California 2013-2014 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 604 — Medical cannabis: state regulation and enforcement.

Last action — From Senate committee without further action.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, an initiative measure enacted by the approval of Proposition 215 at the November 6, 1996, statewide general election, authorizes the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Existing law enacted by the Legislature, commonly referred to as the Medical Marijuana Program Act, requires the establishment of a program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified patients so that they may lawfully use marijuana for medical purposes, and requires the establishment of guidelines for the lawful cultivation of marijuana grown for medical use. The Medical Practice Act provides for the regulation and licensing of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California and requires the board to prioritize investigations and prosecutions of physicians and surgeons representing the greatest threat of harm, as specified. Existing law identifies the cases that are to be given priority, which include cases of repeated acts of excessively prescribing, furnishing, or administering controlled substances without a good faith prior examination of the patient. Existing law makes it unprofessional conduct for a physician and surgeon to prescribe, dispense, or furnish dangerous drugs without an appropriate prior examination and medical indication. Existing law also makes it unprofessional conduct to employ, aid, or abet an unlicensed person in the practice of medicine. Existing law generally makes any person who violates these provisions guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would enact the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Control Act and would create the Division of Medical Cannabis Regulation and Enforcement within the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, to be administered by a person exempt from civil service who is appointed by the Director of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The bill would grant the department the exclusive power to register persons for the cultivation, manufacture, testing, transportation, storage, distribution, and sale of medical cannabis within the state subject to specified exemptions for a city or county. The bill would provide that the director and persons employed by the department to administer and enforce its provisions are peace officers. The bill would prescribe requirements for the issuance, renewal, suspension, and revocation of mandatory commercial registrations and fees in relation to these activities. The bill would permit the department to assist statewide taxation authorities in the development of uniform policies for the taxation of mandatory commercial medical cannabis registrants and to assist in the development of regulation in connection with work safety in this industry. The bill would authorize the division to establish a grant program for the purpose of funding medical cannabis regulation and enforcement. The bill would establish the Medical Cannabis Regulation Fund and would require deposit of fees into the fund. The bill would continuously appropriate moneys within the fund to the division for the purposes of administering the program. The bill would require the deposit of penalty money into the General Fund. The bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2015, to issue regulations as necessary for the implementation and enforcement of mandatory commercial medical cannabis registration, as specified, and would prescribe requirements for provisional registrations to be operative January 1, 2014. The bill would prohibit approval of a mandatory commercial registration for specified reasons, including if a licensed physician making patient recommendations for medical cannabis is an interested party in the proposed operation, and would prohibit a physician from recommending medical cannabis to a patient while he or she is a mandatory commercial registrant, or associated, as specified, with a mandatory commercial registrant. The bill would provide that certain patient and caregiver information is excluded from disclosure to the public. The bill would provide that the actions of a mandatory commercial registrant or provisional registrant, its employees, and its agents that are permitted pursuant to a valid mandatory commercial registration issued by the division and that are conducted in accordance with the requirements of the act are not unlawful, as specified. The bill would provide a similar immunity for a property owner who allows his or her property to be used by a mandatory commercial registrant or provisional registrant. The bill would require the department to work in conjunction with law enforcement entities throughout the state to implement and enforce the rules and regulations regarding medical cannabis and to take appropriate action against businesses and individuals that fail to comply with the law. The bill would prohibit, on and after January 1, 2015, a person other than a mandatory commercial registrant from selling cannabis or cannabis products or performing other actions related to cannabis, except as specified. The bill would provide that its provisions do not affect local zoning ordinances or laws of general application. The bill would make certain violations of its provisions a crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would establish requirements for the transportation of medical cannabis. The bill would specify that its provisions are severable. The bill would specify that recommending marijuana to patients without a good faith examination and medical reason is unprofessional conduct and is a type of case that should be given priority for investigation and prosecution by the Medical Board of California, as described above. The bill would also specify that employment by, or an agreement with, a mandatory medical cannabis registrant to provide recommendations for medical marijuana constitutes unprofessional conduct. By broadening the definition of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would repeal, 90 days after the department posts a specified notice on its Internet Web site, the provisions described above prohibiting prosecution of qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, and designated primary caregivers who associate in California, collectively or cooperatively, to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From Senate committee without further action.

  2. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  3. Senate Rule 29.3(b) suspended. (Ayes 25. Noes 5. Page 2341.)

  4. Re-referred to Coms. on PUB. S. and B., P. & E.D.

  5. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(c).

  6. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  7. Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  8. Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.

  9. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (July 7).

  10. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  11. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  12. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  13. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 41. Noes 34. Page 1843.)

  14. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  15. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  16. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 4. Noes 2.) (April 23).

  17. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  18. From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.

  19. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Ammiano · Primary
  • Leno · Cosponsor
  • Steinberg · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 2 co-sponsors · 119 not signed on · 9 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Ammiano

Co-sponsors (2)

  • Leno
  • Steinberg

Not signed on (119)

119 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 119 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass as amended.

Passed 5 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5200
Total 5200
% of votes cast 71%29%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Nay
Block — Yea
Knight — Nay
Liu — Yea
De León — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Hancock — Yea

Official roll call →

AB 604 AMMIANO Assembly Third Reading

Passed 41 Yea · 34 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 372704
Democratic 4300
Republican 0400
Total 413404
% of votes cast 52%43%0%5%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Nay
Alejo — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Bigelow — Nay
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brown — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Linder — Nay
Maienschein — Nay
Mansoor — Nay
Nazarian — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wagner — Nay
Weber — Yea
Stone — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Medina — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Pan — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Frazier — Nay
Bocanegra — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Gatto — Nay
Gonzalez — Yea
Gray — Nay
Hagman — Nay
Harkey — Nay
Salas — Nay
Holden — Not Voting
Campos — Yea
Chau — Yea
Levine — Nay
Chesbro — Yea
Chávez — Nay
Conway — Nay
Cooley — Yea
Donnelly — Nay
Eggman — Not Voting
Logue — Nay
Melendez — Nay
Morrell — Nay
Mullin — Yea
Nestande — Nay
Olsen — Nay
Perea — Nay
Rendon — Yea
Ting — Yea
Waldron — Nay
Wilk — Nay
Williams — Yea
Daly — Not Voting
Dickinson — Yea
Fox — Not Voting
Yamada — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Gorell — Nay
Hall — Yea
Beth Gaines — Nay
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Nay
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Nay
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Garcia, Robert Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Nay
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Grove, Shannon Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay
Patterson, Joe Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 4 Yea · 2 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4201
Total 4201
% of votes cast 57%29%0%14%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Ammiano — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Melendez — Nay
Quirk — Yea
Skinner — Not Voting
Waldron — Nay

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety healthcare labor
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 604 do?
Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, an initiative measure enacted by the approval of Proposition 215 at the November 6, 1996, statewide general election, authorizes the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Existing law enacted by the Legislature, commonly referred to as the Medical Marijuana Program Act, requires the establishment of a program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified patients so that they may lawfully use marijuana for medical purposes, and requires the establishment of guidelines for the lawful cultivation of marijuana grown for medical use. The Medical Practice Act provides for the regulation and licensing of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California and requires the board to prioritize investigations and prosecutions of physicians and surgeons representing the greatest threat of harm, as specified. Existing law identifies the cases that are to be given priority, which include cases of repeated acts of excessively prescribing, furnishing, or administering controlled substances without a good faith prior examination of the patient. Existing law makes it unprofessional conduct for a physician and surgeon to prescribe, dispense, or furnish dangerous drugs without an appropriate prior examination and medical indication. Existing law also makes it unprofessional conduct to employ, aid, or abet an unlicensed person in the practice of medicine. Existing law generally makes any person who violates these provisions guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would enact the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Control Act and would create the Division of Medical Cannabis Regulation and Enforcement within the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, to be administered by a person exempt from civil service who is appointed by the Director of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The bill would grant the department the exclusive power to register persons for the cultivation, manufacture, testing, transportation, storage, distribution, and sale of medical cannabis within the state subject to specified exemptions for a city or county. The bill would provide that the director and persons employed by the department to administer and enforce its provisions are peace officers. The bill would prescribe requirements for the issuance, renewal, suspension, and revocation of mandatory commercial registrations and fees in relation to these activities. The bill would permit the department to assist statewide taxation authorities in the development of uniform policies for the taxation of mandatory commercial medical cannabis registrants and to assist in the development of regulation in connection with work safety in this industry. The bill would authorize the division to establish a grant program for the purpose of funding medical cannabis regulation and enforcement. The bill would establish the Medical Cannabis Regulation Fund and would require deposit of fees into the fund. The bill would continuously appropriate moneys within the fund to the division for the purposes of administering the program. The bill would require the deposit of penalty money into the General Fund. The bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2015, to issue regulations as necessary for the implementation and enforcement of mandatory commercial medical cannabis registration, as specified, and would prescribe requirements for provisional registrations to be operative January 1, 2014. The bill would prohibit approval of a mandatory commercial registration for specified reasons, including if a licensed physician making patient recommendations for medical cannabis is an interested party in the proposed operation, and would prohibit a physician from recommending medical cannabis to a patient while he or she is a mandatory commercial registrant, or associated, as specified, with a mandatory commercial registrant. The bill would provide that certain patient and caregiver information is excluded from disclosure to the public. The bill would provide that the actions of a mandatory commercial registrant or provisional registrant, its employees, and its agents that are permitted pursuant to a valid mandatory commercial registration issued by the division and that are conducted in accordance with the requirements of the act are not unlawful, as specified. The bill would provide a similar immunity for a property owner who allows his or her property to be used by a mandatory commercial registrant or provisional registrant. The bill would require the department to work in conjunction with law enforcement entities throughout the state to implement and enforce the rules and regulations regarding medical cannabis and to take appropriate action against businesses and individuals that fail to comply with the law. The bill would prohibit, on and after January 1, 2015, a person other than a mandatory commercial registrant from selling cannabis or cannabis products or performing other actions related to cannabis, except as specified. The bill would provide that its provisions do not affect local zoning ordinances or laws of general application. The bill would make certain violations of its provisions a crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would establish requirements for the transportation of medical cannabis. The bill would specify that its provisions are severable. The bill would specify that recommending marijuana to patients without a good faith examination and medical reason is unprofessional conduct and is a type of case that should be given priority for investigation and prosecution by the Medical Board of California, as described above. The bill would also specify that employment by, or an agreement with, a mandatory medical cannabis registrant to provide recommendations for medical marijuana constitutes unprofessional conduct. By broadening the definition of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would repeal, 90 days after the department posts a specified notice on its Internet Web site, the provisions described above prohibiting prosecution of qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, and designated primary caregivers who associate in California, collectively or cooperatively, to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 604?
AB 604 is sponsored by Ammiano, Leno, and Steinberg.
What is the current status of AB 604?
This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 604?
Track AB 604 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 604

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 604

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →