Where's the weed? Mapping L.A.'s marijuana dispensaries
It's green. It's herbal. It's organic. It's compassionate. It's healing. And it's nonprofit too.
This plethora of adjectives is not describing a gimmick to cash in on alternative energy or a new diet plan.
No, it's L.A.'s latest retail craze: medical marijuana.
Those words, pulled from the Los Angeles city clerk's website, were the most common descriptors in the names of the 966 dispensaries registered in the city.
A Times analysis of pot store names, however, showed that the most frequently occurring word was the socialist-tinged "collective," appearing in 199 of the names.
Whether that choice of words is merely merchandising double-speak or genuine cultural expression -- a point on which reasonable minds might differ -- may ultimately be of little consequence.
But by plotting the addresses of the pot dispensaries, The Times has made another finding: At least 260 of them fall within 1,000 feet of a school, a library or a park. The distance is significant because it's the buffer in a proposed law the Los Angeles City Council has been kicking around for a couple of years. The ordinance is still pending, with no vote yet scheduled, while council members figure out how to shield their constituents from too much underground pot culture without trampling the dispensaries' legal right to exist.
The marijuana conundrum goes back to the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, passed by California voters. It legalized the use of marijuana for pain or illness. Then in 2003, state Senate Bill 420 (yes, the same number as the underground name for pot) authorized the attorney general to set possession limits and shielded physicians from prosecution.
Alarmed by the rate at which dispensaries were opening, the Los Angeles City Council in 2007 froze the number at the 186 already licensed. No new ones were supposed to open unless applicants received a hardship exemption.
But the moratorium had the opposite effect as would-be pot impresarios rushed to reserve their licenses by filing applications. The city attorney opined that enforcement officials could not shut them down while their applications are pending.
By the time the city cut off the exemption loophole in June, 779 applications had been filed. That's not to say that every one of them is actually selling pot. Many of the registered businesses exist only on paper, apparently filed by entrepreneurs who hoped to get a foothold. Among them are the 58 registered at a single address in Northridge.
The City Council has recently begun crawling through the 779 hardship applications, deciding on a case-by-case basis which will be allowed. It has reviewed about 85 applications, and all of them were rejected or withdrawn.
-- Doug Smith and Thomas Suh LauderRelated
L.A.'s medical pot dispensary moratorium led to a boom instead
Los Angeles medical marijuana dispensaries could face closure








Hey LATimes,
How about you report on the will of the people of the State of California being thwarted by a few City Council persons.
Are they done with the actual regulations they want to cook up for medical marijuana?
No, they just stall in their beureaucratic ways of innefficiency and then say that it is all about the children.
I don't understand why the laws for a dispensary need to be any different than those for a regular pharmacy.
But, hey, keep working the scare everyone for the children tactics in the name 0f selling papers and controlling the sheeple.
Posted by: Observer | September 10, 2009 at 07:51 AM
yeah the LATimes reporting sure has gone downhill
Posted by: howard | September 10, 2009 at 08:06 AM
So, how many people receive prescriptions for it?
Posted by: J Henson | September 10, 2009 at 08:21 AM
Why doesn't LA Times list where all the pharmacies are at? How many there are and where they are at and how close to schools they are so we can go get are Oxycotins and Valiums and all the other cure all drugs for us and our kids Prozac mmmmmm. I wonder what kind of goodies are going to be in the H1N1 Flu Vaccinnation.
Posted by: twotone200w | September 10, 2009 at 08:23 AM
Howbout a story on how many LIQUOR STORES are within 1000 feet of schools, libraries, or parks?
Posted by: motodude | September 10, 2009 at 08:24 AM
This article is written to stir up fear. Are you planning on doing the same report and map for pharmacies which sell much more dangerous doctor prescribed remedies near schools? Those that are in need of the compassionate care you mock consider marijuana the same as any patient views their prescriptions.
Posted by: Reality Check | September 10, 2009 at 08:33 AM
I look forward to the Times' analysis of liquor stores and their distances from schools, libraries, and parks.
Posted by: Evan | September 10, 2009 at 08:33 AM
Would you guys please do a map showing how many stores that sell liquor and cigarettes are within 1,000 feet of a school, a library or a park.
Posted by: Warren | September 10, 2009 at 08:42 AM
I hope you map the number of Liquor Stores across the street from or within a short walk from a school giving potential access to Tobacco and Alcohol and catering to a much more violent clientele! The Liquor Store around the corner from me has a collection of Drunks and Derelicts out front all day and is in the direct path of students heading too and from school! Most (legal) dispensaries have tight controls on who can access them and have strict rules concerning the use of medicine on or near the premises. Yes there are some under the radar bad eggs in the bunch but that's no reason for the Witch Hunt this article will inspire! And a word to the L.A. City Council: watch out when you are up for re-election our numbers are MUCH greater than you think AND we VOTE IN LARGE NUMBERS!!!!! GET WITH THE TIMES L.A. TIMES!!!
Posted by: Curtis Orthmann | September 10, 2009 at 08:42 AM
"A Times analysis of pot store names, however, showed that the most frequently occurring word was the socialist-tinged "collective," appearing in 199 of the names."
No doubt this article was written by conservative Fox news watching pinheads. Maybe you guys should read the State laws that govern the sell of marijuana to understand why the "socialist-tinged "collective"" word is used.
Posted by: Warren | September 10, 2009 at 08:49 AM
REALLY?????? Man I was just defending the Times the other day. This is not news at all it is PURE PROPAGANDA. Number 1 hypocrisy: DEATH, compare the numbers of death by: Marijuana vs. alcohol, or prescription drugs, or tobacco, or flying, or driving, or war, or riding a bike, or crossing the street. .....the list is endless just as the list of the benefits of marijuana are. We need to shed this Victorian morality that the status quo is clutching to with a death grip.
Posted by: Tim Rose | September 10, 2009 at 08:55 AM
If more people medicated there would be fewer problems in the world.
Posted by: Paul Vaughn | September 10, 2009 at 08:58 AM
So, how many people receive prescriptions for it?
Posted by: J Henson | September 10, 2009 at 08:21 AM
-------------------------------------
Last year it was 2% of the population. Likely close to 3% now.
Posted by: Observer | September 10, 2009 at 09:00 AM
Perhaps we should apply the same rule of 1,000 feet to pharmacys. After all, the biggest concern regarding drugs in schools today are prescription pharmacuticals -- the same drugs that have been killing celebrities so frequently of late.
The dispensaries aren't letting kids in to buy, and prices in these establishments are generally much higher than on the street anyway. So what's the point of all this?
Posted by: Tom K | September 10, 2009 at 09:06 AM
Dear LA City Council
Please remember that it was the will of the people to allow marijuana usage.
If you try to throw up roadblocks and make it difficult for people who are ill to access this valuable medicine we will not forget when election time rolls around.
And the reason they're called collectives is because that's how they are described in the law.
Jeez, LA TIMES GET SOME BETTER WRITERS!
Posted by: Julia | September 10, 2009 at 09:06 AM
Oh yea, and thanks for the map!
Posted by: Tom K | September 10, 2009 at 09:07 AM
Do Doug Smith and Thomas Lauder co-write for Fox News and CNN?
This is a horrible article with a conservative agenda.
Posted by: FightOn | September 10, 2009 at 09:09 AM
Hey Motodude! I agree with your comment on LIQUOR STORES. These places are really what L.A. Times and the Los Angeles "officials" should be concerned with. Much more in the realm of debauchery happens at the millions of liquor stores in Los Angeles county that are in every neighborhood near every school.
Posted by: Mariposa Blanca | September 10, 2009 at 09:12 AM
Where is the story about the liquor stores and "Quickie Marts" that are directly across the street from these same parks and schools? When it comes to the clientele of the majority of the storefront dispenseries they buy their herb and leave with little loitering. Try comparing that to the clientele at the liquor store across the street from your kid's school.
Posted by: Geoff | September 10, 2009 at 09:17 AM
Your article sucks. It is not informative, it is based on vague language and has no point other than to have writing under an inflamatory heading. Please do your job: INFORM!
Posted by: Joe Garcia | September 10, 2009 at 09:29 AM
There is a liquor store in a small shopping center across the street from my son's elementary school. Sometimes, he and his friends will run in there for snacks. There is also a small local mexican diner that sells beer next door.
My son cannot run into a "collective" to grab snacks. He is not exposed to marijuana. One cannot simply just walk into the pharmacy I use. Even though they know be by name, I still must present my ID, and pass through two electronically locked doors. It was so much easier to buy pot in high school from a drug dealer. But not nearly as safe.
The war on marijuana is fueled by ignorance. Until we change the attitudes of lawmakers, it will still go on, wasting billions of dollars. These are the same people who choose to ignore the facts and statistics because the truth does not support what they feed to the public.
My son is a wonderful 5th grader who gets A's an B's, helps other students when they need it. He has zero discipline problems. He is in a household that does not abuse alcohol, but has a father that consumes marijuana. He is well adjusted socially, and can carry an intelligent conversation with anyone.
It boggles my mind the things that fly out of politicians' mouths. They speak without knowledge and information. Think about this: Why has the US put a halt to studies involving marijuana? We now get most of our results from studies done in Europe and Israel. Could it be that the findings do not support what politicians need to get funding? Perhaps.
This is a ridiculous waste of time and money. Just leave us alone and we will continue to be lawyers, teachers, doctors, bartenders, actors, fathers, mothers, and any other positive role model for our children.
Too much being made of nothing.
Posted by: Harry | September 10, 2009 at 09:48 AM
The Times should also write a story about how many strip clubs are near schools, parks and librarys as well since the San Fernando Valley seems not to care about that. If we all panicked over everything that are close to schools then we should shut all of the schools down so buisness can continue without the aid of Students hard earned allowance, as most of those near schools rely on that money more than the locals coming in for their nightly 40oz'er. There are so many dispensarys out there that they should be renamed WEEDBUCKS.. or maybe DOPE-11.
I do think there are too many and another opening on a corner near you.
City Council get off your butts and discuss the topic already. Tax the hell out of all of them and see who survives... Then maybe these dispensarys will examine if it is a viable buisness, and the City would not be broke and be able to afford all those 1000 cops they need.
Posted by: Farbie | September 10, 2009 at 09:53 AM
Love how the writers slipped in the "socialist" concept. Surprised that their word choice wasn't "commie"... When is the reasonable science-based argument on whether cannabis can be an effective medicine going to begin? When will the Times join that discussion? I won't be holding my breath.
Posted by: Voice of Reason | September 10, 2009 at 09:53 AM
There is already a law that prohibits alcohol and tobacco from being sold near a school.
Posted by: Brian | September 10, 2009 at 10:00 AM
I wonder how many liquor stores are within 1,000 feet of schools? Dispensaries won't even let you inside unless you have a medical mj card, much less if you're a minor.
I love the fact that there are so many dispensaries in LA because it's proving all the lies about marijuana—told by prohibitionist republicans— wrong on a daily basis. Shouldn't the crime rate be soaring now? With so much good chronic going around, shouldn't there be crazy stoners robbing liquor stores everywhere? Why isn't everyone in LA addicted to smack because the "gateway drug" is so rampant.
This is a great social experiment. Marijuana is everywhere in Los Angeles and nothing is happening. Armageddon has not come.
Posted by: Charles Patterson | September 10, 2009 at 10:00 AM