The City of Anderson lost its first court skirmish Tuesday, Nov. 22, when Shasta County Superior Court Judge Stephen H. Baker, District 3, denied the city’s emergency request for a temporary restraining order to close a medical marijuana collective operating in spite of a city zoning ordinance banning such businesses.
“The court did not make any finding on the validity of the city’s ordinance” or on the city’s request for a preliminary injunction, said attorney Daniel S. Roberts of Irvine, a partner in Best Best & Krieger, LLP, the same firm in which City Attorney Ann M. Siprelle of Sacramento is also a partner.
However, the presiding judge did deny the city’s request for an emergency temporary restraining order because the city did not adequately show any immediate or overriding cause for the action.
Roberts is considered the firm’s expert on medical marijuana issues and will represent the city in all issues of this nature, he explained Wednesday via telephone.
The next round, a preliminary injunction against The Green Heart collective, was scheduled for Jan. 3. The additional time will allow attorneys for both sides to “fully present their arguments for consideration on the matter,” Roberts said.
Judge Baker presided during a 15-minute hearing that started shortly after 1:15 p.m., parties on both sides of the argument told the Valley Post.
“We are still open. We are still providing medicine to our clients,” said collective owner Gina Munday via cell phone as she was leaving the county courthouse at 2 p.m.
Gina attended the hearing accompanied by her husband, Joe Munday, and several supporters including former Anderson City Council member Rodney Jones, now representing NORML, a nonprofit National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws.
The Munday’s attorney, James DeAguilera of Redlands, made his argument to block the temporary restraining order by telephone conference call.
Attending as interested parties on the city’s side were Anderson City Council member John Day, his wife Donna Day, and Kristen Maze, Anderson's director of development services.
“I wasn't there to represent the city. I just wanted to see the proceedings,” Maze said Tuesday, Nov. 22, when contacted by telephone.
“I could tell things were not going to go in our favor when the judge announced beforehand that he was in favor of not granting the temporary restraining order, but that he would listen to the arguments from the attorneys before making a ruling,” Maze said.
Judge Baker was probably mindful of the precedent it would set since the City of Redding is facing similar legal challenges to its recent decision to shut down 23 medical marijuana collectives with more than 10 clients each, noted Anderson City Manager Dana Shigley.
“At this point, all we know is that they have denied the temporary restraining order that we sought,” Shigley said during a telephone interview Tuesday, Nov. 22. “We've held off on using our administrative powers to levy fines or penalties under our new code enforcement guidelines because we were going to court and we thought we could expedite it that way.”
City officials may decide Wednesday, Nov. 30, during a 3 p.m. special closed session meeting whether to pursue other options at their disposal, she noted.
“We have all the confidence in the world in our ordinance. We are going to fight to defend our ordinance,” Shigley said.
The city’s request for an emergency restraining order and preliminary injunction against the business is a cross complaint, Roberts said, to a lawsuit filed on behalf of the collective that is seeking more than $25,000 in damages, legal fees and related court costs from the city for enacting a zoning ordinance that took effect Nov. 3.
The Munday’s attorney James DeAguilera claims that zoning ordinance violates the U.S. Constitution.
An initial status conference on that matter had originally been scheduled for 10:30 a.m. Jan. 30, also in front of Judge Baker.
“The court may decide to amend that schedule” when both parties meet Jan. 3, Roberts said.
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 3
just_an_observer writes:
Instead of following the State Law and Attorney General Guidelines. The City of Anderson determined it is above the laws with their ordinances.
Instead of wasting tax payer dollars fighting suits the city could have avoided legal battles by designing an ordinance everyone could live with or just follow the State of California laws.
Ignoring State laws and creating a growing ordinance that clearly violates state law by creating a penalty when Proposition 215 specifically states "no criminal prosecution or sanction."
Then in the body of the ordinance there is a section for "Criminal Penalty" is a direct violation of State law. And violates the constitutional authority given by the State to create these vary ordinances.
What ever the costs the City will get exactly what they deserve, at a severe cost to the taxpayers of the City of Anderson.
Close businesses, create more empty buildings, reduce the taxes paid to the city because they don't like a plant that God created for human consumption.
Ignorance is bliss
TheKid writes:
Gotta concur. When are they going to realize that mj use is not going to go away not matter how hard they try. People prefer it over alcohol. End this stupid prohibition and tax it! Too many lives wasted over this already.
GreenLeaf writes:
They should welcome any business that wants to open in Anderson. What! A total wellness center that could really help the sick that are seeking treatment..the only people coming to Anderson is to get to Cottonwood. Ok we have walmart and movies..ok cannabis to, 3 things now. LOL
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.