Councilman Perry Woodward warns that if the city pursues an
ongoing legal battle to shut down the MediLeaf marijuana dispensary
which opened up on First Street without a business license, it
could cost between $300,000 and $600,000.
Councilman Perry Woodward warns that if the city pursues an ongoing legal battle to shut down the MediLeaf marijuana dispensary which opened up on First Street without a business license, it could cost between $300,000 and $600,000.
But the four council members who voted to pursue legal action to shut down the dispensary haven’t changed their minds.
The battle’s not worth it for Councilman Peter Arellano. “These court things can go on forever,” he said. “I don’t know how deep their pockets are.”
Wednesday, the City Council revisited the Nov. 16 resolution passed behind closed doors that allowed the city to take legal action against the city’s lone medical marijuana dispensary.
Council members Craig Gartman, Perry Woodward and Peter Arellano maintain that the city should not pursue a costly legal battle against MediLeaf, and they believe the council violated open government laws by approving a resolution in closed session on Nov. 16 that allowed the city attorney to take action against MediLeaf. Superior Court Judge Kevin Murphy chastised the Council for violating the state’s open government law, the Brown Act, which governs public meetings, before he denied the city a preliminary injunction on Dec. 15 that would have shut down the dispensary pending a trial.
Mayor Al Pinheiro and council members Cat Tucker, Dion Bracco and Bob Dillon believe that the city’s legal counsel has done everything that the council has asked of it, and that the closed session vote on Nov. 16 adhered to the Brown Act.
While details regarding the MediLeaf saga continue to change, the 4-3 vote split on matters pertaining to the dispensary remain the same, even though Woodward and Gartman say the open government issues were completely different from matters pertaining to the dispensary itself.
Gartman, Woodward and Arellano believe they acted on principle by refusing to join the Nov. 16 closed session. They contend zoning and licensing matters should have been discussed publicly.
“To me, there’s a failure to look at the cold hard reality that’s staring the city in the face in light of its failure in court,” Woodward said.
City Administrator Tom Haglund notified Woodward last week that Berliner-Cohen estimated it had spent $37,300 on litigation so far, although some of the work that has been done also could be useful in a trial. In addition, the case could drag on for several years even if the city succeeds in a trial, as MediLeaf could appeal, Woodward said.
Opponents of MediLeaf also believe they are acting on principle by taking action against an entity that opened without city approval, regardless of the cost.
“What it gets down to, to me is, are you going to enforce your rules or not?” Councilman Bob Dillon said.
He said Tuesday that he has no problem with the amount that the city has spent on litigation thus far.
Similarly, Pinheiro said the council made its decision on MediLeaf in October, and it should now act as a unified body. Unlike Woodward, he believes Berliner-Cohen has represented the city well over the years.
“They’ve got a magnitude of expertise at their firm,” Pinheiro said.
Council members who favor taking MediLeaf to court say that no violation of state laws occurred on Nov. 16. However, Pinheiro said the city would be wise to take the advice of its legal counsel to protect itself.
City Attorney Linda Callon maintained in a memo to council members that the council has not violated the Brown Act, but that “we (at Berliner-Cohen) think it is in the best interests of the City Council to take this opportunity to effect a cure should a court view the situation differently from our analysis.”
The staff report notes that the council also will discuss the possibility of banning medical marijuana dispensaries.
If the council continues with litigation, both sides will likely begin the process of depositions and discovery.
“I don’t imagine anyone will see the inside of a courtroom from six months to a year,” Dillon said.
Still, MediLeaf representatives will be on hand to try to persuade the council to reach an agreement with the dispensary rather than continue the suit.
MediLeaf ombudsman Eric Madigan said it is not in anyone’s interest to continue litigation.
“At a certain point, you have to ask, ‘Where is the money going to?'” he said of the lawsuit.
He noted that cities in California that are pursuing outright bans of medical marijuana dispensaries are facing a slew of lawsuits.
Regardless of the final outcome of the case, one thing is certain: the community commotion surrounding the cannabis collective is unlikely to die down anytime soon.
When stating his views, Pinheiro summarized the sentiments of council members on both sides of the litigation debate: “We need to protect the city.”
