Two men have opened a medical marijuana dispensary in north
Gilroy less than a month after the City Council effectively
rejected their business application.
– Gilroy Dispatch
Two men have opened a medical marijuana dispensary in north Gilroy less than a month after the City Council effectively rejected their business application.
Morgan Hill residents Batzi Kuburovich and Neil Forrest have been trying to start a cannabis collective in Gilroy since May and hit a major roadblock last month when the City Council voted 4-3 against creating a special ordinance for marijuana dispensaries in Gilroy. The vote effectively nixed the application, but specified that the city should reconsider the idea in January.
However, the business has apparently opened anyway at 1321 First St. – near Lana’s Dance Studio and Togo’s. The dispensary was originally slated to open near this location, but the dispensary proprietors have considered several other locations. It was unclear whether the men had permits to open a business in Gilroy.
State law permits medical marijuana dispensaries, but federal law prohibits cannabis across the board. Without a local law, City Attorney Linda Callon said last month that staff are unable to process MediLeaf’s business application. The applicants had argued they deserve due process in front of the planning commission, which can impose project-specific conditions on unorthodox business applications.
One of many cases winding its way through state courts came from the Second District Court of Appeals last month. The court upheld a Claremont city ban on dispensaries, a move which suggests cities can bar citizens from setting up shops that are specifically permitted by state laws. In addition, the Los Angeles County District Attorney announced last week that prosecutors would pursue hundreds of “over the counter” collectives in the area that exchange marijuana for cash – a sticky situation Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney Steve Lowney told the council it should avoid by working with District Attorney Dolores Carr on any proposed ordinance.
While the proposed ordinance would have regulated store hours, security requirements and products, council members said they were swayed to vote against it by an outpouring of e-mails and phone calls from constituents. They also expressed concerns of a dispensary inviting legal interference from above.
