Category: AUMA

In November of 2016, California voters approved Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA). Under Proposition 64, adults 21 years of age or older can legally grow, possess, and use cannabis for non-medicinal purposes, with certain restrictions. In addition, beginning on January 1, 2018, AUMA makes it legal to sell and distribute marijuana through a regulated business.

Posted on

Sacramento City Council Approves Permit for High Times Central California Cannabis Cup

Sacramento Cannabis

The County of Sacramento, California, has a population of over 1.5 million.  (Sacramento County Census.)  54% of the voters of the County approved the legalization of cannabis (The Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) Proposition 64) on November 8, 2016.  (California Proposition 64 County Results.)

The City of Sacramento represents nearly 1/3 of the total County population (Sacramento City Census) and the City of Sacramento is the only city in the County accepting cannabis permit applications for indoor and mixed light marijuana cultivation, non-volatile manufacturing, testing laboratories, delivery-only (non-storefront) dispensaries, and distribution.  There are currently 30 permitted medical cannabis dispensaries, with 11 also having a cannabis license for adult marijuana use.   The City is not accepting any cannabis permit applications for additional dispensaries at this time.  (Sacramento City Cannabis Permit Process.)

The majority of other cities in Sacramento County (representing slightly less than 1/3 of the population of the County – City Census Data) Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, Folsom, and Rancho Cordova, have adopted complete bans of commercial cannabis businesses.

Despite the fact that the majority of Sacramento County voters approved Proposition 64, the County Board of Supervisors also adopted a ban on commercial marijuana businesses by a 3-2 vote.  (Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Action Summary Marijuana Ban.)

It is apparent that the County of Sacramento and most of the County’s cities are struggling with meeting the expectations of their constituents in cannabis regulation and taxation.

In the latest example, even the City of Sacramento, which took the first steps in creating a local cannabis economy, hesitated in permitting the first licensed temporary cannabis activity at the Cal Expo Fairgrounds.

On April 24, 2018, the City of Sacramento considered a temporary permit process resolution to allow the City Manager to license temporary cannabis events.  The City Council continued the item, without any discussion, jeopardizing the potential success of the first-ever Sacramento located Central Valley High Times Cannabis Cup scheduled for May 4-5, 2018.  The policy proposed on April 24, was not limited to just the upcoming event, but to any temporary cannabis event in the City.  (Sacramento City Council Report re Local Approval for Temporary Cannabis Events at Cal Expo.)  The continuance may have been influenced by a decision of the City of San Bernardino to deny a temporary permit less than 48 hours before the High Times 4/20 Cannabis Cup event the week before.  The 4/20 Cannabis Cup event proceeded without the sale of cannabis at the event.

On May 1, 2018, less than 72 hours before the start of the Central Valley High Times Cannabis Cup, the Sacramento City Council considered an agenda item limited to only the upcoming High Times Cannabis Cup Central Valley event.  High Times CEO Adam Levin spoke at the meeting.

After more than two hours of robust debate, the Sacramento City Council approved the temporary City cannabis event permit for the Cannabis Cup at the Cal Expo Fairgrounds.

Contact us to learn more about California state or local cannabis regulations, cannabis regulatory compliance, and cannabis litigation.

Posted on

Cannabis Opportunities in San Bernardino; or lack thereof

Marijuana Laws

For several years, cannabis businesses of any kind were banned in the City of San Bernardino.  In November 2016, the citizens of San Bernardino had three choices regarding the future of cannabis in their town.  Two of the choices were the result of the initiative process which requires the proponents to collect sufficient signatures from registered voters in the City before they could be placed on the ballot.  The third choice was a City-sponsored ballot measure.  With three options on the ballot, San Bernardino voters were faced with a difficult choice.

Measure “O” established a regulatory process for all cannabis businesses (medical and adult-use), including zoning restrictions related to specific parcel numbers, distance from residential zones, and taxation.  Measure “N” also established a regulatory process for medical cannabis businesses only, including zoning restrictions to permit businesses in commercial zones, established distance requirements, imposed a 5% taxation on all gross receipts, and mandated a minimum of twenty medical cannabis business licenses in the City.  Measure “P”, placed on the ballot by the City Council,  established a regulatory process for all cannabis businesses, including zoning restrictions, but no taxation.

The City-wide ballot measures were on the same ballot as California Proposition 64 (Adult Use of Marijuana Act – AUMA) , the State-wide legalization of Adult Use of Cannabis (read more about California Cannabis Law).  Nearly 53% of the citizens of the County of San Bernardino voted for the legalization of the Adult Use of Cannabis.

Measure “O” was the successful measure with 54% of the votes cast (Measure “N” received 51.10%, and Measure “P” 48.45%).

The City was simultaneously sued to mandate the immediate implementation of Measure “O” and, alternatively, a challenge to the validity of Measure “O”.  The Court issued its Final Statement of Decision invalidating Measure “O” on February 9, 2018.  Read the Court Decision on San Bernardino Measure O.

It is anticipated that the proponents of Measure “O” will appeal the trial court decision and request a stay of the trial court decision.  It is further anticipated that the proponents of Measure “N” will file a lawsuit demanding that Measure “N” is immediately operative.  For more info, see this article from the San Bernardino Sun.

Meanwhile, on February 1, 2018, the City of San Bernardino extended a moratorium for ten months and fifteen days reinstating the previous ban of all cannabis businesses.  City staff presented proposed new regulations to the City Council on February 7, 2018.  The proposed new regulations will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration.

Between lawsuits and City Council consideration of new regulations,  it is unclear what the future of cannabis will be in the City of San Bernardino.

Contact us to learn more about California state or local cannabis regulations, cannabis regulatory compliance, and cannabis litigation.