A. The City Council hereby finds that the cultivation of medical marijuana significantly impacts, or has the potential to significantly impact, the City's jurisdiction. These impacts include damage to buildings in which cultivation occurs, improper and dangerous electrical alterations and use, inadequate ventilation, increased occurrences of home-invasion robberies and similar crimes, nuisance impacts to neighboring properties due to noxious odors, and increased crime.
B. It is acknowledged that the voters of the State of California have provided a criminal defense to the cultivation, possession, and use of marijuana for medical purposes through the adoption of the Compassionate Use Act in 1996 pursuant to Proposition 215 codified in Health and Safety Code section 11362.5. The Compassionate Use Act (CUA) does not address land use or other impacts that result from the cultivation of medical marijuana.
C. The purpose of this section is to adopt rules consistent with the CUA and the Medical Marijuana Program Act (MMPA) commencing with Health and Safety Code section 11362.7 to regulate medical marijuana in a manner that protects the public health, safety, and welfare of the community, prevent adverse impacts which such activities may have on nearby properties and residents without interfering with the rights of qualified patients and their primary caregivers to possess or cultivate medical marijuana pursuant to state law.
D. The CUA is limited in scope providing a defense from criminal prosecution for possession and cultivation of marijuana to qualified patients and their primary caregivers. The scope of the MMPA is also limited; it established a statewide identification program of qualified patients, persons with identification cards, and their primary caregivers providing an affirmative defense to certain enumerated criminal sanctions that would otherwise apply to transporting, processing, administering or distributing marijuana.
E. The CUA and MMPA do not appear to have facilitated the stated goals of providing access to marijuana for patients in medical need of marijuana; the predominant use of marijuana continues to be for recreational and not medicinal purposes. The report entitled, "California Chiefs Association Position Paper on Decriminalizing Marijuana" (September, 2009), states, "[it has become clear, despite the claims of use by critically ill people that only about 2% of those using crude marijuana for medicine are critically ill. The vast majority of those using crude marijuana as medicine are young and are using the substance to be under the influence of THC [tetrahydrocannabinol] and have no critical medical condition.]"
F. Facilities purportedly dispensing marijuana for medicinal purposes are commonly referred to as medical marijuana dispensaries, medical marijuana cooperatives or medical marijuana collectives; however, these terms are not defined anywhere in the CUA or MMPA. Significantly, nothing in the CUA or MMPA specifically authorizes the operation and the establishment of medical marijuana dispensing facilities.
G. The CUA and the MMPA do not require or impose an affirmative duty or mandate upon local governments, such as the City of Gridley, to allow, authorize, or sanction the establishment and/or the establishment and operation and of facilities dispensing medical marijuana within its jurisdiction. Moreover, the CUA/MMPA do not create a constitutional right to obtain medical marijuana.
H. It is critical to note that neither Act abrogates the City's powers to regulate for public health, safety, and welfare. Health and Safety Code section 11362.5(b)(2) provides that the Act does not supersede any legislation intended to prohibit conduct that endangers others. In addition, Health and Safety Code section 11352.83 authorizes cities and counties to adopt and enforce rules and regulations consistent with the MMPA.
I. On August 25, 2008, Edmond G. Brown, the California Attorney General, issued "Guidelines for the Security and Non-Diversion of Marijuana Grown for Medical Use" (the Attorney General Guidelines"), which sets regulations intended to ensure the security and non-diversion of marijuana grown for medical use by qualified patients. Health and Safety Code section 11362.81(d) authorizes the Attorney General to "develop and adopt appropriate guidelines to ensure the security and non-diversion of marijuana grown for medical use by patients qualified under" the CUA/MMPA. Nothing in the Guidelines imposes an affirmative mandate or duty upon local governments, such as the City of Gridley, to allow, sanction, or permit the establishment and/or the operation of facilities dispensing marijuana within their jurisdictional limits.
J. Marijuana remains an illegal substance under the Federal Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801, et. seq. and is classified as a "Schedule I Drug" which is defined as a drug or other substance that has a high potential for abuse, which is not currently accepted as medical use for treatment in the United States, and it has not been accepted as safe for its use under medical supervision. Furthermore, the Federal Controlled Substances Act (FCSA) makes it unlawful for any person to cultivate, manufacture, distribute or dispense, or possess with intent to manufacture, distribute or dispense marijuana. The Federal Controlled Substances Act contains no statutory exemption for the possession of marijuana for medical purposes. The City of Gridley does not wish to be in violation of federal law.
K. The City has the power to regulate permissible land uses throughout the City and to enact regulation for the preservation of public health, safety, and welfare of its residents and community pursuant to the City of Gridley's police powers as authorized in Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution. The City also has the power through the City Council to declare actions and activities that constitute a public nuisance pursuant to Government Code 38771.
L. The City Council finds that neither the CUA nor the MMPA preempts the City's exercise of its traditional police powers in enacting land use and zoning regulations, as well as legislation for preservation of public health, safety, and welfare, such as this zoning ordinance prohibiting the cultivation and establishment and operation of medical marijuana cooperatives and collectives within the City.
M. The City Council finds that the public health, safety, and general welfare of the City and its residents necessitates and requires the adoption of this zoning ordinance, prohibiting the cultivation and the establishment and operation of medical marijuana cooperatives and collectives, and prohibits the processing, transport and/or delivery of marijuana and its products in order to: (a) protect and safeguard against the detrimental secondary negative effects and adverse impacts of facilities dispensing medical marijuana; (b) preserve and safeguard minors, children, and students in the community from the deleterious impacts of medical marijuana cultivation and facilities; and (c) preserve the City's law enforcement services, in that monitoring and addressing the negative secondary effects and adverse impacts will likely burden the City's law enforcement resources. The City Council further finds that due to negative secondary effects and adverse impacts of facilities dispensing medical marijuana, the establishment and operation of these facilities will negatively impact the City.
N. The zoning code, Title 17, of the Gridley Municipal Code, is consistent with the City of Gridley 2030 General Plan's goals, policies, and objectives and do not permit or contemplate the cultivation of marijuana nor the establishment or operation of medical marijuana cooperatives, collectives, or similar facilities that engage in dispensing of marijuana for medical purposes.
(Ord. 823-2016 § 36 (part), 2016)