Pubdate: Tue, 30 Dec 2014
Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal (NV)
Copyright: 2014 Las Vegas Review-Journal
Contact: http://www.reviewjournal.com/about/print/press/letterstoeditor.html
Website: http://www.lvrj.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/233
Author: Ben Botkin

COUNTY REJECTS MARIJUANA APPLICANTS

Dispensaries Number 10 Instead of 18 Allowed

Clark County commissioners on Monday rejected dozens of applicants 
for medical marijuana dispensaries, including eight who already won 
approval from the state.

The 5-1 action, with Commissioner Tom Collins opposed, sets the 
county up to have 10 dispensaries in unincorporated areas instead of 
the 18 allowed under state law. County officials said they are 
hopeful the state will grant provisional certificates to applicants 
who already have county permits but currently lack state approval.

The move was made against the backdrop of a Clark County District 
Court order issued Friday in a lawsuit filed by dispensary applicants 
who got approval from the county, but not the state. The plaintiffs 
asked the court to rule the state improperly approved applicants who 
lacked county zoning approval. But District Judge Kathleen Delaney 
found the state Division of Public and Behavioral Health had followed 
the law in

Judge rules state followed law choosing which applications to approve.

"The Legislature clearly did not intend for the local jurisdictions 
. to have de facto authority to dictate to the Division whom it may 
consider for registration," the judge wrote.

Nearly 80 applicants for dispensaries made a run for one of the 
coveted 18 county slots after a 2013 state law laid the groundwork 
for regulated sales and distribution of medical marijuana in Nevada.

The county granted special-use permits to 18 dispensary applicants in 
June. But when the state announced its picks in November, they didn't 
all match up.

Only 10 applicants got the needed approval from both the state and 
the county. That left two other groups that have become known as the 
"county eight" (those who got approval from the county but not the 
state) and the "state eight" (those who got state approval but were 
rejected by the county Monday).

The commissioners' vote rejected all applications they had previously 
held "in abeyance" - 57 in all, including those of the state eight. 
Commissioners could have approved the eight applications with state 
certificates, putting the county forward with 18 dispensaries.

Instead, Monday's action left it up to the state to determine if 
Clark County will get more than 10 dispensaries.

Legal questions remain as the state and county wrestle with the issue.

The county, pointing to prior statements from state officials in 
public meetings about the role of local governments, previously asked 
the state if it would select additional applicants if its initial 
choices lacked approval from local jurisdictions. But the division's 
response was that it's done issuing provisional certificates, as the 
limited 90-day period for reviewing applications is over.

But county officials appeared hopeful that the state may budge on 
that position.

Clark County's legal counsel, MaryAnne Miller, said the state is 
revisiting whether its interpretation of the 90-day rule was 
appropriate, adding that the state also could open up a new 
application process for the eight remaining slots.

"Nothing will happen unless and until the county takes action," she said.

Commission Chairman Steve Sisolak said he hopes the state will take 
action, noting that in the worst-case scenario, patients will still 
have 10 dispensaries in unincorporated areas.

"I don't think it leaves any patients in limbo whatsoever," he said, 
adding that the county took the decisions very seriously.

Collins, before the vote, noted that the county has no guarantee or 
commitment from the state.

State officials had no immediate comment on the county's action or on 
whether they are revisiting their stance on the 90day review period.

Laura Freed, deputy administrator of the Division of Public and 
Behavioral Health, said in a statement that her agency will first 
need to evaluate the county's denials and determine if any 
dispensaries with provisional state approval "have exhausted all 
their appeal rights with the county."

As for opening up the state's application process, that can't happen 
until 2015, with the 45-day notice required by law, Freed said.

"However, at the present time, there are no open dispensary slots in 
unincorporated Clark County," she said. "Therefore, there are no 
provisional registrations for the State to issue."

Jared Kahn, a lawyer for one of the applicants rejected by the county 
Monday, said his client, Naturex LLC, and others were trying to 
figure out how to respond and haven't decided whether to go to court.

Kahn said the logic the county relied on - that the state could 
decide to grant new licenses to bring the number up to 18 - is at 
odds with the stance the attorney general's office has taken in court.

Linda Anderson, chief deputy attorney general, has said the state 
cannot grant new licenses because the law gave it only 90 days to 
review applications. That period has ended.

Kahn called the decision "very disappointing" and added, "Millions of 
dollars are at stake that have been jeopardized by potentially 
uninformed ... misstatements that we cannot have the opportunity to refute."

He said his client and others could lose their licenses if they don't 
open within 18 months of getting state approval.

"So every day of delay is biting away at that 18 months' time frame 
we have," Kahn said. "We've just been having to sit every day since 
Nov. 4. We'll be sitting further ... waiting to know what we'll be doing."

Trevor Hayes, an attorney for Wellness Connection of Nevada, said his 
client is willing to work with the county on addressing any concerns, 
including moving the location. His client has a state provisional 
certificate but lacks county approval.

"They certainly could have taken a look now at the state eight group 
a little more closely," he said, adding that he understands the 
county's in a tough spot.

But now that the county is no longer reviewing hundreds of 
applications, Hayes said, a hearing examining the merits of the state 
eight would be productive.

Medical marijuana advocates at the meeting were critical of the move, 
telling commissioners it reduces access.

"We're sick and tired of waiting, sir," said Raymond Fletcher, 
chairman of the board of Wellness Education Cannabis Advocates of 
Nevada. "Patients have waited far too long for safe access to 
medication. Are we going to get these other eight dispensaries that 
are outlined? We don't know." Fletcher wasn't alone in his 
frustration. "We as advocates are so frustrated with this," said 
Vicki Higgins, a medical marijuana advocate who uses it to relieve 
her symptoms of fibromyalgia. "We're down to 10 when we were supposed 
to have 18."

Higgins added: "It's sad. Let's re-evaluate this process for next 
time. ... Thank you for making the effort. I'm just sorry it came to this."

Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani was absent.

Eric Hartley contributed to this report.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom