This is an archive of a past election.
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/la/ for current information.
LWV League of Women Voters of California Education Fund If you appreciate our service to voters, please consider helping us with a donation.
Smart Voter
Los Angeles County, CA May 21, 2013 Election
Ordinance F
Medical Marijuana Regulation and Taxation
City of Los Angeles

Initiative Ordinance - Majority Approval Required
Unofficial Results as of: 05/22/2013 2:59:42 AM

Fail: 117,305 / 40.9% Yes votes ...... 169,629 / 59.1% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Information shown below: Summary | Fiscal Impact | Impartial Analysis | Arguments |

Shall an ordinance regulating associations of qualified patients and/or primary caregivers who cultivate, provide or engage in other activities related to marijuana for medical purposes (MMCs) by: (1) prohibiting MMCs but providing limited immunity for MMCs that register with the City (without limiting the number that can register but giving registration priority to those possessing City tax certificates by October 2012), generally have not ceased operations for more than 90 days, pass annual background checks, are separated from residential uses, maintain certain distances from schools, parks, child care facilities, other designated places and other MMCs, and meet other requirements and operational standards; (2) exempting dwellings zoned residential, and other exemptions; and (3) increasing the MMC tax to $60 per each $1,000 of gross receipts; be adopted?

Summary Prepared by the Ballot Simplification Committee:
THE ISSUE:
Shall the City of Los Angeles regulate "medical marijuana collectives" by requiring collectives to register with the City by complying with three periods of registration and meet other requirements and operational standards, without limiting the number of collectives that can register?

THE SITUATION:
There has been a proliferation of medical marijuana establishments citywide. Regulations governing their number, location, and operation may protect residents, businesses, and patients from potential adverse impacts.

THE PROPOSAL:
This measure regulates by banning "medical marijuana collectives" while granting immunity from the ban to those collectives that register with the City and meet other requirements and operational standards. The measure does not limit the number of collectives that can register and creates a registration priority system.

This measure exempts from City regulation dwelling units zoned exclusively for residential uses and not permitted for any commercial activity. It also exempts licensed health care facilities and vehicles or other modes oftransportation used to cultivate or distribute marijuana.

This measure would increase the City tax on these businesses from $50.00 to $60.00 for each $1,000 of gross receipts.

A YES VOTE MEANS:
You want to regulate "medical marijuana collectives" by requiring collectives to register with the City and meet other requirements and operational standards, without limiting the number of collectives that can register. You also want to increase the City tax on these businesses from $50.00 to $60.00 for each $1,000 of gross receipts.

A NO VOTE MEANS:
You do not want to regulate "medical marijuana collectives" by requiring collectives to register with the City and meet other requirements and operational standards, without limiting the number of collectives that can register. You do not want to increase the City tax on these businesses from $50.00 to $60.00 for each $1,000 of gross receipts.

Fiscal Impact from
Miguel A. Santana
City Administrative Officer:
This measure will allow new Medical Marijuana Collectives (MMCs) to establish themselves in the City upon meeting specified requirements. It also will increase the business tax rate paid by MMCs from $50 per each $1000 in gross receipts to $60 per each $1000 of gross receipts.

The impact of this measure cannot be quantified. The City received $2.5 million in business taxes from MMCs in 2012. The higher tax rate and the formation of new MMCs will likely increase revenue. Existing and new MMC business tax revenue will be deposited in the General Fund and will be used to fund police, fire, street services, parks, libraries and other general purposes throughout the City. Additional public safety and enforcement expenditures resulting from anticipated new MMCs and from exemptions for dwelling units and health care facilities are also unknown.

Impartial Analysis from
Gerry F. Miller
Chief Legislative Analyst
This is the third of three competing ballot measures that propose to regulate medical marijuana in the City of Los Angeles. One of the measures is a proposition. Two of the measures, including this one, are the result of an initiative petition process and submitted to a vote of the electorate.

This measure would regulate "medical marijuana collectives" by banning such collectives, but then grant immunity from the ban to any collective that registers with the City Clerk and complies with specified operational requirements. It would provide three periods for registration + the first open to collectives established by October 9, 2012, the second open to collectives established by October 20, 2012, and the third open to all other collectives. It defines a "medical marijuana collective" as any unincorporated or incorporated entity or association of qualified patients and/or primary caregivers and/or persons with identification cards, who provide money and in-kind contributions, reimbursements, and reasonable compensation towards the entity's actual expenses for activities including, but not limited to, planting, cultivation, harvesting, transporting, manufacturing, compounding, converting, processing, preparing, storing, packaging, providing and/or retail sales of medical marijuana.

The measure would create operational standards, which are conditions for receiving immunity and enforceable as misdemeanors if violated, including: generally has not ceased operations for 90 days, passes annual background checks, is separated from residential uses, operates as a non-profit, limits compensation paid to its members, maintains a 1,000-foot distance from schools and a 500-foot distance from parks, child care facilities and other designated places, and other requirements. The initiative requires a 500-foot distance separation between collectives. This measure would also increase the City taxes on collectives from $50.00 to $60.00 for each $1,000.00 of its gross receipts.

This initiative would exempt from City regulation any legal dwelling zoned exclusively for residential use and not permitted for any commercial activity. The measure would also exempt licensed health care facilities and any vehicle or other mode of transportation, stationary or mobile, which is used to cultivate, distribute, process, administer, deliver, give away, or transport marijuana.

If any or all of the three competing measures are approved by a majority of voters, only the one ballot measure that receives the most votes will become effective.

 
This election is archived. Any links to sources outside of Smart Voter may no longer be active. No further links will be added to this page.
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Ordinance F Arguments Against Ordinance F
Ordinance F will protect our communities and children, strictly regulate medical marijuana collectives and require them to register, and provide desperately needed revenue to fund police, fire and education. Unlike another medical marijuana initiative on the ballot, Ordinance F provides revenue for services for the residents of Los Angeles by requiring collectives to pay an additional 20% increase in their city taxes. To assure financial transparency, Ordinance F requires each collective to file an annual audit of its operations, certified by an independent certified public accountant, with the City Controller.

ORDINANCE F PROTECTS OUR COMMUNITIES AND OUR CHILDREN BECAUSE IT:

  • Prohibits medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries from locating within 1000 feet of a school.
  • Prohibits medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries from locating near a public park, licensed child-care facility, youth center, public library, religious institution or substance abuse rehab center.
  • Prohibits medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries from allowing minors to enter their premises.
  • Prohibits the sale, dispensing or consumption of alcoholic beverages at the location or parking area of any medical marijuana collective or dispensary.
  • Reduces community congestion by requiring medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries to provide parking at each location.

ORDINANCE F PROTECTS THE SICK AND ELDERLY BECAUSE IT:
  • Requires medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries to test marijuana for pesticides and other regulated contaminants before providing the medical marijuana to their patients.
  • Requires medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries to provide a licensed and uniformed security guard patrol at the premises during all hours of operation.

The City of Los Angeles has unsuccessfully spent years fumbling the issue of medical marijuana collective regulation. Don't be fooled by Proposition D. It is a Trojan Horse. This measure was slapped on the ballot at the last minute by the City Council, the same group of politicians who in 2012 voted to ban all dispensaries in Los Angeles, and thereby deny access to medical marijuana to all residents of the city + as well as violate the clearly expressed will of the voters of California in passing Proposition 215 in 1996. Moreover, Proposition D is based on a distinction between marijuana collectives that was found unconstitutional by Judge Anthony Mohr of the Los Angeles Superior Court and could be found unconstitutional again + which would leave the City without regulation. It is time the People take control of the situation and pass strict but reasonable regulation of medical marijuana to protect our communities, and add significant new revenue to pay for law enforcement, firefighters, and schools.

FOR COMMUNITY SAFETY AND COMPASSIONATE CARE - VOTE YES ON INITIATIVE ORDINANCE F!

ROBERT KERNS

NICK MORROW, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Detective, Retired

Rebuttal to Arguments For
Vote NO on Initiative Ordinance F This ordinance will increase the proliferation of illegal pot shops across Los Angeles. It won't overturn Federal law which prohibits the sale or possession of marijuana for any reason. This initiative will only protect the untold millions of illegal cash profits made by illegal pot shop owners at the expense of our communities. The continued operation of illegal pot shops only creates the potential for increased blight, robberies and even homicide. Law enforcement needs every tool possible to keep our City safe. It will NOT provide additional revenue for Los Angeles. Medicine is not subject to tax. This initiative will place the City in endless litigation, diverting vital resources from core services. We all have sympathy for the seriously ill; however, this initiative does nothing to protect patients. Join law enforcement and community leaders across Los Angeles and Vote NO on F.

BERNARD C. PARKS, Councilmember, District 8, City of Los Angeles

MITCHELL ENGLANDER, Councilmember, District 12, City of Los Angeles

ROBERT RUBIN, Consultant

THEODORE THOMAS, President, Park Mesa Heights Community Council

PAULA CRACIUM, President, Porter Ranch Neighborhood Council

Vote NO on Initiative Ordinance F This initiative will increase the proliferation of illegal pot shops across Los Angeles.

Nothing in F will overturn Federal law which prohibits the sale or possession of marijuana for any reason. This initiative will only protect the untold millions of illegal cash profits made by illegal pot shop owners at the expense of our communities.

Vote NO on Initiative Ordinance F. It ties the hands of neighborhoods under siege by illegal pot shops. There are more illegal pot shops than ice cream stores in Los Angeles. The continued operation of illegal pot shops only creates the potential for increased blight, takeover robberies, and even homicides. Law enforcement needs every tool possible to keep our City safe.

Vote NO on Initiative Ordinance F. It will NOT provide additional revenue for Los Angeles.

Medicine is not subject to tax. The pot shop owners have already sued the City to prevent taxation of their illegal businesses. This initiative will just place the City in endless litigation and divert vital resources from core services.

Vote NO on Initiative Ordinance F. We all have sympathy for the seriously ill; however, this initiative does nothing to protect patients. California's 1996 Compassionate Use Act already protects patients and their caregivers from criminal prosecution.

Protect our communities from blight, illegal drug sales and violent crime. Join law enforcement and community leaders across Los Angeles and vote NO on F.

BERNARD C. PARKS, Councilmember, District 8, City of Los Angeles

MITCH ENGLANDER, Councilmember, District 12, City of Los Angeles

PAULA CRACIUM, President, Porter Ranch Neighborhood Council

EDWARD HEADINGTON, President, Granada Hills North Neighborhood Council

BETTYE BRYANT, Representative, Mid City Neighborhood Council Region 1

THEODORE THOMAS, President, Park Mesa Heights Community Council

ROBERT RUBIN, Consultant

Rebuttal to Arguments Against
VOTE YES ON F!

The Argument against F is not based in reality, lacks any factual foundation and hopes to confuse you, the voter, by using fear and intimidation. In fact, the Argument against Ordinance F was drafted by the same Los Angeles City Council that voted to ban all medical marijuana collectives rather than regulate them. Clearly the City Council has no honest intent to regulate or tax medical marijuana in the City as it purports to do in its own measure + it wants to do away with all dispensaries. It is evermore clear that Ordinance F is the only reasonable choice for this City to end the proliferation of medical marijuana dispensaries, as well as a practical way to add much-needed revenue to our City's budget for police, firefighters and our schools + especially with the defeat of Measure A in the March primary.

Unlike the other measures Ordinance F is the only regulation that will:

  • Require background checks of all managers, employees and volunteers;
  • Require each medical marijuana dispensary to file with the City Controller an audit of its operations that is reviewed by a CPA;
  • Require each dispensary to provide parking for its customers;
  • Deny access to all children under any circumstance; and
  • Require each medical marijuana dispensary to test and analyze medical marijuana for pesticides and toxins. Ordinance F will NOT overturn Federal Law as the United States Supreme Court has already ruled that Federal law does not preclude state's regulation of medical marijuana.

Ordinance F will NOT tie the hands of neighborhoods as it allows the City Council to make reasonable changes that advance the spirit of the law.

Ordinance F will NOT make it harder for law enforcement to regulate medical marijuana as each collective will have to register with the City and the police department.

Ordinance F increases the revenue the City already receives from medical marijuana by 20%. After collecting tax revenue from medical marijuana collectives for only six months in 2011, the City received over $2,500,000 in taxes from medical marijuana collectives alone.

Unlike the other measures, the success of Ordinance F will limit future litigation as there will be a solid and constitutional law on the books for the City to enforce.

Don't be fooled by the other measures. Ordinance F provides the greatest amount of reasonable regulation and compassion to provide the City relief from the proliferation of medical marijuana dispensaries, while at the same time raising much needed revenue to pay for law enforcement, firefighters and education for Angelenos.

It is time the People take control and join LAW ENFORCEMENT AND COMMUNITY LEADERS to protect our communities by voting YES on ORDINANCE F!

ROBERT KERNS

STEPHEN DOWNING, Deputy Chief of Police (Retired), Los Angeles Police Department

NICK MORROW, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Detective, Retired

TRAVIS GUEVARA KASPER, South Park Business Director, Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council


Los Angeles Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: July 8, 2013 11:51 PDT
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund   http://cavotes.org
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.