1. Skip to Menu
  2. Skip to Content
  3. Skip to Footer
Thursday, May 23rd 2013 
1:43am
Cloudy

63°F

Cloudy

Wind: 3 mph

Stay Connected:

FacebookTwitterYoutubeFeed

Appeals Court Strikes Down Meat of City's Medpot Ordinance

View Comments

9:10am | Reporting by Greggory MooreThe Second Appellate District Court of Appeal ruled Tuesday that much of Long Beach's medical-marijuana ordinance is in violation of federal law, thus striking down several of its provisions, including all of those pertaining to the permitting process for collectives.
 
The ruling, authored by Judge Patrick T. Madden, was handed down in the case of Ryan Pack et al. v. the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, in which petitioners Pack and Anthony Gayle sued the City of Long Beach under the theory that the City's entire medpot ordinance is invalid because it is preempted by federal law, since (as Madden writes) "the City’s ordinance went beyond decriminalization and insteadpermitted conduct prohibited by the federal CSA [i.e., Controlled Substances Act], and thus was preempted."
 
The case is remanded to the trial court for the resolution of several issues, but what seems to be the crux of the matter has been decided: the City's entire permitting process has been found to be illegal, since "[a] law which 'authorizes [individuals] to engage in conduct that the federal [Controlled Substances] Act forbids … "stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress"' and is therefore preempted."
 
This would appear to mean that not only must the City cease its permitting activity — which has consisted mainly of various enforcement actions against collectives (including armed raids) for operating without a permit — but it will likely be compelled to refund all of the approximately $800,000 collected in regards to the September 20, 2010 lottery.
 
Additionally, it appears the City will have to dismiss all criminal and civil charges, be they against individuals or collectives, related to operating a collective without a permit.[i]
 
Lastly, the City is likely to face numerous lawsuits from patients and collectives who will claim to have been denied their state-sanctioned right "collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes" by virtue of a permitting process that has been found to be illegal.[ii]
 
This decision came as no surprise to Matthew Pappas, Pack and Gayle's attorney, who says that during oral arguments at a September 13 hearing the judges in the case stated that by that point they had already "tentatively determined that the ordinance is preempted. [So] the question is no longer whether it's preempted, it's how much of it might survive preemption."
 
That is what the trial court will decide when they take up the remaining issues. But Pappas says that hardly matters, calling the ordinance "effectively dead now."
 
Important to note is that in no way does the Pack decision affect the protections afforded California medpot patients. As Madden writes, "Case law has concluded that California’s statutes are not preempted by federal law, as they seek only to decriminalize certain conduct for the purposes of state law. … [And] [w]hile the [Compassionate Use Act] decriminalizes the cultivation and possession of medical marijuana by patients and their primary caregivers,the [Medical Marijuana Program Act] extends that decriminalization to possession for sale, transportation, sale, maintaining a place for sale or use, and other offenses."
 
Long Beach Post attempted to contact the City Attorney's office late in the day Tuesday, without success.

-
 
[i] In August 2011 the offices of the City Prosecutor and City Attorney tallied for Long Beach Post the amount of outstanding cases, placing the number at more than 50, most of which related to operating a collective without a permit. However, several more similar charges have been filed since then.

[ii] The first cost the City will have to pay, though, has already been determined, as Madden notes at the end of his decision: "The petitioners shall recover their costs in this proceeding."

on Twitter for latest updates and breaking news.

Share this Story:

Add a Comment:
Archived Comments (24)
Dennis
The City Council has bungled this since the beginning and now the city will endure greater costs and legal fees. Had it simply banned MedPot facilities within city limits to begin with, or restricted the sale of the narcotic to only licensed pharmacies, the financially strapped city would be done with this issue. Instead MedPot was seen as a money maker to plug some holes in the budget and an ordinance was passed that allowed this inevitable lawsuit.

For a City Council that went out of its way to undergo redistricting that was completely unnecessary in order to avoid potential lawsuits, continuing to fight this lawsuit instead of banning all MedPot dispensaries in the city effective January 1, 2012 seems contradictory.

Had the City Council done the right thing to protect the citizens of the city, protect the neighborhoods of the city and protect the long term fiscal health of the city and banned the dispensaries this would now be a non-issue.
Keyser Soze
Now, the Federal Law prohibiting possession of Marijuana is UN-Constitutional and should be struck down because it is arbitrary and capricious without a scientific or researched foundation to categorize the Indica strain as more dangerous than alcohol.
L B Bill
The idea that restrictions on med pot distribution help to protect our neighborhoods and citizens is a misunderstanding. Any problems associated with pot distribtuion are about money and not a result of the effects of marijuana as such. City council would do far more to protect the citizens if it concentrated on alcohol, drugs like crack cocaine and methamphetamines, and gang violence in our city.
Mike Ruehle
WOW. I guess City Attorney Bob Shannon's recent announcement of his saving taxpayers $576,000 (before legal fees estimated at $600,000) of the $20 million taxpayers lost investment in Lehman Brothers is pretty much overshadowed by this multi million dollar loss the city will now suffer as a result of the ordinances written by the City Attorney's office and approved by City Council.

I sat through numerous City Council meetings where lawyers and medpot representitives spoke before Long Beach's City Council that what they were doing was illegal and they were going to sue the city if it followed through on City Attorney Shannon's legal advice.

The medpot representitives and their lawyers followed through on their claims. And now us taxpayers are going to have to pay the multi million dollars to reimburse those impacted.
Kathy Ryan
I was at the council meeting last night and one of the speakers was there to complain about the medpot facility in his neighborhood. There was a shooting right before he came to the council meeting on 7th Street and Rose. Apparently the facility draws users, other than those using marijuana for medical reasons. He did not paint a pretty picture of what is going on near the facility in his neighborhood.

Most sensible individual would have anticipated problems near a medpot facility, but the City Council was blinded by their efforts to increase revenues.

The Citys' only disappointment was that the state did not legalize marijuana outside of medical uses. They were ancipating a windfall if the people agreed to legalize all uses of marijuana.
John B. Greet
Those who are arguing the legitimacy of CUA and MMPA on the grounds that federal law does not preempt state law for state purposes are, I believe, sorely missing the bigger picture.

State law likewise does not preempt federal law for federal purposes. So long as the federal purpose for marijuana is that it remain a schedule 1 controlled substance, all the local and state laws in the world will not immunize those who violate those federal laws from federal prosecution.

Judge Madden was quite clear: "...the City's ordinance went beyond decriminalization and instead permitted conduct *prohibited by* the federal CSA [i.e., Controlled Substances Act]..."

This is yet another aspect of this discussion that is often lost upon some. Neither CUA nor MMPA "legalize" anything, they just de-criminlize (from the state's perspective) marijuana production, dispensing, and use under certain specific conditions.

CUA and MMPA notwithstanding, marijuana remains illegal in California just as it does in every other state. California has simply chosen to not seek state-level prosecutions for those who violate those laws.

The federal government is under no such constraint.

The only way we can make sure that the federal government will be under such constraint is to cause marijuana to be removed from schedule 1 or from the drug schedules altogether and truly allow the states to decide for themselves how they want to address the issue.

Unless and until we do, the sort of costs and complications mentioned in this article are only going to continue.
RW Crum
Ryan, do you have any proof that shooting was directly related to the marijuana facility or are you just assuming again?

Legalize it, regulate the hell out of it, then tax the crap out of it.
Dennis
Everytime this issue is brought up several people will comment, "legalize it." It's not legal now but the problem is the City Council voted to treat pot as it is legal and regulate its sale as if it were a legal product. Until pot is legalized the City of Long Beach should not allow it to be sold in the city, either by dealers on the street or through MedPot shops. The first order on the agenda for next Tuesday should be to reverse the MedPot ordinance and ban all sales except by licensed pharmacies within the city limits. Until this City Council erradicates our city of these neighborhood blights that bring crime, graffitti, vandalism to the communities in which they are located they cannot say they are for better neighborhoods.

@Crum: Kathy Ryan did not say that the shooting on 7th street was related to the MedPot shop where the shooting occured, or in front of which the shooting occured. Kathy said an individual addressing the City Council said there was a shooting in front of the MedPot shop. Everyone knows you have issues with Ms. Ryan, but before your standard attack on her why don't you read what she writes?
Latitude
I agree with Dennis, and hope our city actually learns something from this. Our officials have to be crazy to think that they are above the law of our Federal system.. Suck it up, pay the lawsuits, refund the money, and stop acting like clowns just because you live in a left leaning state. The people you represent pay taxes and city salaries to see majority law, not fringe law. Then remember the pain, because it will again be on California's doorstep in the next election.
Good riddance, and we will remember at the ballot box the "councilmembers" who supported this ordinance. See ya!
Drew
First, fire the City Manager.
Second, fire the City Attorney.
Third, remove the Mayor.
Over the past few years there has been so much incompetence in the operation of this city it is time to find some city management that knows what they are doing.
RW Crum
@Dennis. I did read what she wrote. Did you?

"Most sensible individual would have anticipated problems near a medpot facility, but the City Council was blinded by their efforts to increase revenues."

A direct indictment of the "medpot facility" vis a vis the shooting. Not a splinter of evidence, however.

When I write "legalize it, regulate it, tax it", I'm obviously referring to marijuana in a general sense. It's simply ridiculous to criminalize it. It's time we quit wasting billions of dollars "fighting" something that will never be beaten.

Moreover, the court decision said the city CAN'T restrict the facilities, so therefore they can't ban all sales. It's a federal issue, as the court says, and they're choosing by and large to ignore it.

Disgusted
Kathy Ryan is espousing propaganda and being inflammatory by including "There was a shooting right before he came to the council meeting on 7th Street and Rose." Shootings in that neighborhood are not uncommon, and this shooting had nothing to do with the medical cannabis dispensary. For her to include it in her post, as if it were evidence of criminal activity brought on by the presence of the dispensary, reeks big time. She has no credibility.
Sander
What I do not understand is the consequence that the drafters of this illegal ordinance will suffer from their misguided actions. How can someone who is supposed to defend the City from litigation create a law that is directly responsible for producing it? Will there be any accountability in this regard?

Also, now that these rules have been found to be illegal, where does that leave the existing med-pot facilities? Will they be allowed to continue?

Lastly, will this case produce any significant impact on how other cities are managing dispensaries? Is there a good municipal model that the City can duplicate here?
angelton
I love that some of you think that the potheads can bully the city into submission. Kiss your dispensaries goodbye, and don't forget to look in the mirror when it's time to cry about it.
BG
Hey ang,Get real, they won't "bully" anyone. They just will lawyer up and win just like they just did.
A poss 1.7 BILLION $$ industry will not just go away, wait and see.
Risible
@ angelton- when the potheads are run out of town, can me and yer posse celebrate with some of the scotch, bourbon and whiskey in yer cupboard?
Kity
The municipal model in existance and the one most likely to be followed hereout will be Anaheim - i.e., complete bans on any and all collectives operating within City limits.

Yep, smooch smooch, kiss em good-bye.
RW Crum
Yeah, let's take a huge, untapped source of revenue and run them out of town on a rail. Makes complete and total sense.
Bill Orton
While this outcome serves to blow up an incredibly complicated issue, it does highlight the absence of any meaningful SELF-REGULATION by the pharmagreen industry, without which any meaningful effort to dance on the edge of a sword is doomed. Pharmagreen businesses have not only flaunted all efforts at responsible regulation by government, but there has been no coherent steps taken by the businesses that would inspire any sense of confidence that the industry's operators are acting with sensitivity on the whole range of issues that the sector should be dealing with, like security, access, signage, community respect. Pharmagreen is now 15+ years into the Prop 215 era, roughly where the liquor people were around 1947, when the Oscar winner for best picture was a tale of hard-drinking vets come home from WWII ("The Greatest Years of Our Lives") and when "Lost Weekend" was in the pipeline. Liquor had to confront their own need for self-regulation. If this issue is to be resolved in any long-term way, self-regulation based on strict industry protocols and standards is where pharmagreen must go.
Doubtful
Given that over 50% of the Long Beach population voted for legalization of marijuana in the last state election, I doubt the med-cannabis dispensaries are going anywhere anytime soon, so, tough luck Angelton and Kity and the rest of you disgruntled liquor store and bar owners. Love your optimism, better luck next time...
CheshireCat
@Doubtful - keep pushing it~ The Feds are waking up and taking notice of the legal circus in California (and other pro pot states). The letters are in the mail dispensary owners (or will be soon). This ain't over by a long shot ~

Med Pot Proponents - you insisted on bringing this issue out into the light of day. Do not now complain that the light shines too brightly. You've thrown your truly ill compatriots under the bus - they are the ones who will endure the loss of safe access to medicine while the rest of you will just have to go back to buying your pot on the down low.
Paulcdj@aol.com
The latest is that the Feds can go after anyone who has aided this illegal activity, including landlords and possibly local officials. Good going Big Brother voters. Pot abuse is bad, this is far worse, but on the other hand, those who play on the edge of criminal behavior sometimes get burned.
John B. Greet
Obama administration then:
www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/us/19holder

Obama administration now:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/10/feds-cracking-down-on-california-medical-marijuana-dispensaries

How's all that "hope and change" working out for you?
Gigi
How many liquor stores have been robbed at gunpoint with clerks/customers being shot. And I don't know about the rest of you but graffiti has been a problem long before medical marijuana dispensaries. I don't believe it is the members of the collectives who are defacing the neighborhoods or out shooting people. People rob and kill because they have no moral compass and no conscience. They want cash and it makes no difference where they get it. Maybe not allowing armed guards at medical marijuana facilities sets the dispensaries up for that type of violence. I don't drink or smoke marijuana. I also don't make it my business the police the morality of anyone who does. I do smoke ciarettes and find the over the top laws concerning it ridiculous. The squeaky wheel got oiled there and it is being oiled here as well. How about everyone worry about themselves. I am with the guy who said, "legalize it, regulate it and tax the hell out of it." Just like alcohol and cigarettes. It isn't fair but it seems to be the american way. I also agree that the fight against it can't be won. Marijuana will continued to be demanded and supplied one way or another. Whether that is to the benefit of the City or not remains to be seen.

Popular Now

See more

New in the Marketplace

See more