy on-demand access (a whoosh sound indicates edits); to launch audio, click here (MP3).
In place of explicit ordinance restrictions, DeLong proposed that medical marijuana collectives obtain a "conditional use permit"...meaning persons who object would have to file an appeal to the City Council (with an uncertain outcome determined by a Council majority).
Vice Mayor Val Lerch went further...stating that he disagreed with requiring a CUP and urged only an "administrative use permit" in which city staff could approve an application (which opponents would also have to appeal)...and Councilman Garcia incorporated this in his substitute motion.
Other restrictions in the City Attorney's proposed draft remained...for now...but could be changed at subsequent Council meetings.
Councilmembers Gabelich and Reyes Uranga unsuccessfully sought to include changes that they wanted to see in the ordinance. Gabelich asked to have the measure return as a draft, slowing it from the fast-track for first reading that DeLong's motion proposed and Garcia's substitute echoed.
Garcia ultimately agreed to Gabelich's request that the measure return as a draft first...at which time a Council majority will have an opportunity to make additional changes before the measure returns for "first reading" (one of two final steps in formal enactment). City Attorney Bob Shannon indicated that a revised draft would take at least a month to return to the Council.
City management (which would be required to implement the ordinance and its regulations) presented no staff report and took no public position during the Council discussion.
The agenda item opened with City Attorney Bob Shannon presenting a review of California law on the issue. To hear his presentation, click here (MP3).
To view video of the entire Council item, click here (agenda item 10 begins at roughly 40 minutes into the video clip).
In public testimony running roughly one hour, multiple public speakers testified in support of allowing the operations and/or easing restrictions in the draft text proposed by the City Attorney's office. Several expressed concern about privacy issues in response to the City Attorney draft language that would have required medical marijuana collectives to provide City Hall with the names of their collective members.
When some Councilmembers echoed the privacy concerns, City Attorney Shannon suggested that the issue might be addressed by using patient ID numbers instead of names. Councilman DeLong responded positively, "Be creative," he said.
A number of public speakers cited parking issues and the proliferation and concentration of the currently unregulated operations and urged some type of Council action...but didn't directly oppose the medical marijuana operations.
The first Council speaker was Carl Kemp, whose government advocacy firm (which separately represents developers of the 2nd/PCH proposed project) represents "Belmont Shore Natural Care" (2nd St. location), who introduced legal counsel for his client, who introduced the client. They were admonished about time but were allowed to speak for over seven minutes in total by Vice Mayor Lerch, who presided in the absence of Mayor Bob Foster (who is in Saudi Arabia with about a half dozen other U.S. Mayors on a trip paid for by the Saudi government).
During Council discussion, Vice Mayor Lerch made a roughly three minute statement on medical marijuana outlets and the Council proceedings to regulate them:
Vice Mayor Lerch:...Every argument out there that's been argued from too many on one street, too many in the neighborhood, too many, doesn't hold water, because we have drug stores. We have a Thriftys. We have a CVS. We have a Walgreens, all on the same street corner within blocks. And believe me the drugs that they sell and have in those Walmarts and Thriftys and everything else is a lot worse than that medical marijuana...
You've got to separate yourself from marijuana and substitute that always with medicine, and treat it as any other medicine in this country and in this city. That's what we need to do here.
We have bars within stepping stones of schools. We have cigarette stores and tobacco stores and head shops within steps of schools and we don't have a problem with that, but because it's marijuana we're going to regulate it out of existence in some cases.
The market will control itself. The market will say how many dispensaries or collectives we're going to need in this city, and once it's saturated we won't have it anymore...
...Just like how many liquor stores we have and how many tobacco shops we have...And to go through this whole darn thing of restricting and trying to control a legitimate medicine, because we've got this stigma from the 60s...is beyond any reasoning to me at all.
...But to me the fact that we're going through this is ludicrous to me...I can't believe we're sitting here going through three hours on a legitimate medicine. It's a legitimate medicine and you've got to take yourself away from it, and do this out of body experience and look at it. What is the difference between medical marijuana and codeine? What is the difference of medical marijuana and Vicodin, that any kid can get on any street corner on any day of the week, that he can pick up in any pharmacy...
It is incredible to me. Incredible...It is a medicine. It is a medicine that needs to get to legitimate patients and we need to provide that for them in that mainstream for them...
Earlier in the day, LATimes.comreported that at least 120 CA cities and 8 CA counties ban medical marijuana dispensaries outright.
When the City Attorney brings a second draft ordinance to the Council in about a month, a Council majority could make additional changes...after which a near-finalized version of the ordinance will be brought to the Council for "first reading." At that time, a Council majority could make additional changes before a "second reading" enacts the ordinance.
