Pubdate: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 Source: Desert Sun, The (Palm Springs, CA) Copyright: 2011 The Desert Sun Contact: http://local2.thedesertsun.com/mailer/opinionwrap.php Website: http://www.mydesert.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1112 Author: Blake Herzog JUDGE REFUSES TO THROW OUT RANCHO MIRAGE DISPENSARY SUIT A lawsuit filed by two marijuana dispensaries against Rancho Mirage is moving forward after a judge overruled a city motion to have the $848,000 case thrown out. These motions, known as "demurrers," are frequently filed in a case's early stages and declare it has no legal basis. Riverside County Superior Court Judge Randall White ruled June 3 the issues underlying the case against the city were too large to be dismissed lightly. "The Medical Marijuana Act contemplates the existence of lawful medical marijuana dispensaries," he wrote. "It cannot be determined at the demurrer stage what a complete and permanent ban on such dispensaries can be reconciled with the provisions" of that law. The suit was filed Feb. 3, the same day the City Council banned dispensaries in the city while authorizing home delivery and a transportation subsidy for patients belonging to dispensaries that didn't offer free delivery. Jessica McElfresh, an attorney representing the two dispensaries, said the ruling is encouraging for her clients. "The court said basically ‘no, this is a very important case, and we're acting on an important issue,'" she said. City Attorney Steve Quintanilla said the ruling isn't necessarily a setback for the city. "We got some clarification from the court on what the issues will be," he said. Desert Heart Collective operated briefly as a dispensary within the city after it was denied a business permit. The other dispensary, Metro Meds, also had its permit application rejected from the city but never opened its doors. The suit claims the city violated its own municipal code by not at least considering issuing a business permit, as well as state law with an extended moratorium, or temporary ban, on dispensary operations. The next hearing will be a case management conference Aug. 2, where future hearing dates will be set, evidentiary matters handled, and settlement options discussed. "We sent out a settlement demand to the city, but we haven't gotten any response from them," McElfresh said. Quintanilla said there's a reason: "We haven't had a council meeting yet. These people don't understand we do these things every two weeks." The council will discuss the offer in closed session Thursday, he said. The council votes on allowing delivery and subsidizing transit have never taken effect because the city hasn't lifted the moratorium on dispensaries, which expires in December. The moratorium, or temporary ban, can't be extended any further under state law. Quintanilla said he's not sure what will happen if the dispensary case isn't resolved by then. "I can't predict where the council's going to be in December. I can't predict where state law is going to be in December," he said. The rules did change late last week after the U.S. Attorney General's Office released a memo that stated the federal government would continue to prosecute dispensary operators even if they are located in a state where medical marijuana has been legalized. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard R Smith Jr.