BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 847|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 847
Author: Correa (D)
Amended: 8/23/11
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
SENATE FLOOR : 31-2, 6/1/11
AYES: Alquist, Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Calderon,
Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De Le�n, DeSaulnier, Dutton,
Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Harman, Hernandez, Huff, Kehoe,
La Malfa, Lieu, Negrete McLeod, Pavley, Price, Simitian,
Steinberg, Strickland, Vargas, Walters, Wolk, Wright,
Wyland
NOES: Leno, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Evans, Hancock, Liu, Lowenthal, Padilla,
Rubio, Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 68-5, 8/25/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Medical Marijuana Program: zoning
restrictions: residential
use
CONTINUED
SB 847
Page
2
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.
Assembly Amendments add charter cities to those eligible
and establishment of proximity standards to be a statewide
concern.
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 provides that qualified patients, persons with
valid identification cards, and the designated primary
caregivers of qualified patients and persons with
identification cards, who associate within the State of
California in order collectively or cooperatively to
CONTINUED
SB 847
Page
3
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)
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.
This bill declares that regulating medical marijuana
establishments' proximity to residential zones or uses is
an issue of statewide concern.
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
CONTINUED
SB 847
Page
4
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/26/11)
City of Anaheim (source)
Association of California Cities - Orange County
City of Norwalk
Peace Officers Research Association of California
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/26/11)
Americans for Safe Access
Drug Policy Alliance
Marijuana Policy Project
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author:
"SB 847 with the new amendment that now adds charter
cities to those eligible, simply creates a default 600
foot buffer zone between the marijuana dispensaries and
residential neighborhoods and residential usage areas.
The protections in this measure respect local
governments' authority in zoning matters.
"This measure will NOT override any existing local
ordinance nor will it prevent any future local ordinance
from superseding this measure.
"The impact will be to provide a simple yet 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.
"The new proposal simply incorporates local government
control by providing for 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.
"The necessity for this measure is one that is in
response to the growing number of these dispensaries that
CONTINUED
SB 847
Page
5
in some cases have literally opened shop right under
apartments with kids, families having to be subjected to
the marijuana second hand smoke.
"This measure does not restrict the number of businesses
that can open as that is up to local government.
"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."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Representatives of medical
marijuana patients and providers object to this bill,
arguing that it preemptively imposes an arbitrary
one-size-fits-all statewide standard on local governments
that have not adopted regulations governing medical
marijuana establishments, which they contend, is a highly
unusual usurpation of local land use policy. Opponents
maintain that high density cities would experience a
reduction or outright elimination of lawful dispensary
locations as a result of this bill, which would then impose
an unnecessary and unacceptable burden on qualified
patients accessing medical marijuana.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 68-5, 8/25/11
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Atkins, Beall, Bill Berryhill,
Block, Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Butler,
Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo, Conway, Cook,
Davis, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong,
Fuentes, Beth Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gatto, Grove,
Hagman, Halderman, Harkey, Hayashi, Roger Hern�ndez,
Hill, Huber, Hueso, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lara, Logue,
Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mansoor, Mendoza, Miller, Mitchell,
Monning, Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen, Norby, Olsen, Pan,
Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Portantino, Silva, Smyth,
Solorio, Swanson, Torres, Valadao, Wagner, Williams, John
A. P�rez
NOES: Ammiano, Chesbro, Huffman, Wieckowski, Yamada
NO VOTE RECORDED: Allen, Bonilla, Furutani, Gordon,
Gorell, Hall, Skinner
CONTINUED
SB 847
Page
6
AGB:mw 8/26/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED