City of Santa Ana Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative, Measure CC (November 2014)

See also: Competing City of Santa Ana Council-Referred Medical Marijuana Regulation Ordinance (November 2014)

Voting on Marijuana
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local marijuana Local marijuana tax

A City of Santa Ana Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative, Measure CC ballot question was on the November 4, 2014 election ballot for voters in the city of Santa Ana in Orange County, California, where it was defeated.

If approved, this measure would have established the Santa Ana Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative as the law regulating medical marijuana in the city. It would also have repealed a ban on medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives that has hardly been enforced since it was enacted in 2007. This measure competed with a citizen-referred measure also seeking to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries, which was approved. Since both measures received more than 50 percent approval, the one with the most "yes" votes, Measure BB, was enacted, while this measure was rejected. Below is a run-down of the chief provisions of each measure, highlighting the differences between them.

Election results

City of Santa Ana, Measure CC
Result		Votes	Percentage
d No		14,987	45.3%
Yes		18,090	54.7%

Election results via: Orange County Elections Office

While Measure CC received a majority vote, the competing initiative--Measure BB--received more yes votes. Therefore, Measure BB was approved, and Measure CC was defeated.

The competing measures

The following provisions regarding regulation of medical marijuana dispensaries, cooperatives and collectives would be established by the respective competing measures:

Competing Santa Ana Marijuana Measures
Citizen-initiated measure		Council-referred measure
Allows use by anyone over 18	Allows use by anyone over 21
Allows 1 dispensary for every 15,000 residents, with min. of 22	No minimum number of dispensaries required
No cap on the number of collectives allowed	Requires a minimum of 500 feet between collectives
Restricts to 600 feet from K-12 schools	Restricts to 1,000 feet from schools, parks and residential areas
Does not prohibit dispensaries from growing marijuana onsite	Prohibits growing marijuana onsite
2 percent additional sales tax for marijuana	Initial 5 percent - growing to 10 percent - additional sales tax for marijuana
No restrictions on operating hours	10:00 AM to 8:00 PM operating hours
Restricts to commercial and industrial zones - C1, C4, C5, M1 and P & C-SM	Restricted to certain industrial zones - M-1 and M-2
Prohibits dispensaries from owning an alcohol and beverage control license	Prohibits the sale of food, alcohol or tobacco onsite
Requires simple registration to operate a medical marijuana business	Requires an annually renewed permit to operate a medical marijuana business
Prohibits the city from using federal marijuana enforcement funds	Does not prohibit federal funds
Does not require background checks for workers	Requires background check for operators and employees
Does not require background check	Denies approval to owners or employees if convicted of drug charge
Requires certain lighting and an alarm system	Requires at least one security guard onsite

Text of measure

Ballot question

The question on the ballot appeared as:

“

Shall an ordinance rescinding the City of Santa Ana's prohibition of medical marijuana dispensaries and adopting new regulations providing for an administrative registration approval process, zoning designations for dispensaries and a business tax on operating dispensaries, known as the Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative, be adopted?

”

Impartial analysis

The following impartial analysis of this measure was prepared by the Santa Ana City Attorney:

“	Measure CC is proposed by voters in the City of Santa Ana who signed an initiative petition. The measure referred to as the Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative is a proposed ordinance seeking 1) to eliminate an existing City ordinance prohibiting the sale of medical marijuana from store-front dispensaries and 2) to replace it with a new ordinance which does all of the following: 1) Permits medical collectives and cooperatives in the C1, C4, C5, M1 and P&C-SM zones; 2) Requires an administrative registration process; 3) Requires payment of a business tax of $20.00 for each $1,000 of gross receipts; 4) Prohibits collectives and cooperatives in all residential zones; 5) Prohibits collectives and cooperatives from locating within 600 feet of public and private K-12th grade schools; 6) Establishes a formula of one (1) collective or cooperative for every 15,000 people, but in no case shall there be less than 22 collectives/cooperatives; (7) Requires lighting and alarm systems for security; (8) Prohibits collectives and cooperatives from also possessing an Alcohol and Beverage Control license; (9) Contains signage restrictions; and (10) Requires compliance with the 2008 Attorney General Guidelines for the Security and Non-Diversion of Marijuana Grown for Medical Use. The measure prohibits the City from accepting federal funds to assist in the enforcement of the Federal Controlled Substances Act which makes it unlawful to manufacture, distribute, or dispense a controlled substance. The measure also prohibits the City from accepting any federal funding or participating in task forces that accept federal funding that would be used to investigate, cite, arrest, prosecute or seize property based upon offenses otherwise legal under California medical cannabis laws. The proposed administrative process does not require a permit, but requires registration. Upon issuance of a Notice of Registration, an applicant becomes eligible for a Certificate of Occupancy. While the measure would provide some structure and requirements in what is presently an unregulated use, the costs associated with implementing the measure and enforcing the new ordinance are unknown. The measure will generate revenue which could be used to offset the costs in part, depending on the amounts collected by the City. This measure must be approved by a majority of the voters to take effect. A "yes" vote is a vote in favor of the ordinance allowing for medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives. A "no" vote will reject the proposed measure and keep in place the existing prohibition against dispensaries.	”
—Santa Ana City Attorney

Initiative Title

The official title of the initiative:

“

Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative

”

Initiative Summary

The official summary of the initiative:

“

The Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative ("proposed Ordinance") seeks to delete the City of Santa Ana's prohibition of medical marijuana dispensaries, including collectives and cooperatives, as defined by the City, contained in Chapters 18 (Health and Safety) and 41 (Zoning) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, and replace it with a ministerial administrative registration process, zoning restrictions, and a business tax requirement for medical cannabis collectives and cooperatives ("cooperatives and collectives"), as defined by the proposed Ordinance. The law's stated intentions include, but are not limited to, fulfilling the purposes of State law regarding medical marijuana, including the Compassionate Use Act and the Medical Marijuana Program Act ("MMP"), providing additional revenue for the City, and imposing further limitations on collectives and cooperatives beyond those imposed under the MMP. Specifically, with regard to zoning restrictions, the proposed Ordinance: (1) Prohibits collectives and cooperatives in all zones except C1, C4, C5, M1, P & C-SM zones; (2) Prohibits collectives and cooperatives in all residential zones; and (3) Prohibits collectives and cooperatives within 600 feet of public and private schools, K-12th grade. The proposed Ordinance also requires all collectives and cooperatives to apply for and obtain a Notice of Completed Registration ("Notice"), which is issued by the City's Director of Planning ("Director"), and is required of all collectives and cooperatives that meet specified requirements and want to continue to operate within the City. The proposed Ordinance's registration process is a ministerial duty upon the Director, where collectives and cooperatives submit an application within specified timelines and pay the required fees. They are subsequently issued a Notice and, within thirty (30) days of that, a Certificate of Occupancy for operation. In addition, the proposed Ordinance establishes a formula for the number of collectives and cooperatives that shall be registered with the City. The proposed Ordinance provides that at least one cannabis collective or cooperative per 15,000 residents, as determined by the last Federal Census or as determined by the latest population estimate by the Department of Finance of the State of California, whichever is higher, and in no case less than 22, shall be registered by the Director if there are that many eligible applicants. Once operating, the cannabis collective or cooperative is required to meet operating standards, which includes but is not limited to, adequate security (i.e., lighting and alarm requirements), prohibition on possessing or maintaining a license from the State Department of Alcohol Beverage Control, signage and all requirements set out by the 2008 Attorney General Guidelines for the Security and Non-diversion of Marijuana Grown for Medical Use. Finally, the proposed Ordinance makes a "cannabis business," as defined, a classification "F," which requires those entities to pay business taxes in the amount of $20.00 for each $1,000.00 of gross receipts. A cannabis business is defined to include medical cannabis transfers by collectives or cooperatives. This tax is prospective only.

”

Support

Santa Ana Committee to Support Medical Marijuana Ballot Initiative logo

Note: Those who support this measure oppose the competing city council-referred measure.

Supporters

The Santa Ana Committee to Support Medical Marijuana Ballot Initiative was the name of the campaign supporting this measure.

The following individuals signed the official arguments in favor of this measure:

• Elisabeth Lopez, business owner
• Guy Lopez, resident

Official arguments

The following official arguments were submitted in support of this measure:

“	Vote YES on the Santa Ana Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative to tax and regulate Medical Cannabis Collectives and Cooperatives. Santa Ana passed a ban on Medical Cannabis Collectives and Cooperatives in 2007 but there are more than 80 locations still operating illegally and not paying taxes. The City Council has created the current situation by their failure to act. The prohibition on Medical Cannabis Collectives and Cooperatives is not working and perpetuating the illicit and criminal distribution of marijuana in the community. A sensibly regulated cannabis industry will help enhance and promote public safety. Voting YES will replace a ban with sorely needed rules and regulations that every other industry is afforded. It will allow a limited number of approved facilities determined by Santa Ana's population and estimated number of patients, will require these approved collectives to be located only in certain areas and will require the Collectives and Cooperatives to pay an additional 2% on top of the standard sales tax rate. These new revenues can then be allocated by our City Council to our general fund and used for purposes such as public safety, code enforcement, community services and maintenance of our parks. This measure includes community protection actions including an administrative registration process and will place approved collectives only in certain business zones and requires them to be 600 feet away from schools, consistent with all state laws. All facilities must also meet strict security standards and be compliant with the most recent Attorney General's guidelines on medical cannabis. California voters passed the Compassionate Use Act in 1996 but voting YES on this measure will fulfill Santa Ana's legal requirements to provide safe access to legal medical cannabis while regulating approved facilities and raising greatly needed revenue for Santa Ana.	”
—Elisabeth Lopez, business owner, and Guy Lopez, resident

Opposition

Opponents

The following individuals signed the official arguments in opposition to this measure:

• Sal Tinajero, Santa Ana Mayor Pro Tem
• Vicente Sarmiento
• Michele Martinez
• Angie Amezcua

Arguments against

Speaking in favor of the competing council-referred measure and against the citizen-initiative, council member Sal Tinajero said, “I am very strongly in favor of having an area where people can get their medicine. But keep them out of our neighborhoods.”

Official arguments

The following official arguments were submitted in opposition to this measure:

“	Simply put, this voter initiative is detrimental to the quality of life of Santa Ana residents. This voter initiative would make Santa Ana the marijuana drug capital of California. It is important to note that this voter initiative proposed the following: It would legalize marijuana storefronts to be within 600 feet of K-12 schools. That is less than 2 football fields from out children and young adults! Currently, this initiative only offers a minimum of 22 dispensaries, but does not cap the number than can open in the City. This means that a marijuana storefront could open up near your neighborhood and you nor the city government could do anything to stop it! This voter initiative does not forbid mobile marijuana dispensaries. A mobile dispensary under this initiative would have the freedom of selling marijuana in grocery parking lots across our City! This voter initiative allows any marijuana dispensary or collective to grow marijuana on their premises. This means that once a marijuana dispensary or collective opens for business they will not only be able to sell marijuana but also grow onsite! This voter initiative does not have any restrictions on the hours of operations for marijuana dispensaries or collectives. This means that marijuana dispensaries or collectives in your neighborhood can remain open as late as they choose to stay open! This marijuana voter initiative was written by owners of marijuana dispensaries and collectives in order to do business in the city without any restrains. In the interest of children, youth and the quality of life in Santa Ana, let's make sure they know that we will not allow our city to be overrun by marijuana companies. There are many negatives to this marijuana voter initiative. I respectfully urge you to read through the proposed ordinance and Vote No!	”
—Michele Martinez and Angie Amezcua

Related measures

Recreational

a Washington D.C. Marijuana Legalization, Initiative 71 (November 2014)

Colorado:

• Nine local 2014 marijuana measures in Colorado

Maine:

a City of Lewiston Recreational Marijuana Legalization Measure (November 2014)
a City of South Portland Recreational Marijuana Legalization Measure (November 2014)
Town of York Recreational Marijuana Legalization Measure (November 2014)

Massachusetts:

• Massachusetts Congressional Districts Marijuana Legalization Public Policy Question Advisory Votes - Eight Districts (November 2014)

Michigan:

• Local marijuana measures in Michigan

New Mexico:

a Santa Fe County Marijuana Decriminalization Advisory Question (November 2014)
a Bernalillo County Marijuana Decriminalization Advisory Question, Measure 1 (November 2014)
City of Albuquerque Marijuana Decriminalization Measure (November 2014)
City of Santa Fe Marijuana Decriminalization Initiative (November 2014)

Wisconsin:

a Dane County State Legalization of Marijuana Referendum (April 2014)

Medical

California:

a City of Santa Ana Council-Referred Medical Marijuana Regulation Ordinance, Measure BB (November 2014)
d City of Santa Ana Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative, Measure CC (November 2014)
d City of La Mesa Medical Marijuana Initiative, Proposition J (November 2014)
d City of Encinitas Medical Marijuana Initiative, Proposition F (November 2014)
d Nevada County Medical Marijuana Cultivation, Measure S (November 2014)
a Butte County Medical Marijuana Ordinance 4075 Referendum, Measure A (November 2014)
d Butte County Medical Marijuana Initiative, Measure B (November 2014)
a Shasta County Outdoor Medical Marijuana Ordinance Referendum, Measure A (November 2014)
d Lake County "Medical Marijuana Control Act" Initiative, Measure O (November 2014)
d Lake County "Freedom to Garden Human Rights Restoration Act" Initiative, Measure P (November 2014)
d City of Weed Permitting Licensing of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Advisory Question, Measure L (November 2014)
a City of Weed Outdoor Marijuana Cultivation Ban Advisory Question, Measure K (November 2014)
a Lake County Marijuana Cultivation Ordinance 2997 Referendum, Measure N (June 2014)
City of Imperial Beach "Compassionate Access Ordinance" Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Act (June 2014)
City of Napa Medical Marijuana Dispensary Referendum (November 2014)
City of San Jose Medical Marijuana Regulation Act of 2014 (November 2014)

See also

• Local marijuana on the ballot
• Orange County, California ballot measures
• November 4, 2014 ballot measures in California

External links

Suggest a link

• Santa Ana City Government website
• Orange County Elections Department website
• Santa Ana Committee to Support Medical Marijuana Ballot Initiative website