Media accounts across nation over the last weeks and months paint a portrait of an industry in decline all over California:  Medical Marijuana.  Starting with the Sacramento Bee there remain only eight stores, down from 99 that at one time operated in Sacramento County.  Sacramento City has frozen permit applications for new dispensaries, while Sacramento County is cracking down in the unincorporated areas:

It’s the twilight hour for medical marijuana dispensaries in Sacramento County.

Eight marijuana stores – from as many as 99 dispensaries that opened – are left. Dozens have closed in recent weeks amid fears of federal prosecution and aggressive actions by the county that include litigation and fines for building code violations.

The city of Sacramento has frozen permit applications for existing dispensaries, but has allowed most to stay. Sacramento County’s crackdown in the unincorporated areas, by contrast, is having a dramatic effect on California’s quickly shrinking medical marijuana industry.

The United Food and Commercials Workers Union, which launched a drive to unionize pot workers during the California dispensary boom, estimates 20 percent of marijuana stores statewide have gone out of business in less than a month.

The four United States’ Attorneys have threatened landlords of dispensaries with asset forfeiture and other legal actions, thereby lessening the allure of doing business in this murky drug trade:

Dan Rush, who directs the union’s medical cannabis division, said letters from California’s four U.S. attorneys threatening dispensary landlords with loss of their buildings put a chill on the trade.

“There is a high rate of people closing voluntarily,” Rush said. “They didn’t want to cause trouble for their landlords or they’re closing to get a chance to figure out how to come back in compliance.”

This is one of the reasons the Tri-M partnership has refused to do business with Mr. David Rosenthal, fear of losing their property.  Dispensaries are closing all over the state from Sacramento County to San Diego County, under the burden of the new federal crackdown:

In San Diego, nearly two-thirds of some 220 dispensaries have shut down amid threatened federal property seizures and city lawsuits.

Three well-known San Francisco dispensaries closed after receiving warning letters from U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag. California’s oldest dispensary, the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana, is fighting to stay in business and preparing to pull its cannabis products after a federal suit to seize the property. The dispensary offers other services, including magnetic massage therapy, physician evaluations and counseling.

“We need to move the marijuana very shortly. I don’t want to get the landlord in any more trouble,” said operator Lynette Shaw.

In Sacramento County, Chris Dean said he decided it was too risky to continue in the medical marijuana trade.

A former real estate agent and mortgage broker driven out by the market by the housing collapse, Dean opened the Paradise Wellness dispensary in Carmichael with two partners in May.

In October, they abruptly closed, days after the state’s U.S. attorneys held a Sacramento news conference to announce federal actions against California medical marijuana entrepreneurs.

“It didn’t look good. I was concerned about the safety of my employees,” Dean said. “I didn’t want to get anybody in trouble. I’m a lawful person.”

In Sacramento County, many marijuana stores had stayed open even as the county collected $91,000 in fines against businesses operating in violation of zoning codes. Two months ago, the county began threatening $1,000 daily fines against property owners for building code violations for unpermitted work that converted rental space to dispensaries.

Faced with monthly penalties of $30,000, “the property owners all of a sudden got interested in evicting their tenants,” said Steve Pedretti, the county’s director of building and code enforcement.

Dean said Paradise Wellness had stayed open despite orders to close in hopes that a political accord would be reached to allow dispensaries in Sacramento County.

“I was … thinking this was a cat and mouse game with the county in waiting to get a permit,” Dean said. Ultimately, “with the code enforcement people after us every day, I just felt there was too much opposition.”

The county also filed lawsuits against 11 dispensaries for zoning violations, winning court orders to close some and persuading others to voluntarily cease operating. Three suits are pending against open dispensaries, including the Arcade Wellness Collective on El Camino Avenue, the Herbal Connoisseur on Kitty Lane and Magnolia Wellness in Orangevale.

Rush said crackdowns on medical marijuana businesses statewide have cost as many as 5,000 jobs, including positions in dispensaries, construction, security and other support businesses.

Cannabis magazines and alternative weekly newspapers that got a surge in revenue from dispensary ads are feeling the downturn.

Jeff vonKaenel, publisher of the Sacramento News & Review, saw his circulation leap from from 74,000 to 89,000 as the weekly used medical marijuana advertising dollars to buy up hundreds of news racks it remade with original art and filled with papers.

On Aug. 25, the SN&R’s medical marijuana section – “The 420″ – featured 36 pages and 65 dispensary ads, plus listings for cannabis physicians, hydroponic supply stores and other services. On Nov. 23, the section totaled eight pages, with 11 ads for marijuana stores.

“We never thought medical marijuana (advertising) would be this strong and I never thought it would last this long, frankly, ” vonKaenel said. “We prepared ourselves for that. But I’m not kidding, it’s a blow for us. We’re going to have to prepare for a new reality.”

The Sacramento Bee, which began running medical cannabis business ads on Aug. 26 as a small advertising niche, peaked with four dispensary listings Sept. 16 and last had a marijuana store ad on Oct. 14.

About 25 of 38 dispensaries remain open in the city of Sacramento. The city, which collects a 4 percent tax on medical marijuana sales, froze applications for dispensary business permits but is allowing operators to stay open until Aug. 13.

Dispensaries in the city “are absolutely in a better place” than those in the county, said Caleb Counts, president of the Sacramento Alliance of Collectives.

But Counts said as many as 16 may have to move or close under city discussions to impose a 1,000-foot distance requirement from schools or parks. The new policy is being considered as federal prosecutors threaten to enforce U.S. laws that carry penalties of up to 40 years in prison for drug sales near such sites.

“I think everyone in Sacramento doesn’t know what to think right now,” said Counts, who runs the Fruitridge Health and Wellness Collective in south Sacramento.

Federal authorities in October filed marijuana distribution charges against operators of the R & R Wellness Collective in south Sacramento and raided another location, the MediZen Collective, on Northgate Boulevard. No charges have been filed in the second case. Several other Sacramento dispensaries received letters threatening federal seizures of the properties.

Medical marijuana advocates who challenged the federal actions in court were dealt a setback last week. U.S. District Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong declared she couldn’t stop federal sanctions against dispensaries because “marijuana remains illegal under federal law, and in Congress’ view, it has no medicinal value.”

This weekend, the Christian Science Monitor ran an excellent editorial on Medical Marijuana entitled:  The smokescreen of reclassifying pot for health.  Its main point is that the push for medical marijuana is nothing more than a well-monied national campaign to legalize all pot use:

Too many elected state leaders still fall for the idea that legalizing “medical” marijuana really isn’t about a well-monied national campaign to legalize all pot use.

And yet, truth be told, it is.

The latest twist in this ongoing political ruse is a request by two governors to have marijuana reclassified under federal drug law – even though such an effort is really a sideshow.

On Nov. 30, Gov. Chris Gregoire (D) of Washingtonand Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I) of Rhode Island asked theDrug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to change how marijuana is rated as a drug under the Controlled Substances Act. Their 106-page petition seeks to have cannabis designated for limited medical use – a category known as “Schedule II” – while still retaining its status as a harmful substance with a high potential for abuse.

The governors claim they simply want safe access to pot for the ill in the 16 states that have so far decriminalized pot for medical reasons. Both of them are frustrated by recent federal crackdowns on the trafficking of “medical” marijuana. To protect state employees and others from being prosecuted, they recently killed proposals passed by their legislatures to allow pot dispensaries.

Rather than simply uphold the federal ban, the governors have caved to powerful pro-pot forces that seek legalization through the backdoor. They know the DEA only last July decided not to remove marijuana from Schedule I – the most restrictive category – based on a lack of consensus in the medical field. The agency found “a material conflict of opinion among experts.”

And this was the third time in recent decades that the DEA has denied such a petition.

The federal crackdown picked up steam two months ago in California, where four US Attorneys decided to end the abuse of marijuana dispensaries by thousands of people who have few health problems. Many California dispensaries were also shipping pot around the country.

The raids in California and other states are not aimed at individuals using pot for medical reasons. Rather they are directed at those who profit from the growing or selling of pot – and who extend those sales way beyond “medical” use.

As DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart says, “The known risks of marijuana use have not been shown to be outweighed by specific benefits in well-controlled clinical trials that scientifically evaluate safety and efficacy.”

But of course, the real issue isn’t whether the medical use of pot makes sense (especially when smoked). Instead, governors should simply uphold federal law – and Obama administration policy – that finds marijuana has too many adverse effects.

States should not be frustrating federal law by playing into the hands of the pro-pot legalization campaign.

I happen to agree with the Monitor.   Again, the purpose of the federal crackdown is not aimed at or meant to keep sick individuals from benefiting from legitimate marijuana needs.  Rather, it is a direct result of the abuse inherent in an industry that thrives on making outrageous sums of money from selling a schedule one drug.  The money quote worth reposting:

The federal crackdown picked up steam two months ago in California, where four US Attorneys decided to end the abuse of marijuana dispensaries by thousands of people who have few health problems. Many California dispensaries were also shipping pot around the country.

The raids in California and other states are not aimed at individuals using pot for medical reasons. Rather they are directed at those who profit from the growing or selling of pot – and who extend those sales way beyond “medical” use.

Within the last two weeks the New York Times ran this story:   Medical Marijuana Industry Is Unnerved by U.S. Crackdown.  Some of the relevant points in the story include:

An intensifying federal crackdown on growers and sellers of state-authorized medical marijuana has badly shaken the billion-dollar industry, which has sprung up in California since voters approved medical use of the drug in 1996, and has highlighted the stark contradiction between federal and state policies.

A billion dollar industry.  That’s a lot of stage four cancer and glaucoma patients–isn’t it?

Federal law classifies the possession and sale of marijuana as a serious crime and does not grant exceptions for medical use, so the programs adopted here, in 15 other states and in the District of Columbia exist in an odd legal limbo.

Legal Limbo: This is exactly the primary problem.  The conflict between very clear federal law, and incredibly vague, ambiguous, and contradictory state law in California.

But in the last several weeks, federal prosecutors have raided or threatened to seize the property of scores of growers and dispensaries in California that, in some cases, are regarded by local officials as law-abiding models. At the same time, the Internal Revenue Service has levied large, disputed tax charges against the state’s largest dispensary, threatening its ability to continue.

Even dispensaries which local law enforcement thinks are appropriate may not be from the United States Justice Department’s view.  Do we really want to voluntarily inject this uncertainty and element into our local community?

“The federal and state laws exist in parallel universes,” said Thomas D. Allman, the Mendocino County sheriff, in his office in Ukiah. He is as tough as anyone on the illegal marijuana trade, he said, but “growing and using medical marijuana is a right of a California citizen.”

Now, he said, the 94 collectives that receive permits and plant tags from his office are frightened.

Parallel universe may be just a bit charitable given the circumstances.  The money these so called “legitimate” (under state law) and “non profit” “collectives” generate is mind numbing:

In Oakland, the state’s largest dispensary, Harborside Health Center, sells marijuana and derived products to more than 600 people a day, charging from $25 to $60 per one-eighth of an ounce, with a limit of two ounces per patient per week. Steve DeAngelo, the executive director, described that as “the maximum amount that a medical patient could legitimately consume in a week.”

Registered with the state as a not-for-profit cooperative, Harborside has 95,000 patient-members and 120 employees, takes in $22 million a year and is one of Oakland’s top 10 taxpayers, Mr. DeAngelo said.

In October, the Internal Revenue Service notified the center that it considered it a criminal drug-trafficking organization and said it could not deduct its rent, salaries, counseling and other operations as business expenses. It billed the center for $2.5 million in back taxes, which would destroy the company, said Mr. DeAngelo, who plans to fight the decision in court.

$22 million a year, placing it in the top 10 taxpayers in Oakland:  a stellar example of big business at its finest.

“We’re clearly breaking federal law every day, but we are faithfully following the laws of California and Oakland,” Mr. DeAngelo said. The Supreme Court has ruled that federal criminal law can prevail, but Mr. DeAngelo and others question the Justice Department’s priorities.

Again, a prime example of a California dispensary operating “legally” under the poorly drafted and even more poorly understood California law–but ripe for federal law enforcement and IRS action.   And, why are is the federal government cracking down?  The actual abuse of the intent of the law:

But federal justice officials say the real change is the proliferation of large, commercial enterprises, not their guidelines.

“A lot of the medical marijuana stores that claim to be nonprofit are making lots of money,” Benjamin B. Wagner, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of California, in Sacramento, said in an interview.

He added that prosecutors were skeptical about the medical needs of many buyers. “We’ve found in California that anybody can get a medical recommendation,” he said.

This is hardly a surprise to anyone–and provides further support for the Christian Science Monitor editorial above.  The final portions of the New York Time’s story again makes the strong case for the discrepency between the myths propogated by the medical marijuana industry and the reality of the every day situation:

Even many marijuana advocates agree that state laws governing medical marijuana are inadequate, largely leaving it to local officials to set rules for growing and selling that vary wildly by county. It is also an open secret that a share of doctor-approved buyers do not have plausible medical needs.

On Ocean Front Walk at Venice Beach, for example, touts compete to lure people into shabby clinics with names like Medical Kush Doctor, promising medical recommendations for $45.

“Why don’t they go after the bad actors?” asked Mr. Cohen, the Mendocino County grower. “I’m a strong advocate of tighter regulations.”

State Senator Mark Leno, a Democrat from San Francisco, is now working with Attorney General Harris to devise a state law that would establish more uniform and stringent rules for medical marijuana. But he condemned what he called the federal authorities’ “heavy-handed interventions.”

Even if the state tightens controls and pares back the industry, the central clash, between the federal war on drugs and California’s desire to offer medical marijuana, will remain.

Ms. Harris said she hoped that if the state improved oversight, federal officials would find other priorities. “I’m a career prosecutor,” she said, “and I know that everyone has a lot of obligations and limited resources.”

There are literally dozens more articles out there, from jurisdictions all over the state, setting forth the same facts, same ideas, and same reasons for the federal crackdown by law enforcement.  Unless and until  the federal government re-classifies marijuana from a schedule one drug to something else, federal and state laws will remain in conflict, with no one, including local state officials, being able to intelligently articulate what is or is not acceptable under federal law.

Marijuana dispensaries are in decline all of the state.  The federal government will continue in its law enforcement actions.  The IRS will continue levying fines and confiscating property.  Why on earth do we want to voluntarily inject this element into our local community?

I have no idea of the current status of Mr. David Rosenthal’s application to the county to open a pot dispensary in Nipomo.  I have requested clarification from county planning, but have heard nothing as of yet.  Based on Mr. Rosenthal’s presentation at the SCAC meeting on Monday 11/28/11, it is clear he intends to move forward as though his application is intact.

While the process moves forward, I think it is important to anticipate exactly what Mr. Rosenthal’s dispensary might look like.  Fortunately we have some idea based on Mr. Rosenthal’s current activities as an owner and/or operator of the TerraFarma 420 medical cannabis collective.  Based on his own website, Mr. Rosenthal already operates a county wide clinic via personal delivery service, providing marijuana to individuals all over San Luis Obispo County.  I’m not exactly certain why he needs a brick and mortar building in the Nipomo community given the current status of his TerraFarma 420 “collective.”

The first thing that struck me about Mr. Rosenthal’s current collective is it’s name.  Some names I’ve seen on the Internet based on quick Google searches turn up some of the following:  Herbal Choice Care Givers;  The Kind Alternative; Covington Holistic Medicine; MedCan Delivery; Greenlink Collective–to name just a few.  Instead of marketing his collective with a name related to medical or medicinal images, Mr. Rosenthal explicitly markets his collective with a direct link to the drug counterculture with the “420″ reference.  There is nothing in the name even suggesting it is being marketed toward sick people.  Rather it is a direct marketing reference to the drug counterculture. For some interesting background on the “420″ drug counterculture reference check out the links here, here, here, and here.  Is this the image we want to import into Nipomo at a local pot dispensary?  If you are marketing yourself as a medical or medicinal alternative, why specifically target the current drug counterculture?

What about inside?  How might our community pot dispensary look? Can you imagine row upon row of glass cases filled with the various pot samples available?  The following images are taken directly from Mr. Rosenthal’s TerraFarma 420 website here.

AFGHAN KUSH
Type:	Indica
Grade:	A+
Visual:	Uniquely light brown, node like fowers
Scent:	An earthy, pungeant skunky fragrance.
Taste/ Smoke:	A pure, smooth and lung expanding smoke. Effects felt immediately.
Overall:	Long lasting and stony. Pain and anxiety relieving. Recommended for appetite and stress relief.

.

SUPER LEMON HAZE
Type:	Sativa
Grade:	A++
Visual:	Large to medium compact buds, red hairs, crystals
Scent:	Spicy, earthy, slightly skunky
Taste/ Smoke:	Very smooth, crisp fragrant smoke with fruit undertones.
Overall:	Euphoric and uplifting, good choice for a focused, relaxed feeling.

.

CHERRY  KUSH
Type:	Indica
Grade:	A++
Visual:	Large dense buds
Scent:	Cherry and sweet fruit aroma
Taste/ Smoke:	Very reflective of how the buds smell, a pungent and rich taste strikes the senses. A very smooth smoke. The bomb!
Overall:	Intense body high good for pain, discomfort, stress relief

.

AK47
Type: Indica Grade: A+ Visual: Medium to large compact flowers Scent: Sweet earthy aroma Taste/ Smoke: Lung expanding with a thick pure smoke that reflects the smell of the bud. Overall: Recommended for pain relief, appetite and insomnia. Also works for stress. Although AK47 is an indica, this clear buzz will not leave patience disoriented or couch locked.

.

BLUE DREAM
Type:	Sativa Hybrid
Grade:	A
Visual:	Blue Dream is a beautifully compacted, multicolored bud. Light green with hues of orange, dark green, blue and white.
Scent:	A sweet smelling rich floral aroma as opposed to being citrucy or fruity.
Taste/ Smoke:	Blue Dream is one of the smoothest smoking cannabis strains. A warm flavor that accentuates the original scent.
Overall:	Blue Dream is recommended for depression, inducing creativity and relieving anxiety.

.

BLUEBERRY THAI
Type:	Sativa Hybrid
Grade:	A+
Visual:	Light green with purple undertones
Scent:	Earthy fragrance with a hint of pine
Taste/ Smoke:	Smooth and pleasant.
Overall:	This is an uplifting strain that will please those looking for a “head high”.

.

COTTON CANDY
Type:	Indica
Grade:	A+
Visual:	As the name suggests, this strain smokes sweet and fragrant. Purple with dark green undertones. Rich with red hairs and dark trichomes.
Scent:	A very rich, sweet floral aroma that is expressed with most purple stains.
Taste/ Smoke:	Reflective of it’s floral form,  a dark, rich tasting flavor. A lung expanding smoke.
Overall:	Recommended for any patient who suffers from body pains or headaches. Also works well for insomnia and appetite.

.

ORGANIC  WATER PROCESSED HASH
Type:	Mix of Indica strains
Description:	Dark Blonde – not sticky, dense
Visual:	Looks like hash
Scent:	Earthy floral smoothness
Taste/ Smoke:	Reflective of it’s floral form, this hash has a rich tasting flavor.
Overall:	Recommended for any patient who suffers from body pains or headaches. Also works well for insomnia and appetite.

For a more realistic vision the photos which follow are from actual marijuana clinics currently in operation or which at one time were actually in operation in other locations:

These were from a dispensary operating earlier this year in Longmont Colorado:

This is from inside the Starbudz medical- marijuana clinic which operated in North Hollywood until July 2011 when it was closed by the City Attorney’s Office:

You can Google marijuana clinics and see hundred’s of similar images.  This is the element Mr. Rosenthal wants to bring to Nipomo, with all the attendant and inherent legal, social, and drug related problems that plague marijuana dispensaries all over California.

Finally, it turns out medical cannabis advocates hold an annual medical cannabis competition in San Francisco.  For an interesting selection of photos of what goes on there, please see here, and here.

I am sorry Mr. Rosenthal suffers from lymphoma.  If he truly benefits from smoking marijuana, it appears given his current operating collective he will have a supply sufficient for his needs.  That is also true for the some 400 patients he claims he has helped over the last year.  He can continue to serve those individuals truly in need without coming to Nipomo.  I just don’t see any benefit to Nipomo bringing his current collective to a physical location in our community.  If you feel the same, let our 4th District Supervisor, Paul Teixeira know your thoughts.  His email address is pteixeira@co.slo.ca.us.

To read all prior Marijuana Dispensary posts click here, and scroll down.

More to come . . .

It reads in full:

Mr. Murray,

For your information.  Please call if you have any questions.

Brandon

——– Original Message ——– Subject: general application DRC2011-00024 From: eric gamble <eric@amald.com> Date: Wed, November 23, 2011 7:50 pm To: planning@co.slo.ca.us Cc: william_woodson@hotmail.com

San Luis Obispo County Planning Dept.

RE: Minor Use permit application at 115 Cuyama Ln., Nipomo, CA

To whom it may concern,

It has come to my attention that one David Rosenthal has made application for a Minor Use Permit, reference number DRC2011-00024 through his agent and attorney, Kirby K. Gordon. This application is ostensibly for a property owned by Tri-M Rental Group at 115 Cuyama Ln, Nipomo CA. Let it be known that Mr. Gordon was and is not authorized to sign on behalf of Tri-M Rental Group as an agent or an attorney in fact.

Mr. Gordon approached us regarding his client, David Rosenthal, acquiring this property over one year ago. We declined their offer at that time. Mr. Gordon approached us again a few months ago , Tri-M Rental Group, again declined their offer.

At no time has Tri-M Rental Group authorized any person to make the above application for a use permit and as such this application should be viewed as void.

Please do not hesitate to call me with any questions or clarifications.

Sincerely,

Eric Gamble, Director

Tri-M Rental Group

PO Box 1862 Santa Maria, CA 93456

(805) 348-3600

fac (805) 348-3607

eric@amald.com

I do not know how the county will now view this application or how it will proceed.  Clearly there are at least two versions of the facts about how this application originated, and just who is representing whom.  And, while it might be interesting to pursue which is the most accurate, in my view it just doesn’t matter for purposes of opposing the proposed marijuana dispensary in Nipomo.  My hope is that this application and project have run into sufficient barriers that it is forever derailed and that this applicant, this project will simply go away.  If I obtain any further information I will post it as it becomes available.

As an update to my last post on the Nipomo marijuana dispensary, I spoke again this afternoon with Mr. Brandon Gesicki, of the Abel Maldonado campaign.  Based on my discussion with Mr. Gesicki, I came away with the understanding that Mr. Maldonado has never favored or agreed renting to the individual, i.e., David Rosenthal (named in the application papers filed with the county) seeking to operate a marijuana dispensary in Nipomo.  Mr. Gesicki confirmed that Mr. Maldonado does have an ownership interest (along with other partners) in Tri-M; however, Mr. Gesicki speaks only on behalf of Mr. Maldonado, and not Tri-M.  Mr. Maldonado is a silent partner in the organization.  And, it is Mr. Maldonado’s position that when Mr. Rosenthal first approached the Tri-M partnership about renting the building for a marijuana dispensary, the Tri-M partnership told him no.   They further told Mr. Rosenthal that they would not sell him the subject property so that he could use it as a marijuana facility. 

Mr. Gesicki represented to me that Mr. Rosenthal was never authorized or told he would be able to rent the subject property and operate a marijuana dispensary from that building. I pointed out to Mr. Gesicki that Kirby Gordon, Esq., a local attorney who represents Tri-M–the owner of the subject building, has filed a written application with the County of San Luis Obispo, as of 10/5/11 representing to county officials that in fact Tri-M was going to rent to the subject building to Mr. Rosenthal. I further pointed out to Mr. Gesicki that Tri-M represented to the county, through Mr. Kirby Gordon, that Tri-M knew at the time the application was filed that the building would be used as a marijuana dispensary in Nipomo.  The application appears to be signed by Kirby Gordon, who holds himself out as an authorized agent of Tri-M.  Mr. Gordon is also an attorney, licensed to practice law in the State of California.

I explained to Mr. Gesicki that Mr. Maldonado’s position that Tri-M never approved the building’s use as a marijuana clinic is directly in conflict with the representations made by Mr. Gordon in the application for a minor use permit filed with the County of San Luis Obispo. I also pointed that Mr. Gordon’s signature is just below a clause which states:

LEGAL DECLARATION:
I the record owner of this property have completed this form accurately and declare that all statement here are true. I do hereby grant official representatives of the county authorization to inspect the subject property.

This particular declaration by Mr. Gordon appears to be in direct conflict with Mr. Maldonado’s position about the approval of and use of the building as a marijuana dispensary.  I informed Mr. Gesicki that the SCAC was meeting during their regularly scheduled time next Monday evening, where the subject project would be discussed, as a project officially on the county’s books as a legitimate project and is moving forward through the planning process, of which this meeting next Monday is but one small part.

I requested any written documentation that would support Mr. Maldonado’s, position, and that if provided that I would post it on the Internet. I also requested any written documentation that would suggest Mr. Gordon was not authorized to make representations on behalf of Tri-M.

I have called Mr. Gordon’s office,  in Pismo Beach, left a message, sent him an email and a fax; however, he has not contacted me.  Of course, I have no idea what was or was not discussed in any negotiations between Tri-M and Mr. Rosenthal.  I have no idea what involvement Mr. Maldonado had in the decision making process, other than Mr. Gesicki’s representation that Mr. Maldonado never agreed to having the subject building used as a marijuana dispensary, and is currently opposed to such a use.

I don’t know what representatives, if any will be attending the next SCAC meeting, or whether there will even be a project still in process at that time.  My hope is that there is not.  As I obtain further information, I will make it available online here.

Hi this message is for Guy Murray.  My name’s Brandon, and I work with Abel Maldonado.  Just wanting to call you, and saw or had your blog pointed out to me.  Your information is incorrect.  There was a I guess medical marijuana group that approached the partnership that owns that building for rent.  They denied them.  They even went so far as to try I guess to go to the county to show that they had that they tried to buy the facility–buy the building.  Again, the group that is partially partnered with Able Maldonado denied the medical dispensary.  So I would appreciate if you would update that information.  If you have any questions you can call me at (831)   (Number redacted)         , that’s (831) (Number redacted)      .  Thank you.

I returned Mr. Gesicki’s call last evening; however, I did not hear back from him.  As of this morning’s post, he has still not returned my call.  So, Mr. Gesicki–if you’re still reading, I’m happy to speak with you.  The content of your message raises far more questions in my mind than it answers.  I look forward to speaking with you, and will be happy to post the sum and substance of our conversation if we actually speak.

In a very strange twist to the latest Nipomo Marijuana Dispensary application, the name of Abel Maldonado, California’s former Lt. Governor, past State Senator, Assemblyman, and Santa Maria Mayor has surfaced.  Mr. Maldonado may have an ownership interest in the building to be rented to the applicant wanting to open a marijuana dispensary in Nipomo.  I have attached a 29 page Statement of Economic Interests Form which reflects that Abel Maldonado, Jr. has an ownership interest in Tri-M Rental Group, the same name that appears on the County’s application form as the owner of the building in question.  Here’s the link to the financial disclosure information required of California politicians.  Go to page 14 for details on Tri-M’s ownership interest in the property: Maldonado 2011

Again, the application paperwork is located here, and clearly shows Tri-M Rental Group as the building owner.  Mr. Maldonado’s financial disclosure form clearly establishes he has an ownership interest in a Tri-M Rental Group in Santa Maria.  I have placed a call to Mr. Kirby, whom I believe is representing Tri-M, and probably Mr. Maldonado to confirm this relationship and ownership; however, I have not yet received any response from Mr. Kirby.  The only slim doubt is that the address given for Tri-M in the financial disclosure papers is a street address.  The address given on the application to San Luis Obispo is a P.O. Box.  I have no reason to believe there are two Tri-M Rental Groups operating out of Santa Maria.  I would like to hear from the building owner’s representative to confirm or deny the relationships apparently disclosed by these forms.

I will continue to update this information and more as it becomes available.

As unbelievable as it sounds, San Luis Obispo County is once again considering Nipomo as the location for a marijuana dispensary, despite the overwhelming opposition of Nipomo residents to a similar project almost two years ago.  See local media reports here and here.  The South County Advisory Council (SCAC) will discuss the proposed project at their November 28, 2011 meeting held at the Nipomo Community Service District (NCSD) Board Room at 6:30 p.m.  The meeting location is 148 S. Wilson Street, Nipomo, CA.  If you have an opinion on this issue I am certain the SCAC board welcomes your input.  Please attend and express your opinion to the SCAC.

The project applicants this time are more local than the last go round; however, they still are not local to Nipomo:

Landowner:  Tri-M Rental Group, a General Partner, P.O. Box 1862, Santa Maria, CA; Telephone (805) 348-3600;

Applicant Name: David Rosenthal, 1585 15th St. Los Osos, CA; Telephone (805) 234-8163;

Agent Name: Kirby K. Gordon, Attorney at Law, 760 Mattie Road, A1, Pismo Beach, CA (805) 773-2610

For those in Nipomo who oppose a marijuana dispensary in our community your attendance at and participation in this meeting will be critical.  We need to send a message to the County Board of Supervisors that we do not want to invite this element and the inherent problems it brings into our community.

You can read a copy of the application paperwork here:  Medical Marijuana Dispensary

The proposed location for the dispensary is 115 Cuyama Lane, the site of a former golf shop over in an industrialized section of Nipomo, close to the Santa Barbara County line.  You can see an aerial view here at this link.  Below are some photos of how the location looks and some of the surrounding areas–first starting with the subject location:

Views of the surrounding area:

I have more information and comments to share in subsequent posts.  Please check back and feel free to leave comments sharing your own opinions.

Certainly the web site owner has an agenda.  Still, the video excerpts are disturbing.  Is the 4th Amendment under assault by law enforcement?  Did the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff’s deputies who responded to this particular call go too far and abuse their discretion, violating the 4th Amendment rights of Matt Hart?  My collegue Louis Koory, Esq. a well seasoned civl and criminal trial lawyer is interviewed in this “documentary” as is a former San Luis Obispo Police officer.  They raise some troubling questions about this particular raid.  Questions I would like to hear the two Sheriff’s candidates answer.

How do our current Sheriff Candidates Joe Cortez and Ian Parkinson feel about this raid?  How do they feel about the 4th Amendment?  I am going to post links to this video and article to their Facebook pages and invite them to comment.  I would like to hear their responses.  How about you?  Joe.  Ian.  Any comments?

If you have an opinion about whether Nipomo should have a Marijuana dispensary operating under the guise of “medical marijuana” contact all of the board of supervisors, not just our own supervisor, Katcho.  You can find all the supervisor’s email addresses here.

The applicant’s appeal is here: appeal form- applicant_20100618162319

More to come . . .