My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE - 55D - ADDITIONAL
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2014
>
06/17/2014
>
CORRESPONDENCE - 55D - ADDITIONAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/1/2014 5:31:51 PM
Creation date
7/1/2014 5:27:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Agency
Planning & Building
Item #
55D
Date
6/17/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
MATTHEW S. PAPPAS <br />A T T O R N E Y <br />E -AlAm: <br />OFFICH@MATTPAPPASL W.COM <br />HAND- DELIVERED <br />Hon. Manuel Pulido, Mayor <br />City of Santa Ana <br />20 Civic Center Plaza <br />Santa Ana, California 92701 <br />22762 ASPAN ST, #202 -107 <br />LAKE FOREST, CA 92630 <br />June 17, 2014 <br />Re: June 17, 2014 City Council Meeting <br />Agenda Item — [PROPOSED] City Medical Marijuana Initiative <br />Dear Mayor Pulido: <br />(949) 382 -1485 <br />FACSMLE: (949) 242 -2605 <br />I ask that this letter be included in the records of the aforementioned City Council <br />meeting after being marked and numbered as an exhibit. My office represents several <br />seriously ill and/or disabled individuals who are members of medical marijuana collectives <br />located in Santa Ana, California. <br />I am now in receipt of the proposed Santa Ana initiative /ordinance the Council <br />intends to place before voters for approval /rejection in November, 2014. I have reviewed <br />the ballot initiative. Included with this letter is a true and correct copy of the proposed <br />ballot initiative with areas highlighted. Also included is a copy of a lawsuit filed <br />approximately two (2) weeks ago by the City of Riverside against a medical marijuana <br />ballot initiative that has qualified for inclusion in that City in November. Please note that <br />the lawsuit filed by the City of Riverside alleges the ballot initiative proposed for that <br />City is invalid and preempted by Federal law. <br />In October, 2011, the Second District Court of Appeal agreed with my arguments <br />against an ordinance passed by the City of Long Beach that is very similar to the ordinance <br />you are proposing for Santa Ana (Pack v. Superior Court, 2011). Although the California <br />Supreme Court later granted review in that case, the City of Long Beach repealed that <br />ordinance rendering the case moot. While I am not citing that case for its legal proposition, <br />it is available on the Internet solely for the purpose of examining potential issues cities and <br />counties need to be aware of when crafting legislation in the area of medical marijuana. <br />I am well aware of the City's relationship with Best, Best and Krieger. It is my <br />opinion that law firm used the core Long Beach Municipal Code Chapter 5.87 ordinance as <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.