LOS ANGELES – Lawyers for Los Angeles County recommended a “surge strategy” Tuesday to shut down medical marijuana dispensaries operating illegally in the face of a ban in effect in unincorporated areas.
The county’s legal team told the Board of Supervisors that they had closed 60 dispensaries between 2011-16 and another 31 after the board asked for a crackdown in March 2016.
Enforcement is pending against another 49 dispensaries and lawyers are prepping to force 26 more to close. That would account for all the marijuana retailers identified by the county to date, though new shops continue to pop up.
County counsel estimated that it would take four to six months to close the remaining 75 on the county’s hit list if more county lawyers were hired to team up with the District Attorney’s Office.
“County Counsel and the District Attorney recommend an aggressive, uniform and expeditious enforcement `surge strategy’ against illegal MMDs (medical marijuana dispensaries),” lead counsel Mary Wickham wrote in a letter to the board.
Though a county ban on dispensaries has been in place since 2011, enforcing a zero-tolerance policy has proven difficult.
Dispensaries shut down and then open up under different names, creating a game of “whack-a-mole” for enforcement agencies, said Lance Wong, head deputy of the district attorney’s Major Narcotics Division.
The lucrative nature of the business means that entrepreneurs fight hard to keep their dispensaries open, with some filing civil suits against the county. Wong said another problem is that some people mistakenly believe that dispensaries are legal everywhere.
In addition to bringing the hammer down on dispensaries, the county has banned cultivation and distribution of marijuana in unincorporated areas. That ordinance is set to expire in June, but county counsel said it would be rolled into a new regulation.
Landlords are also prohibited by county law from renting to dispensaries.
Supervisor Kathryn Barger said it was tough for landlords to turn down the premiums being offered by some would-be dispensary operators and stressed the importance of educating property owners.
Barger also highlighted public safety concerns that surround dispensaries that operate as all-cash businesses, reminding colleagues of an dispensary employee murdered in her district.
Supervisor Hilda Solis echoed that concern and also worried aloud about dispensaries near schools.
Supervisor Janice Hahn said she’d like to see more enforcement in her district, which stretches along the South Bay and then along the border with Orange County out to Diamond Bar.
“There’s a ban. They’re illegal. They ought to be shut down,” Hahn said.
Recent enforcement has focused on Solis’ First District, which runs from downtown Los Angeles east to Pomona and south to South Gate. Twenty-five of the 31 dispensaries shut down in the last year were in those neighborhoods.
The county crackdown comes as other jurisdictions seek to profit from the statewide legislation of recreational marijuana, approved by voters in November.
Recreational sales will not begin under the new law until January, but some residents and business owners urged the county to focus on licensing and regulating dispensaries rather than banning them.
“If the goal is to maximize the transition from the illicit market to the regulated market, then we should try and figure out how to transition some of these operators,” said Cat Packer, California policy coordinator for the Drug Policy Alliance. “We need a surge of economic opportunities for communities.”
Under the state law, local jurisdictions can only ban commercial activities and outdoor cultivation, something county lawyers are preparing to do.
“Why continue to wage a battle that you obviously are losing?,” resident David Green asked the board. “Almost 60 percent of the voters thought recreational use was fine.”
Other advocates stressed the drug’s medicinal value.
“Cannabis is an exit drug (for me),” said Alexis D’Angelo of Women Grow Los Angeles. D’Angelo called the drug life-saving, telling the board she was able to wean herself off six pharmaceutical drugs and stay away from alcohol by substituting marijuana.
The report by county counsel required no vote by the board and no action was taken.
The county has set up an anonymous tip line — (213) 974-6453 — for residents to report dispensaries.
–
William says
I wish I had some cookie dough.
,,, I forget that, too.... says
as a person who uses MM to aid treating my PTSD from years of Naval service, I voted NO to make it for “recreational use” for this very same reason- “they” would find reasons to take it away. Regardless, this is about shutting down ILLEGAL pharmacies, so I don’t see what the “problem” is…
either that or I’m stoned and I forgot what my point was…. :P
Tim Scott says
It should be noted in this push to shut down illegal pharmacies that there are no legal pharmacies.
13 Speed says
Makes perfect sense,Lets use our money and police force to arrest people for something that’s legal. Then we come up short for real crime but oh well that’s how republicans roll.
Bob says
” how republicans roll.”
funny how the majority of our supervisors that came up with the rules are Dems….. But don’t let the truth color your thinking.
Rockso says
I’m just waiting to vote to legalize cocaine.
Bob says
But liquor stores that sells crack pipes are ok next to day cares? 30th & Ave S Palmdale
Where’s the public safety?
Laughing says
Those are not crack pipes, they are open ended test tubes. LOL
Tm says
Thank you!! Let’s legalize marijuana but shut down the dispensaries, doesn’t make sense, yet you have crack pipes in smoke shops , druggies,prostitution,human trafficking, drunks living on the streets, etc…
Outdoor says
I hope Tim Scott reads this. He seems to find the facts. We voted for recreational marijuana in California. How can someone tell me I can’t grow my legal number of plants in my yard. Doesn’t state law supersede a weed Hating county officials “rules”.
Tim Scott says
Prop 64 allowed “local regulation” as long as it was “reasonable” (which cities and counties immediately started pressing the limits of) and did not completely prohibit. It spelled out that cities and counties specifically couldn’t prevent growing up to six plants as long as they were in a “completely enclosed secure space.” So that allows local governments to prohibit outdoor cultivation.
I expect some enterprising individuals to make a booming business out of installing six plant hydroponic grow sheds. Heck, I might unretire for that myself.
Tim Scott says
I read it and replied, but for some reason it didn’t get through.
Anyway…
The state law allows for local “reasonable regulation.” Of course it doesn’t define “reasonable” so there will have to be lawsuits when sore loser authoritarians push the boundaries of reason and try to ban everything.
However, the law does state that local governments CANNOT prevent growing six plants per residence in a secured structure. By specifically saying that they left an opening for the banning of outdoor cultivation because of accessibility.
If you want to produce a useful test case and get into the lawsuit battle I would consider building a full (including top) chain link enclosure that can be locked around six plants in your yard. Such a case would clarify that the local authority wasn’t really following the intent of the law, which is “we can’t grow it and just have schoolkids picking it on their way home” and was just banning whatever they could without reason.
BobM says
you nailed it Tim Scott
Tim Scott says
Thanks. FWIW I’m running specs on a six plant fully automated hydroponic and light system with a secure enclosure to see how little I could install them for and what sort of footprint they would require in a back yard. Stay tuned.
BobM says
The shed would require an air conditioner as I think it would get to hot inside come summer time.
I would prefer to save power and grow under the sun. Many a home has been burned down by indoor grows.