Pot group: Banning medical marijuana dispensaries would cost L.A. millions

Tools

By WIRE SERVICES

Los Angeles' proposed medical marijuana ordinance, which would outlaw the sale of pot at dispensaries, would cost the city $36 million to $74 million in lost sales taxes, a marijuana advocacy group asserted Sunday.

Under the proposed ordinance, only nonprofit medical marijuana collectives -- groups of qualified patients and their primary caregivers -- would be allowed to cultivate the drug to relieve pain from serious illnesses.

According to the California chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, the proposed ordinance would "effectively shut down the city's medical marijuana distribution system by banning all sales of marijuana and sharply curtailing collectives' ability to grow and obtain medicine.''

"Los Angeles would be foolish to pass this unworkable, ill-conceived ordinance," said California NORML coordinator Dale Gieringer. "Not only would it cost $36 to $74 million in lost sales taxes and thousands of jobs, but the city can expect serious legal challenges in the courts. The city would be better advised to adopt a system of licensed regulation and taxes, which has proven successful elsewhere in the state."

Other cities and counties that regulate dispensaries allow them to sell to their members as nonprofit collectives so long as they pay sales taxes, according to NORML, which estimates there are currently 100,000 to 200,000 medical marijuana patients in the Los Angeles area, generating $400 to $800 million annually in retail sales, including $36 to $72 million a year in sales taxes.

Cities with what NORML describes as "successful dispensary regulations,'' such as Oakland, San Francisco and West Hollywood, are currently collecting millions in taxes and license fees from dispensaries, the group noted.

A survey of California dispensaries by California NORML found they pay an average of $82,000 a year in sales taxes.

In addition, Cal NORML's survey found that the average dispensary has 7.4 employees, so closing 900 dispensaries would cost Los Angeles some 6,500 paying jobs.

No other city or county in California has regulated collectives while banning sales, according to NORML.

Under the proposed ordinance, over-the-counter sales of the drug would be outlawed, and the collectives would have to be at least 1,000 feet from other collectives, schools, playgrounds, child care facilities, religious institutions, public libraries, public parks, hospitals and rehab centers.

The usual committee hearing process is being bypassed so the city council could vote on the measure as soon as Nov. 3.

There are an estimated 800 to 1,000 pot dispensaries throughout the county, and a judge recently ruled the city's temporary ordinance banning new medical marijuana dispensaries was invalid.

According to NORML, the proposed ordinance would further make the distribution of medical marijuana unviable in Los Angeles by limiting collectives to a single garden of 100 plants, limiting collectives to serving a handful of members and requiring tens of thousands of collectives and growing operations throughout the city.

Nothing in state law authorizes such limitations, according to NORML, and most collectives serve hundreds or thousands of members and draw from many gardens.

NORML also objects to a provision in the ordinance that would ban cannabis extracts and edibles, which enable users to ingest the drug without smoking it.

Opponents say turning marijuana into food and drinks encourage its use by children.

A recent poll by Mason-Dixon found that 77 percent of Angelenos favor regulated dispensaries.

Patient advocates are expected to sue if the proposed ordinance is passed, on the grounds that it would unconstitutionally limit patients' right to collectively cultivate and obtain medicine, as guaranteed under Proposition 215 and Senate Bill 420.

You have indicated this comment should be removed.

Close

The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .

D.J. Aleusha Work Cited II said on Thursday, Nov 19 at 1:25 PM

Klein, Joe, “Why Legalizing Marijuana Makes Sense.” 16 April, 2009, 19 November 2009 Legislative Analyst's Office, ”California's Annual Costs to Incarcerate an Inmate in Prison”, June, 2009, 29 October, 2009 “Marijuana: Inside America’s Pot Industry” CNBC Original Documentary CNBC. Sacramento Ca, 22 January, 2009

32370849
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Concerned Parent said on Tuesday, Oct 27 at 11:32 AM

Let's put the drug cartels and street thugs out of business. Let's allow individuals to grow a little marijuana for personal use. Limit the size of the growing area or the number of plants, and put a small user-fee on it to cover administrative costs and leave a little something for education, health care, infrastructure… One possibility:$100 per year for a permit to cultivate a dozen plants, something like a fishing license. It's a win-win. Who’s on board for this?

31177221
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Anonymous said on Tuesday, Oct 27 at 11:31 AM

Let's put the drug cartels and street thugs out of business. Let's allow individuals to grow a little marijuana for personal use. Limit the size of the growing area or the number of plants, and put a small user-fee on it to cover administrative costs and leave a little something for education, health care, infrastructure… One possibility:$100 per year for a permit to cultivate a dozen plants, something like a fishing license. It's a win-win. Who’s on board for this?

31177177
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

sherm said on Tuesday, Oct 27 at 10:07 AM

ohkodoko, ur an idiot the goverment makes millions off those adds wake up drinking kills way more than pot , all day every day

31172193
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

mac said on Tuesday, Oct 27 at 7:50 AM

I've got my lawyer on speed dial in case I am ever injured or worse from crime from one of these places or a care accident from someone who is DRUNK. Unfortunately, the odds of getting hit by a drunk driver leaving the local bar are sooo much higher (pun intended) than your bizarro scenario.

31163927
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Kyle said on Monday, Oct 26 at 1:34 PM

"If booze was not safer than pot then how come the government allows them to have commercials advertising their six pac's?" Really, OhKoDoKo? You think the government is out there for your health? Alcohol is legal because alcohol prohibition failed in the same blood-soaked way drug prohibition has failed. The government operates on politics, not facts or science. Tens of thousands of studies have shown that marijuana actually fights certain cancers, alleviates pain, and lots more.

31129026
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

peter said on Monday, Oct 26 at 11:15 AM

I own a private collective. No pot smoking allowed and very private. THE DISPENERIES ARE breaking the LAW. Folks it is still not legal.

31121737
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Sherry said on Monday, Oct 26 at 8:06 AM

David : That is your US right to say you don't want a dispensary near your home. But its also a right for people who need their medicines to get it locally. There are elderly patients and others who can not go to another town to get their prescriptions. Its my right to live pain free but I live in a state which does not give me that choice..

31113091
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

David said on Monday, Oct 26 at 7:27 AM

These pot dispensaries are a menace and I do not want one in my neighborhood. Why can't these people go to a licensed pharmacy to get this stuff? I have got my lawyer on speed dial if I am ever injured or worse from crime from one of these places or a car accident where the driver is high and got his pot from a dispensary

31111573
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

OhKoDoKo said on Monday, Oct 26 at 6:16 AM

Beer, wine and hard alcohol are best cause they've not been turned into some kind of food or sweet drink which encourage its use by children. If booze was not safer than pot then how come the government allows them to have commercials advertising their six pac's?

31109057
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Add a comment

Name:

Comment: 1000 Characters Left

The Los Angeles Independent and its affiliated companies are not responsible for the content of comments posted or for anything arising out of use of the above comments or other interaction among the users. We reserve the right to screen, refuse to post, remove or edit user-generated content at any time and for any or no reason in our absolute and sole discretion without prior notice, although we have no duty to do so or to monitor any Public Forum.

ON DEMAND

This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled. Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.