Skip to content
Subscribe

Bill to Create Clearer Medical Marijuana Regulations Rejected by Assembly

Published:

Credit: Wikimedia Commons

medical marijuana regulations

A bill that would have created clearer regulations for the cultivation, sale, and taxation of medical marijuana in California was rejected by the state Assembly on Friday. Assembly Bill 473, authored by Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D- San Francisco), would have established the Division of Medical Marijuana Enforcement under the state's Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

The new regulatory agency would have simplified the current system a little more by enforcing stricter guidelines on the medical marijuana industry, which was legalized by voters in 1996. Since then, it has really been left up to cities and local municipalities to handle the issue. As a result, the legal status of medical marijuana and medical marijuana dispensaries throughout the state has been murky.

AB 473 would have also required medical marijuana dispensaries to register with the Division of Medical Marijuana Enforcement, which supporters say would help ease concerns over "pot shops" selling to any customer that walks into a dispensary, regardless of whether or not the customer is legally able to purchase medical cannabis.

Advocates of the bill argue that lawmakers in the state are not voting on the issue of medical marijuana itself. Assemblymember Nancy Skinner (D-Berkley) pointed out that Proposition 215 -- which legalized medical marijuana in California -- is the law regardless of an individual's support or opposition to it. Since the issue has been left up to local municipalities, however, it is not applied evenly.

Some cities allow medical marijuana dispensaries to operate within their jurisdictions while other cities use zoning regulations and other means to ban the shops. The California Supreme Court recently ruled that cities have the right to ban dispensaries which means that unless the state Legislature creates clearer statewide regulations, the issue will remained unsolved.

Opposition to the bill included the League of California Cities. The group was concerned AB 473 didn't provide enough safeguards to make sure medical cannabis stayed out of the wrong hands.

The Assembly voted 35-37 against the bill.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.
Preparing the article

Bill to Create Clearer Medical Marijuana Regulations Rejected by Assembly

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us