Pubdate: Wed, 16 Jan 2013
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Copyright: 2013 Los Angeles Times
Contact:  http://www.latimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/248
Author: Kate Linthicum
Page: AA3

VOTERS COULD DECIDE ON 3 POT MEASURES

Two of the Items Are Backed by Marijuana Activists, and the Council 
Will Decide This Week If the Third Should Go on Ballot.

Even in the complicated world of pot politics, it's a confusing 
prospect: In the May municipal election, Los Angeles voters could 
face not one but three ballot measures geared toward regulating 
medical marijuana dispensaries.

All three of the proposals would allow some pot shops to remain open, 
albeit under different regulations.

The first two measures, which are sponsored by two groups of medical 
marijuana activists with competing interests, qualified for the 
ballot last week. One would permit only those dispensaries that 
opened before a city moratorium in 2007. The other would allow any 
pot shop that meets certain requirements to operate and would raise 
taxes on medical marijuana sales by 20% to pay for city enforcement.

Neither of those options appeals to the City Council, which has 
struggled for years to regulate medical cannabis against a backdrop 
of ever-shifting case law and increasing pressure from federal drug 
enforcement officials. City Council President Herb Wesson said Monday 
that neither of the existing ballot measure proposals would 
"accomplish the goal of limiting the proliferation of medical 
marijuana dispensaries while providing adequate protections for our 
neighborhoods."

He and his colleagues decided to propose a ballot measure of their 
own. The council will vote Wednesday on whether to present it to voters in May.

The language of the new proposal is still being worked out, but it 
will probably require dispensaries to be at least 1,000 feet apart, 
according to Chris Koontz, who has worked on the issue as an aide to 
Councilman Paul Koretz. It will also include an increase of the 
medical marijuana tax.

Koontz acknowledged that voters might be confused by having to choose 
from three ballot measures with only slight differences. "I cannot 
believe this is how policy is made," he said. But he said the council 
passing its own law was a less viable option. It was unclear whether 
a previous Koretz proposal to allow only the pre-moratorium shops to 
stay open had the political will to clear the council, Koontz said, 
and even if the law had been approved, it might be invalidated in May 
if voters approve one of the other medical marijuana measures.

A supporter of one of those measures dismissed the council's action 
as "a political play." David Welch, who is pushing for the measure 
that would allow any shop that meets certain requirements to operate, 
said the council should make laws "instead of punting the issue to 
the voters." Welch said he had not yet seen the details of the new proposal.

Neither had Yami Bolanos, the president of the Greater Los Angeles 
Collective Alliance, which is backing the competing proposal that 
would allow only the pre-moratorium dispensaries. She said she was 
also frustrated by the council, which she said has chosen not to work 
with the medical marijuana community. "I'm kind of in disbelief," she said.

But Bolanos held open the possibility that her coalition, which 
includes a labor union that represents dispensary workers, might come 
around to support the council-backed proposal. After all, the 
council's law would allow older dispensaries like the ones she 
represents to stay open, although they would have to follow the 
1,000-foot distance requirements.

"I can't tell you whether I would abandon my initiative to go to that 
one," Bolanos said. "But if that's what it takes, that's what it takes."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom