The Los Angeles City Council moved forward with its own medical marijuana ballot measure Wednesday, increasing the chances voters could face three pot initiatives on the May ballot.

On an 11-1 vote, the council instructed city lawyers to draw up
language for a ballot measure that would restrict the number of
marijuana dispensaries allowed in the city. Supporters of the measure,
including Councilman Paul Koretz and Council President Herb Wesson, said
it would raise taxes on medical marijuana sales and would permit only
those dispensaries that opened before a city moratorium in 2007.

The proposal comes after two other initiatives qualified for the
ballot this month. According to Wesson,

A third measure regulating medical marijuana storefronts in Los Angeles could be headed toward the May ballot.

The Los Angeles City Council voted 11-1 Wednesday to draft ballot
language that would allow some existing clinics to remain in operation
while formalizing restrictions on where the shops can be located. Only
those clinics that were opened prior to September of 2007, when the city
first approved a set of rules for dispensaries, could remain open. Even
then, they would be have to meet requirements including:

• Ban consumption on the premises
• Close from 8 p.m. to 10 a.m.
• Pay taxes
• Prohibit minors
• Conduct LAPD background checks on employees
• Operate more than 1,000 feet from schools, libraries, parks and religious institutions

The city estimates there are 800 to 1,000 clinics operating in the
city. Only about 180 of them opened before the 2007 restrictions took
effect. 

The proposal, authored by Councilman Paul Koretz, would increase the
tax on clinics to $60 per $1,000 of gross receipts. One medical
marijuana initiative that has qualified for the May 21 ballot, sponsored
by Angelenos for Safe Access, also calls for increasing the tax on
clinics, but without limiting the number in operation.

Another measure, backed by Americans for Safe Access, would also
place time and location restrictions on clinics that opened prior to
September of 2007. (Representatives from both groups talked about their
proposals on KPCC

Two medical marijuana cases going before the state Supreme Court could
determine whether dispensary bans by dozens of California cities are
legal.

The City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patient’s Health and
Wellness Center is scheduled to begin Feb. 5 at the University of San
Francisco School of Law over the city’s legal authority to ban the
dispensaries, which was upheld by an appeals court last year.

In another upcoming case, City of Upland v. G3 Holistic Inc.,
G3 lawyers are expected to argue that cities can’t ban the dispensaries
because they’re allowed under Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use
Act, which legally allows doctors to prescribe marijuana to patients.

Some cities contend they have the power to close the dispensaries based solely on zoning laws.

Medical marijuana advocates have said that more than 170 bans
were in place across California at one point, including Long Beach. The
city and county of Los Angeles have also both attempted to ban
dispensaries but were forced to back down.

City officials also lean on federal law that says marijuana – medical or otherwise – is illegal.

"We’re watching the Riverside case very closely yes," said T.
Peter Pierce, an attorney for Los Angeles-based Richards, Watson &
Gershon, which is representing Upland in its Supreme Court case.

"Once the Supreme Court decides, they would apply that decision in the G3 case as well as to all medical marijuana decisions."

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Riverside, or local
governments, it would affirm an appellate court ruling in the G3 case.

Attorneys representing G3 Holistic filed an appeal in December
2011 to the Supreme Court after the 4th District Court of Appeal in
Riverside sided with Upland’s ban on dispensaries on Nov. 9, 2011, based
on its zoning code language.

A similar decision was reached in the Riverside case that same day.

J. David Nick, an attorney for Inland Empire Patient’s Health
and Wellness Center, said he thinks a decision in the Riverside case
would allow the Supreme Court to "remand things back to the appellate,"
which would allow appellate courts to make decisions based on the
Supreme Court case.

Navigating state and federal marijuana laws has created a
quagmire for local governments as they attempt to regulate or ban the
drug, which is legal in California for medical purposes but illegal
under federal law.

Last July, an appeals court struck down Los Angeles County’s ban on all dispensaries in unincorporated areas.

Justices said that the state’s medical marijuana laws
authorize cooperatives and collectives to grow, store and distribute
cannabis, contrary to the county’s ban passed in 2010.

"The phrase `regulate the location, operation, or
establishment’ does not mean ban, prohibit, forbid, or prevent all
medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives from operating within the
entire jurisdiction `solely on the basis’ that they engage in medical
marijuana activities," Judge Robert Mallano wrote.

If full-on bans are ruled illegal, that could leave cities in a precarious position.

In 2011, a federal appeal court ruled that Long Beach couldn’t
regulate medical marijuana dispensaries, as many other cities have
attempted to do. Justices said the rules violated federal law.

Long Beach then appealed to the state Supreme Court for
clarification on its powers to regulate medical marijuana – while later
banning collectives of more than three people.

The high court threw out the appeal after the city banned medical marijuana outright.

Long Beach City Attorney Robert Shannon said the Supreme
Court’s decision on the Upland and Riverside cases will apply to the
city, assuming justices do not rule on a narrow front affecting only
those cities.

Shannon called that scenario "unlikely."

"I think they’re poised to give guidance to the cities, and frankly to the medical marijuana collectives," he said.

For the city of Los Angeles, the Supreme Court hearing on the Riverside case is not expected to have any immediate impact.

"These cases concern whether local government can ban dispensaries," said Jane Usher, a special assistant city attorney.

The Los Angeles City Council had voted to ban dispensaries but
reversed its decision after medical marijuana advocates collected
enough signatures to put a referendum on the ballot to overturn the
prohibition.

But, Usher said, the city is closely watching to see if the court will spell out how cities can govern pot shops.

"We anticipate that the Supreme Court may use these cases to
set forth its views regarding the scope of the regulatory authority of
local government," Usher said.

"If the court takes that opportunity, we will recommend the
city follow the court’s lead in any new medical marijuana regulations."

Usher said the direct cases involving the city’s proposals on
limiting the clinics have been pushed back to the point that the city
attorney has not even been told to prepare legal arguments.

Kris Hermes of Americans for Safe Access said the Riverside
case will have an impact on the ability of cities to address safe and
legal access to medical marijuana.

"With dozens of local regulatory ordinances through the state
and more than 170 municipal bans, there is a patchwork of access that
patients have to navigate," Hermes said.

Hermes said advocates for medical marijuana hope Los Angeles
will change its regulations and avoid the need for a further legal
battle.

SAN DIEGO

Mayor Bob Filner ordered a halt Thursday to the prosecution of medical marijuana dispensaries in the city, using his power as strong mayor to direct police and code compliance officers to stop targeting the pot shops.

The decision came two days after Filner spoke before the San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group for medical marijuana. Filner criticized law enforcement

San Diego Mayor Bob Filner declared an end on Thursday to the city’s legal war on medical pot with a letter to city authorities ordering civil prosecutors to "stop the crackdown on marijuana dispensaries."

Filner, a Democrat who was sworn in December 1, said in the letter sent to the police chief, city attorney and the city’s Neighborhood Code Compliance Department that such shops could still be scrutinized for other code violations like any other business.

"Until we have a new set of regulations for medical marijuana distribution, I have asked the Neighborhood Code Compliance Department and the Police Department to temporarily halt all prosecutions of city zoning code violations when it comes to medical marijuana dispensaries," Filner said in a statement.

He added that he plans to bring a proposed ordinance on the matter to the city council soon to regulate marijuana dispensaries to close a regulatory gap that had allowed the shops to be prosecuted on zoning violations.

The announcement signals a sea change in dispensary prosecutions in California’s second largest city, with a population of 1.3 million. In 2011, the city attorney launched code enforcement action lawsuits against more than 100 medical marijuana dispensaries and shut most of them down.

City Attorney Jan Goldsmith responded to Filner’s call for an end to the prosecutions in a letter that said, "We will, of course, comply with that direction."

The move comes amid a growing federal-state battle over marijuana that intensified when states in the U.S. West and Northeast liberalized medical pot laws in recent years, setting the stage for voters in Colorado and Washington in November to approve legalizing recreational use of the drug as well.

The federal government holds that marijuana is an illegal drug liable to be abused and has cracked down on medical marijuana operations in California and other states where it is legal.

San Diego U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy sent a letter in August to the city of Del Mar warning that even city employees who "conduct activities mandated" by a proposed Del Mar medical marijuana ordinance were not immune from prosecution.

Duffy was traveling out of the district on Thursday and was unable to respond to media inquiries, her staff said.

Other cities, including Oakland and San Francisco, have sought to add zoning rules that allows such shops. In October, the city of Oakland sued the federal government to block U.S. authorities from closing down a prominent medical marijuana dispensary that is featured on a reality television show.

Eugene Davidovich, the spokesman for the San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access, applauded the mayor’s move to end targeted prosecutions.

"I’m so hopeful that this is the end to these lawsuits and it will create a path to regulation of shops for the thousands of people who rely on this medicine," Davidovich said.

This week, Mayor Bob Filner re-opened the door to the possibility of
legal medical marijuana collectives in San Diego. Speaking to the group
Americans for Safe Access, the mayor said he would work to stop the city of San Diego from closing medical marijuana collectives.

As first reported by San Diego CityBeat, Goldsmith then sent Filner a letter saying that the mayor could stop him from going after the collectives in "30 seconds."

On Thursday, Filner responded by ordering the city to stop referring medical marijuana code violation cases to Goldsmith for prosecution.

On KPBS Midday Edition, Goldsmith said now that Filner

SAN DIEGO

Where to begin without burying the
lede? Mayor Bob Filner’s sensational promises? His surprising disregard
for the city attorney? His over-the-top optimism? 

How about with a quote?: 

"When
they wrote the strong-mayor form of government, they weren’t thinking
about me," Filner told the San Diego Chapter of Americans for Safe
Access last night.  

Filner
was on fire at the La Jolla Brew House, where he met with
medical-marijuana activists for the first time since taking office. He
couldn’t have been more incendiary if he’d come equipped with a
flamethrower and swished to and fro, lighting pipes and bongs while
crying out, "Toke deep, my friends, Ras Bobby is here!"

That’s
a stretched simile, sure, but not wholly hyperbolic. Filner fired out
promises more rapidly than the medical-marijuana patients could process
them. 

It had been a long, dramatic afternoon and evening for the new, liberal mayor. Earlier, during the council session, he’d
engaged in a public spat with City Council President Todd Gloria over
SANDAG appointments. Then he appeared at a meeting of the Hillcrest Town
Council, where he discussed Uptowny issues. After that, he booked it
north to La Jolla, where he received a rock-star reception from a packed
house. Or at least that’s how it looked and sounded from the three
streaming cameras. 

He
began by giving credit to the advocates for their work in his election;
the medical-marijuana community was among the first to get behind his
candidacy. You’d see his signs in the windows of collectives