Agenda - Planning Commission - 07/18/2013 - Special

Home

Zoning Bulletin May 25, 2013 I Volume 7 1 Issue 10 Marijuana Program Act Citation: Conejo Wellness Center, Inc. v. City of Agoura Hills, 154 Cal. Rptr. 3d 850 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2013) CALIFORNIA (03/28/13)—This case addressed the issue of whether city ordinances banning medical marijuana dispensaries were pre- empted by California's Compassionate Use Act ("CUA") and/or California's Medical Marijuana Program Act ("MMPA"). It also ad- dressed whether town ordinances banning medical marijuana dispensa- ries deprived the dispensary operator of a vested property right. The Background/Facts: Beginning in June 2006, Conejo Wellness Center, Inc. ("Conejo") was a California cooperative corporation that operated as a nonprofit collective engaged in the distribution of medi- cal marijuana to its members. Conejo operated in a Business Park Manufacturing District in the City of Agoura Hills (the "City"). Under the City's zoning ordinance, a "medical marijuana dispen- sary" was not listed as a permitted use within any commercial district. As such, it was a prohibited use under the zoning ordinances. In September 2008, the City adopted ordinance No. 08-355, which added § 9660 to the Agoura City Hills Municipal Code ("AHMC"). Section 9660 expressly stated that the operation of a medical marijuana dispensary was not a permitted use anywhere in the City. Under the AHMC, a violation of the ban on medical marijuana dispensaries was punishable by six months in jail or a $1,000 fine or both. In October 2010, the City adopted Ordinance No. 10-379, which added § 4125 to the AHMC. Section 4125 expressly prohibited any medical marijuana dispensary from receiving "compensation" for the distribution of medical marijuana. Ordinance No. 10-379 also made other changes to the AHMC, including: requiring nonprofit businesses to obtain an annual business registration permit prior to operation; and expressly prohibiting operation of a business without a valid business permit. In November 2010, Conejo applied for a 2011 business registration perrnit. The peirnit was denied because medical marijuana dispensary was not a permitted use under the AHMC. Subsequently, Conejo filed a legal complaint seeking injunctive and declaratory relief against the City based on Ordinance No. 08-355 and Ordinance No. 10-379. Among other things, Conejo argued that California's CUA and MMPA preempted Ordinance No. 08-355, parts of Ordinance No. 10-379, and the various AHMC provisions that made violation of those ordinances either misdemeanors or public nuisances subject to abatement. The City filed a cross -complaint seeking both declaratory and injunc- ©2013 Thomson Reuters 3