BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1182|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1182
Author: Leno (D)
Amended: 5/24/12
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 5-2, 4/24/12
AYES: Hancock, Calderon, Liu, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Anderson, Harman
SUBJECT : Medical marijuana access and distribution
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill (1) provides that a cooperative or
collective that operates within the Attorney General's (AG)
guidelines shall not be subject to prosecution for
marijuana possession or commerce, as specified; and (2)
provides that where such an entity operates within the AG's
guidelines, the entity and its employees, officers and
members shall not be subject to prosecution for marijuana
commerce because the entity or its employees, officers, or
members received compensation for actual expenses incurred
in carrying out activities in compliance with the
guidelines.
Senate Floor Amendments of 5/24/12 strike references in the
bill to business entities other than cooperatives and
collectives that are engaged in medical marijuana
distribution.
CONTINUED
SB 1182
Page
2
ANALYSIS : Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of
1996 (Act) (Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 11362.5),
includes the following purposes:
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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))
The Act also provides:
1. 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))
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))
3. 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))
CONTINUED
SB 1182
Page
3
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
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 directs the AG to develop and adopt
appropriate guidelines to ensure the security and
nondiversion of medical marijuana. (HSC Section 11362.81,
subd. (d).) Section IV of the guidelines concern
collectives and cooperatives.
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. There are specified exceptions for medical or
elder care facilities, local ordinances adopted prior to
enactment of the state standard and for later adopted
ordinances that are more restrictive than state law. (HSC
Section 11362.768)
Existing law allows cities or other local governing bodies
to adopt and enforce local ordinances that regulate the
location, operation, or establishment of a medical
marijuana cooperative or collective, as follows:
1. A local government entity may enforce a medical
marijuana ordinance through civil or criminal remedies
and actions.
2. A local government entity may enact other laws
consistent with the Medical Marijuana Program, as
specified. (HSC Section 11362.83)
This bill provides that for any medical marijuana
collective, cooperative, or other business entities that
comply with medical marijuana guidelines published by the
AG, the following shall apply:
1. Collectives or cooperatives, and the employees, officers
CONTINUED
SB 1182
Page
4
and members thereof shall be exempt from criminal
prosecution and nuisance abatement actions, as
specified.
2. The fact that a cooperative or collective, including an
employee, officer or member thereof, receives
compensation for actual expenses for activities carried
out within the guidelines published by the AG shall not
be subject to prosecution under HSC Sections 11359 and
11360.
This bill defines "collectives and cooperatives" to mean a
collective or cooperative that operates within the terms of
the Act and this article and that is organized and operated
in compliance with paragraphs A and B of Section IV of the
Guidelines for the Security and Non-Diversion of Marijuana
Grown for Medical Use, issued by the AG in August 2008,
pursuant to Section 11362.81. For purposes of this section
"collectives and cooperatives" includes the officers,
members, and employees of the collectives and cooperatives.
For purposes of this bill, a collective may be organized as
any statutory business entity permitted under California
law.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/25/12)
American Civil Liberties Union
Americans for Safe Access
California NORML
California Public Defenders Association
County of Mendocino
Crusaders for Patients Rights
Drug Policy Alliance
Lawmen Protecting Patients
Marijuana Policy Project
The Greater Los Angeles Collective Alliance
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/25/12)
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
CONTINUED
SB 1182
Page
5
Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs
California Fraternal Order of Police
California Narcotic Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs Association
International Faith Based Coalition
Long Beach Police Officers Association
Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association
Los Angeles Police Protective League
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
Sacramento Deputy Sheriffs' Association
Santa Ana Police Officers Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author:
Senate Bill 1182 will clarify the legality of medical
cannabis collectives, cooperatives, and other business
entities that are organized and operated in compliance
with the Guidelines For The Security And Non-Diversion of
Marijuana Grown For Medical Use issued by the Attorney
General in 2008. The bill also clarifies the rights of
these entities and their officers, employees and members
to receive compensation pursuant to and consistent with
statute and the guidelines of the Attorney General.
The legality of medical marijuana collectives,
cooperatives, and other business entities is ambiguous
under current state law resulting in needless arrests and
prosecutions. Lack of certainty in the law creates
confusion on the part of local elected officials who
increasingly choose to ban collectives and cooperatives
rather than adopt reasonable regulations that protect
public safety, prevent neighborhood nuisances and provide
for safe access for qualified patients and their
designated primary caregivers.
SB 1182 provides a focused solution that clarifies
elements of state law. This simple fix is compatible
with, and may be enacted independently of, omnibus
legislation that may provide a more comprehensive
solution to state medical marijuana issues. While it is
beyond our reach to resolve the conflict in federal and
state law, there is no valid reason to further delay
resolving existing ambiguities in state law that are
within our power to fix.
CONTINUED
SB 1182
Page
6
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Law enforcement groups opposed
to this bill indicate, "Not only is this measure in
violation of federal law, but it also is even inconsistent
with Proposition 215. Proposition 215 is very clear that
marijuana may be cultivated or provided by qualified
patients, or by caregivers. Proposition 215 did not
authorize cultivation or distribution of marijuana by any
other entities. Senate Bill 1182 dramatically changes that
state of affairs by evidently permitting "collectives,
cooperatives, or other business entities" to engage in
cultivation or distribution of so-called medical marijuana.
It appears that Senate Bill 1182 would permit the selling
of so-called medical marijuana for profit - something that
not only goes way beyond Proposition 215, but is
unambiguously in violation of federal law. Currently
medical marijuana dispensaries are a blight on
neighborhoods and have been magnets for criminal activity.
Law enforcement, with the assistance of the US Attorneys,
has been successful in closing these
dispensaries, but Senate Bill 1182 would be aimed at giving
legitimacy to these operations, in direct violation of
federal law."
RJG:kc 5/25/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED