BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                      



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 847|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  SB 847
          Author:   Correa (D)
          Amended:  5/24/11
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE  :  6-0, 4/27/11
          AYES:  Wolk, Huff, DeSaulnier, Fuller, Hernandez, La Malfa
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Hancock, Kehoe, Liu

           SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE  :  6-0, 5/5/11
          AYES:  Hancock, Anderson, Calderon, Harman, Liu, Price
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Steinberg

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8


           SUBJECT  :    Medical Marijuana Program:  zoning 
          restrictions:  residential
                      use

           SOURCE  :     City of Anaheim


           DIGEST  :    This bill prohibits a medical marijuana 
          cooperative, collective, dispensary, operator, 
          establishment or provider that operates through a 
          storefront or mobile retail outlet from being located 
          within a 600-feet radius of a school unless the local 
          governing entity (city council or board of supervisors) 
          enacts an ordinance regulating the residential location of 
          such medical marijuana entities.

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 847
                                                                Page 
          2

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of 
          1996 (Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 11362.5), 
          includes the following purposes:

           To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right 
            to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where 
            such use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended 
            by a physician for treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, 
            chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, 
            or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief.

           To ensure that patients and primary caregivers who obtain 
            and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the 
            recommendation of a physician are not subject to criminal 
            prosecution.

           To encourage the federal and state governments to 
            implement a plan to provide for the safe and affordable 
            distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need 
            of marijuana.  (HSC Section 11362.5, subd. (b)(1)(A)-(C)) 


          Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act, also provides:

           The act shall not be construed to supersede legislation 
            prohibiting persons from engaging in conduct that 
            endangers others, or to condone the diversion of 
            marijuana for non-medical purposes.  (HSC Section 
            11362.5, subd. (b)(2))

           No physician in California shall be punished or denied 
            any right or privilege for recommending medical marijuana 
            to a patient.  (HSC Section 11362.5, subd. (c))

           Penal laws relating to the possession of marijuana and 
            the cultivation of marijuana shall not apply to a 
            patient, or to a patient's primary caregiver, who 
            possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal 
            medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral 
            recommendation or approval of a physician.  (HSC Section 
            11362.5, subd. (d))

          Existing law provides that qualified patients, persons with 
          valid identification cards, and the designated primary 

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 847
                                                                Page 
          3

          caregivers of qualified patients and persons with 
          identification cards, who associate within the State of 
          California in order collectively or cooperatively to 
          cultivate marijuana for medical purposes, shall not solely 
          on the basis of that fact be subject to state criminal 
          sanctions under existing law.  (HSC Section 11362.775)

          Existing law 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.  (HSC Section 11362.768)

          Existing law states that the 600-feet distance 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.  (HSC Section 11362.768, subd. (c))

          Existing law provides that the 600-feet restriction shall 
          not apply to medical marijuana cooperatives or 
          dispensaries, as specified, which are also licensed 
          residential medical or elder care facilities.  (HSC Section 
          11362.768, subd. (d))

          Existing law provides that 660-feet restriction shall only 
          apply to a medical marijuana facility, as specified, 
          authorized by law to possess, cultivate or distribute 
          medical marijuana that has a storefront or mobile retail 
          outlet that ordinarily requires a business license.  (HSC 
          Section 11362.768, subd. (e))

          Existing law states that a local entity can only adopt 
          local ordinances that impose more restrictive requirements 
          on the location of a medical marijuana cooperative, 
          collective, dispensary, operator, establishment, or 
          provider that is authorized by law to possess, cultivate or 
          distribute medical marijuana than imposed under state law.  
          (HSC Section 11362.768, subd. (f))

          Existing law does not preempt local ordinances, adopted 
          prior to January 1, 2011, that regulate the location or 
          establishment of a medical marijuana cooperative, 

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 847
                                                                Page 
          4

          collective, dispensary, operator, establishment, or 
          provider.  (HSC Section 11362.768, subd. (g))

          This bill prohibits a medical marijuana cooperative, 
          collective, dispensary, operator, establishment or provider 
          that operates through a retail or mobile retail outlet from 
          being located within a 600-feet radius of a school.

          This bill provides that the 600-feet limit would not apply 
          if a local governing entity (city council or board of 
          supervisors) enacts an ordinance specifically regulating 
          the residential location of such medical marijuana 
          entities.  The local ordinance concerning establishment of 
          medical marijuana establishments in relation to residences 
          can either be more restrictive or less restrictive than 
          state law.  

           Background  

           Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (Proposition 215) - Medical 
          Marijuana
           
          The Compassionate Use Act (CUA) was enacted in 1996.  (HSC 
          Section 11362.5.)  The CUA established the right of 
          patients to obtain and use marijuana to treat specified 
          illnesses and any other illness for which marijuana 
          provides relief.  Additionally, the CUA specifically 
          protects physicians who recommend the use of marijuana to 
          patients for medical purposes and exempts qualified 
          patients and their primary caregivers from California drug 
          laws prohibiting possession and cultivation of marijuana.  

           California Constitutional Provisions Limit the Ability of 
          the Legislature to Amend the CUA   

           Legislative Power to Amend Initiatives Generally
          
          The California Constitution states, "The Legislature ? may 
          amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute 
          that becomes effective only when approved by the electors 
          unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal 
          without their approval."  (California Constitution, Article 
          II, Section 10.)  Therefore, unless the initiative 
          expressly authorizes the Legislature to amend an 

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 847
                                                                Page 
          5

          initiative, only the voters may alter statutes created 
          thereby. 
          
          Legislation Affecting the Compassionate Use Act - 
          Legislature Cannot Limit the Amount of Medical Marijuana a 
          Patient may Possess
          
          The California Supreme Court recently ruled on the power of 
          the Legislature to amend or affect the Compassionate Use 
          Act (CUA).  (  People v. Kelly  (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1008.)  In 
           Kelly  , the court ruled that the legislative restriction on 
          the number of plants a qualified medical marijuana patient 
          may possess was unconstitutional as it interfered with the 
          rights established by the CUA initiative.  Although the 
          Legislature may clarify or expand the rights established in 
          the CUA, it may not enact legislation that interferes with 
          those.

          Restrictions in this Bill on Placing a Medical Marijuana 
          Establishment within Specified Distances from Residences
          
          This bill creates a statewide prohibition for any medical 
          marijuana collective, cooperative, operator, provider or 
          dispensary to be located within 600 feet of a residential 
          zone or residential use, unless the city council or board 
          of supervisor adopts an ordinance "specifically regulating 
          the location of such establishments in relation to 
          residential uses."  The statewide restriction, applicable 
          in the absence of a local ordinance, is very broad.  
          Residential use would appear to mean any residence, even in 
          any area that is otherwise commercial or industrial.

          It appears that a local ordinance regulating the placement 
          of medical marijuana entities near residences could either 
          be more restrictive or less restrictive than the 600-feet 
          statewide standard.  An ordinance in one county could 
          provide that no facility could be within 5,000 feet of a 
          residence for example.  An ordinance in another county or a 
          city could allow such entities to operate in residential 
          areas with few limitations.  Local government ordinances on 
          medical marijuana entities could well be subject to 
          frequent amendment or repeal, further complicating matters 
          for medical marijuana providers.
          

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 847
                                                                Page 
          6

          This Bill Applies to Entities that Normally Require a 
          Business License; Complications with Cooperatives and 
          Collectives
          
          It must be noted, however, that the bill and the statute 
          the bill amends only apply to an entity with a storefront 
          or mobile retail outlet that ordinarily requires a local 
          business license.  A dispensary or establishment that 
          operates like any retail business would clearly fall under 
          the terms of this bill.

           Related Legislation
           
          AB 1300 (Blumenthal) defines the terms "cooperative or 
          collective" for purposes of the CUA to mean a location 
          where qualified patients, persons with valid identification 
          cards or primary caregivers "associate ? in order to 
          collectively or cooperatively cultivate or dispense 
          marijuana for medical purposes ?"  The bill could be 
          interpreted as defining cooperatives differently in the 
          medical marijuana context than in other state law.

           Prior Legislation

            AB 2650 (Buchanan), Chapter 603, Statutes of 2010
           SB 420 (Vasconcellos), Chapter 875, Statutes of 2003
           Proposition 215, November 1996 General Election

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes   
          Local:  Yes

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  5/24/11)

          City of Anaheim (source)
          Association of California Cities - Orange County
          Peace Officers Research Association of California

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  5/24/11)

          Americans for Safe Access
          Drug Policy Alliance 
          Marijuana Policy Project

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author:

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 847
                                                                Page 
          7


            "SB 847 as presented in the Governance and Finance 
            Committee to be officially amended here creates a 
            600-foot buffer zone between marijuana dispensaries and 
            residential neighborhoods and residential usage areas.  
            The language will create a 'good neighbor fence' of a 
            default 600-foot buffer zone which will NOT override any 
            existing local ordinance nor prevent any future local 
            ordinance from superseding this measure.

            "The bill will provide a basic distance between what many 
            believe to be an incompatible use within a neighborhood.  
            The legislature has recognized the conflict by 
            establishing such a buffer zone around schools last year 
            in AB 2650 (Buchanan), Ch. 603, Stats. 2010.  This bill 
            simply provided a default buffer zone of 600 feet from 
            residential areas until government that hasn't enacted 
            its own local ordinance acts on its own with a smaller or 
            larger buffer.

            "This measure is necessary to respond to the growing 
            number of dispensaries that in some cases have literally 
            opened shop right under apartments with kids, with 
            families subjected to second-hand marijuana smoke.  I 
            know this because I personally witnessed this in my own 
            district.

            "This measure does not restrict the number of businesses 
            that can open.  That is up to local government.  This 
            measure will simply protect our neighborhoods and our 
            children.  The debate over medical marijuana is not 
            whether these should be made available; the voters said 
            it should be for medical uses.  The issue is whether 
            these businesses, such as in other instances such as 
            alcohol and other adult venues should be kept a 
            reasonable distance from where children play and families 
            live."


          AGB:mw  5/24/11   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 847
                                                                Page 
          8

          












































                                                           CONTINUED