THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Feds threaten to seize property where South Lake Tahoe pot clubs do business


image_pdfimage_print

By Kathryn Reed

The federal government has written letters to the property owners of the three South Lake Tahoe medical marijuana dispensaries threatening to seize their property, fine them or send them to jail if they keep those particular tenants.

“The letter didn’t direct us to shutdown. It put the landlord on notice about the dispensary,” Cody Bass, who runs Tahoe Wellness Collective, told Lake Tahoe News. “We are open every day and we’ll remain that way. We have no intention to close.”

What his landlord Patty Olson does remains to be seen. In a terse conversation with Lake Tahoe News on March 21, Olson said she wants to talk to Bass about what his collectives in Sacramento and Berkeley are going to do. She could not explain how that would be relevant to what she, as the property owner in South Lake Tahoe, would do.

Darcy De Tarr of De Tarr Properties in Burlingame was sent a letter dated Feb. 27 from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Sacramento that says, “This letter is formal notice that continued use of the property in violation of federal law may result in forfeiture and criminal or civil penalties. You should consult an attorney concerning this letter.”

De Tarr was not reachable and Gino DiMatteo, who operates City of Angels 2 on De Tarr’s property, did not return a phone call.

Kevin Khasigian, assistant U.S. attorney, who co-signed the letter with U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner, provided his number in the body of the letter to De Tarr. He did not return a phone call from LTN.

Erika and Matt Triglia run Patient2Patient and own the property.

“We are always concerned about being shut down, but we are committed to patients getting plant based medicine,” Erika Triglia told Lake Tahoe News.

She believes the three South Tahoe dispensaries are on the fed’s radar because city officials have legalized the businesses by issuing them business licenses and having created an ordinance that will permit each facility.

City Attorney Patrick Enright said he was not surprised the letters were sent after the federal government sent the first batch of letters in October to larger collectives in bigger cities. But the city also was not given a heads up the letters were in the mail.

Enright said he does not foresee South Lake Tahoe being threatened by the feds even though the city has approved medical marijuana being cultivated, sold and possessed. The city is going with state law under the voter approved Proposition 215. It’s the federal government that believes all marijuana is illegal.

Police Chief Brian Uhler echoed Enright’s belief, saying he had been talking to federal authorities while the city was writing its ordinance.

El Dorado County Assistant District Attorney Hans Uthe had heard about the letters, but had neither seen one nor had his federal counterparts contacted him.

The letter to property owners says, “It is also a felony for a property owner to rent, lease or otherwise make a place available for cultivation or distribution of marijuana. Violation can result in imprisonment and a fine up to $500,000; or a civil penalty of $250,000 or twice the gross receipts, whichever is greater.”

Lauren Horwood, spokeswoman for the Sacramento U.S. Attorney’s Office, said follow-up with landlords would be done on a case-by-case basis. She said the intent of the letter was to get people to “comply on their own” and not have her office file a forfeiture complaint with the court.

Triglia doesn’t believe the feds can do much more than write threatening letters at this point because of a lawsuit filed late last year by NORML against the four U.S. attorneys in California, Attorney General Eric Holder and DEA Administrator Michele Leonhardt to keep them, as the suit says, “from arresting or prosecuting plaintiffs or those similarly situated, seizing their medical cannabis, forfeiting their property or the property of their landlords or threatening to seize property, or seeking civil or administrative sanctions against them or parties whose property is used to assist them.”

Triglia said, “We are here to help people and we’re going to continue to do that.”

 

 

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (17)
  1. Dogula says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    “Enright said he does not foresee South Lake Tahoe being threatened by the feds even though the city has approved medical marijuana being cultivated, sold and possessed”

    And Enright has been correct about so much in the past.(sarc)
    The feds are flexing their muscle. Much of what they are doing at the federal level right now is targeted at the 10th ammendment. Constitution in the cross hairs.

  2. Kathy says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    Threats ,thats all it is, Action speaks louder then words,I always say,Keep them open ,Cancer patients need this,and so do a lot of other people in pain.

  3. Skier says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    I have to give the City kudos on this one. They are following state law, assuring the collectives are legal, and being reactionary for a change. Stay the course and keep making these sensible decisions SLT council.

  4. biggerpicture says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone, it’s been in the works for months now here in California. I’m kinda surprised it took this long for the letters to go out to these SLT property owners. Let’s hope something gets worked out.

    It’s time for federal legalization, but, like I’ve said before, those pushing for legalization should be very careful about using the medical mj as a means to that end. Could come back and bite us right on the a..!

  5. Bob says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    If I was the owner of the property it would be a tough decision not to kick them out. I’d probably want a huge increase in their deposit though if they stayed.

  6. Red Dog says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    It’s not very smart on the part of the landlords to wait and see what the feds will do because once they seize your property, it’s theirs. The landlords are hoping the feds will forget ? You’re smokin too much if that’s the case. The dispensaries don’t have much to worry about, they get their money and probably don’t have much in their everyday, wouldn’t lose much. All they have to do is convince the landlords to ignore the feds, (don’t look behind the curtain, just keep taking our rent).

    Foolish. How often do you get advance notice the federal government thinks you’re violating the law and even time to comply?

    When they take control of your property one day, don’t be whinning to the rest of us. Under the drug laws, you won’t be getting it back either. They keep it, sell it and put the money in the drug enforcement programs. Just the kind of publicity Tahoe needs to encourage families to come here and vacation.

  7. sandsconnect says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    Hate to say I told you so but saw this one coming a mile away. Check my posts!

  8. John says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    I dont see much of an issue here. The courts have ruled that national drug laws are constitutional because drug markets are clearly interstate. The dispensaries do not check state residency to sell pot. A Nevada resident can get a California state pot card. So this is clearly interstate, and that is the pervue of the feds. The law should be enforced, the owners of the buildings should have their property confiscated and be charged with federal felonies per the law.

  9. biggerpicture says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    Sorry John, you are mistaken. One of the eligibility requirements for a California medical mj license is California residency and proof thereof, thereby disproving your interstate sales claim!

  10. John says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    Bigger, I run a business in Nevada and drug test. I am constantly getting people with a Califonia card and Nevada addresses. So maybe its another case where the California law is a farce and just recreational dope. I am just thankful as an employer I can refuse employment and fire employees based on drug tests.

  11. dryclean says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    At $9k a month rent you can see why Ms. Olson would be terse .

  12. Tahoe Mom says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    I look forward to the day I can drive my child to/from school without having to be exposed to the kind that hang out around these places!

  13. Frank says - Posted: March 22, 2012

    Landlord gets $9,000 a month? Isn’t that drug money which could and should be siezed under the fed regulations? If the dispensaries really are paying that kind of money, isn’t it obvious to the landlord its hush money? They can’t get that kind of rent in SLT from any other business. It’s so obvious no wonder the feds are closing the places down.

    How much longer do we have to put up with drug shops in our town?

  14. sandsconnect says - Posted: March 23, 2012

    Yeah I can’t wait to have weed dealers standing on the corners and houuses in my neighborhood with cars waiting outside all night long selling weed.

  15. firsthand says - Posted: March 24, 2012

    And 9k a month seems a little steep. Sounds like the landlords are taking advantage of the situation as well!

  16. Richard Chesler says - Posted: March 25, 2012

    Medical MJ should be used for medicine and it should be respected by all as a healing medicine that eases pain and brings comfort to the sick and the weak.

    Shame on the federal government for getting between people and their well-being!

  17. Sickoftahoe says - Posted: August 8, 2012

    Theres a crapy rental next to my place in SLT and guess what their doing. I put my place up for sale. The first thing an agent noticed was the skunk smell.
    I hope the feds close all this BS down for good.