Los Angeles Dispensary Ban Delayed ››

Los Angeles Dispensary Ban Delayed... At Least for Now Kali Mist

A look at the implications of the ban and the wider effort to keep the dispensaries open

In the fight to keep the dispensaries of Los Angeles in business, the dedicated efforts of a handful of owners, activists and unionized workers have paid off – for now, at least. Having gathered

around 50,000 signatures in just nine days, their collective endeavors have forced a postponement of the proposed ban, Ordinance 182190. The petition signatures must be counted and verified, and sufficient valid signatories may legally oblige the City Council to permanently suspend the ordinance. The verification process will take 15 to 45 days; once the signatures are verified, L.A.’s dispensary ban will be postponed until the primary election ballot in March of 2013, where it will be voted on in a public referendum.

On September 5th, 2012, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich issued a statement on the municipal website confirming the stay, while emphasizing the illegality of medical marijuana as a land use. Dispensaries have been closed in the past for contravening land-use laws, as it is not legally possible to acquire the

appropriate permit – whether or not a tax registration certificate has been issued. This is the legal basis for the proposed legislation, which seeks to shut down all dispensaries; the implication is that police actions will continue to occur in the near future. This has been interpreted as a thinly-veiled threat by many dispensary owners, one that ostensibly is in the interest of public safety – but in reality tightens con-

trol and keeps those establishments that do not voluntarily close in a state of fear and uncertainty.

The clear and immediate response to the ban is a heartening indication of public opinion. The number of signatures gathered was more than double the required number to overturn the ban, and the organized nature of the response demonstrates just how dedicated the movement has become. Another positive move, albeit a compromise, is Councilman Paul Koretz’s proposal that dispensaries opened prior to 2008 should be allowed to continue operating. This would account for over 200 establishments, so if the proposal is carried forward it could afford protection to a large number of vulnerable shops and could drastically limit the damage that could be done to the city infrastructure, crime rate and

civic confidence, if the ban was to be enforced. have opened in the Eagle Rock neighborhood since the ban was first voted on; these have attracted an influx of visitors from nearby neighborhoods with dispensary bans, such as Pasadena.

The arguments against the proliferation of dispensaries are basic. Although around eighty percent of L.A.’s population is pro-medical marijuana – at least, in theory – even very tolerant parents may draw the line at exposing their children to people smoking weed on the street outside the dispensaries. There are also many suggestions that areas with dispensaries undergo increases in loitering, littering and reselling. This has led to a situation where even pro-medical voters are beginning to speak out against the prolific increase of shops in certain areas, adding fuel to the fire of the abolitionists. However, the response to the proposed ban clearly shows that while there is some disquiet regarding the more questionable establishments, the public fully supports the availability of safe, laboratory-tested medical Cannabis.

Of the hundreds of dispensaries currently operating within L.A., only 182 are licensed by the Los Angeles City Council. Since the moratorium on new licenses was issued in 2007, an estimated 600 to 900 further dispensaries opened up without licenses by using an exemption designed to protect dispensaries facing ‘hardship’. Many of these unlicensed establishments are particularly at risk of closure and their uncertain status gives them little legal power, but their owners and customers argue that their existence is necessary to fully meet demand.

However, 2011’s Measure M, a voterapproved initiative taxing Cannabis outlets, saw the number of Los Angeles dispensaries registered with the city increase to 762. The number of cityregistered dispensaries in July of 2012, when the ban was passed, stood firm at 762 in total – even these registered shops are at some risk of closure.

There are an estimated 350,000 medical marijuana patients in L.A. (according to the Union of Medical Marijuana Patients), whose needs are met by the

Market Street Cooperative, a casualty of San Francisco closures (© Goodnight London)

L.A.’S DISPENSARY BAN WILL BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE PRIMARY ELECTION BALLOT IN MARCH OF 2013.

Patients should have access to professional-quality pot (© Neon Tommy)

approximately 1000 dispensaries currently in operation. With increasing numbers of medi-weed patients, as the stigma fades the uses multiply, and the desire to seek alternatives to pharmaceuticals becomes ever stronger. We can expect that the capacity to supply this customer base will be easily met by the existing (and still growing) number of shops, but demand will be far harder to meet if we close down half of them. If the federal government were to succeed in its ultimate goal of eradicating

the dispensaries entirely, these 350,000 patients, with a legal right to access and use safe forms of their medication, could be forced back into illegal transactions.

The effort to ban dispensaries involves rewording the city charter to specifically disallow storefront dispensaries, as they are not expressly forbidden otherwise. However, the original language of Proposition 215 only explicitly gave permission for those with a doctor’s recommendation to grow their own Cannabis for personal use. The argument that allowing medical marijuana does not implicitly allow for commercial cultivation is often cited by opponents of storefront dispensaries, particularly the larger, highly-profitable organizations. Nonetheless, medi-weed patients are often physically, mentally or financially incapable of cultivating professional-grade plants, and rely upon the expertise of others to guarantee the strength, quality and effect they specifically require. Completely shutting down large, well-organized enterprises (such as Harborside Health Center in Oakland, which was served with eviction papers in July, 2012) has the effect of de-legitimizing the business in the eyes of society – for few valid reasons –

and depriving hundreds of thousands of patients of their vital medication.

The controversial Wietpas (‘Weed Pass’) system currently undergoing trials in the south of the Netherlands has already shown undeniable signs of utter failure, in that coffeeshop sales have plummeted to the point that many establishments face closure, and the level of street dealing has exploded in that same time. Authorities in Maastricht are already proposing to suspend the pass – as so few residents are prepared to sign up to the customer database – and have suggested that proof of address, along with a Dutch ID, will henceforth be sufficient to purchase Cannabis. sense of complacency to arise if the intention is to strip it away; demand does not lessen in response to prohibition, and the economy that has arisen around the industry will find new ways to reach its logical conclusion. It is the ages-old argument against prohibition, and it’s painfully obvious how valid it is. Furthermore, once accustomed to a certain degree of quality, it is cruel and unusual punishment to force patients to go back underground, to potentially dangerous criminals, with no guarantee of the product being free of contaminants.

There is an almost inexhaustible demand for medical marijuana; reducing the number of dispensaries is disin-

genuous, and as always, sensible regulation appears to be the only answer. Allowing the market to naturally reach saturation point and achieve an equilibrium, whereby the wheat will be separated from the chaff and the unneeded or second-rate establishments will ultimately be forced to close, would be ideal.

Unfortunately, unchecked proliferation of Cannabis distribution points causes its own problems – although arguably due to the fact that these policies are not universal, and relaxed laws in one neighborhood attract traffic from more restrictive areas nearby. Therefore, limitations on new establishments may well be appropriate, but arbitrary raids on existing ones do more harm than good. Costs saved by ceasing the raids could go towards funding better regulatory systems and guidelines, such as stipulating that outside areas are kept clear of ‘loitering’ customers.

As it stands, federal raids on Los Angeles dispensaries continue, just as throughout California, even as other states opt to allow medi-weed. The disconnect is becoming ever more painful, and the outlook is far from rosy. The large tax revenues that various municipalities have collected from licensed sales are apparently not enough to prevent further closures from occurring, as is the case with the Harborside Health Center,

which has contributed millions of dollars in taxes – as well as tens of millions to the local community.

Many cities in California (including Lake Forest and Costa Mesa) have already imposed outright municipal bans, although the Supreme Court has yet to decide on the legality of such a move. In the case of Long Beach, the recent disastrous attempt to limit the number of licenses issued, based upon a zip code ‘lottery’, ultimately failed at Los Angeles Superior Court-level, due to both contravention of state law and the inherent federal violation of attempting to control or regulate the distribution of marijuana. However, that was

THE RATE OF NEW ESTABLISHMENTS OPENING IN LOS ANGELES HAS SLOWED, BUT NOT BY A GREAT DEAL.

Many patients are unable to cultivate to a high standard (© Neon Tommy)

Edibles will be much harder to source illegally (© Eggrole)

THERE ARE AN ESTIMATED 350,000 MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS IN L.A., WHOSE NEEDS ARE MET BY THE APPROXIMATELY 1000 DISPENSARIES CURRENTLY IN OPERATION.

not before dozens of establishments, which had each paid a $15,000 license application fee, were raided and shut down. Furthermore, the city then changed its ordinance to prohibit dispensaries from opening within 1,000 feet of a beach or park, effectively invalidating the license applications of establishments that had actually won the controversial ‘lottery’! Added to this bizarre and confusing process are plentiful rumors of official corruption, which are in fact being investigated by the FBI, including favoritism and rigging of the notorious draw for licenses. Around the country, DEA raids have led to numerous closures since 2011: 23 in Washington, 26 in Montana, and dozens in California, among many more. In Lake Forest alone, federal raids saw all 38 dispensaries closed down by November, 2012; in Costa Mesa all 27 establishments were shut down in just two months, with the final one closing its doors in March, 2012. Added to this, a plethora of bewildering proposals and amendments have tightened the net even further, leaving dispensary owners in a permanent state of confusion over their future. These closures ultimately led to the Supreme Court ruling that cities do not have the right to ban dispensaries, but in the case of Lake Forest at least, none of the shuttered storefronts have reopened.

This war will be long and hard-fought, and unfortunately the biggest losers will be the patients, as well as the would-be legitimate business owners. For some, the temptations of illegal dealing are beginning to outweigh the laborious, expensive and time-consuming ordeal of setting up as a legal business – simply evading taxes and permits can save thousands of dollars. Separately, raids foster resentment and lack of faith in the legal system, leading to further disaffected potential street dealers. If this trend continues, coupled with the abundance of cultivated marijuana, there could be an explosion of street dealers and an associated rise in crime, which is exactly what legislation is intended to prevent.

Blood-Brain Barrier and Pharmacokinetics Sativa Diva

While some people don’t really care how Cannabis works – as long as it does – others are quite interested in the pharmacological action of the drug. By studying three scientific topics, it becomes a little easier to understand how the drug acts inside our bodies, as well as why we get high.

Smoked Cannabis crosses the blood-brain barrier in around ten seconds

What is the blood-brain barrier?

The blood-brain barrier or BBB is just that: a central nervous system line of defense between the blood circulating through our bodies, and the BECF (brain extracellular fluid). The BBB is the main reason the human body can endure extreme injuries and infections, as not many substances are

capable of passing through. The cerebrospinal fluid or CSF is protected by endothelial cells, which prevent microscopic intrusion from bacteria and other pathogens, as well as larger molecules. These same cells allow the transfer of glucose, white blood cells and other helpful substances. In addition to prevention and protection, and occurring along all capillaries, the BBB cells are also capable of transporting substances (e.g., oxygen, hormones, carbon dioxide) across the barrier.

As too-large antibodies are incapable of crossing the barrier, the BBB is luckily able to prevent most bacterial or viral infections that might otherwise affect the brain. Unfortunately, however, if drugs are administered through the CSF, they are often unable to penetrate the BBB unless the barrier is inflamed – even antibiotics and cancer treatments. What is unique about this barrier is that it does allow cannabinoids to penetrate and bind with the body’s transmembrane cannabinoid receptors, such as CB1 and CB2, mimicking the action of the

neurotransmitter anandamide, an endocannabinoid produced within our bodies. Within about ten seconds of taking a toke, the plant’s drugs cross the double-cell barrier and release a flood of wonderful feelings – which is why Cannabis has been the most widely-used illicit drug in human history and predates pharmacology.

While it may seem shocking that cannabinoids can penetrate a barrier that other substances cannot, this can explain the plant’s efficacy at being an anti-inflammatory, analgesic and even a neuroprotective antioxidant. What is even more unusual is that certain animal studies have expressed the ease with which the metabolite of Δ-9-THC, known as 11-OH-Δ-9-THC, enters the brain – more easily than Δ-9 in its original form. This concentrated metabolite has a greater effect on the CNS due to its uptake in much higher quantities, possibly explaining why heavy smokers require four to eight weeks of sobriety before they feel entirely ‘clean’ again. In addition, there is evidence to support the theory that 11-OH-Δ-9-THC deposits in the liver after consumption and continues to impact the brain.

THE BLOOD-BRAIN BARRIER ALLOWS CANNABINOIDS TO PENETRATE AND BIND WITH THE BODY’S TRANS-MEMBRANE CANNABINOID RECEPTORS.

Pharmacokinetics and Cannabis

Although much research is dedicated to the effects of drugs on our bodies, much more attention is now being paid to the actions of our bodies upon the drugs. Effectively, pharmacokinetics is the study of the body’s effect on drugs, testing aspects such as the mechanism and absorption of substances, rate of uptake and duration of effect, chemical changes or metabolic processes in the body relating to the substance, and excretion activity of the drug’s metabolites by tracking enzyme action. This is important because of the long half-life that Cannabis displays inside the human body, as not only do the plant’s drugs settle throughout certain human tissues and fat deposits, but the metabolized form of certain cannabinoids may continue to affect the user, or compound further drug use.

The pharmacokinetic process is known as ADME, with the latent addition of ‘L’. A regards the absorption of the substance into the bloodstream; D refers to the dissemination (distribution) of the drug or compound throughout the body’s fluids and tissues. The next step in the testing process is M for metabolism, also known as bio-transformation, as drugs are irreversibly changed into different substances. Finally, E regards the excretion of the substances which, when combined with metabolism, eliminates the substance from the body – this includes the observation that, in rare cases, some drugs never entirely exit our systems. The latter-day addition of an L for liberation accounts for how the drug is actually released from its formulation, which can lead to more effective prescriptions, more accurate dosage, etc.

Pharmacokinetic research reveals much about drugs that we cannot see: this scientific discipline often proves that, for example, different administration sites affect uptake rate, effectiveness and duration. Differing dosages of the same drug can have highly differing – and unusual – effects. These ideas have been represented anecdotally, especially in the Cannabis community, but through pharmacokinetics, scientists can actually prove these effects empirically. Now we know for certain that eating or drinking cannabinoidinfused products has a distinctly different effect on the body than smoking inhaled cannabinoids. Even so, vaporizing inhaled cannabinoids also presents a different action inside the body than smoking. With this information, the medical Cannabis community should be able to more effectively medicate its patients.

Eating cannabinoid-infused products will impart a delayed effect, different than smoking

Pharmacodynamics

Conversely to pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics studies the effects of drugs on the body and both faculties are often studied in conjunction. This can be done in several ways: patient testimony and feedback, controlled pharmacological studies on humans, and animal testing. While it seems quite obvious that drugs affect us when they are consumed, it is important to understand exactly how they work and why they do what they do. Opponents of Cannabis legalization look forward to negative results from clinical studies of the drug; however, even positive results can be manipulated or selectively reported to make a particular drug look more dangerous than it is.

Likewise, pro-pot advocates have often been accused of focusing solely upon an abundance of non-empirical information to promote only the positive aspects of recreational and medical Cannabis use. Detractors tend to ignore the actual scientific research that proves cannabinoids can actually protect the body, from killing tumor cells to stimulating brain tissues. For this reason, it is especially important that both pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic research continues.