Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
City of Upland Medical Marijuana Dispensary Initiative (2016)
| City of Upland Medical Marijuana Dispensary Initiative - Special Election |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| Unknown |
| Status: |
 Not on the ballot
|
| Topic: |
| Local marijuana |
| Related articles |
| Local marijuana on the ballot Local ballot measures, California San Bernardino County, California ballot measures City of Upland Medical Marijuana Dispensary Initiative (November 2016) |
| See also |
| Upland, California |
A medical marijuana dispensary initiative was not put on a special election ballot for Upland voters in San Bernardino County, California, in 2016. The election date would have depended on the speed with which petitioners collected the required signatures and the subsequent actions of the city council, provided petitioners had collected enough valid signatures to force an election.
This measure would have lifted the city's ban on medical marijuana retail operations and would have established regulations, fees, and permits for the legal operation of three dispensaries in the city. Unlike a previous initiative sponsored by the same activists, this measure was designed to authorize only $15,000 in annual operation fees.[1]
According to the city, the $75,000 that the first initiative proposed by marijuana advocates was designed to authorize was well over the cost to the city of issuing a permit to an MMD. Thus, it authorized extra city revenue and was required by law to go on a general election ballot. This was the reasoning the city used to delay the first initiative until the November 2016 ballot. Proponents started the petition effort for this second initiative to speed up the timeline. Proponents stated that since this initiative was designed to authorize operating fees equal to the estimated permit issuing costs of the city, it would have provided no additional revenue to the city and would have been put on a special election ballot in 2016.[1][2]
Supporters argued that the measure would have reduced black-market operations, would have helped make medical marijuana more available for patients in need, and would have provided new revenue to the city.[3]
Opponents argued that the initiative was written largely with the goal of profit for dispensary owners and did not do enough to ensure the safety and comfort of community members. Opponents also stated that the initiative was poorly written and did not have the basic restrictions and rules necessary to keep the operation of dispensaries from attracting crime and producing nuisances for city residents.[4]
Support
Note: Supporters and supporting arguments for this measure and the nearly identical initiative that already qualified for the November 2016 ballot were the same.
Supporters
The initiative petition to put this measure before voters was backed by the Upland branch of a group called the California Cannabis Coalition.[3][5]
Arguments in favor
| Voting on Marijuana | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
| Ballot Measures | |||
| By state | |||
| By year | |||
| Not on ballot | |||
|
Supporters of medical marijuana dispensaries argued that dispensaries help patients who are unable to grow or acquire marijuana from other sources. They also argued that the operation of dispensaries would provide increased revenue to the city.[3]
When signatures were turned in for the delayed, first version of this initiative, the California Cannabis Coalition administration wrote:[6]
| “ |
Today the directors of California Cannabis Coalition and the patients of upland converged on Upland City Hall. We turned in enough signatures to force a special election. Upland City Council imposed a ban on medical marijuana about a year ago. The patients were outraged and wanted access to medicine. We will not quit until prohibition has ended![7] |
” |
| —California Cannabis Coalition administration[6] | ||
The California Cannabis Coalition published an article stating that the city was manipulating the legal system in order to continue the ban on medical marijuana dispensaries for another year by putting this initiative on a ballot in 2016. The article supported the proponents of this initiative for suing the city because of the election date debate. The article concluded:[8]
| “ |
Upland has spent over $750,000 fighting to ban medical marijuana. The city has failed and now has opened the door for litigation. We understand and support the proponent decision to file legal action against the city. The intent of the people is to do a special election. The intent of the city is to keep medical marijuana away from the people. It time for a change. Activist in Upland are considering a recall petition as a way to clean up local Upland government.[7] |
” |
| —California Cannabis Coalition administration[8] | ||
Opposition
Note: Opponents and opposing arguments for this measure and the nearly identical initiative that already qualified for the November 2016 ballot were the same.
Opponents
Jim Richardson, a member of Upland’s Community Block Grant Development Committee, wrote a guest commentary column for the Daily Bulletin arguing against this initiative. In the article, he recounted his experience at the public city council meeting on March 9, 2015. He stated that nearly all of the opposition to the initiative came from city residents, while supporters were largely from out of town. He wrote, "The author, attorney, financial backer and lead advocate are not from Upland. The majority of speakers were not from Upland, either." He went on to say that everyone who spoke in opposition to the initiative was a city resident.[4]
Arguments against
Upland City Councilman Glenn Bozar said, “This was not a citizens’ initiative to help sick people. It was a not so well thought out attempt at making some big money for a few insiders.”[9]
In Richardson's article in opposition to the initiative, he stated that the initiative was poorly written and did not contain enough regulation of the industry. He claimed that the enactment of the measure would have resulted in dispensaries that attracted crime and created lots of nuisances for residents. An excerpt of his article is below:[4]
| “ |
All opponents to the initiative were from Upland. Most spoke of first-hand experience living near a dispensary, and none painted a pleasant picture. They described being prisoners in their homes; seeing buyers conducting secondary deals in alleys and streets. The poorly written initiative includes demands such as: licenses could never be revoked for any reason, no limit on size, hours, usage permitted on site, inspections might only occur when convenient to the owner, etc. It did not address sanitation, neighborhood impact, hygienic conditions, client safety, cash on site, buyer’s authorizations, audits, accounting, taxes, prohibited chemicals ... , background checks of permit applicants, consequences for failure to comply and many more commonsense issues. [...] Proponents claim compassion as their motivation; I noted RAND and UCLA findings that for-profit marijuana businesses have strong incentives to market to problem users. [...] Violent crime attends to dispensaries everywhere they operate, in states that regulate them or not, presenting an “attractive nuisance” to criminals. If Upland is to take this road, it must be on our terms. Our ordinance must place the safety of neighbors, customers, workers, the city and finally the owners before reactions to threats from wealthy non-residents.[7] |
” |
| —Jim Richardson[4] | ||
Path to the ballot
Originally, proponents of this initiative submitted signatures for an original version with a higher annual business fee. Coalition petitioners needed 5,542 valid signatures to qualify the initiative for the ballot—a number calculated from 15 percent of the total registered voters in the city. The group collected and submitted 6,865 signatures, 5,736 of which were found to be valid by the county elections office. When the city council members were required to make a decision on the certified initiative petition in March 2015, they voted three-to-two to postpone the measure until the city's next general election in November 2016, citing a law governing ballot measures that impose taxes.[1][2][10]
Proponents, after failing to force the city to hold a more immediate election through the courts, decided to launch this second initiative petition to get the measure on an earlier 2016 ballot. The group needed to collect another approximately 5,500 valid signatures by December 5, 2015, to qualify this second initiative for the ballot. No signature petition sheets were submitted by the deadline.[1][2][10][11][12][13]
Election date
According to the city, the original initiative was postponed to November 2016 because it was designed to authorize an annual business fee of $75,000. The city said that inspecting dispensary locations and issuing a permit would only cost $15,000, making the business fee a source of extra revenue for the city. According to law, any measure that would impose a tax must be voted on at a general election. Since the city's next general election was scheduled for November 2016, this was the election for which the city council scheduled the initiative. The second version of the initiative was designed to charge an annual business fee exactly equal to the city's estimated costs for inspections and the issuance of permits—$15,000—so that the measure could go on a special election earlier in 2016. This second initiative failed to make the ballot.[1]
Similar measures
- City of Riverside Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Initiative, Measure A (June 2015)
- City of Vallejo Veto Referendum Targeting City Council Medical Marijuana Ordinance (2015)
- Mendocino County “Mendocino Cannabis Commission” Initiative (November 2015)
- Town of Yucca Valley Medical Marijuana Dispensary Authorization and Regulation Act, Measure X (June 2015)
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Upland medical marijuana initiative. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
|
External links
- San Bernardino County Elections Office website
- City of Upland Government website
- California Cannabis Coalition website, accessed February 9, 2015 & Facebook page
Additional reading
- Daily Bulletin, "Upland rejects $1,000 donation from cannabis coalition," June 10, 2015
- The Sun, "Upland, attorney weigh in on Costa Mesa medical marijuana ruling," April 25, 2015
- Daily Bulletin, "Upland councilman questions report on medical marijuana dispensaries," March 22, 2015
- Daily Bulletin, "Medical marijuana dispensaries election in Upland — setting the record straight: Debbie Stone," March 12, 2015
- Daily Bulletin, "Medical marijuana dispensary initiative aims to overturn bans in Upland," January 14, 2015
- Daily Bulletin, "Cannabis activists aim for legalization initiative," March 24, 2013
- Daily Bulletin, "Upland medical marijuana dispensaries initiative needs review: Letters," February 13, 2015
- Daily Bulletin, "Don’t sign that initiative petition until you’re sure it’s a good thing: Editorial," February 19, 2015
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 The Sun, "Upland medical marijuana initiative proposes to lift ban," May 25, 2015
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Daily Bulletin, "Upland to look at medical marijuana initiative," February 8, 2015
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 California Cannabis Coalition, "Home," accessed February 9, 2015
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Daily Bulletin, "Upland’s medical marijuana initiative issue — put safety above all else: Guest commentary," March 17, 2015
- ↑ Daily Bulletin, "Cannabis coalition launches campaign to overturn dispensary bans in Upland," October 22, 2014
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 California Cannabis Coalition, "CCC Turns In Enough Signatures To Force Special Election To End Marijuana Ban," January 14, 2015
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 California Cannabis Coalition, "Upland spends 3/4 million to keep medical marijuana out of city," March 11, 2015
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedFailed - ↑ 10.0 10.1 The Press Enterprise, "UPLAND: Medical marijuana debate heats up," July 10, 2015
- ↑ Upland City Government website, "City Council Meeting Agenda for February 9, 2015," accessed February 9, 2015
- ↑ Daily Bulletin, "Upland asks for report on medical marijuana initiative," February 10, 2015
- ↑ Daily Bulletin, "Upland medical marijuana measure fails to gather necessary signatures," December 22, 2015
| |||||
