POT CLUB REGULATIONS HEADED TO CALIFORNIA'S HIGH COURT

SANTA CRUZ - One of the most significant threats to the state's
medical marijuana industry since voters approved Proposition 215 in
1996 is going before the state's highest court, with the future of
medical marijuana dispensaries at stake.

The seven justices will decide whether pot shop regulations violate
federal law, agreeing Wednesday to review a lower court decision that
not only said they did, but suggested local officials could be jailed
for issuing them. The October decision put the brakes on a burgeoning
statewide effort to regulate storefront pot shops, including in Santa
Cruz County, and has roiled the medical marijuana industry.

"I think what's at stake here is the delivery method," said Santa
Cruz County counsel Dana McRae, who joined with the American Civil
Liberties Union to ask the court to overturn the ruling. "There's
nothing that a local government can do to license that storefront."

Last year, the county passed pot club rules outlining where the clubs
could locate and regulating their business practices. But the county
board beat a hasty retreat following the decision in the Long Beach
case, which came before any local permits were issued and has
reverberated throughout California.

Citing the case, many cities have taken steps to ban dispensaries
within city limits. That includes California's biggest city, Los
Angeles, where the City Council is expected to take up the issue.

The case, Pack v. Long Beach, and a second companion case have not
yet been scheduled for a hearing.

The Long Beach decision was issued just as federal authorities in
California's initiated a crackdown on the state's medical marijuana
trade, targeting both those who provide pot to dispensaries and
owners of the buildings that house them.

The California Supreme Court will hear the case against that
backdrop. The marijuana trade is clearly illegal under federal law,
but medical marijuana backers have long complained that the feds
should stay out of a state decision to provide pot to medically needy patients.

Ben Rice, an attorney who represents several local pot clubs, said he
was optimistic after the court decided to review the decision, hoping
it could be reversed or at least depublished, which means it applies
to the case has no precedential value.

But losing at the Supreme Court potentially would have a
game-changing effect on California's medical marijuana operations, he
acknowledged.

"The landscape would be dramatically impacted because we would have
incredible pressure put on cities and counties who have been trying
to be responsible and trying to regulate how patients get their
medicine," Rice said. "It means it would be up to local cities and
counties whether they want to put their resources into shutting them down."

If that occurs, that would leave home growers or grow-your-own
collectives as one of the only options for medical marijuana patients
to get their pot.

Marc Whitehill, founder of the Boulder Creek Collective, last week
moved his operation to a new Mid-County location, partly in response
to the short-lived county regulations. He said a court victory would
not stop the federal crackdown, and does not think a loss represents
the end of the world.

"I don't think so. I think California made a commitment to medical
cannabis and it's been going on for 15 years. I don't know how you
stuff the rabbit back in the hat," Whitehall said.

"Places that are clearly committed, progressive areas - Santa Cruz,
San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley - we're not going to all shut down,"
he added. "When you start a new industry, nobody ever promises you a
clear path or an easy ride."