BILL ANALYSIS AB 2650 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 2650 (Buchanan) As Amended May 28, 2010 Majority vote PUBLIC SAFETY 4-2 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Hagman, Gilmore, Hill, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Ammiano, | | |Portantino | |Bradford, | | | | |Charles Calderon, Coto, | | | | |Davis, | | | | |Monning, Ruskin, Skinner, | | | | |Solorio, Torlakson, | | | | |Torrico | | | | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Ammiano, Beall |Nays:|Conway, Harkey, Miller, | | | | |Nielsen, Norby | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Prohibits any medical marijuana cooperative, collective, dispensary, operator, establishment, or provider who possess, cultivates, or distributes medical marijuana, as specified, from being located within 600 feet of a school, public or private, k-12. Specifically, this bill : 1)States that the 600-foot restriction shall be the horizontal distance measured in a straight line from the property line of the school to the closest property line of that lot on which the medical marijuana cooperative or dispensary is located without regard to intervening structures. 2)Provides that the 600-foot restriction shall not apply to medical marijuana cooperatives or dispensaries, as specified that are also licensed residential medical or elder care facilities. 3)Provides that this restriction shall apply to medical marijuana cooperatives, collective, dispensary, operator, establishment or providers that are authorized by law to possess, cultivate or distribute medical marijuana and that has a storefront or mobile retail outlet which is ordinarily requires a business license. AB 2650 Page 2 4)States that nothing in this restriction shall preempt local ordinances, adopted prior to January 1, 2011, that regulate the location or establishment of a medical marijuana cooperative, collective, dispensary, operator, establishment of provider. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, unknown, significant General Fund costs, well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, to the Department of Justice (DOJ), to defend the state against imminent litigation. Based on the current experience in L.A. (see comment 2), where several suits were filed within weeks of the signing of a related ordinance, preliminary indications from DOJ concur with this assessment. COMMENTS : According to the author, "January 2010, the Los Angeles City Council passed an ordinance to regulate the collective cultivation of the medical marijuana in order to ensure the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Los Angeles. Several cities in our district, including Danville, Walnut Creek and Isleton, have recently passed ordinances to move, restrict or ban marijuana dispensaries within their city limits. As Medical Marijuana Dispensaries are increasing throughout the state, more and more are opening closer to our schools. Currently, there is no guidance as the most appropriate locations for these dispensaries to open. As a result, we have cases of dispensaries opening up close to schools and other places where children congregate. As Medical Marijuana Dispensaries continue to open throughout the state, they are increasingly located near schools and parks, public libraries and child care facilities. To keep Medical Marijuana Dispensaries from further encroaching from places where children and families congregate, we believe we need to keep them a measured distance from these locations." Please see the policy committee for a full discussion of this bill. Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Horiuchi / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 AB 2650 Page 3 FN: 0004648