By Ryan Van Lenning It seems that the medicinal marijuana landscape is constantly shifting in California as it is everywhere else. As one advocate and soon-to-be pot biz entrepreneur told me, "every region and county has a different way of looking at it." One of the many issues facing city and county officials is how many dispensaries should be allowed, where they should be located, and how they should be taxed or regulated.
Hayward this week answered the first question with a loud "none," after voting against allowing any dispensaries in the city. Los Angeles is cracking down and looking to close hundreds of dispensaries. And Walnut Creek's C3 Collective, the city's first non-profit storefront dispensary, has been ordered by a judge to close by March 23, citing city zoning violations. Moritoriums for opening new dispensaries are in effect in several cities with more in the works. Expect legal battles to follow.
Closer to home, Berkeley is weighing in on how to tax dispensaries within city limits, in order to help cover a $12 million budget gap. However, Berkeley would tax dispendaries based on physical size, unlike Oakland, where the tax is based on sales and was approved by proposition last year. This has caused resistance from dispensary owners, which is also unlike Oakland, where dispensaries largely supported and pushed for the cannabis biz tax. As a result, an amendment is being considered that would tax initially based on revenue, then on size ($10/sq. foot) down the road should the dispensary become a non-profit.
And in other news, Avery Badenhop of Petaluma, a supplier of dispensaries in Oakland, Berkeley, and San Francisco, has a federal forfeiture complaint against him, after police found some $800,000 after pulling him over for speeding in Marin. According to his wife, Badenhop was raking in over $15,000 a month in his role as grower and delivery man.
And the Sacramento Bee launched its "Weed Wars" blog by Peter Hecht on March 1.
Posted by Ryan Van Lenning on 03/12/10
