Late this summer, the San Diego City Council voted 6-2 to repeal the city's restrictions on medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries. The Council had passed restrictions on the dispensaries in April 2011, but voters were going to challenge them in a referendum, either by putting a question on the ballot in the June 2012 elections or holding a special election. Many council members voting to repeal the restrictions believed that the referendum would not clarify the wishes of the city's residents, as some were protesting the restrictions as being too severe while others wanted tougher restrictions or an outright ban on the dispensaries and did not believe the current ordinances went far enough. The lack of ordinances governing the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries after the Council's vote leaves those who operate the dispensaries in San Diego in a state of legal limbo.
The ordinances that the Council voted to repeal had made the city's approximately 160 dispensaries close down and apply for an operating permit before re-opening. The laws also articulated where the dispensaries could operate, preventing the dispensaries from being within 600 feet of one another as well as within 600 feet of schools, playgrounds, libraries, child-care and youth facilities, parks and churches.
It is unclear now that the ordinances are no longer in effect what the legal status of medical marijuana dispensaries is in San Diego. The city no longer has a panoptic policy for medical marijuana collectives to let people know how to operate one legally. Under city code prior to the April implementation of the rules governing the collectives, medical marijuana dispensaries were illegal. However, city officials rarely prosecuted code violations for operating dispensaries.
The City Council could try to pass new ordinances to try to give those operating dispensaries guidance on how to conduct themselves, but such ordinances would need to be "different" than the ordinances the Council just repealed. The City Attorney's Office was not able to adequately describe to what extent any new ordinances would need to differ in order to be acceptable. An alternative option for the Council would be to wait a year and vote again on ordinances substantially similar to the ones the Council just repealed.
While the Council ponders its next move in this matter, those who run the collectives and dispensaries are left to wonder how they should operate going forward so as to best avoid legal problems.
