Dacono MMJ shops ask courts for injunction on citywide ban

Up in Weld County, owners of the three dispensaries in Dacono have filed a complaint to stop a citywide ban on medical marijuana businesses that's scheduled to take effect January 1. Dacono Meds, Maryjane's Medicinal and Green Medicals filed their request for an injunction last Friday, hoping to stay in business at least until voters have a chance to vote on repealing the ban.

The main argument of the pot shops is that the Dacono City Council violated state law when it voted 4 to 2 to ban dispensaries this past June, with proponents arguing that Dacono's reputation was being marred as the small, eight-square-mile town became known as a pot destination for nearby communities. But according to the state medical marijuana code passed by the Colorado Legislature in 2010, municipalities only had until July 1, 2011, to ban marijuana businesses.

The complaint says that if the ban is enforced, it will put the shops out of business entirely and cause them "irreparable harm" -- including forcing the dispensaries to destroy all of their plants and seeds.

Attorney Judd Golden, who filed the suit, points out that a petition calling for a repeal of Dacono's dispensary ban has already been approved for a special ballot in 2013 -- possibly as early as February. And dispensary owners are hopeful that momentum from Amendment 64, which Dacono voters approved, will carry over to that special election. Their filing includes that assumption, noting that "the repeal initiative is likely to succeed, given that a majority of Dacono voters voted in favor" of Amendment 64.

"Plaintiffs cannot reasonably or practically suspend their business operations for five months or more pending the likely favorable outcome of the special election to repeal Ordinance 765," Golden argues. No hearing date has been set on the filing, though Golden says the matter will have to go to court this week in order to get a ruling before the ban takes place in twelve days.

Dacono mayor Charles Sigman did not return our calls for comment.

More from our marijuana news archive: "Marijuana: Tamra Ward, repping employers on task force, says there's no "conflict of interest""; "Amendment 64: Marijuana task force meets for the first time, plots "aggressive timeline"".

My Voice Nation Help
2 comments
South-Park-Ranger
South-Park-Ranger

Well, at least there was a time-frame for banning dispensaries in Am. 20. Under Am. 64, IF anyone is lucky (?) enough to be granted a state license to sell recreational marijuana, they will ALWAYS have to be looking behind their back to see if their city or county will try to ban them. There is no time limit under A64. IF you get a state license to sell recreational dope, you can be banned at any time - 1 year after you set up shop, 5 years after, or 10 years after, or MORE. Another reason why the Am. 64 is set up to fail. You'd have to have pretty deep pockets to be able to take on that kind of risk.

Regulation works -- for the regulators, auditors, investigators, security companies, surveillance companies and other law-enforcement types that will get rich policing things that were never a crime before. Wait until Colorado throws out the THC-police to "regulate" how much THC you can have. Raise your hand if you voted for Am. 64 and think the THC-police are a good idea, so we know who to blame for this cluster-pluck that has become cannabis in Colorado.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 *** Regulation Works!! ***

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

Loading...