BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        AB 243|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                                   THIRD READING 


          Bill No:  AB 243
          Author:   Wood (D), et al.
          Amended:  9/1/15 in Senate
          Vote:     27 - Urgency

           SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE:  5-0, 7/8/15
           AYES:  Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara, Pavley
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Nguyen, Moorlach

           SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE:  5-0, 7/15/15
           AYES:  Wieckowski, Hill, Jackson, Leno, Pavley
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Gaines, Bates

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE:  5-0, 8/27/15
           AYES:  Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Bates, Nielsen

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  60-15, 6/3/15 - See last page for vote

           SUBJECT:   Medical marijuana cultivation


          SOURCE:    Author

          DIGEST:   This bill states the Legislature's intent to enact  
          legislation that would establish, a dedicated funding source to  
          address environmental damages resulting from illegal cannabis  
          cultivation.

          ANALYSIS: 
          
          Existing law:

          1)Establishes the Compassionate Use Act, which:









                                                                     AB 243  
                                                                    Page  2



             a)   Authorizes the use and cultivation of marijuana for  
               medical purposes. 
             b)   Allows qualified patients, persons with valid  
               identification cards and the designated primary caregivers  
               of qualified patients and persons with identification  
               cards, who associate in order collectively and  
               cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes,  
               are not subject to criminal sanctions solely on the basis  
               of that fact.

             c)   Makes it a crime to plant, cultivate, harvest, dry, or  
               process marijuana, except as otherwise authorized by law.

          1)Allows patients and primary caregivers to collectively and  
            cooperatively cultivate medical marijuana and established a  
            medical marijuana card program for patients to use on a  
            voluntary basis.

          2)Regulates various aspects of agricultural production,  
            including water use, pesticide use and land use.

          3)Allows local governments, through their police power, to  
            regulate, restrict, or ban the cultivation or distribution of  
            marijuana within their jurisdictions.

          This bill:

          1)States the Legislature's intent to enact legislation that  
            would establish a dedicated funding source, to address  
            environmental damages resulting from illegal cannabis  
            cultivation.

          2)Makes the enactment of the bill contingent on the enactment of  
            AB 266 (Bonta) and SB 643 (McGuire).

          Background
          
          The Compassionate Use Act and SB 420.  In 1996, voters approved  
          Proposition 215, known as the Compassionate use Act of 1996  
          (CUA).  The CUA allowed patients and primary caregivers to  
          obtain and use medical marijuana, as recommended by a physician  
          and prohibited physicians from being punished or denied any  








                                                                     AB 243  
                                                                    Page  3



          right or privilege for making a medical marijuana recommendation  
          to a patient.  In 2003, SB 420 (Vasconcellos, Chapter 875)  
          allowed patients and primary caregivers to collectively and  
          cooperatively cultivate medical marijuana and established a  
          medical marijuana card program for patients to use on a  
          voluntary basis.  However, since the passage of Proposition 215  
          and SB 420, the state has not adopted a framework to provide for  
          appropriate licensure and regulation of medical marijuana.  In  
          addition, despite the CUA and SB 420, marijuana is still illegal  
          under state and federal law.  

          Local authority over medical marijuana.  By exempting qualified  
          patients and caregivers from prosecution for using or from  
          collectively, or cooperatively cultivating medical marijuana,  
          the CUA and SB 420 essentially authorized the cultivation and  
          use of medical marijuana.  These laws have triggered the growth  
          of medical marijuana dispensaries in many localities and in  
          response, local governments have sought to exercise their police  
          powers to regulate, or ban activities relating to medical  
          marijuana.  After numerous court cases and years of uncertainty  
          relating to the ability of local governments to control medical  
          marijuana activities, particularly relating to the ability to  
          control the zoning, operation and existence of medical marijuana  
          dispensaries, the California Supreme Court (Court), in City of  
          Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients (2013) 56 Cal. 4th 729, held  
          that California's medical marijuana statutes do not preempt a  
          local ban on facilities that distribute medical marijuana.  The  
          Court held that nothing in the CUA or SB 420 expressly or  
          impliedly limited the inherent authority of a local  
          jurisdiction, by its own ordinances, to regulate the use of its  
          land, including the authority to provide that facilities for the  
          distribution of medical marijuana will not be permitted to  
          operate within its borders.  Accordingly, many California  
          jurisdictions, roughly estimated by the League of California  
          Cities at 50% pending completion of a statewide survey, ban the  
          cultivation and sale of medical marijuana altogether.  

          Environmental concerns.  According to some estimates, there are  
          30,000 cultivation sites in the tri-county area of  
          Humboldt-Mendocino-Trinity, and an additional 10,000 or more  
          cultivation sites elsewhere in California.  As a result,  
          California land, watersheds and some species have been  








                                                                     AB 243  
                                                                    Page  4



          significantly damaged by some cultivation operations.  "Trespass  
          grows", which cultivate marijuana without permission on public,  
          tribal or privately owned land, have been associated with  
          wildlife poisoning, use and dumping of fertilizers and  
          pesticides, illegal water diversions and water pollution,  
          logging and land disturbance and severe problems with garbage  
          and human waste.  These industrial-size marijuana grows, taking  
          place in the National Forests and on private timberland in some  
          of the state's most remote and ecologically sensitive areas, are  
          the subject of a recent study by the California Department of  
          Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), "Impacts of Surface Water Diversions  
          for Marijuana Cultivation on Aquatic Habitat in Four  
          Northwestern California Watershed," which showed that during  
          drought conditions, water demand for marijuana cultivation  
          exceeded stream flow in three of four study watersheds and that  
          diminished stream flow from this water-intensive activity is  
          likely to have lethal to sub-lethal effects on salmon and  
          steelhead trout, which are listed under the state and federal  
          Endangered Species Acts and cause further decline of sensitive  
          amphibian species.  

          In response, the Budget Act of 2014 appropriated resources for  
          both CDFW and the State Water Resources Control Board, to reduce  
          environmental damage caused by marijuana cultivation on private  
          and high value state-owned public lands in California.  A total  
          of $3.3 million was allocated to the two agencies to create a  
          multi-disciplinary Marijuana Task Force and to implement a  
          priority-driven approach, to address the natural resources  
          damages from marijuana cultivation on private lands in northern  
          California and on high conservation value public lands.  This  
          program was authorized as a pilot program for five years. 

          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:NoLocal:    No


          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill has  
          no fiscal impact.












                                                                     AB 243  
                                                                    Page  5



          SUPPORT:   (Verified9/1/15)


          California Forestry Association 
          California League of Conservation Voters
          California Trout 
          County of Humboldt Board of Supervisors
          County of Mendocino Board of Supervisors 
          County of Sonoma Board of Supervisors 
          County of Trinity Supervisor John Fenley 
          Emerald Growers Association
          Mendocino County Sheriff's Office
          Sierra Club California 
          Small Farmers Association
          Sonoma County Water Agency
          Trust for Public Land


          OPPOSITION:   (Verified9/1/15)


          CaliforniaNORML
          Urban Counties Caucus
           
           
          ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  60-15, 6/3/15
          AYES:  Alejo, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke,  
            Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd, Eggman,  
            Frazier, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson,  
            Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Hadley, Roger Hernández,  
            Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Lackey, Levine, Lopez,  
            Low, Maienschein, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian,  
            O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon,  
            Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone,  
            Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood,  
            Atkins
          NOES:  Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Brough, Chávez, Beth  
            Gaines, Gatto, Grove, Harper, Kim, Linder, Mathis, Melendez,  
            Obernolte, Steinorth
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Calderon, Campos, Chang, Dahle, Mayes

          Prepared by:Anton Favorini-Csorba / GOV. & F. / (916) 651-4119








                                                                     AB 243  
                                                                    Page  6



          9/1/15 21:19:38


                                   ****  END  ****