Preview
1 XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
2 HARINDER K. KAPUR
Senior Assistant Attorney General
3 STACEY L. ROBERTS
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
4 ROBERT TOMLIN WHITE
State Bar No 222504
5 ETHAN A. TURNER
Deputy Attorney General
6 State Bar No. 294891
600 West Broadway, Suite 1800
7 San Diego, CA 92101
P.O. Box 85266 E-FILED
8 San Diego, CA 92186-5266 10/21/2020 5:46 PM
Telephone: (916) 210-7898 Superior Court of California
9 Fax: (916) 327-2319 County of Fresno
E-mail: Ethan.Turner@doj.ca.gov By: J Nelson, Deputy
10 Attorneys for Defendants
Bureau of Cannabis Control and Lori Ajax, Chief of
11 the Bureau of Cannabis Control
12 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
13 COUNTY OF FRESNO
14
15
COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, ET AL., Case No. 19CECG01224
16
Plaintiffs,
17 DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO
v. PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF
18 REGARDING RIPENESS
19 BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL;
LORI AJAX, in her official capacity as Dept: 403
20 Chief of the Bureau of Cannabis Control; Judge: Hon. Rosemary T. McGuire
and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Trial Date: November 16, 2020
21 Time: 10:00 AM
Defendants. Action Filed: April 4, 2019
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
2 Page
3 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 10
Argument ...................................................................................................................................... 11
4
I. Justiciability: The Doctrines of Ripeness and Standing Both Requre
5 Dismissal ............................................................................................................... 11
A. Ripeness ................................................................................................... 11
6
B. Standing Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1086........................... 11
7 II. Plaintiffs Do Not Have Standing and This Case is Unripe Because
Plaintiffs Ordinances are Not contrary to the Delivery Regulation ...................... 12
8
A. Plaintiffs Have Failed to Submit Evidence Proving Their
9 Ordinances Are Preempted by the Delivery Regulation ........................... 12
B. State Preemption of Local Ordinances ..................................................... 13
10
1. There is No Duplication ................................................................ 14
11 2. There is No Contradiction ............................................................. 16
12 3. The Delivery Regulation Does Not Expand the Field of
State Regulation or Operate to Expressly or Impliedly
13 Preempt Local Ordinances ............................................................ 17
III. An Analysis of Each of Plaintiffs’ Ordinances Demonstrates That They
14 Are Not Contrary to the Delivery Regulation ....................................................... 18
15 A. Plaintiffs That Require State Licensees to Obtain Local Licenses
Or Permits ................................................................................................. 19
16 1. The City of Angels Camp ............................................................. 21
17 2. The City of Atwater ...................................................................... 22
3. The City of Ceres .......................................................................... 23
18
4. The City of Riverbank ................................................................... 24
19 5. The City of Tracy .......................................................................... 25
20 B. Plaintiff Jurisdictions that Ban All Retail Activity, Including
Delivery ..................................................................................................... 25
21 1. The City of Agoura Hills............................................................... 28
22 2. The City of Arcadia....................................................................... 29
3. The City of Clovis ......................................................................... 30
23
4. The City of Covina ........................................................................ 31
24 5. The City of Downey ...................................................................... 31
25 6. The City of McFarland .................................................................. 32
7. The City of Newman ..................................................................... 34
26
8. The City of Palmdale .................................................................... 34
27 9. The City of Riverside .................................................................... 36
28 10. The City of San Pablo ................................................................... 36
2
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
2 Page
3 11. The City of Tehachapi ................................................................... 37
C. Plaintiff Jurisdictions that Ban Deliveries by Non-local Businesses ....... 39
4
1. The City of Dixon ......................................................................... 40
5 2. The City of Oakdale ...................................................................... 41
6 3. The County of Santa Cruz ............................................................. 41
4. The City of Sonora ........................................................................ 42
7
5. The City of Turlock ....................................................................... 43
8 D. Jurisdictions That Ban All Delivery; Ban Only Adult-Use
Delivery; Or, Impose No Restrictions on Delivery................................... 44
9
1. The City of Patterson .................................................................... 44
10 2. The City of Beverly Hills .............................................................. 44
11 3. The City of Temecula.................................................................... 45
4. The City of Vacaville .................................................................... 45
12
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 46
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 CASES
2 Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. S.F. Airports Com.
(1999) 21 Cal.App.4th 352 (Associated Builders) ....................................................................12
3
4 Baldwin v. County of Tehama
(1994) 31 Cal.App.4th 166 .......................................................................................................14
5
Big Creek Lumber Co. v. County of Santa Cruz
6 (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1139 (Big Creek)....................................................................................13, 17
7 Braude v. City of L.A.
(1990) 226 Cal.App.3rd 83, 87 .................................................................................................27
8
Cal. Assn. of Medical Products Suppliers v. Maxwell-Jolly
9
(2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 286 .....................................................................................................11
10
California Grocers Assn. v. City of L.A.
11 (2011) 52 Cal.4th 177 ...............................................................................................................21
12 City and County of S.F. v. Post
(2018) 22 Cal.App.5th 121 .......................................................................................................13
13
City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center, Inc.
14
(2013) 56 Cal.4th at 744 (Riverside) ................................................................................. passim
15
Cohen v. Bd. of Supervisors (1985) 40 Cal.3d 277, 298-299 .........................................................14
16
County of San Luis Obispo v. Sup. Ct.
17 (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 288 .......................................................................................................27
18 Fisher v. City of Berkeley
(1984), 37 Cal.3d 644 ...............................................................................................................21
19
Grant v Board of Med. Examiners
20
(1965) 232 Cal.App.2d 820.......................................................................................................27
21
Great Western Shows, Inc., v. County of L.A.
22 (2002) 27 Cal.4th 853 (Great Western Shows) .......................................................14, 16, 20, 21
23 Kirby v. County of Fresno
(2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 940 (Kirby) ...................................................................................13, 14
24
L.A. v. Shell Oil. Co.
25 (1971) 4 Cal.3d 108 ..................................................................................................................39
26
Morehart v. County of Santa Barbara
27 (1994) 7 Cal.4th 725 .................................................................................................................20
28
4
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 Northern Cal. Psychiatric Society v. City of Berkeley
(1986) 178 Cal.App.3d 90...................................................................................................13, 21
2
O’Connel v. City of Stockton
3
(2007) 41 Cal.4th 1061 .............................................................................................................16
4
Pacific Legal Foundation v. Cal. Coastal Comm.
5 (1982) 33 Cal.3d 158 (Pacific Legal) .......................................................................................11
6 San Diego County Veterinary Medical Assn. v. County of San Diego
(2004) 116 Cal. App.4th 1129 ..................................................................................................42
7
Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach
8 (2011) 52 Cal.4th 155 (Save the Plastic Bag) ...........................................................................12
9
Schmier v Supreme Court
10 (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 703 .......................................................................................................27
11 Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of L.A.
(1993) 4 Cal.4th 893 (Sherwin-Williams) .....................................................................16, 17, 21
12
Stonehouse Homes LLC v. City of Sierra Madre
13 (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 531 .....................................................................................................11
14
T-Mobile West LLC v. City and County of S.F.
15 (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 334 .........................................................................................................13
16 Tosi v. County of Fresno
(2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 799 .....................................................................................................19
17
STATUTES
18
Agoura Hills Municipal Code
19 § 1200, subd. (a) ........................................................................................................................28
20 § 9660.2.C .................................................................................................................................28
21 Angel’s Camp Municipal Code
§ 5.10.040 ..................................................................................................................................21
22 § 5.10.090.C ..............................................................................................................................22
23 Arcadia Municipal Code
§ 9.101.02.040.E.5 ....................................................................................................................29
24 § 9101.01.040.E.4.a ..................................................................................................................29
25 § 9101.02.040.D ........................................................................................................................29
§ 9101.02.040.E.3.b ..................................................................................................................29
26
Atwater Municipal Code
27 § 5.60.050 ..................................................................................................................................22
§ 5.60.120 ..................................................................................................................................22
28
5
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 Beverly Hills Mun. Code, § 10-3-4703.A .......................................................................................44
2 Business and Professions Code
Division 10 ................................................................................................................................45
3
§ 16000 ......................................................................................................................................21
4 § 16000 ......................................................................................................................................38
§ 16000 et seq. ..........................................................................................................................20
5 § 16100 et seq. ..........................................................................................................................20
§ 26012 .............................................................................................................................. passim
6 § 26030, subdivision (e) ......................................................................................................17, 25
§ 26055 ....................................................................................................................15, 21, 33, 38
7
§ 26055, subd. (a) ......................................................................................................................15
8 § 26055, subd. (g)(1) .................................................................................................................15
§ 26055, subd. (g)(2)(d) ............................................................................................................15
9 § 26070.5 ...................................................................................................................................16
§ 26080, subdivision (b)..........................................................................................33, 35, 38, 46
10 § 26090 .............................................................................................................................. passim
11 § 26200 .............................................................................................................................. passim
§ 26201 .............................................................................................................................. passim
12
California Code of Civil Procedure § 1085...............................................................................11, 12
13
Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act...............................................................................................10
14
Ceres Municipal Code
15 § 5 9.120.060 .............................................................................................................................23
§ 5.04.010 ..................................................................................................................................23
16
§ 9.120.040 ................................................................................................................................23
17 § 9.120.060 ................................................................................................................................23
18 Clovis Municipal Code
§ 5.22.07 ....................................................................................................................................30
19 section 5.22.09 ..........................................................................................................................30
§ 55.22.05, subd. (c) ..................................................................................................................30
20
Code of Civil Procedure § 1086 ................................................................................................11, 12
21
22 Covina Municipal Code
§ 1.16 .........................................................................................................................................31
23 § 17.84.040 ................................................................................................................................31
§ 17.84.040.C ............................................................................................................................31
24 § 17.85.030 ................................................................................................................................31
25 Dixon Municipal Code
26 § 6.12.080.A ..............................................................................................................................40
§ 6.12.080.B ..............................................................................................................................40
27 § 6.12.120, subd. A ...................................................................................................................40
28
6
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 Downey Municipal Code
§ 1200 et seq. ............................................................................................................................32
2 § 9204 ........................................................................................................................................32
3 § 9248.06-08 .............................................................................................................................31
§ 9428.14 ...................................................................................................................................31
4
Government Code
5 § 11350 ................................................................................................................................10, 12
§ 25132 ......................................................................................................................................42
6 § 25845 ......................................................................................................................................42
§ 36900, subd. (a) ......................................................................................................................22
7
§ 36901 ................................................................................................................................31, 40
8 § 37101 ................................................................................................................................20, 22
§ 38771 ......................................................................................................................................22
9 § 53069.4 .............................................................................................................................23, 42
10 Health and Safety Code
§ 11359 ......................................................................................................................................28
11
§ 11362.1 ........................................................................................................................... passim
12 § 11362.2 .............................................................................................................................31, 35
§ 13869.7 ...................................................................................................................................20
13 § 18941.5subd.(b) .....................................................................................................................20
§ 26080(b) .................................................................................................................................29
14 § 101025 ....................................................................................................................................20
15 Marijuana Act..................................................................................................................................39
16
MAUCRSA ............................................................................................................................. passim
17
McFarland Municipal Code
18 § 17.08.050 ................................................................................................................................32
§ 5.04.040 ..................................................................................................................................32
19 § 5.04.045, subd. B ...................................................................................................................32
§ 5.04.045, subd. C ...................................................................................................................33
20 § 5.04.290 ..................................................................................................................................33
21
Newman Municipal Code
22 § 8.07.020, subd. (B) .................................................................................................................34
§ 8.07.020, subd. D ...................................................................................................................34
23
Palmdale Municipal Code
24 § 1.12.020 ..................................................................................................................................35
§ 1.12.030 ..................................................................................................................................35
25
§ 5.05.020, subd. (C) .................................................................................................................34
26 § 5.05.030 ..................................................................................................................................35
§ 5.05.040 ..................................................................................................................................35
27 § 5.05.080 ..................................................................................................................................35
28
7
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 Patterson Municipal Code
§ 6.56.060.A & C ......................................................................................................................44
2 § 6.56.080.C ..............................................................................................................................44
3
Revenue and Taxation Code, § 7284 ..............................................................................................20
4
Riverbank Municipal Code
5 § 110.19 .....................................................................................................................................24
§ 120.50 .....................................................................................................................................24
6
Riverside Municipal Code
7 Chapter 1.17 ..............................................................................................................................36
§ 19.342.020 ..............................................................................................................................36
8
§ 19.342.070 ..............................................................................................................................36
9
San Pablo Municipal Code
10 § 17.62.130 ................................................................................................................................37
§ 17.62.130, subd. D .................................................................................................................36
11 § 17.62.130, subd. G .................................................................................................................37
12 Santa Cruz County Code, § 7.130.050, subd. (C) ...........................................................................42
13
Tehachapi Municipal Code
14 § 11.10.020 ................................................................................................................................38
§ 6.20.170.B.1 ...........................................................................................................................38
15 § 6.20.170, subd. B.1 ................................................................................................................37
16 Temecula Municipal Code § 8.52.040.D ........................................................................................45
17 Tracy Municipal Code
§ 6.36.020 ..................................................................................................................................25
18
§ 6.36.040, subd. (a)(v) .............................................................................................................25
19 § 6.36.460 ..................................................................................................................................25
20 Vacaville Municipal Code
§ 9.13.030 ..................................................................................................................................45
21 § 9.13.040 ..................................................................................................................................46
22 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
23 California Constitution, Article XI
24 § 7 ............................................................................................................................20, 22, 38, 42
25 Federal Constitution ........................................................................................................................39
26 OTHER AUTHORITIES
27 American Legal Publishing Corporation ........................................................................................24
28
8
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 California Code of Regulations, Title 16
§ 5416 (d) ..................................................................................................................................10
2 § 5416, subd. (d) ...........................................................................................................10, 18, 26
3
MC Arcadia, CA .............................................................................................................................29
4
Palmdale Municipal Code ...............................................................................................................35
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 INTRODUCTION
2 On August 5, 2020, this Court issued its Tentative Ruling which stated that it
3 “acknowledges that plaintiffs filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief [, but] elects
4 to treat the complaint as a writ of mandate.” (Tentative Ruling (TR), p. 1.) The Court’s Tentative
5 Ruling then continued, “parties are ordered to brief the issue of ripeness with respect to each and
6 every plaintiff,” and Plaintiffs “that alleged standing must submit evidence to show that they have
7 an ordinance in place which is contrary to the California Code of Regulations, title 16 section
8 5416 (d)” (Delivery Regulation). 1 (TR, p. 2.)
9 In accordance with the Court’s order, the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau) and Lori
10 Ajax, Chief of the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Defendants) demonstrate herein that the case is
11 unripe and that every Plaintiff in this matter lacks standing. This is because the Delivery
12 Regulation does not apply to Plaintiffs and could never be applied in any way that interferes with
13 any actual rights of the Plaintiffs or implicate any duty of the Defendants. While it is the case
14 that both Proposition 64 and the Medicinal and Adult Use of Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act
15 (MAUCRSA) contained provisions that do expressly preempt some types of local ordinances, the
16 Delivery Regulation has no such effect. The Delivery Regulation states, in part, that “[a] delivery
17 employee may deliver to any jurisdiction within the State of California.” (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 16,
18 § 5416, subd. (d).) The Delivery Regulation does not apply to local jurisdictions. (Ibid.) Instead,
19 it applies to licensed retailers that deliver cannabis. (Ibid.) Because the Delivery Regulation does
20 not and cannot be applied to Plaintiffs, the Delivery Regulation does not preempt (i.e., it is not
21 contrary to) any of the Plaintiffs’ ordinances. Accordingly, there is no ripe controversy and
22 Plaintiffs do not have standing to bring this action.
23
24
25
1
Prior to the hearing on August 6, 2020, Defendants objected to the admissibility of Plaintiffs’ ordinances because
26 they are outside the administrative record and should not be considered in an action for declaratory relief under GC
section 11350. (GC, § 11350, subd. (d).) However, at the hearing, Defendants withdrew their objection based on the
27 Court’s order, and acknowledged that in a writ proceeding where it is alleged that there is an actual controversy
involving application of the regulation to the ordinances themselves, reference to the ordinances is appropriate.
28
10
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 ARGUMENT
2 I. JUSTICIABILITY: THE DOCTRINES OF RIPENESS AND STANDING BOTH
REQURE DISMISSAL
3
4 This case should be dismissed because the doctrines of ripeness and standing preclude this
5 Court from exercising its judicial authority. Because the Delivery Regulation does not apply to
6 Plaintiffs and applies only to licensees (meaning that Plaintiffs’ ordinances are not contrary to the
7 Delivery Regulation), this case is not ripe and the Plaintiffs do not have standing.
8 A. Ripeness
9 As Defendants set forth the case law addressing what constitutes a ripe controversy in their
10 Trial Brief, which was also adopted in part in the Court’s Tentative Ruling (Defendants’ Trial
11 Brief (DTB), pp. 12-16; TR, pp. 1-2.), Defendants will not repeat that analysis here. Rather,
12 Defendants will address this Court’s specific request to identify whether Plaintiffs “have an
13 ordinance in place which is contrary” to the Delivery Regulation through the application of the
14 California Supreme Court’s ripeness test set forth in Pacific Legal Foundation v. Cal. Coastal
15 Comm. (1982) 33 Cal.3d 158, 171 (Pacific Legal). In order to determine whether a matter is ripe
16 for adjudication, courts evaluate (1) the fitness of the issues for judicial decision, and (2) the
17 hardship to the parties of withholding court consideration. (Pacific Legal, supra, 33 Cal.3d 158,
18 171; see also Stonehouse Homes LLC v. City of Sierra Madre (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 531, 540.)
19 As shown below, this case is unripe as to all Defendants.
20 B. Standing Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1086
21 California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 1085 “authorizes a trial court to issue a
22 writ of mandate to compel an act which the law specifically requires. A petitioner ... is required
23 to show the existence of two elements: a clear, present and usually ministerial duty upon the part
24 of the respondent, and a clear, present and beneficial right belonging to the petitioner in the
25 performance of that duty.” (Cal. Assn. of Medical Products Suppliers v. Maxwell-Jolly (2011) 199
26 Cal.App.4th 286, 302.) In reviewing a petition under the CCP section 1085, a trial court's role
27 generally is to “determine whether the agency’s action was arbitrary, capricious, or without
28 evidentiary support, and/or whether it failed to conform to the law. The trial court may not
11
Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224)
1 substitute its judgment for that of the agency or force the agency to exercise its discretion in a
2 certain way.” (Ibid.)
3 “[S]tanding is jurisdictional.” (Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. S.F. Airports
4 Com. (1999) 21 Cal.App.4th 352, 361 (Associated Builders).) A party must be “beneficially
5 interested” to have standing to seek a writ of mandate under Government Code (GC) section
6 1085. (Code Civ. Proc, § 1086.) 2 A government agency has standing to sue another government
7 agency if the challenger can meet the “over-and-above” standard:
8 [O]ne may obtain the writ [of mandamus] only if the person has some special interest
to be served or some particular right to be preserved or protected over and above the
9 interest held in common with the public at large. . . One who is in fact adversely
affected by governmental action should have standing to challenge that action if it is
10 judicially reviewable.
11 (Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach (2011) 52 Cal.4th 155, 165 (Save the
12 Plastic Bag) (internal quotes and citations omitted)); Associated Builders, supra, 21 Cal.App.4th
13 352, 361.)
14 As the California Supreme Court emphasized in Save the Plastic Bag, “the beneficial
15 interest must be direct and substantial.” (Save the Plastic Bag, supra, 52 Cal.4th 155, 165.) Here,
16 Plaintiffs fail to establish standing because they do not have a direct and beneficial interest in a
17 regulation that does not apply to them, as set for
Preview
1 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California 2 HARINDER K. KAPUR Senior Assistant Attorney General 3 STACEY L. ROBERTS Supervising Deputy Attorney General 4 ROBERT TOMLIN WHITE State Bar No 222504 5 ETHAN A. TURNER Deputy Attorney General 6 State Bar No. 294891 600 West Broadway, Suite 1800 7 San Diego, CA 92101 P.O. Box 85266 E-FILED 8 San Diego, CA 92186-5266 10/21/2020 5:46 PM Telephone: (916) 210-7898 Superior Court of California 9 Fax: (916) 327-2319 County of Fresno E-mail: Ethan.Turner@doj.ca.gov By: J Nelson, Deputy 10 Attorneys for Defendants Bureau of Cannabis Control and Lori Ajax, Chief of 11 the Bureau of Cannabis Control 12 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13 COUNTY OF FRESNO 14 15 COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, ET AL., Case No. 19CECG01224 16 Plaintiffs, 17 DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO v. PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 18 REGARDING RIPENESS 19 BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL; LORI AJAX, in her official capacity as Dept: 403 20 Chief of the Bureau of Cannabis Control; Judge: Hon. Rosemary T. McGuire and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Trial Date: November 16, 2020 21 Time: 10:00 AM Defendants. Action Filed: April 4, 2019 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Page 3 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 10 Argument ...................................................................................................................................... 11 4 I. Justiciability: The Doctrines of Ripeness and Standing Both Requre 5 Dismissal ............................................................................................................... 11 A. Ripeness ................................................................................................... 11 6 B. Standing Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1086........................... 11 7 II. Plaintiffs Do Not Have Standing and This Case is Unripe Because Plaintiffs Ordinances are Not contrary to the Delivery Regulation ...................... 12 8 A. Plaintiffs Have Failed to Submit Evidence Proving Their 9 Ordinances Are Preempted by the Delivery Regulation ........................... 12 B. State Preemption of Local Ordinances ..................................................... 13 10 1. There is No Duplication ................................................................ 14 11 2. There is No Contradiction ............................................................. 16 12 3. The Delivery Regulation Does Not Expand the Field of State Regulation or Operate to Expressly or Impliedly 13 Preempt Local Ordinances ............................................................ 17 III. An Analysis of Each of Plaintiffs’ Ordinances Demonstrates That They 14 Are Not Contrary to the Delivery Regulation ....................................................... 18 15 A. Plaintiffs That Require State Licensees to Obtain Local Licenses Or Permits ................................................................................................. 19 16 1. The City of Angels Camp ............................................................. 21 17 2. The City of Atwater ...................................................................... 22 3. The City of Ceres .......................................................................... 23 18 4. The City of Riverbank ................................................................... 24 19 5. The City of Tracy .......................................................................... 25 20 B. Plaintiff Jurisdictions that Ban All Retail Activity, Including Delivery ..................................................................................................... 25 21 1. The City of Agoura Hills............................................................... 28 22 2. The City of Arcadia....................................................................... 29 3. The City of Clovis ......................................................................... 30 23 4. The City of Covina ........................................................................ 31 24 5. The City of Downey ...................................................................... 31 25 6. The City of McFarland .................................................................. 32 7. The City of Newman ..................................................................... 34 26 8. The City of Palmdale .................................................................... 34 27 9. The City of Riverside .................................................................... 36 28 10. The City of San Pablo ................................................................... 36 2 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) 2 Page 3 11. The City of Tehachapi ................................................................... 37 C. Plaintiff Jurisdictions that Ban Deliveries by Non-local Businesses ....... 39 4 1. The City of Dixon ......................................................................... 40 5 2. The City of Oakdale ...................................................................... 41 6 3. The County of Santa Cruz ............................................................. 41 4. The City of Sonora ........................................................................ 42 7 5. The City of Turlock ....................................................................... 43 8 D. Jurisdictions That Ban All Delivery; Ban Only Adult-Use Delivery; Or, Impose No Restrictions on Delivery................................... 44 9 1. The City of Patterson .................................................................... 44 10 2. The City of Beverly Hills .............................................................. 44 11 3. The City of Temecula.................................................................... 45 4. The City of Vacaville .................................................................... 45 12 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 46 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 CASES 2 Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. S.F. Airports Com. (1999) 21 Cal.App.4th 352 (Associated Builders) ....................................................................12 3 4 Baldwin v. County of Tehama (1994) 31 Cal.App.4th 166 .......................................................................................................14 5 Big Creek Lumber Co. v. County of Santa Cruz 6 (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1139 (Big Creek)....................................................................................13, 17 7 Braude v. City of L.A. (1990) 226 Cal.App.3rd 83, 87 .................................................................................................27 8 Cal. Assn. of Medical Products Suppliers v. Maxwell-Jolly 9 (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 286 .....................................................................................................11 10 California Grocers Assn. v. City of L.A. 11 (2011) 52 Cal.4th 177 ...............................................................................................................21 12 City and County of S.F. v. Post (2018) 22 Cal.App.5th 121 .......................................................................................................13 13 City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center, Inc. 14 (2013) 56 Cal.4th at 744 (Riverside) ................................................................................. passim 15 Cohen v. Bd. of Supervisors (1985) 40 Cal.3d 277, 298-299 .........................................................14 16 County of San Luis Obispo v. Sup. Ct. 17 (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 288 .......................................................................................................27 18 Fisher v. City of Berkeley (1984), 37 Cal.3d 644 ...............................................................................................................21 19 Grant v Board of Med. Examiners 20 (1965) 232 Cal.App.2d 820.......................................................................................................27 21 Great Western Shows, Inc., v. County of L.A. 22 (2002) 27 Cal.4th 853 (Great Western Shows) .......................................................14, 16, 20, 21 23 Kirby v. County of Fresno (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 940 (Kirby) ...................................................................................13, 14 24 L.A. v. Shell Oil. Co. 25 (1971) 4 Cal.3d 108 ..................................................................................................................39 26 Morehart v. County of Santa Barbara 27 (1994) 7 Cal.4th 725 .................................................................................................................20 28 4 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 Northern Cal. Psychiatric Society v. City of Berkeley (1986) 178 Cal.App.3d 90...................................................................................................13, 21 2 O’Connel v. City of Stockton 3 (2007) 41 Cal.4th 1061 .............................................................................................................16 4 Pacific Legal Foundation v. Cal. Coastal Comm. 5 (1982) 33 Cal.3d 158 (Pacific Legal) .......................................................................................11 6 San Diego County Veterinary Medical Assn. v. County of San Diego (2004) 116 Cal. App.4th 1129 ..................................................................................................42 7 Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach 8 (2011) 52 Cal.4th 155 (Save the Plastic Bag) ...........................................................................12 9 Schmier v Supreme Court 10 (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 703 .......................................................................................................27 11 Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of L.A. (1993) 4 Cal.4th 893 (Sherwin-Williams) .....................................................................16, 17, 21 12 Stonehouse Homes LLC v. City of Sierra Madre 13 (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 531 .....................................................................................................11 14 T-Mobile West LLC v. City and County of S.F. 15 (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 334 .........................................................................................................13 16 Tosi v. County of Fresno (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 799 .....................................................................................................19 17 STATUTES 18 Agoura Hills Municipal Code 19 § 1200, subd. (a) ........................................................................................................................28 20 § 9660.2.C .................................................................................................................................28 21 Angel’s Camp Municipal Code § 5.10.040 ..................................................................................................................................21 22 § 5.10.090.C ..............................................................................................................................22 23 Arcadia Municipal Code § 9.101.02.040.E.5 ....................................................................................................................29 24 § 9101.01.040.E.4.a ..................................................................................................................29 25 § 9101.02.040.D ........................................................................................................................29 § 9101.02.040.E.3.b ..................................................................................................................29 26 Atwater Municipal Code 27 § 5.60.050 ..................................................................................................................................22 § 5.60.120 ..................................................................................................................................22 28 5 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 Beverly Hills Mun. Code, § 10-3-4703.A .......................................................................................44 2 Business and Professions Code Division 10 ................................................................................................................................45 3 § 16000 ......................................................................................................................................21 4 § 16000 ......................................................................................................................................38 § 16000 et seq. ..........................................................................................................................20 5 § 16100 et seq. ..........................................................................................................................20 § 26012 .............................................................................................................................. passim 6 § 26030, subdivision (e) ......................................................................................................17, 25 § 26055 ....................................................................................................................15, 21, 33, 38 7 § 26055, subd. (a) ......................................................................................................................15 8 § 26055, subd. (g)(1) .................................................................................................................15 § 26055, subd. (g)(2)(d) ............................................................................................................15 9 § 26070.5 ...................................................................................................................................16 § 26080, subdivision (b)..........................................................................................33, 35, 38, 46 10 § 26090 .............................................................................................................................. passim 11 § 26200 .............................................................................................................................. passim § 26201 .............................................................................................................................. passim 12 California Code of Civil Procedure § 1085...............................................................................11, 12 13 Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act...............................................................................................10 14 Ceres Municipal Code 15 § 5 9.120.060 .............................................................................................................................23 § 5.04.010 ..................................................................................................................................23 16 § 9.120.040 ................................................................................................................................23 17 § 9.120.060 ................................................................................................................................23 18 Clovis Municipal Code § 5.22.07 ....................................................................................................................................30 19 section 5.22.09 ..........................................................................................................................30 § 55.22.05, subd. (c) ..................................................................................................................30 20 Code of Civil Procedure § 1086 ................................................................................................11, 12 21 22 Covina Municipal Code § 1.16 .........................................................................................................................................31 23 § 17.84.040 ................................................................................................................................31 § 17.84.040.C ............................................................................................................................31 24 § 17.85.030 ................................................................................................................................31 25 Dixon Municipal Code 26 § 6.12.080.A ..............................................................................................................................40 § 6.12.080.B ..............................................................................................................................40 27 § 6.12.120, subd. A ...................................................................................................................40 28 6 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 Downey Municipal Code § 1200 et seq. ............................................................................................................................32 2 § 9204 ........................................................................................................................................32 3 § 9248.06-08 .............................................................................................................................31 § 9428.14 ...................................................................................................................................31 4 Government Code 5 § 11350 ................................................................................................................................10, 12 § 25132 ......................................................................................................................................42 6 § 25845 ......................................................................................................................................42 § 36900, subd. (a) ......................................................................................................................22 7 § 36901 ................................................................................................................................31, 40 8 § 37101 ................................................................................................................................20, 22 § 38771 ......................................................................................................................................22 9 § 53069.4 .............................................................................................................................23, 42 10 Health and Safety Code § 11359 ......................................................................................................................................28 11 § 11362.1 ........................................................................................................................... passim 12 § 11362.2 .............................................................................................................................31, 35 § 13869.7 ...................................................................................................................................20 13 § 18941.5subd.(b) .....................................................................................................................20 § 26080(b) .................................................................................................................................29 14 § 101025 ....................................................................................................................................20 15 Marijuana Act..................................................................................................................................39 16 MAUCRSA ............................................................................................................................. passim 17 McFarland Municipal Code 18 § 17.08.050 ................................................................................................................................32 § 5.04.040 ..................................................................................................................................32 19 § 5.04.045, subd. B ...................................................................................................................32 § 5.04.045, subd. C ...................................................................................................................33 20 § 5.04.290 ..................................................................................................................................33 21 Newman Municipal Code 22 § 8.07.020, subd. (B) .................................................................................................................34 § 8.07.020, subd. D ...................................................................................................................34 23 Palmdale Municipal Code 24 § 1.12.020 ..................................................................................................................................35 § 1.12.030 ..................................................................................................................................35 25 § 5.05.020, subd. (C) .................................................................................................................34 26 § 5.05.030 ..................................................................................................................................35 § 5.05.040 ..................................................................................................................................35 27 § 5.05.080 ..................................................................................................................................35 28 7 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 Patterson Municipal Code § 6.56.060.A & C ......................................................................................................................44 2 § 6.56.080.C ..............................................................................................................................44 3 Revenue and Taxation Code, § 7284 ..............................................................................................20 4 Riverbank Municipal Code 5 § 110.19 .....................................................................................................................................24 § 120.50 .....................................................................................................................................24 6 Riverside Municipal Code 7 Chapter 1.17 ..............................................................................................................................36 § 19.342.020 ..............................................................................................................................36 8 § 19.342.070 ..............................................................................................................................36 9 San Pablo Municipal Code 10 § 17.62.130 ................................................................................................................................37 § 17.62.130, subd. D .................................................................................................................36 11 § 17.62.130, subd. G .................................................................................................................37 12 Santa Cruz County Code, § 7.130.050, subd. (C) ...........................................................................42 13 Tehachapi Municipal Code 14 § 11.10.020 ................................................................................................................................38 § 6.20.170.B.1 ...........................................................................................................................38 15 § 6.20.170, subd. B.1 ................................................................................................................37 16 Temecula Municipal Code § 8.52.040.D ........................................................................................45 17 Tracy Municipal Code § 6.36.020 ..................................................................................................................................25 18 § 6.36.040, subd. (a)(v) .............................................................................................................25 19 § 6.36.460 ..................................................................................................................................25 20 Vacaville Municipal Code § 9.13.030 ..................................................................................................................................45 21 § 9.13.040 ..................................................................................................................................46 22 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS 23 California Constitution, Article XI 24 § 7 ............................................................................................................................20, 22, 38, 42 25 Federal Constitution ........................................................................................................................39 26 OTHER AUTHORITIES 27 American Legal Publishing Corporation ........................................................................................24 28 8 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 California Code of Regulations, Title 16 § 5416 (d) ..................................................................................................................................10 2 § 5416, subd. (d) ...........................................................................................................10, 18, 26 3 MC Arcadia, CA .............................................................................................................................29 4 Palmdale Municipal Code ...............................................................................................................35 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 9 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 INTRODUCTION 2 On August 5, 2020, this Court issued its Tentative Ruling which stated that it 3 “acknowledges that plaintiffs filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief [, but] elects 4 to treat the complaint as a writ of mandate.” (Tentative Ruling (TR), p. 1.) The Court’s Tentative 5 Ruling then continued, “parties are ordered to brief the issue of ripeness with respect to each and 6 every plaintiff,” and Plaintiffs “that alleged standing must submit evidence to show that they have 7 an ordinance in place which is contrary to the California Code of Regulations, title 16 section 8 5416 (d)” (Delivery Regulation). 1 (TR, p. 2.) 9 In accordance with the Court’s order, the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau) and Lori 10 Ajax, Chief of the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Defendants) demonstrate herein that the case is 11 unripe and that every Plaintiff in this matter lacks standing. This is because the Delivery 12 Regulation does not apply to Plaintiffs and could never be applied in any way that interferes with 13 any actual rights of the Plaintiffs or implicate any duty of the Defendants. While it is the case 14 that both Proposition 64 and the Medicinal and Adult Use of Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act 15 (MAUCRSA) contained provisions that do expressly preempt some types of local ordinances, the 16 Delivery Regulation has no such effect. The Delivery Regulation states, in part, that “[a] delivery 17 employee may deliver to any jurisdiction within the State of California.” (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 16, 18 § 5416, subd. (d).) The Delivery Regulation does not apply to local jurisdictions. (Ibid.) Instead, 19 it applies to licensed retailers that deliver cannabis. (Ibid.) Because the Delivery Regulation does 20 not and cannot be applied to Plaintiffs, the Delivery Regulation does not preempt (i.e., it is not 21 contrary to) any of the Plaintiffs’ ordinances. Accordingly, there is no ripe controversy and 22 Plaintiffs do not have standing to bring this action. 23 24 25 1 Prior to the hearing on August 6, 2020, Defendants objected to the admissibility of Plaintiffs’ ordinances because 26 they are outside the administrative record and should not be considered in an action for declaratory relief under GC section 11350. (GC, § 11350, subd. (d).) However, at the hearing, Defendants withdrew their objection based on the 27 Court’s order, and acknowledged that in a writ proceeding where it is alleged that there is an actual controversy involving application of the regulation to the ordinances themselves, reference to the ordinances is appropriate. 28 10 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 ARGUMENT 2 I. JUSTICIABILITY: THE DOCTRINES OF RIPENESS AND STANDING BOTH REQURE DISMISSAL 3 4 This case should be dismissed because the doctrines of ripeness and standing preclude this 5 Court from exercising its judicial authority. Because the Delivery Regulation does not apply to 6 Plaintiffs and applies only to licensees (meaning that Plaintiffs’ ordinances are not contrary to the 7 Delivery Regulation), this case is not ripe and the Plaintiffs do not have standing. 8 A. Ripeness 9 As Defendants set forth the case law addressing what constitutes a ripe controversy in their 10 Trial Brief, which was also adopted in part in the Court’s Tentative Ruling (Defendants’ Trial 11 Brief (DTB), pp. 12-16; TR, pp. 1-2.), Defendants will not repeat that analysis here. Rather, 12 Defendants will address this Court’s specific request to identify whether Plaintiffs “have an 13 ordinance in place which is contrary” to the Delivery Regulation through the application of the 14 California Supreme Court’s ripeness test set forth in Pacific Legal Foundation v. Cal. Coastal 15 Comm. (1982) 33 Cal.3d 158, 171 (Pacific Legal). In order to determine whether a matter is ripe 16 for adjudication, courts evaluate (1) the fitness of the issues for judicial decision, and (2) the 17 hardship to the parties of withholding court consideration. (Pacific Legal, supra, 33 Cal.3d 158, 18 171; see also Stonehouse Homes LLC v. City of Sierra Madre (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 531, 540.) 19 As shown below, this case is unripe as to all Defendants. 20 B. Standing Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1086 21 California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 1085 “authorizes a trial court to issue a 22 writ of mandate to compel an act which the law specifically requires. A petitioner ... is required 23 to show the existence of two elements: a clear, present and usually ministerial duty upon the part 24 of the respondent, and a clear, present and beneficial right belonging to the petitioner in the 25 performance of that duty.” (Cal. Assn. of Medical Products Suppliers v. Maxwell-Jolly (2011) 199 26 Cal.App.4th 286, 302.) In reviewing a petition under the CCP section 1085, a trial court's role 27 generally is to “determine whether the agency’s action was arbitrary, capricious, or without 28 evidentiary support, and/or whether it failed to conform to the law. The trial court may not 11 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Regarding Ripeness (19CECG01224) 1 substitute its judgment for that of the agency or force the agency to exercise its discretion in a 2 certain way.” (Ibid.) 3 “[S]tanding is jurisdictional.” (Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. S.F. Airports 4 Com. (1999) 21 Cal.App.4th 352, 361 (Associated Builders).) A party must be “beneficially 5 interested” to have standing to seek a writ of mandate under Government Code (GC) section 6 1085. (Code Civ. Proc, § 1086.) 2 A government agency has standing to sue another government 7 agency if the challenger can meet the “over-and-above” standard: 8 [O]ne may obtain the writ [of mandamus] only if the person has some special interest to be served or some particular right to be preserved or protected over and above the 9 interest held in common with the public at large. . . One who is in fact adversely affected by governmental action should have standing to challenge that action if it is 10 judicially reviewable. 11 (Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach (2011) 52 Cal.4th 155, 165 (Save the 12 Plastic Bag) (internal quotes and citations omitted)); Associated Builders, supra, 21 Cal.App.4th 13 352, 361.) 14 As the California Supreme Court emphasized in Save the Plastic Bag, “the beneficial 15 interest must be direct and substantial.” (Save the Plastic Bag, supra, 52 Cal.4th 155, 165.) Here, 16 Plaintiffs fail to establish standing because they do not have a direct and beneficial interest in a 17 regulation that does not apply to them, as set for