With Santa Barbara County now in the midst of its first legalized cannabis harvest, the number of enforcement actions against illegal growing operations continues to mount and litigation has challenged the fairness of the lengthy process by which the City of Santa Barbara selected its three retail operators. That legal challenge was filed by the Arizona-based SGSB, who scored the second highest number of points in the city’s application competition held early this year, but was excluded from consideration because its proposed site on the 900 block of State Street was located within 1,000 feet of the top-ranked applicant Coastal Partners.
The lawsuit named both the City of Santa Barbara and Coastal Partners, accusing the latter of lying in its written application to City Hall. SGSB claimed Coastal Partners falsified real estate documents to make it appear they owned a property on the 1000 block of Chapala Street when in fact it was only in escrow. In past interviews, city officials have confirmed that was the case, but stated the deadline for all finalists had been extended a month; by that time, they stated, the property proposed by Coastal had, in fact, cleared escrow.
SGSB also claimed that the 1,000-foot distance between dispensaries was arbitrary, capricious, and legally indefensible. SGSB principals had no idea at the time they submitted their proposal where other prospective dispensaries might be located. Cannabis consumers and city residents will suffer, the lawsuit argued, because a less qualified provider would be allowed to operate. During the first phase of evaluations, SGSB posted the highest scores. In the second wave, it was edged out by Coastal by three points out of a possible total of 1,000. Calls to the City Attorney’s office and to Coastal for comment were not returned by deadline.