Some Marijuana Dispensaries Get Reprieve in Long Beach: Will Los Angeles Give Pot Shops a Second Chance?

By Dennis Romero Wed., Feb. 15 2012 at 8:03 AM

Andrew Hecht

Long Beach is giving marijuana dispensaries a second chance. At least some of them.

And as the city at the center of a court case that could help decide the fate of pot shops in the cannabis collective capital of America, Los Angeles, that city's decision could offer hope for dispensary supporters here.

Here's what the L.B. City Council decided last night:

In an 8-1 vote it moved to ban all dispensaries, as originally planned, except for "18 city-approved operators" that will get six months to prove their worth to the people of the LBC, according to the Long Beach Press-Telegram.

While that might sound onerous for the city's pot business, keep in mind that 18 represents about a third of the dispensaries in town, apparently: 35 that are allegedly unlicensed would be ordered to close under the vote, according to the P-T.

The big question is, would this move be legit?

The city was threatening to shut down the whole pot game after a state appeals court said municipalities like Long Beach couldn't permit and approve-by-lottery pot shops when the federal government has essentially outlawed all things marijuana.

That decision, Pack v. City of Long Beach, sent chills through the cannabis retail world, and the city of L.A. has since moved forward with an outright dispensary ban of its own that is expected to reach the Los Angeles City Council as soon as this month.

But in making its move to save at least some of its weed sellers, the Long Beach City Council is letting what it believes are clean retailers stay open while the Pack case is considered by the California Supreme Court. That decision could take months.

Will the L.A. City Council follow and give at least some of its dispensaries a reprieve? At this point it doesn't seem likely. But you never know.

[@dennisjromero / djromero@laweekly.com / @LAWeeklyNews]

Tags:

City Council, dispensaries, Long Beach, Los Angeles, marijuana, Pack v Long Beach, pot shops

We Recommend

Dennis

Most of the blame can be put on Dennis Romero and his shoddy journalism.........

Leo

as a journalist, please do your research.... not one single collective in long beach, not the 18, nor the 35, nor any ever received any license our permit....

... the council was given a prejudicial motion Wooten by the city attorney to allow an exemption for the 18 collectives that were selected in the lottery that was ruled illegal by the high court. The criteria that the city is using to determine who is good and bad is based on the very law that was stricken.

The motion was given to Councilman Garcia being closed doors as a desperate measure by the city attorney to fool the council into voting for a ban. And a ban is what was passed.

The so called bad collectives are not bad, many off them simply had their applications thrown in the Ed the waste basket before being considered by evil Erik Sund.

The bad news is that the very exemption clause will be the basis for the new lawsuits that are being written at this very day to rip the recent council action apart.

The city attorney will chime back in a week and playing the nice guy tell everyone that he really tried tried to exempt, but in the end couldn't.

However, the ban will still stand just as he planned and nothing in heaven or hell will be able to undo under horror that city council voted on unknowingly this week.

The exempted collectives have been dancing on the graves of the poor other collectives that were excluded.

Sad. Soon they will understand it is about patients.

Bob

And you are right Leo, the city will be facing lawsuits again that they cannot afford to fight. Grow some balls City of Long Beach. Yes or no, don't favor and delay because you spent the money from the lottery already.

Bob

Yeah, this is horrible. I would'nt blame Shannon too much because he does what he was taught to do. But these flip floppin, money taken council members should be investigated. Even one of their own is now talkin about them. Either yes or no man. They are showing favoritism from the start. You banned them all or just let them be, but when you favor certain collectives and called the rest "greedy" "rogue" collectives that are run by organized thugs, then you are projecting. 90 percent of the people in that business are in it because of greed. Can you blame them? The other 10 percent are the 215 diehards and they are about the fight. These selected collectives are no different from the "rogue" collectives. There are organized criminal elements in there too.

Christopher Neal

It amazes me, the silly little things our elected leaders choose to focus on...

Maybe under Obamacare, we can all get free medicine. That is, until those wealthy who according to Obama need to "pay their fare share" run out of money.