SUPES APPROVE MEDICAL MARIJUANA ZONING, ORDINANCE

The San Diego County Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the
county's Zoning Ordinance to cover medical marijuana facilities and
also approved a regulatory ordinance for the licensing and operation
requirements for such facilities.

The county supervisors approved the first reading and introduction of
the regulatory ordinance June 23 and the second reading and adoption
June 30. Both votes were by 4-1 margins with Supervisor Ron Roberts in
opposition. A Zoning Ordinance amendment does not require a second
reading and takes effect immediately, and the zoning component was
approved June 30 on the 4-1 vote. The regulatory ordinance will take
effect July 30.

"I think that what staff has brought before us is probably the best
that we can do," said Supervisor Dianne Jacob.

Some public speakers opposed the ordinance as being too strict while
others felt it was too lenient.

"I didn't hear a lot of unqualified support for what's before us,"
Jacob said.

In November 1996 the state's voters passed Proposition 215, which
allows the cultivation, possession, and use of marijuana for medical
purposes, although under federal law the sale of marijuana for any
purpose is illegal. Proposition 215 did not address the sale of
medical marijuana, although in 2003 the state legislature adopted
Senate Bill 420, which prohibits prosecution of sales to persons with
a prescription. Those authorized to possess or cultivate marijuana for
personal medical purposes include qualified patients, primary
caregivers, and patients and caregivers who associate to collectively
or cooperatively cultivate marijuana for medical purposes.

By August 2009 three medical marijuana dispensaries in unincorporated
San Diego County were confirmed: two in Spring Valley and one in
unincorporated Vista. On August 5, 2009, the Board of Supervisors
adopted an urgency ordinance which enacted a moratorium on all new
marijuana dispensaries. The moratorium was intended to allow county
staff time to study where such dispensaries should be allowed and
determine appropriate use regulations.

A workgroup including staff members from the county's Department of
Planning and Land Use (DPLU), County Counsel, and the Sheriff's
Department worked to develop two companion ordinances, the regulatory
and the zoning measures, to regulate medical marijuana facilities.

In 2001 DPLU granted an administrative permit for a topless dancing
facility in unincorporated El Cajon across from a shopping center
which included a children's dance studio, an arcade, and a pizza
parlor. In response to that situation, in 2002 the county supervisors
amended the Zoning Ordinance to remove commercial zoning areas as
potential sites for adult entertainment businesses and limit adult
establishments not grandfathered to land with industrial M50, M52,
M54, and M58 zoning.

The adult entertainment ordinance also prohibited such establishments
within 500 feet of a residential area, 600 feet of a school, church,
or public park, or 1,000 feet from another adult entertainment
establishment.

The zoning for medical marijuana dispensary facilities limits such
dispensaries to the same M50, M52, M54, and M58 land as adult
entertainment facilities while imposing separation requirements of
1,000 feet from each other, a church, school, public park, or
residential area.

DPLU identified 187 possible industrial properties, although the
1,000-foot separation from other dispensaries reduces that number to
between 15 and 25 sites. Although the county has a C46 Medical Center
zoning category intended to create a concentration of medical and
compatible uses, permitted civic uses in areas with C46 zoning include
child care services and small schools as well as medical services. The
allowance for medical-related facilities in C46 zones is not absolute;
ambulance services are only allowed with a Major Use Permit. All
development in C46 zones must have a site plan.

The restriction to industrial areas also makes cultivation facilities
more compatible with surrounding businesses. The cultivation process
requires heavy electrical, air venting and circulation, fertilizing,
and water usage requirements for which commercial buildings might not
be suitable.

The Zoning Ordinance also requires dispensaries to be designed and
constructed so that no area or portion where marijuana is cultivated
or stored can be visible from the exterior while requiring the
entrance to be visible from the public street. Dispensaries in
commercial locations established prior to the moratorium must cease
operations at that site prior to August 1, 2013, while facilities
which opened illegally after the moratorium was enacted do not have
such an amortization period.

Medical marijuana dispensaries do not require discretionary permits
but will require building permits, licenses, and other ministerial
authorizations.

Due to free speech issues the county cannot regulate the content of
signage, although signage as well as parking requirements for medical
marijuana dispensaries must conform to regulations for other
businesses with similar zoning.

The county's Planning Commission recommended distances equal to those
stipulated in the adult entertainment ordinance, although the county
supervisors reinstated the 1,000-foot separations proposed by DPLU
staff.

"I just believe a thousand feet is a better distance requirement,"
Jacob said.

The ordinance to amend the County Code of Regulatory Ordinances
involves law enforcement and was not covered in the May 14 Planning
Commission hearing which focused on the zoning amendment.

The regulatory amendments include an operating certificate requirement
which involves processing through the Sheriff's Department licensing
division and includes form submission, background checks and fee
payment. Infrastructure requirements to ensure public safety include
alarms, closed-circuit television, door, window, and visibility standards.

Operating requirements include record-keeping designed to show that
the facility is operating as a non-profit collective and serving
qualified patients; other operating requirements include hours of
operation, age limitations, security guard presence, and prohibitions
against on-site ingestion and the sale of food or drink containing
marijuana.

"If they're out of compliance with the new regulations, then they have
no protection under either California law or Federal law," said
Commander E.J. Pendergast of the Sheriff's Department.

The County of San Diego does not have land use jurisdiction in
incorporated cities.

"The cities have their own regulations," said Supervisor Pam
Slater-Price.

The industrial zoning requirement and 1,000-foot restrictions led to
the identification of sites in Ramona, Lakeside, Alpine, San Dieguito,
unincorporated El Cajon, Julian, Borrego, and Spring Valley. Advocates
of medical marijuana questioned the terrain and access of the sites.

"You're lumping medical marijuana patients with the purveyors and
patrons of porn," said Martha Sullivan of Del Mar.

The Lakeside sites are near Slaughterhouse Canyon and the San Vicente
Dam. "It's halfway between the 67 and Poway. There's no public access.
There's no buses," said Lakeside resident Adela Falk. "It's on a dirt
road."

DPLU deputy director Jeff Murphy notes that the sites have both
vehicular access and utility access.

"We feel that these sites meet that criteria," he said. "We're not
required to identify sites and buildings which are turnkey ready."

Tom Hetherington, who owns a business in Bonsall, noted that the fees
are necessary for enforcement.

"Money's a big issue," he said. "I'm concerned about making rules and
regulations that you won't or can't enforce."

Chemotherapy veteran Donna Lambert believes that the fees are overly
restrictive.

"It's the job of the local jurisdiction to facilitate the safe and
affordable distribution," she said. "The high fees will encourage
cartels and drug profiteers to be the only groups who can afford to
operate."

Lambert told the county supervisors that patients who are sick will
need exemptions from the fees and that the fees could be waived under
the Americans with Disabilities Act.

"I'm more concerned than ever that what we're doing is the wrong
thing," Roberts said.