LA City Council bans MMJ shops

Discussion in 'Marijuana News' started by BushSquatting, Aug 8, 2012.

  1. This is really bad news for MMJ patients in California.

    In the latest attempt to regulate what many say is an out-of-control proliferation of medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles, the City Counted voted 14-0 Tuesday to ban pot shops.

    Under the ban, each of the 762 dispensaries that have registered with the city will be sent a letter ordering them to shut down immediately. Those that don't comply may face legal action from the city.

    Medical marijuana activists who had packed the council chambers jeered when the vote came down. More than a dozen Los Angeles Police Department officers were called in to quell them.

    Under the ban, medical patients and their caregivers will be able to grow and share the drug in small groups of three people or less.

    But the activists say most patients don't have the time or skills to cultivate marijuana. One dispensary owner told the council that it would cost patients a minimum of $5,000 to grow marijuana at home.

    In a seemingly contradictory move, the council also voted to instruct city staff to draw up an ordinance that would allow a group of about 170 dispensaries that registered with the city several years ago to remain open.

    Councilman Jose Huizar, who voted against that motion, said it might give the public “false hope” that the ban wound not be enforced.

    He said the ban would be enforced, especially against problem dispensaries that have drawn complaints from neighbors. “Relief is on its way,” he said.

    But he acknowledged that the city may not have the resources to shut down every dispensary in the city.

    Councilman Paul Koretz, who initially voted against the ban, and who supported the motion to allow the oldest dispensaries to stay open, said he hoped the city would come up with a more compassionate law in the future.

    “We have shut off almost every way that a normal person can get access to marijuana,” he said. “It will be a ban until otherwise noted,” he said.

    The article can be seen here, along with a video
  2. Time for LA to have a RECALL of city council officials in office.

    kick their asses out of office and rescind their actions...or sit back like a herd of good sheeple (it ain't that baaaAAAaad they say, the koolaid that the prohibitionist serve is soothing...).
  3. what a crush to our hopes... -.-.
  4. This is against state law and it is already in process of being over-turned.
  5. There will still be around 170 dispensaries open... this isnt a big deal at all.
  6. Not saying I agree with this at all in the least bit, but there is way to many shops in la lol.
  7. It's not illegal until the CA Supreme Court says it's illegal and I'm not counting on that happening. LA dicked around for way to long while this exploded in their faces - City council deserves the boot for non-action.
  8. I'm tired of the Federal vs State vs City bullshit. Let's end this and fucking legalize.
  9. Federal law always trumps state law.
  10. I dont know how to feel about this, note that they are allowing 170 of the original shops to stay open, which i think is commendable. i mean 170 sounds like a shit ton of dispensaries to somebody like me, from a zero tolerance state.

    what i really want to know is what constitutes a "problem dispensary" and what problems the neighbors are having...
  11. Like I said - it isn't illegal until the CA Supreme Court makes a decision. Since you failed to read your own links, please stand in front of the class and read aloud the bolded section below 10 times:

    "The ordinance provides that the ban shall remain in effect unless and until the Court of Appeal or the California Supreme Court deems it to be “unlawful,” in which event the provisions of the former ordinance, which required a conditional use permit and business license and imposed location restrictions and operating requirements (set forth in subdivisions D through H), will again take effect."

  12. ". During the hearing, James De Aguilera the attorney representing one of the collectives referred to a recent state appellate decision prohibiting city and county bans of dispensaries and collectives."

Share This Page