May 192013
 May 19, 2013

Los Angeles medical marijuana ordinance fThere is a big vote this Tuesday in Los Angeles, California that will largely determine the future for medical marijuana dispensaries in the area. Below is a message that I received from my friends in Los Angeles:

On May 21 join Angelenos for Safe Access -  a coalition of business, collectives, doctors and patients – in voting Yes on F and No on D.

Proposition D is a fraud that doesn’t work.  Proposition D doesn’t protect minors, patients or the public. Ordinance F is the solution to create sustainable and healthy rules that would – regulate medical cannabis collectives in Los Angeles.

Ordinance F Saves Jobs: Proposition D wants to decrease the number of dispensaries, which would result in job loss.  The estimated 750,000 legitimate medical marijuana patients in Los Angeles would be forced to crowd into less than 135 dispensaries. Only Ordinance F aims to maintain enough dispensaries so sick patients have easy access to their medicine and 70,000 jobs aren’t lost.

Ordinance F Requires Mandatory Backgrounds Checks On All Dispensary Employees: In the process of legalizing medical marijuana, Ordinance F wants to ensure that dispensaries are operated by law-abiding citizens, and not associated with any criminal activity. By assuring the community that dispensaries are being operated and inhabited by people who have no criminal record in the past 10 years we can eradicate criminals owning and operating dispensaries.

Ordinance F Protects Our Children: Ordinance F is the only measure that prohibits children from entering the premises of dispensaries under any circumstance.  Only Ordinance F requires that all dispensaries stay 1000 feet away from schools and 500 feet from parks. Dispensaries are required to relocate if a school were to open up within 1000 feet of its location.  Proposition D which doesn’t require background checks and allows minors to enter dispensaries would ultimately allow children to buy cannabis from criminals.

Ordinance F Will Generate 25 Million Tax Dollars For The City: Ordinance F is the only measure that requires audits to ensure dispensaries are paying a 20% tax increase to the city. Currently, dispensaries pay a sales tax that goes to the state, as well as a city business-licensing fee of 5% of gross receipts. Revenue from dispensaries generated $2 million in revenue for Los Angeles in just the first quarter of 2012. If this 5% tax is increased by 20%, it would bring the taxes to the City to 6%, which would generate millions of additional revenue for law enforcement, fire departments and schools.

67,000 voters signed a petition to place Ordinance F on the ballot; to find out more information or how you can support Yes on F, please visit: http://voteyesonf.com

Powered by

About Johnny Green

Johnny Green is a marijuana activist from Oregon. He has a Bachelor's Degree in Public Policy. Follow Johnny Green on Facebook and Twitter. Also, feel free to email any concerns.
  • Ray

    Wow this doesn’t sound like an informative piece. It sounds like pro F propaganda. You should read both D and F, and try to be unbiased.

    The biggest problem in LA is the free for all that is going on by all the Johnny come lateleys. Now the city is over run by collectives. Prop D reduces the number of collectives for now and it doesn’t mean there can’t be more later. This is what the city and residents want. The collective scene, although unregulated,hummed along fine until they started multiplying like rabbits. Single owners don’t need 3,4,5……20 collectives. Prop F is for the greedy. I know people that have run 20-24 collectives.

    • Miles Monroe

      Measure D is a knee-jerk reaction by the same body that has tried to BAN ALL PATIENT ACCESS to medical cannabis, in response to patient and dispensary voter initiatives (E and F) that will take the issue out of the council’s authority, which is clearly being guided by ignorance, prejudice, and vested interests.

      Measure D imposes a cap of 135 dispensaries, but also allows for none–zero, zip, NADA; Measure F places no such arbitrary numerical limit. If you’re a federal prosecutor, which one makes your job–SHUTTING THEM ALL DOWN–just a whole lot easier?!

  • Sean

    I say the more the merrier. Yes on F and no to these faux marijuana activists who sit their on their high horse deciding who is worthy and not worthy of the herb. More access equals more freedom.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Malcolm-Kyle/100001700224506 Malcolm Kyle

    Prohibitionism is intensely, rabidly, frantically, frenetically, hysterically anti-truth, anti-freedom, anti-public-health, ant-public-safety, and anti-economy.

    An important feature of prohibitionism (which it closely shares with fascism) is totalitarianism. That means: A police state apparatus; widespread surveillance, arbitrary imprisonment or even murder of political opponents, mass-incarceration, torture, etc.

    Like despicable, playground bullies, prohibitionists are vicious one moment, then full of self-pity the next. They whine and whinge like lying, spoilt brats, claiming they just want to “save the little children”, but the moment they feel it safe to do so, they use brute force and savage brutality against those they claim to be defending.

    Prohibitionists actually believe that they can transcend human nature and produce a better world. They allow only one doctrine, an impossible-to-obtain drug-free world. All forms of dissent, be they common-sense, scientific, constitutional, or democratic, are simply ignored, and their proponents vehemently persecuted.

    During alcohol prohibition (1919-1933), all profits went to enrich thugs and criminals. While battling over turf, young men died, every day, on inner-city streets. Corruption in Law Enforcement and the Judiciary went clean off the scale. A fortune was wasted on enforcement that could have been far more wisely allocated. On top of the budget-busting prosecution and incarceration costs, billions in taxes were lost. Finally, in 1929, the economy collapsed. Does that sound familiar?

  • Bob

    YES ON PROP D
    Why Vote Yes on D is the right vote. Neither Initiative is perfect, but prop D has been welcomed by the city and is at least a stepping stone in the right direction that will provide access to Patients while the city and state work towards full regulation. Prop D is endorsed by Eric Garcetti, and a majority of the city council. Prop F has been falsely promoted and actually only a limited number of dispensaries, (less then 100), all represented by 1 lawyer will be allowed to stay open.
    PROP D IS THE YES VOTE AND WAY TO GO TOMORROW

  • elijah

    nether one of these laws are good because they are set up for the farmasuitical companys are trying to take over. does a phamicy have to move because of a school no because they are big business vote no on both laws a despence is a drug store what the fuck does that have to do with a school they are doing that in washington and using any type of school to shut you down you better rethink who is behind these new laws because they dont care about u they care about where your money is not going so vote NOOOOO way in hell big business