Initiative would legalize and regulate a handful of pot dispensaries; city argues it would violate state, federal law
Published: June 9, 2014 Updated: June 10, 2014 5:15 p.m.
, FILE PHOTO
Less than a month after medical-marijuana supporters learned they had collected enough signatures to get their measure on Riverside’s ballot in 2015, the city has filed a lawsuit to stop the county registrar from putting the issue before voters.
Riverside currently bans all marijuana dispensaries through its zoning code. Last year, the state Supreme Court sided with the city in a legal challenge to the ban.
The ballot measure would legalize, tax and regulate dispensaries in the city, allowing a small number of them in restricted locations.
The initiative is unlawful and “goes beyond the legislative powers of the electorate” because it would force the city to violate state and federal laws, including the federal Controlled Substances Act, the city’s attorneys argue in a June 4 court filing.
Interim Riverside County Registrar of Voters Rebecca Spencer said she can’t comment because she has not yet been served with the suit.
Attorney Jason Thompson, representing initiative backers Riverside Safe Access, called the city’s move “the nuclear option to interfere with the democratic process” and added that typically cities will let an election play out before acting, since the ballot measure might not pass.
The lawsuit against the registrar was filed at the City Council’s direction, Riverside spokesman Phil Pitchford wrote in an email. He declined to comment on why officials chose to sue now rather than waiting to see if voters approved the measure.
On Monday, City Attorney Greg Priamos was out of the office and Deputy City Attorney Neil Okazaki was in court, and neither responded to a request for comment.
The suit argues that the ballot measure would cause the city to break local and state laws requiring its rules not conflict with state or federal legislation, and that it would create zoning rules that violate federal drug laws.
The intersection of federal and state marijuana laws is “a hornets’ nest of conflicts” but many states – including California – have chosen to allow medical use of marijuana despite the federal prohibition, said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
Riverside’s argument, that the local marijuana measure exceeds voters’ authority, is common in fights over ballot issues, she said.
Levinson said she hasn’t read the proposed initiative or Riverside’s suit, but if the city is right, “It’s not contravening the democratic process. ... It says, ‘This is illegal, so why should it go through the democratic process?’”
Thompson said he’s surprised the city would take this step on the heels of a May 30 vote by the U.S. House to stop federal interference with state medical marijuana laws.
If the city prevails, Thompson believes the decision could invalidate other cities’ attempts to regulate medical marijuana. “They’re arguing to take away the rights of the local municipality,” he said.
City Council members backed the attempt to block the ballot measure, but they appear to have mixed feelings on the issue of medical marijuana.
No comments:
Post a Comment