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