A lawsuit calling for Mendocino County to stop enforcing its medical marijuana regulations was continued for the second time Friday, and more delays may be in the offing, according to filing attorney J. David Nick.
The suit, filed in September, calls for the court to bar the county from enforcing its marijuana cultivation code on the basis that the regulations are pre-empted by state law, the Ukiah Daily Journal’s Tiffany Revelle reports here.
A hearing to decide whether a preliminary injunction would be granted was scheduled first for Oct. 9, then for Friday. The new date – for now – is May 14.
Nick, who filed the lawsuit jointly with Ukiah attorney E.D. Lerman on behalf of five medical marijuana patients, said the fate of the case hinges on the fate of an appeal pending in the Santa Ana appellate court.
The Qualified Patients’ Collective sued the city of Anaheim, claiming the city couldn’t ban medical marijuana, Nick said. The Orange County Superior Court ruled in the city’s favor, and the collective appealed the ruling.
“This is going to be the guiding principle,” Nick said. “It addresses directly municipalities’ authority to enact medical marijuana legislation, and whether state law pre-empts that authority.”
Nick said the Santa Ana court could decide the collective’s appeal in late May or early June. He said he will file another motion to continue the hearing in the lawsuit against Mendocino County if the Santa Ana court hasn’t ruled by May 14.
“The effect on this case could be as little as dealing with a moratorium or a ban, or they could go as far as to lay down a pretty clear set of rules about what ordinances are lawful and which are not,” Nick said.
The Mendocino County lawsuit challenges the county’s and Sheriff Tom Allman’s authority to enforce medical marijuana regulations outlined in County Code 9.31 by treating violations as nuisances.
In October, Mendocino County Counsel Jeanine Nadel filed a response to the suit on behalf of the Board of Supervisors and Allman. In it, Nadel says the county is within its constitutional rights to enforce the regulations and to treat violations as nuisances.
Meanwhile, a committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors in December finished a monthslong process of revising the county code that is the subject of the lawsuit.
One suggested change in the embattled code is to allow marijuana cooperatives and collectives that get a permit from the Sheriff’s Office to grow up to 99 plants, an exception to the county’s current 25-plant-per-parcel limit.
Supervisor John McCowen, who sat on the committee with Supervisor Kendall Smith, said he hopes to have the revised code before the full Board of Supervisors for final adoption – or further revision – in March.
