Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ATTACHMENT 2. <br /> <br />8A <br />PagEr ~ <br />Page 1 <br /> <br />REPORT <br /> <br /> <br />December 14, 2009 <br /> <br />SUBJECT <br />Temporary moratorium on the establishment and operation of medical marijuana <br />collectives. <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />By 4/5 majority vote of the City Council, waive reading and establish a temporary <br />moratorium on the establishment and operation of medical marijuana collectives <br />(Attachment 1). <br /> <br />BACKGROUND <br />In 1996, California voters adopted Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act (CUA) <br />which allows for cultivation, possession, and use of medical marijuana by seriously ill <br />persons and their primary caregivers upon recommendation of a physician. <br /> <br />In 2003, the California Legislature adopted the Medical Marijuana Program Act (MMP) <br />which created a voluntary program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified <br />patients and their primary caregivers. The MMP immunized from prosecution certain <br />limited conduct necessary to enable the program's purpose. It also quantifies the <br />amount of marijuana a qualified patient may possess. <br /> <br />Together, the CUA and the MMP authorize such persons and those who care for them <br />to grow the marijuana plants necessary to meet that need by "collectively" pooling their <br />resources to grow and provide for their collective needs. This is why many municipal <br />ordinances refer to these establishments as IIcollectives", which are substantially similar <br />to cooperatives and are defined as such in the attached ordinance. In contrast to <br />collectives, the law does not allow for "dispensaries" where entrepreneurs sell marijuana <br />to provide for the needs of an undefined group of customers. <br /> <br />State law allows for collectives and/or cooperatives but places very few limits on these <br />businesses. Cities across California have approached medical marijuana collectives in <br />three different ways: <br />. Allow but regulate collectives (about 30 cities); <br />. Ban collectives (100 cities); or <br />. Temporarily ban collectives by enacting a moratorium (50 cities). <br /> <br />Some 30 cities have chosen to allow collectives but regulate them fairly stringently by <br />limiting them to designated areas though zoning, and requiring security precautions. <br />The cities of South San Francisco and San Mateo. and the County of San Mateo are <br />local examples of municipalities that allow but regulate collectives. <br /> <br />1 <br />