CCMIN060507 - Laserfiche WebLink

receive them was proportionate in terms of distribution throughout the county, but because of medical privacy issues, they did not want to share the exact number of people who have received their cards who list Pleasanton as their place of residence. She further discussed a federal drug enforcement agency shutting down one of three dispensaries in Alameda County, but several jurisdictions such as Berkeley, Oakland, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, West Hollywood, Arcata, and Placerville all relay they operate dispensaries without having significant problems or calls for police services. A couple of jurisdictions voiced problems which include re-sale and illegal cultivation of marijuana. However, staff still believes there is significant evidence of criminal activity at or around dispensaries and while there are examples of non-significant problems, the preponderance of evidence indicates that those communities were having significant problems which results in a lot of diversion and use of medical marijuana by non-qualified people. Therefore, staff recommends there be a prohibition on dispensaries because of there are available dispensaries in the area, some provide delivery services, the evidence of secondary negative effect, and the concern regarding illegal diversion particularly to minors. Also, prohibiting dispensaries does not prohibit qualified people from using it in the community, just from prohibiting the storefront operating and selling medical marijuana. Staff presented the following options available to the Council: having staff continue to track federal legislation and return to Council if it changes to coincide with state law; communicate with local congressional delegation to support this type of legislation; form a task force or refer the matter to the Human Services Commission to study what the community need is and how the City could meet such need; direct staff to propose an ordinance to allow medical marijuana dispensaries to operate in the city using some of the information provided from some of the other communities, subject to regulations. Mayor Hosterman confirmed the supplemental information was just provided tonight to the Council from staff which was information from the California Police Chief’s Association, the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office, and an article which appeared in the California Lawyer. When the Council had last reviewed the moratorium extension, staff provided information about negative effects of dispensaries and direction was to bring back information about the i.d. card program, communities that were not having negative effects, and this information still supports the staff’s conclusions. Mayor Hosterman said she did not read the supplemental information and her decisions would be based on the last and most current staff report. She said additional options were outlined, and she asked Ms. Seto for an explanation of the distinction between placing a ban and then allowing for some options and also the moratorium. Ms. Seto explained that Pleasanton’s moratorium which prohibits medical marijuana dispensaries will end in August 2007 as the City will be coming up to the two-year maximum. Staff’s recommendation is to adopt the ban on dispensaries, which can be done in conjunction with any of the other options, and recommends the ban be adopted so that the Council could have time to study one of the other options without the risk of the moratorium lapsing. The Council could also repeal a ban and move forward with other options, but if the Council wanted to regulate dispensaries, it would need to be heard before the Planning Commission, possibly a task force, and to the Council prior to its adoption. She noted that in April, staff received contact from a person interested in opening a dispensary in the City. City Council Minutes 6 June 5, 2007