BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2385
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 20, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Susan Talamantes Eggman, Chair
AB 2385
(Jones-Sawyer) - As Amended April 5, 2016
SUBJECT: Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act: state
licenses: Measure D.
SUMMARY: Amends the recently-enacted Medical Marijuana
Regulation and Safety Act to clarify state licensing
requirements for commercial cannabis activity in the City of Los
Angeles. Specifically, this bill:
1)Prohibits, with regard to commercial cannabis activity in the
City of Los Angeles (Los Angeles) and notwithstanding any
other provision of the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety
Act (MMRSA), state licensing authorities from requiring a
local license, permit, or other authorization.
2)Requires state licensing authorities to issue a state license
to engage in commercial cannabis activity in Los Angeles only
if the licensing authorities determine the applicant satisfies
all
of the requirements of the MMRSA and demonstrates that it meets
all of the following criteria established by Measure D,
approved by the voters of Los Angeles at the May 21, 2013,
general election:
AB 2385
Page 2
a) The applicant was operating in Los Angeles as a medical
marijuana (MM) business by September 14, 2007, as evidenced
by a business tax registration certificate issued by Los
Angeles on or before November 13, 2007;
b) The applicant registered with the Los Angeles city clerk
by November 13, 2007, in accordance with all of the
requirements of the Los Angeles' Interim Control Ordinance;
and,
c) The applicant obtained a Los Angeles business tax
registration for taxation as an MM collective, as
specified.
3)Provides that a state license issued, pursuant to the
provisions of 1) and 2), above, for commercial cannabis
activity shall have the same force and effect and shall confer
the same benefits and responsibilities as licenses issued to
licensees outside of Los Angeles that obtain a license,
permit, or other authorization from the local jurisdiction.
4)Provides that the exemption for local licensing in Los Angeles
as outlined in 1) through 3), above, shall be superseded if
the voters of Los Angeles approve an initiative that
authorizes Los Angeles to issue local licenses to MM
businesses after January 1, 2016, but prior to the time that
the State of California begins issuing state licenses.
AB 2385
Page 3
EXISTING LAW:
1)Prohibits, pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act (CUA, also
known as Proposition 215), criminal prosecution of a qualified
patient with specified illnesses, or a patient's primary
caregiver, for the possession or cultivation of MM upon the
written or oral recommendation or approval of an attending
physician.
2)Provides, pursuant to MMRSA, for the licensing and regulation
by both state and local governments of MM and its cultivation.
3)Allows licensing authorities administering the MMRSA to issue
state licenses only to qualified applicants engaging in
commercial cannabis activity, pursuant to the MMRSA.
4)Prohibits any person, upon the date of implementation of
regulations by the licensing authority, from engaging in
commercial cannabis activity without possessing both a state
license and a local permit, license, or other authorization.
5)Prohibits a person or entity from submitting an application
for a state license, unless that person or entity has received
a license, permit, or authorization by a local jurisdiction.
6)Prohibits a licensee from commencing activity under the
authority of a state license until the applicant has obtained,
in addition to the state license, a license or permit from the
local jurisdiction in which he or she proposes to operate,
following the requirements of the applicable local ordinance.
7)Provides that issuance of a state license or a determination
of compliance with local law by the licensing authority shall
in no way limit the ability of Los Angeles to prosecute any
person or entity for a violation of, or otherwise enforce,
AB 2385
Page 4
Proposition D, nor may issuance of a license or determination
of compliance with local law by the licensing authority be
deemed to establish, or be relied upon, in determining
satisfaction with the immunity requirements of Proposition D,
as specified.
8)Defines "licensing authority" to mean the state agency
responsible for the issuance, renewal, or reinstatement of the
license, or the state agency authorized to take disciplinary
action against the license.
FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS:
1)Bill Summary. This bill clarifies that existing MM businesses
operating in Los Angeles in compliance with that city's MM
ordinance, which does not require a local license, may operate
under a state license without having to obtain a local
license.
This bill prohibits state licensing authorities from requiring
a local permit from these MM businesses. Instead, this bill
requires state licensing authorities to issue a state license
only
if the licensing authorities determine the applicant meets the
requirements of the MMRSA and demonstrates that it meets
specified criteria established by Measure D, which Los Angeles
voters approved in 2013.
This bill contains a mechanism that would eliminate this local
AB 2385
Page 5
licensing exemption for Los Angeles if Los Angeles voters
approve an initiative that authorizes Los Angeles to issue
local licenses to MM businesses after January 1, 2016, but
prior to the time that the state begins issuing state
licenses.
This bill is sponsored by the United Food and Commercial
Workers, Western States Council and the UCBA Trade
Association.
2)Author's Statement. According to the author, "Under the
Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (MMRSA),
California will start issuing licenses to medical cannabis
businesses after January 1, 2018. MMRSA requires a license,
permit or other authorization from a local jurisdiction in
order to apply and receive a state license.
"This legislation will give state agencies direction to issue
state licenses to respect the will
of Los Angeles voters, which is to permit patients to be able
to obtain medical marijuana. This legislation will permit
Measure D-compliant medical marijuana businesses to continue
to operate as they have been in compliance with local zoning,
environmental, and tax requirements."
AB 2385
Page 6
3)Background. Last year, the Legislature approved three
measures that collectively established the MMRSA: AB 243
(Wood), Chapter 688, Statutes of 2015; AB 266 (Bonta, et al),
Chapter 689, Statutes of 2015; and, SB 643 (McGuire), Chapter
719, Statutes of 2015. The MMRSA established a regulatory
framework for the cultivation, manufacturing, transport,
distribution, sale and product safety of MM.
Voters approved the CUA in 1996, well before the enactment of
the MMRSA. The CUA established the right of patients to
obtain and use MM to treat specified illnesses, including any
illness for which it provides relief. The CUA prohibits
prosecution for cultivating or possessing MM for qualified
patients and their primary caregivers. Additionally, the CUA
exempts qualified patients and their primary caregivers from
California drug laws prohibiting possession and cultivation of
MM.
4)Measure D. After passage of the CUA, but before the MMRSA was
approved, many local jurisdictions established MM ordinances,
including Los Angeles. Los Angeles voters approved Measure D
on May 21, 2013, which generally prohibited the operation or
establishment of MM businesses but provided limited immunity
for MM businesses that met the following four requirements:
a) Were timely registered with the city clerk under Los
Angeles' 2007 Interim Control Ordinance;
b) Timely applied for registration under Los Angeles' 2010
AB 2385
Page 7
Medical Marijuana Ordinance, as amended by the 2011
Temporary Urgency Ordinance;
c) Registered under Measure M regarding taxation of medical
marijuana in 2011 or 2012; and,
d) Complied with other operating and location restrictions,
pursuant to Measure D.
Since passage of Measure D, 716 medical marijuana businesses
have been closed across Los Angeles. The City Attorney's
Office has also filed 365 criminal cases against 1,444
defendants.
5)Related Legislation. AB 21 (Wood, et al.), Chapter 1,
Statutes of 2016, amended the MMRSA to clarify the authority
of cities and counties to regulate medical marijuana
cultivation in their jurisdictions.
6)Previous Legislation. SB 643 (McGuire), Chapter 719, Statutes
of 2015; AB 243 (Wood), Chapter 688, Statutes of 2015; and, AB
266 (Bonta, et al.), Chapter 689, Statutes of 2015, were a
package of bills that comprised the MMRSA, which provided for
the licensing and regulation by both state and local entities
of MM and its cultivation.
AB 2385
Page 8
7)Arguments in Support. The United Food and Commercial Workers,
Western States Council, and the UCBA Trade Association,
co-sponsors of this measure, write, "In 2013, over 63% of the
City of Los Angeles voters passed Measure D allowing
approximately
135 dispensaries to remain open while banning others. Under
Measure D, the City of Los Angeles does not actually issue
permits or licenses to those 135 dispensaries; instead, the
city gave the right to assert limited immunity to these
medical marijuana operators.
"As medical marijuana business operators start to apply for
state licenses after January 1, 2018, the California
Department of Consumer Affairs, the Department of Food and
Agriculture, and the Department of Public Health will need
proof from operators in the city of Los Angeles that they are
Measure D compliant?This legislation will ensure that the
state does not issue licenses to operators that are not
following Measure D requirements."
8)Arguments in Opposition. None on file.
9)Double-Referral. This bill is double-referred to the Business
and Professions Committee, where it is scheduled to be heard
on April 19, 2016.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
AB 2385
Page 9
Support
UCBA Trade Association [SPONSOR]
United Food and Commercial Workers, Western States Council
[SPONSOR]
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958