Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
CLEARLAKE -- In light of an expired moratorium prohibiting the issuing of new business licenses for medical marijuana dispensaries, the Clearlake City Council has chosen to fall back on a city ordinance that has brought into question the legality of the section.
Liz Byrd, owner of Lakeside Herbal Solutions, was recently issued a business license only to have that license revoked. Byrd and her attorney William McPike, who specializes in medical marijuana defense, addressed the council at its Dec. 11 meeting appealing the revocation of the license. After a lengthy discussion that lasted more than hour, the council still made no decision and continued the item.
The city issued the moratorium on April 13, 2007, imposing a temporary 45-day prohibition on the establishment of new medical marijuana dispensaries. In May 2007, the moratorium was extended to 10 months and 15 days. The moratorium had originally prohibited the renewal of existing businesses licenses for medical marijuana dispensaries as well; however, in August 2007, the council decided to grant renewals of such licenses.
According to the staff report that originally accompanied the moratorium, it was established to allow city staff time to establish zoning regulations pertaining to medical marijuana dispensaries; however, no zoning regulations have yet been established. It was also the council's intention at the time the moratorium was implemented to sidestep the issue until it was resolved in federal courts.
In April, the council allowed a moratorium to expire and decided to rely on Clearlake Municipal Code 6-3.6, which states that "The issuance of a license under this section shall not entitle the licensee to engage in any or do any, which, for any reason, is in violation of any federal, state, or municipal law, rule, or regulation." Wording of the section has brought up a question as to whether or not the city has the obligation or the right to enforce federal laws.
"You are really dealing with legal issues here," McPike said, adding that Clearlake police officers and city officials are not federal employees and therefore have no legal obligation to enforce federal laws.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently refused to review a landmark decision in which California state courts found that its medical marijuana law was not preempted by federal law.
The state appellate court decision from Nov. 28, 2007, ruled that "it is not the job of the local police to enforce the federal drug laws." Despite the Nov. 2007 ruling, the city staff still contends that the issue remains in litigation and no definitive answers have been given.
Councilmember Joyce Overton spoke in favor of the city making a decision.
"We can't wait for the state to get something done. They can't even get their budget done," she said. "We can not wait for the state to make a decision. We need to be the ones that make a decision for our city."
The city does not have a business license application specifically for establishing a medical marijuana dispensary. The city's business license application does, however, request information describing the type of business for which the applicant is seeking the license. Prior to the moratorium, there were three or more businesses with city-issued business licenses, knowingly providing the dispensary services within the city, one of which had reportedly been in operation for more than four years.
Revoking Byrd's business license could open the city up to litigation. Byrd said that she spent approximately $20,000 opening her business based on the issuance of her business license. She said she had been completely honest in disclosing her intentions when seeking the license and application information from city staff.
"I never misrepresented my intentions to anyone," Byrd said. "I'm not doing this for greed. I'm taking care of people. I'm in shock that I'm standing here before you. I've been truthful from the get-go."
According to Byrd, her original application had specifically identified services for providing medical marijuana. She said, however, when she spoke with city staff, it was recommended that she use wording other than "medical marijuana."
Byrd's alleged discussion with city staff has been contested. "I have tried to reconcile the differing opinions of events leading up to the issuance of a business license to Liz Byrd, but staff and Liz Byrd remember the event happening differently," City Administrator Dale Neiman said.
According to Byrd, upon recommendation by city staff, she chose to use the word "holistic" to describe the services she intended to offer. Because there was already a dispensary in the city using the word in its business name, she said she did not question its use.
Use of the word, however, caused Councilmember Chuck Leonard to accuse Byrd of committing perjury in the application she submitted. Leonard read a definition of the word as "of or relating to holism;" and "relating to or concerned with wholes or with complete systems rather than with the analysis of, treatment of, or dissections into parts." Based on this definition, Leonard claimed that Byrd knowingly signed the business license application against penalty of perjury.
However, further definition of the word, according to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, includes "medicine attempts to treat both the mind and the body."
Upon a motion put forth by Councilmember Roy Simons, the item was continued until such time that the council may converse with legal counsel. The motion passed on a 4-1 vote count with Leonard casting the dissenting vote.
News Hawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Lake County Record-Bee
Author: Denise Rockenstein
Copyright: 2008 Lake County Record-Bee
Contact: Contact Us - www.record-bee.com
Website: Medical marijuana under microscope - www.record-bee.com
Liz Byrd, owner of Lakeside Herbal Solutions, was recently issued a business license only to have that license revoked. Byrd and her attorney William McPike, who specializes in medical marijuana defense, addressed the council at its Dec. 11 meeting appealing the revocation of the license. After a lengthy discussion that lasted more than hour, the council still made no decision and continued the item.
The city issued the moratorium on April 13, 2007, imposing a temporary 45-day prohibition on the establishment of new medical marijuana dispensaries. In May 2007, the moratorium was extended to 10 months and 15 days. The moratorium had originally prohibited the renewal of existing businesses licenses for medical marijuana dispensaries as well; however, in August 2007, the council decided to grant renewals of such licenses.
According to the staff report that originally accompanied the moratorium, it was established to allow city staff time to establish zoning regulations pertaining to medical marijuana dispensaries; however, no zoning regulations have yet been established. It was also the council's intention at the time the moratorium was implemented to sidestep the issue until it was resolved in federal courts.
In April, the council allowed a moratorium to expire and decided to rely on Clearlake Municipal Code 6-3.6, which states that "The issuance of a license under this section shall not entitle the licensee to engage in any or do any, which, for any reason, is in violation of any federal, state, or municipal law, rule, or regulation." Wording of the section has brought up a question as to whether or not the city has the obligation or the right to enforce federal laws.
"You are really dealing with legal issues here," McPike said, adding that Clearlake police officers and city officials are not federal employees and therefore have no legal obligation to enforce federal laws.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently refused to review a landmark decision in which California state courts found that its medical marijuana law was not preempted by federal law.
The state appellate court decision from Nov. 28, 2007, ruled that "it is not the job of the local police to enforce the federal drug laws." Despite the Nov. 2007 ruling, the city staff still contends that the issue remains in litigation and no definitive answers have been given.
Councilmember Joyce Overton spoke in favor of the city making a decision.
"We can't wait for the state to get something done. They can't even get their budget done," she said. "We can not wait for the state to make a decision. We need to be the ones that make a decision for our city."
The city does not have a business license application specifically for establishing a medical marijuana dispensary. The city's business license application does, however, request information describing the type of business for which the applicant is seeking the license. Prior to the moratorium, there were three or more businesses with city-issued business licenses, knowingly providing the dispensary services within the city, one of which had reportedly been in operation for more than four years.
Revoking Byrd's business license could open the city up to litigation. Byrd said that she spent approximately $20,000 opening her business based on the issuance of her business license. She said she had been completely honest in disclosing her intentions when seeking the license and application information from city staff.
"I never misrepresented my intentions to anyone," Byrd said. "I'm not doing this for greed. I'm taking care of people. I'm in shock that I'm standing here before you. I've been truthful from the get-go."
According to Byrd, her original application had specifically identified services for providing medical marijuana. She said, however, when she spoke with city staff, it was recommended that she use wording other than "medical marijuana."
Byrd's alleged discussion with city staff has been contested. "I have tried to reconcile the differing opinions of events leading up to the issuance of a business license to Liz Byrd, but staff and Liz Byrd remember the event happening differently," City Administrator Dale Neiman said.
According to Byrd, upon recommendation by city staff, she chose to use the word "holistic" to describe the services she intended to offer. Because there was already a dispensary in the city using the word in its business name, she said she did not question its use.
Use of the word, however, caused Councilmember Chuck Leonard to accuse Byrd of committing perjury in the application she submitted. Leonard read a definition of the word as "of or relating to holism;" and "relating to or concerned with wholes or with complete systems rather than with the analysis of, treatment of, or dissections into parts." Based on this definition, Leonard claimed that Byrd knowingly signed the business license application against penalty of perjury.
However, further definition of the word, according to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, includes "medicine attempts to treat both the mind and the body."
Upon a motion put forth by Councilmember Roy Simons, the item was continued until such time that the council may converse with legal counsel. The motion passed on a 4-1 vote count with Leonard casting the dissenting vote.
News Hawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Lake County Record-Bee
Author: Denise Rockenstein
Copyright: 2008 Lake County Record-Bee
Contact: Contact Us - www.record-bee.com
Website: Medical marijuana under microscope - www.record-bee.com
