Advertisement

Second marijuana initiative headed to a decision in Costa Mesa

Share

For a second time this month, the Costa Mesa city clerk’s office has certified a medical marijuana petition that could pave the way for storefront dispensaries to openly operate in the city.

The petition met the number needed to initiate a special election — 7,385, or 15% of the Costa Mesa electorate — according to the city clerk’s certification, signed Wednesday.

Representing the petitioners, Los Angeles-based attorney David R. Welch presented nearly 11,000 signatures to City Hall on Oct. 9, and of those sent to the county registrar for verification, 9,552 were reviewed.

Advertisement

Welch’s law would allow up to four storefront collectives in Costa Mesa — where they have been banned since 2005 — that are at least 1,000 feet apart. Proponents have called the regulations flexible because they allow the council to potentially permit more than four, among other provisions.

“We’re looking forward to putting our position forward,” Welch said. “Of the two initiatives, we feel ours is the best, because it allows for change over time at the direction of the City Council.”

The first petition, dubbed ARRO — or Act to Restrict and Regulate the Operation of Medical Marijuana Businesses — was certified Oct. 21.

ARRO, organized by a Fullerton-based law firm, would allow up to eight dispensaries. Supporters have called it a conservative approach that is in accordance with the voter-approved Compassionate Use Act of 1996, which permitted marijuana for medicinal purposes.

Both marijuana proposals head to the City Council on Nov. 18. The council could adopt one of the laws as is, or initiate a special election sometime early next year. The council also could call for a special report that examines the law’s legality and effects on the community.

Both marijuana proposals could be on the same ballot or each could have its own election, depending on the council’s decision.

This year has been a busy one for cannabis advocates, who began collecting signatures in spring. Neither petition, however, was submitted in time for placement on the Nov. 4 ballot.

In August, Councilman Gary Monahan, with help from the city attorney’s office, presented his version of a law that would regulate medical marijuana dispensaries. Monahan had hoped that the law would get placed on the Nov. 4 ballot, but it failed to garner any support from his colleagues.

Monahan’s proposal, which he contended was better than the two petitions and gave the city more control, would not have restricted the number of dispensaries, though it would have limited their locations and required 24-hour security.

Critics objected that the proposal didn’t receive much public vetting before going to the council Aug. 5. Monahan argued that speed was needed to get his law in front of voters before the other two petitions.

Advertisement