My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 28 - OC Grand Jury's Report, Findings, Recs. Regarding Santa Ana's Cannabis Program
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2021
>
09/07/2021 Regular
>
Item 28 - OC Grand Jury's Report, Findings, Recs. Regarding Santa Ana's Cannabis Program
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/17/2023 1:38:30 PM
Creation date
8/17/2023 1:38:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Clerk of the Council
Item #
28
Date
9/7/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
“Pot Luck”: Santa Ana’s Monopoly on Licensed Retail Adult-Use Cannabis in Orange County <br /> <br />2020-2021 Orange County Grand Jury Page 2 <br /> <br />possessing, growing, processing, or transporting marijuana for personal use. The initiative was <br />defeated by the voters with 66.5% No votes to 33.5% Yes votes. <br />Proposition 215 (1996) also known as “The Compassionate Use Act of 1996” made it legal <br />under California law for individuals of any age to use cannabis for medicinal purposes. <br />Individuals must have a recommendation from a doctor to use medical cannabis. The act passed <br />by a vote of 55.58% Yes votes to 44.42% No votes. <br />Proposition 19 (2010) also known as “The Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010” <br />was defeated by the voters with 53.5% No votes to 46.5% Yes votes. If it had passed, <br />Proposition 19 would have legalized various cannabis-related activities in California and <br />authorized local governments to control these activities. In addition, the Proposition would have <br />granted local governments the right to impose and collect cannabis-related fees & taxes, and <br />authorized various criminal and civil penalties. <br />Proposition 64 (2016) also known as “The Adult-Use of Marijuana Act” passed by a vote of <br />57.13% to 42.87%. The measure: <br />• Legalized adult use of cannabis for recreational, non-medical purposes <br />• Created a system for regulating Retail Adult-Use Cannabis businesses <br />• Imposed taxes on Retail Adult-Use Cannabis sales <br />• Changed penalties for cannabis-related crimes <br />Once Proposition 64 was passed, cities in California were granted the opportunity to approve <br />Retail Adult-Use Cannabis and begin the process of granting licenses to shops within their city <br />limits. <br />REASON FOR STUDY <br />The selling of cannabis for “Adult-Use” or “recreational” purposes has been legal in the State of <br />California since January 1, 2018 and yet, until July 2020, Santa Ana was the only city in Orange <br />County that had approved licensing for this type of business. The Orange County Grand Jury <br />(OCGJ) was interested in investigating how the decision to move forward with this licensing <br />impacted Santa Ana and if there were any significant issues. <br /> <br />The Grand Jury felt it was important to investigate this matter in order to make the public aware <br />of the potential gains or pitfalls other cities in the county might encounter should they move <br />forward with Retail Adult-Use Cannabis licensing. <br /> <br />This report focuses only on the licensing and selling of Retail Adult-Use Cannabis in the City of <br />Santa Ana and does not address medicinal sales, cultivation, distribution, or any issues related to <br />the use of cannabis products.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.