Washington cities can ban pot shops despite state OK

OLYMPIA, Washington Thu Jan 16, 2014 5:59pm EST

A thriving marijuana plant is seen at a grow operation in Denver, Colorado December 31, 2013. REUTERS/Rick Wilking

A thriving marijuana plant is seen at a grow operation in Denver, Colorado December 31, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Rick Wilking

Related Topics

Photo

Under the Iron Dome

Sirens sound as rockets land deep inside Israel.  Slideshow 

OLYMPIA, Washington (Reuters) - Cities in Washington state may still opt to ban or regulate marijuana businesses within their boundaries despite a voter-approved state law legalizing recreational pot, the state attorney general said on Thursday.

Washington state and Colorado became the first U.S. states to legalize recreational marijuana following voter referendums in 2012, capitalizing on rapidly changing public opinion about the drug, which remains illegal under federal law.

But in a move that at least one regulator said could complicate efforts to root out a black market for marijuana, state Attorney General Robert Ferguson said in a formal opinion that the law did not require counties, cities or towns to allow marijuana businesses to operate locally.

The opinion marked an early victory for at least three local governments that have enacted bans on pot businesses within their borders, including Pierce County, south of Seattle.

More than 20 others have moratoriums in effect to keep such businesses from opening, at least temporarily, according to the Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington.

The opinion came in response to a request for clarification from the state's three-member Liquor Control Board, the main regulator of its nascent recreational pot industry.

In a conference call with reporters, Ferguson said the ballot measure that Washington state voters passed to legalize recreational-use marijuana contains no language precluding local governments from banning pot businesses.

"If the drafters of the initiative wanted to preempt local authority to ban or regulate marijuana businesses, they could have done so. They did not," said Ferguson, a Democrat. "It is not my role to read language into the initiative that is not there."

HEADED FOR COURTS?

Acknowledging that his opinion would likely not be the last word on the subject, Ferguson said he "would not be surprised" to see the issue resolved in the courts. Unlike Washington state, Colorado's pot law clearly allows local governments to ban recreational marijuana businesses within their borders.

Alison Holcomb, a Seattle-based attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who was the main author of the initiative, sharply disagreed with Ferguson's analysis, saying the authority given to the Liquor Control Board to issue pot business licenses - and to act to limit the black market - made a ban on local restrictions implicit.

"We didn't think we needed to be redundant," Holcomb said. Steve Smith, city attorney for the central Washington state city of Wenatchee, which has moved to prohibit marijuana businesses on the grounds that they are illegal under federal law, characterized Ferguson's opinion as "comforting."

"The attorney general's opinion is not law, but it does give us more direction and comfort that our position is supportable," he said.

Chris Marr, who sits on the Liquor Control Board, said Ferguson's opinion was both surprising and disappointing, adding that the board has not decided whether it will issue licenses to prospective businesses where local bans exist in light of the attorney general's opinion.

Marr added that the opinion's effect could be to make it easier for the black market for marijuana to maintain a foothold in areas of the state where there is no legal alternative.

"In those areas you've pretty much handed it over entirely to the illicit market," he said.

(Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Gunna Dickson)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
Mylena wrote:
If I have a crash or a felony incident with people is under the influence, I will sue the Major authority for millions, because this allowence. Believe me. i will be rich.

Jan 16, 2014 6:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Mylena wrote:
If I have a crash or a felony incident with people is under the influence, I will sue the Major authority for millions, because this allowence. Believe me. i will bwe rich.

Jan 16, 2014 6:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Mylena wrote:
I will sue the city for millions if I have one accident with once under the influence because of you guys that allowed the drug.

Jan 16, 2014 6:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.