|
||||
City Closes Marijuana Dispensary by Ryan ZumMallen | Archive | 11.02.09 |
+  The City of Long Beach has closed Green Nurse Collective, a smoke shop operating on Broadway that also served as a marijuana dispensary, according to City Manager Pat West, who responded "Yes" when asked if the closure is indicative of a concentrated effort by the City to crack down on dispensaries. "We are being extremely aggressive in targeting retailers that have a legitimate business license and then choose to add a new product that is not part of the business license," West said in a phone interview today. "That gives us an opportunity to close the business and fine them if they reopen." West said that many more dispensaries will be closed in the coming days and weeks, and that the process to close several businesses has already begun. The issue with GNC is that the business license in place was violated when the store decided to add marijuana to its list of products. West said the City learned of the violation when the business placed an advertisement in a local newspaper. The issue of dispensaries operating as "for-profit" businesses is separate, he said, and is being dealt with by the Long Beach Police Department. In the meantime, the City is moving forward with closing dispensaries that operate without business licenses to do so. "Every one that's out there does not have a business license," West said. The issue of allowing marijuana dispensaries to operate within Long Beach limits has caused a frenzy since the LBPOST.com publication of an op-ed article from City Prosecutor Tom Reeves, in which he directly compared dispensaries to drug dealers and disputed the notion of the businesses as caregivers. LBPOST.com columnist Greggory Moore wrote a follow-up rebuttal to Reeves' op-ed that cited examples of lawsuits and legislation in favor of the legality of marijuana dispensaries. The debate rages on in the Comments section of this column, written last week by LBPOST.com columnist John Greet. At last week's monthly Beer & Politics public forum, Reeves debated alongside Moore and issued a warning to dispensaries currently operating in the city. "Stop," Reeves said. "Get off that train. Bad things are coming." In other kush-related news, Councilmember Gerrie Schipske has announced that she will host a community town hall meeting to discuss the issue of marijuana collectives operating in the city. The meeting will be held Thursday, November 12, at 6:30pm at the El Dorado Community Center on 2800 Studebaker Road. The following statement is from a Schipske press release: "I have invited City Prosecutor, Tom Reeves and Deputy Police Chief, Blair to attend the meeting and to listen to the concerns of residents who do not want these facilities in our city. Please note that because the City of Long Beach does not regulate facilities dispensing marijuana for medical purposes, I do not receive any type of notice when they open. I am relying upon residents to let me know so that I can refer them to the Police Department. Come to the Town Hall on November 12 and let your opinion be heard."  Disclosure: The LBPOST.com has sponsorship relationships with medical marijuana dispensaries.
Comments
Click Here to Join the Discussion on this Story
23 Comments so far.
John M. Fentis Interesting how quickly the City of Long Beach responded to the closure of this facility as a result of Reeves elevating this issue to some level of newsworthiness and yet no action by the City or the City Prosecutor relative to Sean Hitchcock's neglect in obtaining a grading permit prior to his blantantly illegal land excavation...I guess that "bad things are coming" only for some people. gt I understand the reasoning behind regulations and enforcement. The problem I have is that the city council brought this on themselves by not addressing this issue in the beginning. I might also add that for City Prosecutor Tom Reeves to speak at a forum called Beer and politics about how bad he thinks the dispensaries are is a joke. I can just picture Reeves going home at the end of the day to a few martinis to take the edge off. These guys will not last the next election. Actual Non-Smoker It seems as though the people that are against the weed are the people that *most* need to be smoking it... Paul Good point by Mr Fentis. The juxtaposing of closing pot dispensaries to the virtual greenlighting of the Hitchcock's destruction says it all. The city is run by knuckledraggers. Capster All I can say is that if Tom Reeves starts going after these dispensaries and as he calls them "dope dealers" while continuing to allow Sean Hitchcock type crimes to go unpunished, my advice to Tom Reeves is, STOP, get off YOUR train, bad things are coming! You and the rest of the "good old boy" network are helping breed a new class of anarchists who, for growing good reasons, have no respect or regard for the law. What good reason? Simple - you work the law to fit YOUR ideas of what's good and what's bad. You pass hundreds or thousands of new laws annually, most of which will only be enforced when it serves your purposes, not the good of the populace. You squander our tax dollars on pet projects or worse that do little to improve the lives of the majority of your constituents, and when the well is dry from that, you simply levy new taxes or "fees" to suck more out of our pockets. We're tired of you and the way you play us all, or to quote a line from a classic movie - "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take this anymore!" Or at least, many of us are getting there... John M. Fentis Thank you for developing this story so quickly. Just to be clear, I do not engage in any private practice since my retirement as a Deputy City Prosecutor for the City of Long Beach in 2005. I think that even a first year law student can see some serious constitutional issues here. How does one obtain a license to legally dispense marijuana for medicinal purposes according to California State law when no procedure has been developed by the City of Long Beach to provide for the dispensing of this product? It seems to me that the City of Long Beach might be deemed neglgent in not creating provisions by which to implement a measure which was duly voted into law by the citizens of California. I would invite some constitutional scholars far more creative than myself to weigh in on this issue. More interesting is the issue of how the illustrious Mr. Reeves handles this closure. If he proceeds directly to prosecution for failure to have a business license when he himself manufactured this issue in this publication, I would seriously call into question his notion of consistent and fair application of the laws. There are plenty of businesses out there without appropriate business licenses which are depriving the City of legitimate revenue and yet there is no sudden leap by the Prosecutor's office to wade into this aspect of enforcement. Similarly, I would also question any attempt by Mr. Reeves or his office to enforce any of California' stringent environmental laws since my retirement in 2005. I'm sure that his answer will be that unless City Departments bring his office the cases, these cases will not be prosecuted. Yet I find it curiously strange that in a matter of a few weeks since Mr. Reeves initially brought up the issue of marijuana dispensaries, one has suddenly and mysteriously been closed by the City after a significant period of non-enforcement of this issue. Tell us if you will, Mr. Reeves, why you are not similarly committed to environmental enforcement and why you purposefully chose to dismantle one of the finest municipal environmental enforcement programs in the State of California. It is a great disservice to those members of the City's Fire and Health Departments who were diligently discharging their duties in an effort to ensure environmental compliance within the City of Long Beach. JHz Given the facts that this type of business will be around and growing, if the Long Beach City Council refuses to allow them in the city it only means people will go to other cities to buy. It's too bad they don't see this as an oportunity for revenue for the city and work with these people. No wonder Long Beach is hurting so badly. The City continues to cut off it's nose to spite it's face. I guess they are too busy implimenting cat licenses and yelling at city employees to bother actually doing something that would help people here. Vicki For 2 weeks it seems that 5th district council woman Geri is to busy to answer my emails. Lakewood Village triangle of shopping centers has NOT 1 BUT 2 ( Herbal ) medical marijuana stores. 1 located on Carson next door to a bicycle shop frequented by many kids, the other on Village Road, across the street from a skateboard shop and 2 stores away from a Dance School. How pleseant for all these kids to be on the sidewalks on Saturdays and Sundays. What is worse. Their windows are painted white so nobody can see in. Grates on the doors to protect their pot. And it is said the owners live inside which I thought was against the law. Maybe somebody else can get some answers as to the laws of these dispensarys. francois I personally think Reeves is a political opportunist. It's odd that his most 'passionate' actions are the ones he deems politically fortuitous. Selective prosecution seems to be his main agenda. How much beer is he swilling during the "Beer and Politics" gatherings? Thank you to Mr. Fentis for bringing both the potential constitutionality of Reeves's activities and the conflict of interest in his stated agenda. He looked the other way on Sean Hitchcock's assault on our city, but now bears a standard against those who have medical needs. He should have worked on setting a city policy BEFORE going after the medpot dispensaries. Reeves definitely appears to have an agenda against the collectives. I think it might have something to do with political opportunism or cronyism. Perhaps he has a vested financial investment with other business owners in shutting these storefronts down in order to open 'legitimate' shops? Sander It is really very simple: People will buy marijuana legally if they can. If they can't, they'll buy it illegally. Marijuana has always be widely available, and the City has done absolutely nothing about it. Clearly, they don't want revenues from the sales, and want to criminalize a huge segment of the population. I said this before, and I'll say it again: Marijuana will be legalized. Of that there is no doubt. The question is whether Long Beach will be a leader or, as is most common, scrambling to play catch-up with other more forward looking Cities. Adreana Langston I'm writing this comment at 9:48pm on 11/04/09 and 4 out of 11 banner advertisements on LBPost.com website are for pot dispensaries. When I read The District there are more colored advertisements for pot dispensaries than there are for any other type of industry, including bars. The conspiratal side of me wonders if Reeves and the City Council members want to kill dispensaries in Long Beach in order to cripple the coffers of the two publications which write most consistently about local government. How much more stuff would they be able to do under the radar if they no longer had to be bothered with the prying eyes of The District and Long Beach Post reporters? That story on the illegally developed wetlands, The District CARRIED that story. I mean The Press Telegram and The Gazette weren't really trying to cover it. I'm sure the powers that be recognized that fact just like I did. They can't go after a free press directly but pot dispensaries which have be picking up the slack in paid advertising in a free press are easy targets. John Greet John M. Fentis: First, thank you for your service to our community. Do we truly have any idea "how quickly the City of Long Beach responded" in the case of Green Nurse? Do we know how long the place was alleged to have been operating unlawfully or how long the formal investigation took? You seem to be assuming facts not in evidence here. Also may I ask you this, as a former Deputy City Prosecutor: Can the City Prosecutor file a criminal complaint against Mr. Hitchcock entirely on his own authority or must there be some mechanism through which such a case is brought to him, such as a police report or a citation, etc? Also, isn't it true that the City has a legislative authority and responsibility to regulate businesses within it's jurisdiction? If not, why are hundreds and hundreds of lawful businesses currently paying millions of dollars per year to obtain and retain such licenses? If no local regulations have yet been established for medpot operations, shouldn't that mean that, to be lawful, none such should open in Long Beach until such time as those regulations are, in fact, established? I could be mistaken but I don't think any prosecution will be pursued against the former Green Nurse operators. The place was alleged to have been operating unlawfully and it has now voluntarily closed its doors rather than face mandatory closure and prosecution. I suspect that will suffice to satisfy the City. Is it your contention that because we are not enforcing these laws in EVERY case that we should not enforce them in ANY case? If so, isn't that a bit like saying we shouldn't enforce ANY parking ordinances because we are not citing EVERY parking violator throughout the city, ALL the time? Do you also feel that our failure to more actively enforce our business licensing laws in this area is "a great disservice to those members of the City's Fire and Health Departments who were diligently discharging their duties in an effort to ensure (Fire Safety and Public Health) compliance within the City of Long Beach"? gt: You are correct that the City shoould have taken more constructive action on this challenge sooner, but this fact does not obviate, to any degree, the inherent illegality of every single medpot operation currently open for business in the City. Capster: Mr. Reeves has drawn a clear distinction between legal and illegal medpot operations and, to my knowledge, he has only referred to those currently operating counter to Prop 215, CUA and People v. Mentch as "dope dealers". Mr. Reeves cannot and does not "pass [] new laws" and can only prosecute the cases that others bring to him for consideration. JHz: The City will, indeed, be allowing medpot operations in the City, just as soon as it can craft appropriate regulations that will allow them. We may not like their timetable, but it is, indeed, theirs to follow. Sander: I think most of our Council has made it clear that they want to craft appropriate regulations so that legitimate medpot operations can serve legitimate patients in our community. I do not think it is truly their intent "to criminalize a huge segment of the population". But in any case it is not the City that creates criminals, it is the unlawful actions of people that creates criminals. Adreana: I personally feel that no publication should acceot advertising dollars from any business that is currently operating unlawfully, within the City or elsewhere. Adreana Langston To Mr. Greet. I used to live two blocks from a liquor store. I patronized them until I observed that they sold cigarettes to obviously under-21 people. I never gave that store another dime of my money. So my question to you is, if you don't think LBPost.com should be accepting advertising from dispensaries that are open illegally (all of them), uhm, what are you doing patronizing their online paper? Greggory Sander, when considering Officer Greet's comments on what makes criminals, for context you should know that he feels, for example, that wherever there are laws on the books prohibiting consensual sex acts between adults, anyone engaging in such acts is a criminal and should be arrested. He's proven a bit reticent to put it so bluntly, but he's quite consistent about saying that any law on the books should be enforced - including, as I verified with him elsewhere, just this type of law. He doesn't discriminate when it comes to laws: bad or good, they all should be enforced, in every case; and anyone who breaks a law is a criminal. It's a less humanistic view on criminality than you or I might take, but there it is. John Greet Adreana: I don't "patronize" LBPOST. In the manner that you mean that would entail my paying or otherwise trading something of value with them and I do not do so. I *am* a volunteer columnist for LBPOST and if you read any of my columns you should quickly understand my overall point of view and how I feel it applies to daily life in Long Beach. But I am neither a publisher nor an editor for LBPOST so I have zero control over who they choose to accept advertising dollars from. All I can do, in this regard, is to express my opinion on this matter openly and honestly and this, I hope you will agree, I have done. On the other hand, selling cigarettes to minors is a crime and I would hope that you would also have properly reported the store in question, rather than simply deprive them of your patronage. John Greet Greggory: Thanks for attempting to clarify my position for Sander, though I believe you might be able to do a better job of it if you actually understood it better. To live together amicably in a civil and well-ordered and free society, we must agree to abide by the rule of law. If a given people, say the people of Virginia, as represented by their duly-elected legislature, see fit to enact a law outlawing consensual sodomy, then they are within their right to do so and it is not my place to dispute them. I would not want to live in such a place, but, of course, that's why I don't. Many others, however, apparently *do* want to live in such a place and so that law was passed and remains on the books there. The moment that they deicide otherwise, however, they have a responsibility to either ammend or abolish that law. If they fail of this responsibility then the rule of law fails in their jurisdiction and their well-ordered, free and civil society suffers thereby. Now I submit that if we, in Long Beach, as represented by or duly-elected Council, had decided right after Prop 215 passed that it was a priority that we get effective medpot regulations in place for our community, then we wouldn't likely be having this conversation. But that's not what happened. So either it was not a priority, at least for them,(obviously), our Council experienced a failure of leadership in this area (probably) or both (most likely). But I submit that the correct remedy for all of those is at the ballot box during the next elections and not to allow an entire class of business enterprise to violate our business licensing laws. Kevin Officer Greets long rants don't hold any water and only add to the disinformation on the issue. California Attorney General Jerry Brown has already issued guidelines for how a dispensary is to legally operate. The state's medical cannabis initiative instructs local officials "to implement a plan to provide for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana. The key word is AFFORDABLE, that means money will exchange hands as outlined by our Attorney General. Officer Greets and City Prosecutor Tom Reeves need to quit misleading the public and the CITY COUNCILE with their wackadoodle interpolations of the law. The State Attorney General has spoken, fallow the law gentlemen and quit waiting the city councils time and tax payer money on personal crusades. Greggory Looks like I understood it perfectly - you certainly didn't mention one part of my claim that's wrong; it's just that you want to soft-pedal some of the real-world effects of your inflexible position, since perhaps even you find them to be morally reprehensible - such as arresting adults for their consensual sex acts. You may have just explained WHY you hold such an inflexible position, but in terms of clarifying what you want to happen vis-Ă -vis law enforcement, I did a much better job than you - "Enforce all laws on the books, in every case, no matter what they are, period" - because you are unwilling to be honest and direct enough to say, "Yes, I DO believe people should be arrested for their consensual sex acts when there are laws prohibiting them. Now, here's why...." But I get it: it's a horrible thing to want people to be arrested for, and a terrible misprioritization of the proposed use of our always-limited law-enforcement resources, and I'd feel strange about admitting to it, too. John Greet Kevin: State law is indeed clear, as are the Attorney General's Guidelines. I would encourage you to read them fully or, if you have, to attempt to better understand them. For example: Section IV(B)(1) of the guidelines are quite specific: "Nothing in Proposition 215 or the MMP authorizes collectives, cooperatives, or individuals to profit from the sale or distribution of marijuana. (See, e.g., § 11362.765(a) ['nothing in this section shall authorize . . . any individual or group to cultivate or distribute marijuana for profit']". Also, Section IV(C)(1) is equally clear and, I believe, the origin of Mr. Reeves' assertion that Co-Ops and Collectives are lawful, while Dispensaries may not be: "Although medical marijuana 'dispensaries' have been operating in California for years, dispensaries, as such, are not recognized under the law. As noted above, the only recognized group entities are cooperatives and collectives. (§ 11362.775.) It is the opinion of this Office that a properly organized and operated collective or cooperative that dispenses medical marijuana through a storefront may be lawful under California law, but that dispensaries that do not substantially comply with the guidelines set forth in sections IV(A) and (B), above, are likely operating outside the protections of Proposition 215 and the MMP, and that the individuals operating such entities may be subject to arrest and criminal prosecution under California law. For example, dispensaries that merely require patients to complete a form summarily designating the business owner as their primary caregiver â€' and then offering marijuana in exchange for cash 'donations' â€' are likely unlawful. (Peron, supra, 59 Cal.App.4th at p. 1400 [cannabis club owner was not the primary caregiver to thousands of patients where he did not consistently assume responsibility for their housing, health, or safety].)" Now, Kevin, these are the actual laws and the actual Attorney General Guidelines concerning them. Any questions? John Greet Greggory: So now I am dishonest as well? Very nice. I've made my position perfectly clear on this issue many times and in several ways. I cannot be held responsible if you don't like the way I say it or haven't the wit to understand it. I rather doubt that repeating it yet again will make any difference because for some reason you seem to need to focus upon me, personally, rather than upon my arguments. So unless you can come up with a comment or a position or an argument that I feel is actually deserving of a response, I guess we're done. Painfully Waiting Funny as to nothing being done about a chain called Herbal Solutions that have 5 locations 3 in long beach... all operating without a business license... Last time long beach went on this crusade they closed everyone except Herbal Solutions and some other club... wonder if we are going to see a repeat play... Long Beach is starting to smell a little ripe from all these backdoor political games! We need to vote these jokesters out now!!! Kevin John: I have a question, what is your problem with Marijuana? You seem to be fixated on some puritanical interpretation of the law, while simultaneously missing the intent. “Safe and Affordable distribution of Marijuana” As others have pointed out here, you don’t seem to be consistent with your views on enforcing other laws like prohibiting certain sexual acts between consenting adults. In fact you take that as some kind of personal attack instead of an honest example of your inconsistent and ingenuous posture to only be concerned with the enforcement of law. LB Guy Not surprised this one got shut down, its one of the least like by patients who have rated it on collective surveys. But as another post points out, I wonder if the people in Naples who patronize Herbal Solutions would ever see the same kind of raid. There is no way you can make anyone believe a chain of pot shops is not doing it for profit. I guess being a wealthy resident and contributor to the police department has noooo affect on the selection of which shops stay and which shops go :/
Archive
LBPOST.com Managing Editor Ryan ZumMallen keeps up on all the current and breaking Long Beach news.
Ryan ZumMallen has served as the managing editor of the LBPOST.com since 2007. He graduated from CSULB with a degree in Print Journalism in 2008 and is a member of the 2009 class of Leadership Long Beach. You can find him on various basketball courts around the city.
Ryan's Community
 
Ryan's Archives
Show All Archives |
||||
| About Us | Contact Us | Policies | ||||
