Jacob Bell
New Member
Orchard City's board of trustees is preparing to consider another ordinance banning medical marijuana businesses in the town.
If a measure is adopted, it would have no affect on the state's Amendment 20 approved by voters in 2000 allowing patients to obtain, possess and use marijuana for medical purposes.
The mayor announced last month he would bring an ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana businesses in the town for first reading at the trustees' Jan. 12 meeting. The announcement came during the December town board meeting where the trustees voted 6-0 against adoption of an ordinance that would have granted a local operating license to the town's one dispensary.
Under a state law adopted by the legislature last year, existing dispensaries must have a license to operate from their local jurisdiction by July 1, 2011, or become unlawful. The town board, by its 6-0 vote, has said that it will not grant local licenses for medical marijuana businesses, including the one dispensary and growing operation now in the town.
The Orchard City trustees and mayor met with their town attorney in a workshop session on Jan. 5 to discuss next steps for dealing with the medical marijuana dispensary issue.
Town attorney Larry Beckner told the trustees at their Jan. 5 work session that, since state law empowers the trustees to act prohibiting medical marijuana businesses, there is little chance the town or its board members could be successfully sued for doing so. The possibility of such a suit has been prominent in trustee discussions of the issue, and it remains so. The subject was brought up several times during the work session.
Avoiding potential liability in handling the issue, Beckner said, is mostly a matter of the town board following established, normal and proper procedures for considering and voting on the proposed ban.
The trustees consensus agreed with Beckner's view that adopting a ban ordinance with an effective date before July 1 could create problems. That is because the town has no law enforcement authority of its own to enforce such a ban. The County Sheriff provides enforcement services in the town for county and state regulations, but the Sheriff does not enforce Orchard City's own local codes.
Town Administrator David Varley said that his research had turned up some 12 to 15 other local jurisdictions in the state that are planning to adopt, or have adopted, ordinances banning medical marijuana businesses.
If the town makes July 1 the effective date of its medical marijuana business ban, then enforcement would be the responsibility of the state under its laws.
If the ordinance banning dispensaries and other medical marijuana retail business is presented to the trustees on Jan. 12, it will receive a first reading at that time. There would then most likely be a second reading and a public hearing on the measure at the board's Feb. 9 meeting.
The trustees at their workshop discussed making the effective date of an ordinance in March. But that could raise problems for the town if an enforcement issue should arise.
During the trustees December meeting, Mayor Don Suppes said that he saw little need for the expense of a public vote on the issue of medical marijuana business in town. In the 2000 election, Suppes said, when the State Constitutional Amendment 20 was on the ballot, the two precincts in the town voted heavily against the measure.
According to election records at the county courthouse, on the issue of State Constitution Amendment 20 (medical marijuana) in the 2000 general election, Orchard City Precinct 4 voted 161 for, 230 against. The other Orchard City Precinct, No. 19, voted 94 for, 149 against. That is a town-wide tally of 210 for, 379 against — a 60 percent to 40 percent landslide against.
County wide on the same issue, voters went by a near identical margin of 39 percent for, 61 percent against.
Assuming that a town vote on the issue of a dispensary located in town would fare no better, Suppes said he was opposed to holding one.
During the trustee's Dec. 8 public hearing prior to its 6-0 vote, several town residents said the issue should be put to a vote. The assessment of the town administration and some trustees was that those calls for a vote were intended to ensure that the town's proposed dispensary licensing ordinance went down to defeat.
In other business during the trustee work session, progress on the West Side water line project was discussed, as was the water department's transition under management of the newly-hired supervisor Randy Haynes. Mild winter weather allowed water department personnel to physically read water meters during December, something that hasn't occurred for many years.
Town administrator Varley reported that Orchard City is hoping to purchase some surplus "radio read" water meters from the Town of Cedaredge.
News Hawk- GuitarMan313 420 MAGAZINE
Source: deltacountyindependent.com
Author: Hank Lohmeyer
Contact: Contact s | Delta County Independent
Copyright: © 2011 Delta County Independent
Website: Marijuana dispensary ban again on Orchard City agenda | Delta County Independent
If a measure is adopted, it would have no affect on the state's Amendment 20 approved by voters in 2000 allowing patients to obtain, possess and use marijuana for medical purposes.
The mayor announced last month he would bring an ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana businesses in the town for first reading at the trustees' Jan. 12 meeting. The announcement came during the December town board meeting where the trustees voted 6-0 against adoption of an ordinance that would have granted a local operating license to the town's one dispensary.
Under a state law adopted by the legislature last year, existing dispensaries must have a license to operate from their local jurisdiction by July 1, 2011, or become unlawful. The town board, by its 6-0 vote, has said that it will not grant local licenses for medical marijuana businesses, including the one dispensary and growing operation now in the town.
The Orchard City trustees and mayor met with their town attorney in a workshop session on Jan. 5 to discuss next steps for dealing with the medical marijuana dispensary issue.
Town attorney Larry Beckner told the trustees at their Jan. 5 work session that, since state law empowers the trustees to act prohibiting medical marijuana businesses, there is little chance the town or its board members could be successfully sued for doing so. The possibility of such a suit has been prominent in trustee discussions of the issue, and it remains so. The subject was brought up several times during the work session.
Avoiding potential liability in handling the issue, Beckner said, is mostly a matter of the town board following established, normal and proper procedures for considering and voting on the proposed ban.
The trustees consensus agreed with Beckner's view that adopting a ban ordinance with an effective date before July 1 could create problems. That is because the town has no law enforcement authority of its own to enforce such a ban. The County Sheriff provides enforcement services in the town for county and state regulations, but the Sheriff does not enforce Orchard City's own local codes.
Town Administrator David Varley said that his research had turned up some 12 to 15 other local jurisdictions in the state that are planning to adopt, or have adopted, ordinances banning medical marijuana businesses.
If the town makes July 1 the effective date of its medical marijuana business ban, then enforcement would be the responsibility of the state under its laws.
If the ordinance banning dispensaries and other medical marijuana retail business is presented to the trustees on Jan. 12, it will receive a first reading at that time. There would then most likely be a second reading and a public hearing on the measure at the board's Feb. 9 meeting.
The trustees at their workshop discussed making the effective date of an ordinance in March. But that could raise problems for the town if an enforcement issue should arise.
During the trustees December meeting, Mayor Don Suppes said that he saw little need for the expense of a public vote on the issue of medical marijuana business in town. In the 2000 election, Suppes said, when the State Constitutional Amendment 20 was on the ballot, the two precincts in the town voted heavily against the measure.
According to election records at the county courthouse, on the issue of State Constitution Amendment 20 (medical marijuana) in the 2000 general election, Orchard City Precinct 4 voted 161 for, 230 against. The other Orchard City Precinct, No. 19, voted 94 for, 149 against. That is a town-wide tally of 210 for, 379 against — a 60 percent to 40 percent landslide against.
County wide on the same issue, voters went by a near identical margin of 39 percent for, 61 percent against.
Assuming that a town vote on the issue of a dispensary located in town would fare no better, Suppes said he was opposed to holding one.
During the trustee's Dec. 8 public hearing prior to its 6-0 vote, several town residents said the issue should be put to a vote. The assessment of the town administration and some trustees was that those calls for a vote were intended to ensure that the town's proposed dispensary licensing ordinance went down to defeat.
In other business during the trustee work session, progress on the West Side water line project was discussed, as was the water department's transition under management of the newly-hired supervisor Randy Haynes. Mild winter weather allowed water department personnel to physically read water meters during December, something that hasn't occurred for many years.
Town administrator Varley reported that Orchard City is hoping to purchase some surplus "radio read" water meters from the Town of Cedaredge.
News Hawk- GuitarMan313 420 MAGAZINE
Source: deltacountyindependent.com
Author: Hank Lohmeyer
Contact: Contact s | Delta County Independent
Copyright: © 2011 Delta County Independent
Website: Marijuana dispensary ban again on Orchard City agenda | Delta County Independent
