Only 41 medical marijuana dispensaries eligible to stay in business, Los Angeles officials say [Updated]
View Marijuana dispensaries in a larger map
Los Angeles city officials announced Wednesday that only 41 medical marijuana dispensaries are eligible to stay in business under the city’s restrictive ordinance, a number so low that the city will suspend the winnowing process and ask a judge to rule that it is legal.
“It was a surprise,” said Jane Usher, a special assistant city attorney who worked closely with the City Council to draft the complex law and is defending it in court.
Rather than move ahead with a selection process that would clearly trigger a spate of lawsuits by disqualified dispensaries, the city attorney’s office decided to sue them first and ask a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge to determine that the city’s process was appropriate.
“We’re trying to be proactive,” Usher said.
Yamileth Bolanos, who runs PureLife Alternative Wellness Center, found out that the city had determined her dispensary was not eligible to continue to operate. “I’m not going to take this lying down,” she said. “This is ridiculous. They have screwed up one thing after another. Not once have they thought about the patients of Los Angeles.”
Los Angeles is already tangling with about 85 dispensaries that have filed almost 30 lawsuits challenging the procedure the City Council adopted Jan. 26 to limit the number of dispensaries. Most of the dispensaries that have sued are among more than 400 ordered to shut down.
The city experienced a dizzying increase in the number of dispensaries when it failed to enforce a pot-shop moratorium put in place in 2007. Under that ban, only 186 dispensaries were approved to operate, but hundreds opened, a trend that accelerated after the Obama administration indicated last spring that it would not raid dispensaries complying with state law.
Judge Anthony J. Mohr is presiding over all the lawsuits and has set a Sept. 21 hearing on constitutional issues. It is unclear how quickly Mohr might act on the lawsuit, which the city attorney’s office intends to file Thursday.
“The judge has considered things very expeditiously to date,” Usher said. “He seems to have a very keen awareness of the harm it causes to the community to leave this unaddressed.”
When the City Council passed the ordinance, it acted on an estimate that about 130 dispensaries might qualify to stay open. Under the ordinance, however, if the number dropped below 70, additional dispensaries would be chosen in a lottery. The total number of dispensaries in the city would then be capped at 70.
City officials said 169 dispensaries applied to be allowed to remain in operation, but 128 failed to meet the stringent criteria. The city clerk's office mailed letters Wednesday to each dispensary notifying it of its status and also posted the list on the office's website. [Corrected at 8:50 p.m.: A previous version of this post said 170 dispensaries applied to remain in operation.]
The ordinance, which became effective June 7, allowed only those dispensaries that had registered by Nov. 13, 2007, to operate during the moratorium. But they also had to show that the ownership and management had not changed, that the management had no major criminal record and that the dispensary was at its original location, or had moved just once after being evicted by landlords who received warning letters from the Drug Enforcement Administration.
“We took a very strict interpretation of the ordinance, and if it didn’t match the ordinance exactly, then we declared them ineligible,” said Holly Wolcott, executive officer for the city clerk.
The city will not seek to shut down the disqualified dispensaries before a court ruling. “As of Tuesday,” Usher said, “the entities that filed notices of intent to register and who fully comply with state law will not be prosecuted under the city’s ordinance.”
-- John Hoeffel








At least the street sales of mexican weed has increased now to offset the lost of Los Angeles collectives.
Posted by: Dr.Pikens | August 25, 2010 at 06:18 PM
Nothing will change until this city, and others, stop looking at medical cannabis as a public safety issue and start looking at it as a public health issue. Patients shouldn't be treated as criminals; state law clearly indicates otherwise.
Obviously, only having 41, or even 70 dispensaries in a city with the size and sprawl of LA is ridiculous. Too bad to see that it will take a State Supreme Court ruling to make access reasonably easy for the city's LAWFUL patients. And believe me, they will. State law very clearly allows buildings to dispense medical cannabis and places the onus on governments to protect access to medication for patients.
Posted by: Adam | August 25, 2010 at 06:19 PM
I dont smoke pot - however, I am sick of funding mexican drug gangs and putting people in expensive prisons for this supposed crime. Legalize it already (and tax it to get some money that we so badly need)
Posted by: Fred | August 25, 2010 at 06:30 PM
These so called "City Officials" need to open their eyes and look at the patients who are using it. The real people. Not what they think because "They" have been brainwashed for over 70 years with the prohibition of marijuana. These so called City officials here in Fresno just tried to shut down 15 dispensaries, however Attorney Brenda Linder, who represents four local dispensaries in Fresno, told the board any effort to shut down the shops would be fought in court. "To shut down existing operations that were operating in good faith under direction of your county agencies and then to go through and shut them down I guarantee you there will be additional litigation."
I'm really surprised that the City of LA just doesn't let the existing Dispensaries stay open, and not allow any new ones to open for Two years like Fresno. With the vote coming in November one would think that would be the smartest thing to do! Then again this is LA were talking about.
Posted by: Jason | August 25, 2010 at 06:54 PM
They keep trying to ban it...a nd yet the city now collects a tax since June on the medical marijuana I am allowed to purchase under California law for the last 14 years.
Posted by: EastHollywood | August 25, 2010 at 07:27 PM
It sounds like these so-called "regulations" really amount to an effort to overturn Prop. 215.
It's very sad that this ignorance and bigotry continues in the face of the accruing scientific evidence of the medicinal value of plant-based cannabinoids.
Posted by: Patricia | August 25, 2010 at 07:33 PM
I'm a medical marijuana patient who suffers from severe osteoarthritis. Hip surgery, rebuilt left knee racing toward replacement, recent surgery on right knee to repair torn meniscus, a right leg nearly severed at the shin from a motorcycle accident years ago which has of course long-term complications...Medical marijuana was a God-send, allowing me to sleep and get on with my day relatively pain-free. There are thousands of folks who have their own story with the same conclusion: Allow us access to this very important pain medication which is FAR less damaging to the system than traditional pain pills!
By the way, just why IS marijuana illegal? Does anybody know? The CDC reports ZERO deaths from pot, while conventional pain meds cause thousands of deaths annually. And certainly alcohol kills a ton of people...So again, just WHY is this plant illegal?
Posted by: Eric of Reseda | August 25, 2010 at 07:51 PM
Most of the existing dispensaries in LA are a joke. They do not have handicapped access, and will sell to anyone, sick or not, making it difficult for those that really are sick to get what they need when they need it. The whole process needs some serious revamping with strictly enforced guidelines, as a real pharmacy would have. Real pharmacists filling prescriptions that require REAL doctors' instructed dosages filled in locations with valid pharmaceutical licensing to start. We continue to treat THC as a recreational drug rather than a medical miracle, therefore, no one takes it's need seriously, and in effect: it becomes harder and harder for those that truly NEED it to GET it legally.
Posted by: Ms Powell | August 25, 2010 at 07:51 PM
The City council failed to act and now things are blowing up right in their face. Jane Usher needs to be relieved of her job, so she helped create an ordinance that is unworkable. Her plan now is to sue the collectives? "the city attorney’s office decided to sue them first" I cant believe she is creating such a liability for the city of Los Angeles.
Posted by: joyce hong | August 25, 2010 at 08:00 PM
This city is a joke and wastes taxpayer money on their incompetence. No wonder this whole state and city is falling in the gutter. A victory against the collectives and shutting them down only helps the cartels.
The violent Mexican Cartels must have half the city government on their payroll.
The less Cali grown weed in each shrinking number of collectives means more money for the cartels to buy their guns and ammo.
This whole thing where the city of L.A. want to shut the barn door after they let it swing wide open is idiocy at it's finest.
Watch the movie IDIOCRACY and you will see the future.
Posted by: jazz master | August 25, 2010 at 09:16 PM
Los Angeles is insane to regulate to death one of the only growth industries left in the city, and arguably even the state and country at large. Not to mention, an industry that helps people live better and happier lives.
Posted by: Tirau | August 25, 2010 at 09:24 PM
props to VHC they made the cut....and by far the best caregivers in LA.
Posted by: the prime suspects"TPSK" | August 25, 2010 at 11:51 PM
$113 billion is spent on marijuana every year in the U.S. and because of the prohibition *all* of it goes straight into the hands of criminals. According to the ONDCP, two-thirds of the Mexican drug cartel's money comes from selling marijuana in the U.S., and they protect this cash flow by brutally torturing, murdering and dismembering thousands of innocent people.
Instead of preventing people from smoking, the prohibition creates zero legal supply amid massive and unrelenting demand - this is where the cartels get the incentive and ability to pay their hitmen.
If we can STOP people using marijuana then we need to do so now, but if we can't then we need to legalize the production and sale of marijuana to adults with after-tax prices set too low for the cartels to match.
One way or the other we have to force the cartels out of the marijuana market and eliminate two-thirds of their income - no business can withstand that!
Posted by: Jillian Galloway | August 26, 2010 at 08:45 AM
Liquor stores can open near schools and churches, medical marijuana dispensaries have a strict identification process.
The list of eligible collectives are some of the most corrupt and large mega-drug dealing houses in LA. They want to keep those open so they can raid them later when big pharma finally decides the move in on this: and the end of marijuana as we know it.
Posted by: Smoker | August 26, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Wonder what criminal money is pushing this ordinance? Nothing in LA happens unless it's about money.
Posted by: Mark | August 26, 2010 at 10:50 AM
Is the city trying to make money or lose it? Los Angeles and California have huge budget deficits. Now our city wants to get itself into a billion dollar lawsuit with savvy dispensary operators who will be sure to tap the city's reserves. All over a flower? What are Jane Usher's qualifications? Has she spent any time with patients or dispensaries? Perhaps she is ineligible!
Posted by: JBF | August 26, 2010 at 11:38 AM
Let the original 186 stay and let them stay where they are at. Hopefully our city council, city clerks, & DAs will be scrutinized more so than these dispensary guys. Do LA like they did Bell! Usually such persecution from above is because of corruptibility within.
Posted by: OldYeller | August 26, 2010 at 11:56 AM
So I guess people who use this medication are being punished. This is one reason why I will vote yes on 19.
Posted by: citizen citizentizen | August 26, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Interesting. I found an error by the city clerk…SOCC@14200 ventura & Buds&Roses@13235 ventura are within 500 feet of eachother, a clear no no according to ordinance. They are both eligible on the list yet dont match the 1000 ft rule between dispensaries. Hmmm. Do they check their lists more than once?
Posted by: TheWatcher | August 26, 2010 at 07:57 PM
If pot is medicine -- make sure it's treated like other drug/medicines. That is, liability and guarantees that if and when this drug-social-experiment goes wrong, the growers, retailers and sellers bear the entire cost of any problems they create for individuals or communities. If you are going to legalize a new drug, it should be subjected, like any new drug, to the scrutiny and control of the FDA and the FTC. The pot crowd wants it both ways -- to be declared a "medicine" and to be unregulated and without liability. These fruits should have to carry massive insurance to cover the cost of any problems arising from their drug's use.
Posted by: Karl O | August 27, 2010 at 06:41 AM
Hey Karl O, have you been paying attention to the scientific validities...have you seen the recent proof that marijuana does not affect your driving...are you oblivious to the fact that the marijuana dispensaries do want regulation, do want to help the state, but now cannot. Do you think the medical marijuana industry wants the same people that have been saying no for over 50 years because of politics to have any say? The FDA and FTC are responsible for allowing drugs/pills that have worse side effects than the original diagnosis. Plus, they need to reclassify marijuana before they even get that far. Karl O, you are the bad apple.
Posted by: ThePunisher | August 27, 2010 at 12:02 PM
My dispensary is Pure Life wellness.What the city is doing to them is disgusting.They had 4 city councilman in there and all four approved it.This sue first ask questions later is typical of this city.You are talking about a state that can not even give gay people rights to marry.This is about our choice.We voted and approved it.I really hate living here!If I had a green thumb,I would grow my own.You people who are against medical marijuana have nothing else going on in your lives that you have to upset everyone else's.We should all move to oakland.They seem to have a better handle on it.
Posted by: tyler | August 27, 2010 at 01:45 PM
This is more dirty, thoughtless, political aggression by the city council. When it comes time to vote against these people, please do so.
Posted by: Swami Xtra | August 27, 2010 at 03:17 PM
the pharmacies (well most of them) are indeed a joke - its just a front to sell weed to people who need it and those who just want it recreationally (most). people should just grow their own. screw the pharmacies. they make a KILLING off that stuff. if they were compassionate they wouldnt charge so much. grow your own, put the collectives out of business. or buy mexican weed.
Posted by: the_Truth | August 27, 2010 at 04:22 PM
The city is on the take looking to protect "their" dispenseries while shutting everybody else's, the City of LA is in the pocket of the Mexican mafia, they'd love to shut down all but the family's own shops.
Posted by: Smitty | August 27, 2010 at 04:38 PM