Homeless in Arizona

Prop 203 was written to allow 100 or so special interest groups that were behind it a monopoly on growing and selling medical marijuana in Arizona. And of course make the owners millionaire.

Sadly the Safer Arizona initiative has this blurb in it, and I suspect the legal Arizona medical marijuana cartel will use this blurb

Page 2 - 3-3705 A - Cities, towns and counties may enact reasonable zoning regulations that limit the land use for commercial grows, home gardens, and businesses engaged in retail sale and wholesale of cannabis

The city of Chandler passed a law making it illegal for medical marijuana dispensaries to be located within a mile of each other.

I suspect that law was passed not to protect people from the non-existent dangers of medical marijuana, but to limit the competition of the legal medical marijuana cartel.

I suspect the above blurb marijuana criminal defense attorney Tom Dean put in the Safer Arizona initiative was put in there to do the same thing.

Hey, if marijuana is 100% legal Tom Dean will be out of business.

If you want REAL marijuana legalization support RAD

http://relegalize.100webspace.net/legalize_marijuana_2018.php

Source

Pot dispensary fights Tempe ruling to bar location near ASU

Chris Coppola, The Republic | azcentral.com Published 1:35 p.m. MT May 16, 2016

A medical marijuana dispensary is challenging Tempe's decision to block its request for a new facility across from Arizona State University property, claiming a city official who previously voted against its application has a conflict of interest.

The business, Healing Health Care 3, seeks permission to open a medical marijuana facility in a vacant building on the east side of McClintock Drive, just south of Rio Salado Parkway. The business' owners first argued that the city wrongly applied a zoning rule in blocking the dispensary.

They appealed to the Board of Adjustment, which heard the case Feb. 24 and rejected it on a 4-3 vote. Now, the dispensary claims one of the members who voted to block the request should have recused himself.

The board now is scheduled to hear a second appeal at its May 25 meeting. The law firm representing Healing Healthcare 3 argues that acting board chairman David Lyon should have abstained from the vote because he is an architect employed by SmithGroupJJR, a Phoenix firm retained by ASU to help devise a master redevelopment plan for an area that includes Karsten Golf Course.

Lyon voted to uphold the staff decision.

Prior to that vote, city planning staff rejected the dispensary's application, saying it violated a city zoning rule that prevents dispensaries from locating within 500 feet of property designated as a residential district. Such a district exists on the west side of McClintock Drive, the site of ASU's Karsten Golf Course.

Although the university's golf course occupies the land, the city said it technically is zoned agricultural and considered part of a residential district. The land could allow for construction of residences under the city's zoning rules if a developer sought a zoning change.

In its new appeal, Healing Healthcare 3 argues Lyon should have abstained because his employer stands to profit from its work with ASU on the land cited in denying the dispensary.

"This conflict is made all the worse because Mr. Lyon was the acting chairman and had the ability to direct the discussion and the outcome of the vote,'' Healing Healthcare 3 claimed in a letter submitted by Jeffrey Gross, a former Gallagher and Kennedy attorney who had been representing the dispensary.

The letter said Lyon's views "were presumptively colored by his employer's involvement with the neighboring master plan, including comparing dispensaries to noxious adult uses and public nuisances.''

Lyon disputed the claim of a conflict when contacted by The Republic, saying he has no direct involvement with the ASU project.

"SmithGroupJJR has well over 1,000 employees and many clients. I have not ever done any projects for ASU, and I am not particularly aware of projects that SmithGroup might have for ASU,'' he said, adding that his vote was "based on facts and based on what city regulations are.''

Healing Healthcare 3 previously argued the city staff's denial was unwarranted because it's unlikely Karsten Golf Course will develop with residences. The area of the golf course across from the proposed dispensary is envisioned as a parking lot under ASU's redevelopment master plan, according to the dispensary's zoning application.

Also, high-voltage power lines cross the property, making it an unsuitable spot for homes, the dispensary argued. A towering Arizona Public Service Co. natural gas plant is nearby. The proposed dispensary is along a row of older commercial parcels and backs an industrial area. Tempe Marketplace is to the north.

A letter sent to the city by the dispensary's law firm, Gallagher and Kennedy in Phoenix, said the 500-foot rule was unfairly applied to the property, noting that state law allows cities to impose "reasonable zoning regulations'' when it comes to medical marijuana dispensaries. But that argument was not enough to sway a majority of the board's members.

Two other dispensaries operate in Tempe.

Mark Fuller, an attorney for Gallagher and Kennedy now representing Healing Healthcare 3 in its appeal, declined to comment further on the pending case when contacted by The Republic.

If the board again rejects the dispensary's argument, the next appeal step would be in Maricopa County Superior Court, Ripley said. City officials declined to comment further.