Beverly Hills and 24 other local governments sued on Friday to overturn a ruling that allows licensed cannabis delivery statewide. The cities argue that the rule undermines Proposition 64—which guaranteed cities and counties local control over cannabis activities.
Since California’s legalization of adult cannabis use in 2016 through Prop 64, it has failed to see the fiscal growth that other legal states such as Colorado and Oregon have experienced. This is attributed to 80 percent of the state’s municipalities having banned commercial cannabis activity or not setting up rules to allow for legal sales—effectively cutting off residents in those areas from legal purchases.
Marijuana companies and consumers pushed for statewide home delivery to provide access to legal cannabis within these so-called, “pot deserts.
buy neurontin online http://www.suncoastseminars.com/assets/png/neurontin.html no prescription
” In July 2018, Proposition 64 was modified to allow door-to-door delivery from licensed cannabis delivery services throughout the state.
buy premarin online http://www.suncoastseminars.com/assets/png/premarin.html no prescription
Opponents of the ruling contend that their prohibition of marijuana within their localities should extend to deliveries also.
In addition to Beverly Hills, the lawsuit’s plaintiffs include, Santa Cruz County, the cities of Agoura Hills, Angels Camp, Arcadia, Atwater, Ceres, Clovis, Covina, Dixon and Downey. McFarland, Newman, Oakdale, Palmdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Riverside, San Pablo, Sonora, Tehachapi, Temecula, Tracy, Turlock and Vacaville are also participating in this early court test of California’s Proposition 64.
Share your thoughts
Wallin and Klarich would like to hear from you. Do you think local municipalities and governments have the right to completely ban a substance that the state voted overwhelmingly for its legalization? Let us know in the comments below.