One L.A. Marijuana Measure Smokes Two Others 
function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('One L.A. Marijuana Measure Smokes Two Others ');
 site = new Array(5);
 return false;

One L.A. Marijuana Measure Smokes Two Others 
Posted by CN Staff on May 22, 2013 at 04:39:16 PT
By Laura J. Nelson and Kate Linthicum
Source: Los Angeles Times
Los Angeles -- A ballot measure that would reduce the number of pot shops in Los Angeles, but keep some open, took off during early voting returns Tuesday night. With 14% of precincts reporting at 11 p.m., about 64% of voters supported Proposition D, which would keep about 130 dispensaries open.It is one of three measures on Tuesday's ballot that would change regulations on medical marijuana in Los Angeles. The measure with the most votes will win, but only if it receives more than 50% of the vote. If none of the three receives majority approval, they all fail.
Proposition D would shrink the number of pot shops to about 130, allowing only those operating before a failed 2007 city moratorium on dispensaries to stay open. The measure was backed by a coalition of older shops as well as a labor union that has organized workers at many of them.Measure F, which had 43% support in early returns, would place no limit on the number of pot shops but would require them to submit to city audits, test cannabis for toxins, submit to city audits and remain a certain distance from schools, parks and other dispensaries. It was pushed by a coalition of shops that opened after the 2007 moratorium.A third measure, Initiative Ordinance E, had 38% support. That measure would permit only the older shops without raising taxes.Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)Author: Laura J. Nelson and Kate LinthicumPublished: May 22, 2013Copyright: 2013 Los Angeles TimesContact: letters latimes.comWebsite:  Medical Marijuana Archives 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help 

Comment #3 posted by Hope on May 22, 2013 at 11:52:31 PT
I've noticed this before...
People, our fellow man, our citizens, our neighbors, our government have no trouble at all going un-constitutional, anti-rights, and anti-capitalism on people when it comes to the involvement of cannabis.It's always amazing to see. And it's always so wrong.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by Sam Adams on May 22, 2013 at 08:42:48 PT
this seems awful to me - this is not something that should be voted on, this is the civil right to operate business. The tyranny of the majority comes into play on civil rights. It should not be voted onImagine if votes were held to allow certain minority religions the right to build a church, etc, it would always fail and they'd be screwed. Many jurisdictions in the US, if not entire states, would absolutely support banning alcohol if votes were held.They are going to shutter hundreds of productive, wealth-generating businesses in LA over this.  Going to 130 outlets is a Prohibition referendum. Call it what it is.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by FoM on May 22, 2013 at 04:42:48 PT
How will they decide on which ones stay and which ones must close? I hope it will be fair and not favor one over another.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment