Katelyn Baker
Well-Known Member
Carson City - The Nevada Supreme Court on Monday listened to arguments from the Reno Gazette-Journal and city of Sparks in a lawsuit that could determine whether the names of medical marijuana business licensees will be public record.
The RGJ has requested copies of current business licenses for marijuana cultivation centers, dispensaries and production facilities in Washoe County, Reno and Sparks. The city of Reno and Washoe County have policies to release all of the information included in those business licenses.
The lawsuit followed an RGJ public records request with Sparks for the business licenses related to medical marijuana facilities in the city. The documents returned to the RGJ, however, included redacted names associated with the business licensees.
"Transparency matters," said Kelly Ann Scott, the executive editor of RGJ Media. "We're here today because we believe government operates best under transparency."
District Court Judge Scott Freeman initially heard the case and ordered the city of Sparks to provide the newspaper with the unredacted documents. The city appealed his order.
On Monday, justices listened to the arguments over the unredacted records.
Sparks' Senior Assistant City Attorney Doug Thornley argued that the city was upholding the state's confidentiality regulation for medical marijuana.
"When you are publishing their names, you are making them targets," Thornley said. "The security measures that are by law required at facilities are far more than would be taken at home."
The newspaper's attorney, Scott Glogovac, said that the Supreme Court has historically chosen to make records available to the public unless they are "unequivocally" specified as confidential.
He added that there was no need for secrecy in such a case, and that there was no evidence that those involved in the medical marijuana industry were especially endangered.
"They want to get in the industry, do well by it, but they don't want you to know who they are," Glogovac said.
Business licenses are available for viewing by the public, including the owners' names. The city of Reno, for example, allows anyone to search for business licensees' names on its website.
Justices questioned the vague language in current state regulation.
Though state law is clear that medical marijuana doctors and patients have a protected right to confidentiality, business owners and licensees are not specifically referenced. The RGJ previously turned to the Nevada Attorney General for clarification on how cities are supposed to handle confidentiality for business licensees.
"When a local government obtains records and personal information independently through local licensing and regulatory procedures, that information may be subject to disclosure if it is not otherwise made confidential by a local ordinance," Attorney General spokesperson Patty Cafferata said in a written statement.
In its original lawsuit, the newspaper argued that, "The Nevada Legislature has mandated that the Nevada Public Records Act 'be construed liberally', and that any limitations on public disclosure be 'construed narrowly.' Unless some provision of the law clearly and unambiguously confers confidentiality on the names of (medical marijuana establishment) business license holders in the city, those names are not confidential, and the city must produce unredacted copies of the requested (medical marijuana establishment) business licenses to the RGJ."
Since the state legalized marijuana in 2000, Northern Nevada has become home to almost a dozen medical marijuana dispensaries and has additional cultivation centers. Many of those dispensaries are expected to apply for licensing to distribute recreational marijuana since more than half of Nevada voters legalized pot in November.
The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision on the lawsuit between the RGJ and the city of Sparks at a later date.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Nevada Supreme Court Hears Arguments In RGJ Medical Marijuana Records Case
Author: Jenny Kane
Contact: 775-788-6397
Photo Credit: Getty Images
Website: Reno Gazette-Journal
The RGJ has requested copies of current business licenses for marijuana cultivation centers, dispensaries and production facilities in Washoe County, Reno and Sparks. The city of Reno and Washoe County have policies to release all of the information included in those business licenses.
The lawsuit followed an RGJ public records request with Sparks for the business licenses related to medical marijuana facilities in the city. The documents returned to the RGJ, however, included redacted names associated with the business licensees.
"Transparency matters," said Kelly Ann Scott, the executive editor of RGJ Media. "We're here today because we believe government operates best under transparency."
District Court Judge Scott Freeman initially heard the case and ordered the city of Sparks to provide the newspaper with the unredacted documents. The city appealed his order.
On Monday, justices listened to the arguments over the unredacted records.
Sparks' Senior Assistant City Attorney Doug Thornley argued that the city was upholding the state's confidentiality regulation for medical marijuana.
"When you are publishing their names, you are making them targets," Thornley said. "The security measures that are by law required at facilities are far more than would be taken at home."
The newspaper's attorney, Scott Glogovac, said that the Supreme Court has historically chosen to make records available to the public unless they are "unequivocally" specified as confidential.
He added that there was no need for secrecy in such a case, and that there was no evidence that those involved in the medical marijuana industry were especially endangered.
"They want to get in the industry, do well by it, but they don't want you to know who they are," Glogovac said.
Business licenses are available for viewing by the public, including the owners' names. The city of Reno, for example, allows anyone to search for business licensees' names on its website.
Justices questioned the vague language in current state regulation.
Though state law is clear that medical marijuana doctors and patients have a protected right to confidentiality, business owners and licensees are not specifically referenced. The RGJ previously turned to the Nevada Attorney General for clarification on how cities are supposed to handle confidentiality for business licensees.
"When a local government obtains records and personal information independently through local licensing and regulatory procedures, that information may be subject to disclosure if it is not otherwise made confidential by a local ordinance," Attorney General spokesperson Patty Cafferata said in a written statement.
In its original lawsuit, the newspaper argued that, "The Nevada Legislature has mandated that the Nevada Public Records Act 'be construed liberally', and that any limitations on public disclosure be 'construed narrowly.' Unless some provision of the law clearly and unambiguously confers confidentiality on the names of (medical marijuana establishment) business license holders in the city, those names are not confidential, and the city must produce unredacted copies of the requested (medical marijuana establishment) business licenses to the RGJ."
Since the state legalized marijuana in 2000, Northern Nevada has become home to almost a dozen medical marijuana dispensaries and has additional cultivation centers. Many of those dispensaries are expected to apply for licensing to distribute recreational marijuana since more than half of Nevada voters legalized pot in November.
The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision on the lawsuit between the RGJ and the city of Sparks at a later date.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Nevada Supreme Court Hears Arguments In RGJ Medical Marijuana Records Case
Author: Jenny Kane
Contact: 775-788-6397
Photo Credit: Getty Images
Website: Reno Gazette-Journal