LEAVES CITIES, COUNTIES UNCERTAIN

Ken and Kathy Prather, owners of a Corning medical marijuana
dispensary, are hopeful the city will reconsider its daily issuance of
citations to the dispensary in response to last week's Anaheim court
ruling.

The city has been issuing the citations since the first of the year
based on its interim ordinance banning medical marijuana dispensaries,
such as the Prathers' Tehama Herbal Collective.

Anaheim also has a ban on medical marijuana dispensaries, and was sued
by the Qualified Patients Association. The case ended up in the state
appellate court which released the much-anticipated, but mixed ruling
Thursday.

Many feel the ruling failed to provide the clear precedent that both
sides were anticipating on whether California cities have the right to
ban all such dispensaries.

However, the attorney for medical marijuana patients called it a
"significant victory" that prohibits cities from standing solely on
federal law to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries.

"Unfortunately, the Anaheim decision did not give us the direction we
were hoping for," said Corning City Planner John Stoufer.

"At this time, the decision will not change our stance on our interim
ordinance banning dispensaries, which was adopted pursuant to state
regulations and did not rely on any type of federal regulations, which
the appellate court said cities cannot use."

The three-judge panel from California's 4th District Court of Appeal
agreed with medical-marijuana patients that a lower court "erred" in
declaring that federal law, which prohibits any use of marijuana,
pre-empted state law that allows for specific medical-marijuana activities.

But the appellate panel also determined that the lower court
"correctly concluded that plaintiffs failed to state a cause of
action" related to the Unruh Act, which the court said pertains to
business establishments, not legislative acts.

As the plaintiffs and defendants in the Anaheim case continue to
battle it out, Corning continues to fight its own medical marijuana
case in court.

The Prathers are going to trial on Sept. 15, concerning their city
issued citations, of which there is more than 200.

William Panzer, the Prathers' defense attorney, is claiming the city's
refusal to issue a business use permit and the issuance of the
citations is unconstitutional, and requested the Tehama County
Superior Court to dismiss the case.

Last summer, the Prathers applied for a business use permit with the
city. They were denied the permit by Stoufer, who said the zoning
district does not allow for such businesses.

Panzer's request was denied by Tehama County Superior Court Judge
Richard Scheuler.

"The court is persuaded that the city is correct in its interpretation
of zoning law. The constitutionality of land use planning is upheld,"
Scheuler ruled on May 25.

Panzer was not dissuaded by the ruling and stated he firmly believes
his clients will prevail.

According to city officials, citations will continue to be issued for
every day the dispensary stays in operation, and that fines of $250 a
day may be assessed to the collective operators should they be found
guilty.

In the meantime, Stoufer said city staff is recommending the city wait
until after the November election to see the results of a ballot
measure that would legalize the recreational use of marijuana before
the city considers adopting a permanent ordinance that would regulate
the distribution of marijuana.

He is also hoping the League of California Cities will give the city
some legal analysis and direction on this difficult issue.

The Anaheim case was widely regarded as what might set precedent for
cities across the state. In all, 36 cities joined in support of
Anaheim's position.

"As anxious as we, the parties ... are to reach this important and
interesting question of state pre-emption, this case in its present
posture is not the occasion to do so," the ruling states.

The Anaheim case will now likely go back to the trial court for
further review.

The Orange County Register contributed to this report.