POT-MOBILE PARKED, FOR NOW

The medical marijuana mobile that recently rolled out of Norco and
into unincorporated Riverside County to sell its wares illustrates
the latest in legal entanglements between federal, state and local laws.

Stewart Hauptman said he and his 1985 Pace Arrow motor home are gone
for good from Norco after police cited him for possessing drug
paraphernalia and operating a dispensary. He has since moved to
unincorporated Riverside County, where he says he feels safer because
state law applies.

But Hauptman and his roving pot-mobile may not be driving on any more
solid legal ground.

They are parked at the center of a conundrum created by conflicting
federal, state and municipal laws that leave mobile collectives and a
growing number of pot delivery operations that work like couriers in
unfamiliar territory.

Federal drug laws prohibit the use and possession of marijuana.

State laws allow marijuana for medicinal use, sale that is not for
profit and cultivation under legal limits. It also permits
municipalities to regulate dispensaries.

But cities and counties across the state, including Norco and
Riverside County, have local ordinances that ban dispensaries,
according to city and county officials. San Bernardino County has a
moratorium on them.

Legal experts are still arguing whether cities can ban dispensaries
entirely through zoning laws that have kept many store-front
businesses shuttered.

Mobile and delivery collectives are driving on uncharted roads,
according to some experts.

Hundreds of delivery services across the state are up and running,
dropping off marijuana to homebound people and a variety of
locations. At least a handful of mobile units like Hauptman's are
parking and opening shop.

Dale Gieringer, director of the National Organization for the Reform
of Marijuana Laws in California, said it's difficult to argue that
city zoning laws apply to mobile dispensaries or delivery services.

"They don't have a set address. It's hard to say they're violating
zoning ordinances because it's mobile," Gieringer said.

Kris Hermes, spokesman for Americans for Safe Access said delivery
and mobile dispensaries are legal as long as they abide by state laws.

"I would say that it's first of all, at its foundation, it naturally
provides a service to patients with mobility issues. So it stands to
reason that delivery services, as long as they operate according to
state law, legally can," Hermes said.

Hermes said mobile dispensaries and delivery services are easier to
operate and likely will continue climbing in areas less friendly to
storefront sales.

"In communities hostile to medical marijuana, delivery services have
formed because they're more discreet and they draw less attention. In
a storefront facility, that is obvious to law enforcement," Hermes
said, noting increases in delivery services in San Francisco, Orange
County and San Diego County.

Opponents say delivery services violate state law and are attempting
to circumvent local regulations that ban dispensaries.

Norco City Attorney John Harper said whether a dispensary is mobile
or stationary does not make it exempt from the city ban.

"The city doesn't allow the use of medical marijuana dispensaries
under any circumstances," Harper said. "It's a defined term,
dispensary. It essentially talks about any entity, whatever you like
to call it, which dispenses marijuana."

Riverside County district attorney's office spokesman John Hall
echoed Harper's comment.

But state laws that specifically apply to mobile and delivery
services are not yet on the books.

The number of mobile and delivery business operating in the Inland
area is unknown but online advertisements for them are on the rise.

And businesses could increase if voters approve an initiative on the
November ballot to legalize pot possession.

For people like Hauptman, who operated in Norco for seven months and
has faced no resistance since moving his motor home to Riverside
County, he believes he is operating legally under state law.

He had planned to fight Norco and Corona zoning laws but said it
proved too costly. So he agreed to leave this month after Norco
officials attempted to file a temporary restraining order against him
and the nonprofit Lakeview Collective that he and his wife operated there

"I would have had to mortgage my home to fight them," Hauptman said.

Beyond the legal conflicts, Hauptman said the issues are violating
his right to help people in pain.

"This is so wrong. I got patients that have cancer," Hauptman said.
"People need to hear about it."