BAKERSFIELD, CA -- It's been seven months since a city ordinance passed banning pot shops but still at least 20 remain open. That's because the city has put enforcement on the back burner while it deals with a lawsuit.
This lawsuit is almost identical the one the county faced. A group is claiming the city violated the California Environmental Quality Act. The county lost now the city is doing everything it can to prevail.
"They say they want to do it but to me if you want to do it you'll do it," said Lois Mitchell, a Bakersfield resident. "You're wasting taxpayer money for let's just close it."
As of February 10, 20 still exist around the city mostly on the east side.
"Enforcement has really been placed on the back burner," said Richard Iger, Associate City Attorney for Bakersfield.
That's partially because the city's received one complaint call since the ordinance passed. But mostly because the city is fighting a lawsuit, filed a month after the ordinance took effect it claims the city's ordinance violates the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA.
"Right now I'm getting ready focusing on my hearing for the CEQA case and once that's over I'll reevaluate how we are going to approach the enforcement," said Iger.
This may sound familiar to you since a similar suit was filed against the county, not for their ordnance but for Measure G, which limited locations where medicinal marijuana collectives can operate.
"Different plaintiffs same lawyer," said Iger.
Last month the county lost their suit but Iger said that should decide Bakersfield's case.
"In our eyes we've always had a ban and the ordinance is really just a continuation of that ban so nothing has changed but in the county it allowed it then didn't allow it," said Iger.
The city's hearing on the CEQA suit is set for April giving the green light to dispensaries to continue at least until then.
So where does this leave the county? According to the county attorney's office it's waiting for a judge to sign an order against Measure G. Then the county said it will start enforcement based on a zoning ordinance on the six remaining shops inside county boundaries.
This lawsuit is almost identical the one the county faced. A group is claiming the city violated the California Environmental Quality Act. The county lost now the city is doing everything it can to prevail.
"They say they want to do it but to me if you want to do it you'll do it," said Lois Mitchell, a Bakersfield resident. "You're wasting taxpayer money for let's just close it."
As of February 10, 20 still exist around the city mostly on the east side.
"Enforcement has really been placed on the back burner," said Richard Iger, Associate City Attorney for Bakersfield.
That's partially because the city's received one complaint call since the ordinance passed. But mostly because the city is fighting a lawsuit, filed a month after the ordinance took effect it claims the city's ordinance violates the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA.
"Right now I'm getting ready focusing on my hearing for the CEQA case and once that's over I'll reevaluate how we are going to approach the enforcement," said Iger.
This may sound familiar to you since a similar suit was filed against the county, not for their ordnance but for Measure G, which limited locations where medicinal marijuana collectives can operate.
"Different plaintiffs same lawyer," said Iger.
Last month the county lost their suit but Iger said that should decide Bakersfield's case.
"In our eyes we've always had a ban and the ordinance is really just a continuation of that ban so nothing has changed but in the county it allowed it then didn't allow it," said Iger.
The city's hearing on the CEQA suit is set for April giving the green light to dispensaries to continue at least until then.
So where does this leave the county? According to the county attorney's office it's waiting for a judge to sign an order against Measure G. Then the county said it will start enforcement based on a zoning ordinance on the six remaining shops inside county boundaries.