Exhibit CC 01-19-2016 Item No. 12 Marijuana Presentation and Written CommunicationMedical Marijuana Safety and Regulation Act
(AB 243, AB 266, SB 643)
Effective January 1, 2016
AB 243: Establishes CA Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA) as
licensing and regulatory authority for medical marijuana cultivation.
DFA to work with other state agencies to develop environmental protection
standards,
CA Department of Pesticide Regulation to establish medical marijuana
pesticide standards, and
CA Department of Public Health to create standards for labeling of
marijuana edibles.
AB 266: Establishes Bureau of Medical Marijuana Regulation within
Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA)
Develop regulations and issue state licenses for medical marijuana
dispensaries, distributors, and transporters.
SB 643: Standards for physicians that recommend medical marijuana,
including discipline for physicians who recommend excessive amounts.
Why Update the Municipal Code?
Currently Medical Marijuana Uses are Prohibited BUT with
new laws:
If a city does not have land use regulations or ordinances "prohibiting the
cultivation of marijuana, either expressly or otherwise through permissive
zoning, or chooses not to administer a conditional permit program ... then
commencing March 1, 2016, the (state) division shall be the sole licensing
authority for medical marijuana cultivation applicants ..." (AB 243)
Out of jurisdiction dispensaries can only deliver to cities without an express
ban (AB 266)
Updating Municipal Code preserves local control on
marijuana issues
Proposed Ordinance
Preserves status quo on land use regulations
Prohibits:
Medical marijuana dispensaries,
Cultivation,
Deliveries, and
Commercial cannabis activities
Exclusions:
“Qualified Patient” cultivating and transporting for personal medical
use (NOT for any other person);
“Primary caregiver,” delivering or transporting for purposes of no
more than five specified “qualified patients,” (operating in
compliance with State Law)
Licensed clinic, hospice, health care facility, residential care facility
which are excluded from state law
Legal Basis
Ban on Medical Marijuana dispensaries and facilities:
CA Supreme Court ruled that Compassionate Use Act (Prop. 215) and
the Medical Marijuana Program Act of 2004 do not preempt:
Complete and permanent ban on medical dispensaries, collectives and cooperatives
by local jurisdictions
Cities not required to accommodate medical marijuana facilities in any way
Ban on cultivation activities:
AB 243 expressly permits cities to enact a ban
CA Court of Appeal has upheld a ban in Maral v. City of Live Oak (2012)
Urgency Ordinance
Establishes a Moratorium on:
Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
Marijuana Cultivation Facilities
Commercial Cannabis Activities
Medical Marijuana Deliveries
Effective immediately until the Ordinance changes take effect
Ordinance amendment would take effect March 3, 2016
Negative Secondary Effects
Many cities have experienced negative secondary effects
including:
Unsafe construction and electrical wiring
Noxious fumes and odors
Increased crime in and around marijuana establishments
Diversion of medical marijuana to minors for recreational use
Environmental Assessment
Not subject to CEQA since it is not a project under Section
15378 of CEQA
If it is found to be a project under CEQA then, it can be
exempted since it can be seen with certainty to have no
possibility of a significant effect on the environment
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommends (4-0) that the City
Council enact an Ordinance amending Section 19.08.030 and
adding Chapter 19.98 of the Cupertino Municipal Code
regarding medical marijuana dispensaries, cultivation
facilities, commercial cannabis activities and medical
marijuana deliveries.
Staff also recommends enactment of the Urgency Ordinance to
prohibit the cultivation, delivery and other commercial
cannabis activities.
“Commercial cannabis activity”
[Ca. Bus. & Prof. Code §19300.5(k)]
Proposed Ordinance refers back to the State’s
definition
“Commercial cannabis activity” includes
cultivation, possession, manufacture,
processing, storing, laboratory testing, labeling,
transporting, distribution, or sale of medical
cannabis or a medical cannabis product, except
as set forth in Section 19319, related to
qualifying patients and primary caregivers.
Other Local Jurisdictions
Ban dispensaries
Sunnyvale
Mountain View
Morgan Hill
Los Gatos
Saratoga
Santa Clara
Regulates Dispensaries and Cultivation
San Jose, voters approved a tax
Medical Marijuana California History
In 1996, California voters approved Proposition 215 (The Compassionate Use Act)
Exception from California criminal liability for “seriously ill” patients where a physician has determined that the person’s health would benefit
Cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, “or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief.”
In 2004, State legislature enacted the Medical Marijuana Program (MMP)
Health and Safety Code §§11362.7 to 11362.83
Defines
Qualified Patient
Primary Caregiver
Identification Card
Serious Medical Illness
Medical Marijuana Federal History
Marijuana is a Schedule I Drug
Controlled Substance Act
No legal use
October, 2009
Department of Justice (DOJ), Deputy Attorney General Ogden
DOJ will not focus its enforcement resources on “individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law providing for the use of medical marijuana.”
Proliferation of Dispensaries (Most notably Oakland)
February, 2011
Melinda Haag, US Attorney for Northern District, Oakland’s large-scale industrial marijuana cultivation and manufacturing is not consistent with Federal Law.
Medical Marijuana Federal History
Federal Flip?
June, 2011 (DOJ Deputy Attorney Cole)
2009 memo was never intended to shield large scale operations from criminal enforcement.
Compliance with State and Local laws were no defenses to criminal prosecution.
July, 2011
The DOJ, Drug Enforcement Agency, denied a request to reschedule marijuana from Class I to II or II.
August, 2013 (DOJ Attorney Cole)
Jurisdictions which have “strong and effective regulatory control and systems are in place to control cultivation, distribution, sale and possession of marijuana conducted in compliance with those laws and regulations is less likely to threaten federal priorities.”
Future actions
Does not prevent Council from acting in the
future
If City wants to exempt certain uses, like
dispensaries or cultivation, it may want to
also consider taking it to voters for tax
January 19, 2016
To: City Council Members and to the City Planning Department
From: Cathy Helgerson
Regarding: Marijuana Resolution No. 6793
12. 1 Public Hearing -I am in favor of an Urgency Ordinance Amending the Cupertino Municipal Code to
prohibit marijuana cultivation dispensaries, and deliveries and commercial cannabis activities within the
City of Cupertino and agree with Resolution No. 6793.
I am very disturbed with allowing people who get a medical marijuana card from the doctor for just
about any reason and then they want to grow their own. They then may use it for their own use but
they also sell the marijuana to minors double the price and are making a great deal of money from these
sales.
I believe that dying patients under the care of a hospice or doctor with proof of their condition can then
prescribe marijuana but even then I am reluctant to totally agree with that allowance because it can be
misused.
Marijuana is a gateway drug and leads too many other drugs and it should not be considered to be
anything less, it is damaging to the lives of people of any age who use this drug for any reason outside of
a serious life threating disease.
I would ask the City Council and Planning Department to prohibit any marijuana commercial businesses
and/or dispensaries to locate within the City Limits. I also ask that you prohibit marijuana dispensaries,
commercial cultivation or cultivation by primary caregivers as well. I further would like to see any
marijuana only dispensed by a legal authorized doctor who has a license to do so by the State and
Federal Governments. I also would like to see that these doctors are screened and that they are
investigated periodically to make sure they are working under the strict laws governing marijuana
prescription dispensing.
I would like to change the ordinance if it could be possible to exclude primary care givers in making the
decision to allow patients to use marijuana, because I feel that this drug should only be administered
under a qualified doctor's care that has the right credentials by law. I seriously believe that because of
this allowance by our Government that many times the delivery is not made to qualified patients. The
marijuana is sold to normal people adults and teens because it is so easy to get. I know people with
teens that can testify to this situation and that they are suffering from worry about their children.
See 12 C White Papers -Marijuana dispensaries are commonly large money-making enterprises that will
sell marijuana to most anyone who produces a physician's written recommendation for medical use.
These recommendations can be had by paying unscrupulous physicians a fee and claiming to have most
any malady, even headaches. While these dispensaries will claim to receive only donations, no
marijuana will change hands without an exchange of money.
These operations have been tied to organized criminal gangs, foster large grow operations, and are
often multi-million-dollar profit centers. There are also many crimes committed under the sale and use
of marijuana which even involve crimes of murder.
There is a great deaf of information offered under 12 C White Papers all issues are true and I ask that
The City Council look to keep drugs out of the hands of the general public and out of the hands of our
children.
I would suggest that people read the Issues Surrounding Marijuana in Santa Clara County by the Office
of the District Attorney which is very alarming and we the people should be very worried about the
future of our children we need to protect them.
I would like to see the City of Cupertino, City Planning Department, Fremont Unified School District
Administrators, De Anza College Administration, Sherriff s Department, and the Santa Clara County use
all there power and keep drugs away from our children and the citizens.
I have read that the City of Cupertino can change this ordinance in later years and would hope and pray
that you never happen and that they will impose stronger ordinances in the coming years. I also would
like to mention that there needs to be strong opposition to any formal State or Federal Legalization to
legalize Marijuana.
Thank you,
Cathy Helgerson