Laserfiche WebLink
1'~ <br />2, <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />~ 11 <br />z <br />~~ ~ 12 <br />~~ ~ ~~ 13 <br />~o ~~ 14 <br />~~ ~ 15 <br />~ ~ 16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />Attached as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the survey results of Medical Marijuana <br />Dispensaries in California Cities as of September 2006. <br />33. San Diego and San Bernardino Counties have joined in a lawsuit against the State of <br />California seeking to overturn the Compassionate Use Act. These counties have argued that the <br />state law conflicts with federal law and an international narcotics treaty signed by the United <br />States in 1961. The case is currently on appeal. 4th Dist., Div. 1, Case No. D050333. <br />34. Kurt Smith, the Director of Community Analysis and Technology for the City of <br />~ Redlands summed up that community's response to medical marijuana. "Prevalence should not <br />equal acceptance. Furthering the distribution and availability of marijuana increases the <br />opportunity for crime and may further destabilize neighborhoods and endanger those at highest <br />risk for its use- children in our community." <br />35. The City's Planning Department and Police Department have worked to be leaders <br />in researching the topic of medical marijuana and dispensaries. The City has shared its <br />experience with an MMD, documentation and research with numerous other jurisdictions in <br />California. Two of those cities in this county and at least one outside the county have also <br />adopted ordinances prohibiting marijuana dispensaries. <br />36. In October 2006, the City of Los Angeles announced, while they had previously <br />regulated MMD's, they have initiated a lengthy moratorium on the establishment of any new <br />dispensaries. They have discovered the open dispensaries are not complying with regulations <br />and appear to be in violation of criminal statutes. <br />IMPACT ON ANAHEIM <br />37. "420 Primary Caregivers" at 421 N. Brookhurst Street, Suite #130 obtained a <br />'~ business license from the City of Anaheim on May 19, 2004. The type of business was listed as <br />a primary caregiver. By the fall of 2004 the Police Department began to receive complaints <br />from neighboring businesses in the multi-unit complex regarding "420 Primary Caregivers." In <br />January 2005, "420 Primary Caregivers" and its employees were robbed at gunpoint and <br />physically beaten by three masked suspects who took both money and marijuana from the <br />location. <br />- ~ - Decl Opp to OSC Re Preliminary Injunction <br />15 of 36 <br />75A-138 <br />