Sei sulla pagina 1di 68
Approved, SCAO Orginal - Court 2nd copy - Plant fst copy - Defendant ra copy Retum ‘STATE OF MICHIGAN ‘CASE NO. JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2018- CZ SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT 6th, JUDICIAL ciRCUT 2018-165596-CZ COUNTY PROBATE Tour adaress Gourt Telephone no. 1200N, Telegraph Rd, Pontiac, MI. 48341 (248) 858-0582 Pramiffe name(s), adcress(es), and flephone no(). Defendants namels), address(es), and telephone nal). ZCI GROUP, LLC, a Michigan limited liability v___ |ciTyoF Troy, Company, and GHAZWAN SAFFO, an individual la Michigan municipal corporation clo Plaitiffs' Counsel ” i This case has been designated as an efiling case. To revie ‘a copy of the Notice of Mandatory eFiling visit Panatts army, bat no, ade, and leone ra (Charles E- Murphy (P28009) and Tason Re Camser (Péoxisy |WWw.oakgov.com/clerkrod/Pages/efiling. Clark i PLC, 151 S. Ol Woodward Ave, St. 200 Bimingham, MI 48009 (248) 988-5879 Barton W, Moris (P5701 and Nickolas Galen (P8O184) Cannabis Legal Group, 20 Main S., Royal Oak, ML 48067 218) 2600 ‘SUMMONS | NOTICE TO THE DEFENDANT: In the name of the people of the State of Michigan you are notified: 1. You are being sued 2, YOUHAVE 21 DAYS after receiving this summons to file a written answer with the court and serve a copy onthe other party or take other lawful action with the court (28 days'f you were served by mailor you were servedoutside this state), (WCR2111(C) 3. Ifyou do not answer or take other action within the time allowed, judgment may be entered against you or the relief demanded in the complaint, ieaued This summons expres Court ere 5/9/2018 AUG 08 2018 Lisa Brown “This summons is lnvald urlass served on or before is exptalion dale. This document must be sealed by the seal ofthe courk COMPLAINT) Instruction: The following is information thatis required to bein the caption of every complaint and is tobe completed ‘By the plaintiff. Actual allegations and the claim for relief must be stated on addtional complaint pages and attached to this form. This is a business case in which all or part of the action includes a business or commercial dispute under MCL 600.8035. Family DivisionCases. “Tere fsno ther pending or tesolvedactionwthinthejurisdcton ofthe faniyavsionofercuitcourtinvolingthefamlyorfarly members of the parties, ‘An action within the jurisdiction of the family division of the circuit court invaiving the family or family members of the parties has been previously filed in s =< Court, ‘The action remains isno longer pending. The docket number and the judge assigned to the action are: Dod age Barn, General Civil Cases 1) There is no other pending or resolved civil action arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as alleged in the complaint. civil action between these parties or other parties arising out of the transaction or occurrence alleged in the complaint has. been previously filedin Court The action remains isnolonger pending. The docket number and the judge assigned to the action are: FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM Docket no Tage Barn: VENUE | Pani) residence (elude cy, jownship, or Vilage) DDefendarife) residence (include Gly, township, or vlage) Troy, Oakland County Troy, Oakland County lace where action arose or business conducled Troy, Oakland County 0510872018 ‘sI Charles E, Murphy if you require special accommodations to use the court because ofa disability ori you require a foreign language interpreter tohelp {you fuly participate in court proceedings, please contact the court immediately to make arrangements. Mc ot (si15) SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT MCR 2.102(8)11), MOR 2.104, MOR 2.105, MOR 2.107, MCR 2.113(C)2¥a).(o). MOR 3.2064), FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT PROOF OF SERVICE Case No. 201 Zz TO PROCESS SERVER: You are to serve the summons and complaint not later than 91 days from the date of fling or the date of expiration on the order for second summons. You must make andfile yourreturn with the court clerk. Ifyou are unable tocomplete. service you must return this original and all copies to the court clerk CERTIFICATE / AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE/ NONSERVICE (| OFFICER CERTIFICATE OR (|) AFFIDAVIT OF PROCESS SERVER | certify that | am a sheriff, deputy sheriff, bailiff, appointed Being first duly sworn, I state that | am a legally competent court officer, or attomey fora party (MCR 2.104(AJ(2)), and adult whoisnotaparty oran officer ofa corporate party, and that: (notarization not required) that: (notanzation equired) (11 served personally a copy of the summons and complaint, [I served by registered or certified mail (copy of retum receipt attached) a copy of the summons and complaint, togetherwith (Tata documents seved withthe Summons and Complaint on the defendant(s): Defendants name ‘Complete aarass(es) of sevice Day, date, time [Ihave personally attempted to serve the summons and complaint, together with any attachments, on the following defendant(s) and have been unable to complete service. Defendants name Complete address(es) of service Day, date, time | dectare that the statements above are true to the best of my information, knowledge, and belief. ‘Service fee Miles traveled | Mileage fee | Total fee Signature $ S $s Namie Type or rity 7 Subscribed and sworn to before me on County, Michigan. Date My commission expires: ‘Signature: Date Deputy cour irony pubic Notary public, State of Michigan, County of ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE | acknowledge that | have received service of the summons and complaint, together with “Racivan on ‘ay. date me ‘on behalf of Signanre This case has been designated as an eFiling case. To review a copy of the Notice of Mandatory eFiling visit www.oakgov.com/clerkrod/Pages/efiling. STATE OF MICHIGAN CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF OAKLAND ZCIGROUP, LLC, a Michigan limited liability Company, and GHAZWAN SAFFO, an individual, CLARK HILL PLC Attorneys for Plaintiffs 500 Woodward Ave., Ste. 3500 Detroit, MI 48226 Phone: (313) 965-8257 Fax: (313) 309-6857 icanvasser/@elarkhill.com PLAINTIFFS’ VERIFIED Ct PLAIN’ Plaintiffs, Case No. 18- -CZ 2018-165596-CZ 3 v. Hon. JUDGE LEO BOWMAN © z CITY OF TROY, a Michigan municipal fs corporation, 8 x Defendant. 5 s Barton W. Morris (54701) Charles E. Murphy (P28909) 5 Nickolas Galendez (P80184) CLARK HILL PLC 2 Cannabis Legal Group Attorneys for Plaintifis S$ Attorneys for Plaintiffs 151 S. Old Woodward Ave., Ste, 200 8 520 N. Main St. Birmingham, MI 48009 3 Royal Oak, MI 48067 Phone: (248) 988-5879 & Phone: (248) 541-2600 Fax: (248) 988-2331 = Fax: (855) 541-2609 cmurphy@clarkhill.com 6 barton@cannabislegaleroup.com o nick@cannabislegalgroup.com Jason R. Canvasser (P69814) £ zc s 3 g Q 3 w a a a z There is no other pending or resolved civil action arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as alleged in this Complaint, 21964165411 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM NOW COME Plaintiffs, ZCI Group, LLC (“ZCI Group”) and Ghazwan Saffo (“Satfo”) (collectively, “Plaintifis"), by their attomeys, Cannabis Legal Group and Clark Hill PLC, and, for their Verified Complaint against the City of Troy (“Troy” or “Defendant”, state as follows: INTRODUCTION i 1. This matter arises from the City’s improper passage of Chapter 104 of the City of Troy Code, the Medical Marihuana Grow Operation License Ordinance (the “Ordinance”. As set forth herein, the Ordinance is invalid because, among other reasons it (i) is preempted by, conflicts with, and violates the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, MCL § 333.26421 et. seq. (MMMA”); (ii) was not enacted in conformity with the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act (MZEA"); (iii) constitutes a regulatory taking requiring just compensation to be paid to Plaintiffs; (iv) violates the MZEA’s requirement that pre-existing non-conforming uses, such as Plaintiffs, be grandfathered into newly enacted ordinances; and (v) violates substantive due process requirements. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE 2. ZCI Group is a single-member Michigan limited liability company doing business as ZCI Properties, LLC, which owns real property and leases space at 1662 Austin and 1675 E. Maple Rd,, Suite E, Suite J, and Suite A, in the City of Troy, County of Oakland, State of Michigan to, among others, registered caregivers, who cultivate medical marihuana in accordance with the MMMA. 3. Saffo is a registered caregiver, who cultivates medical marihuana as allowed by the MMMA, and is a tenant in the commercial real property located at 1934 Austin Dr., in the City of Troy, County of Oakland, State of Michigan. 219641654.1 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM 4. Defendant is a home rule city and municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Michigan, whose address is 500 W. Big Beaver Road, Troy, Michigan, 48084, which is located within Oakland County 5. Venue is proper pursuant to MCL § 600.1615 because Defendant is a governmental unit that exercises its governmental authority in Oakland County, Michigan, and pursuant to MCL § 600.1621, because the parties are located in and/or conduct business within Oakland County, Michigan, and the events giving rise to this cause of action occurred in Oakland County, Michigan. 6 This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to MCR 2.605(A) because there is an actual controversy within this Court’s jurisdiction necessitating a declaration of legal rights between the parties. 7, This Court also has jurisdiction pursuant to MCL § 600.615 because this case involves a request for equitable and injunctive relief. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 8. On or about February 22, 2017, Defendant issued ZCI Group's tenant, a Certificate of Occupancy to operate a MMMA facility at 1662 Austin Dr. Ex A, Certificate of Oceupaney, 9. On or about March 27, 2017, Defendant issued ZCI Group a Certificate of Occupancy to operate a MMMA facility at 1675 E. Maple Rd., Suite E, Ex. B, Certificate of Occupancy. 10, On or about Apr 28, 2017, Defendant issued ZCI Group a Certificate of ‘Occupancy to operate a MMMA facility at 1675 E, Maple Rd., Suite J. Ex. C, Certificate of Occupancy. 2196416541 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM 11. On or about April 28, 2017, Defendant issued ZCI Group a Certificate of Occupancy to operate a MMMA facility at 1675 E. Maple Rd., Suite A. Ex. D, Certificate of Oceupaney. 12, 1662 Austin Dr, and 1675 E. Maple Rd. Suites E, J, and A are owned by ZCI Group (the “ZCI Properties”). 13. On May 3, 2017, Saffo was issued a caregiver card through the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs Michigan Medical Marihuana Program. Ex. E, Saffo Caregiver Card. 14. On or about July 28, 2017, Defendant issued to Saffo a Certificate of Occupan to operate a MMMA facility at 1934 Austin Dr. Ex. F, Certificate of Occupaney (the “Saffo Property”) (the ZCI Properties and the Saffo Property are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Properties”) 15, At the time the City issued Plaintiffs Certificates of Occupancy, the City did not “have a licensing ordinance, and instead issued occupancy permits only if the proposed location demonstrated compliance with the MMMA, including but not limited to having a separate locked enclosed facility for the cultivation of marihuana plants for each of the caregiver's connected patients.” Ex. G, Memo re: Proposed Medical Marihuana Care Giver Grow Operation License Ordinances (emphasis added), 16. ZCI Group, its tenants, and Saffo all substantially relied on Defendant's processes and procedures when they invested substantial time, money, and energy when they, inter alia, applied for building permits and performed construction on the Properties to bring them in compliance with the City’s Code. See, eg, Ex. H, ZCI Building Permits and Inspection Records. 219641654.1 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM 17, Since issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, Saffo has operated incident free. 18. Since issuance of the Certificates of Occupancy, ZCI Group and its tenants have operated incident free 19. On February 5, 2018, Defendant opted out of the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act (*MMFLA”), MCL § 333.27101 et seg. 20. On April 3, 2018, Defendant's City Attorney presented a proposed medical marihuana caregiver grow operation license ordinance to the City Council for review. At the regular City Council meeting held on April 9, 2018, the Council extended a pre-existing moratorium on issuing building permits for new medical marihuana caregiver grow operations. Ex. G. 21. OnMonday, April 23, 2018, Defendant adopted the Ordinance. Id. 22. The Ordinance was published in the Troy Times on April 26, 2018 (Ex. 1), and becomes effective 10 days later. 23. Prior to the adoption of the Ordinanee, there was no City Planning Commission public hearing with notice, nor was there a recommendation by the City Planning Commission to the City Council regarding the Ordinance. 24. The City did not provide any notice to Plaintiffs and other property owners affected by the Ordinance prior to the April 23, 2018 City Couneil meeting where the Ordinance was adopted. THE MICHIGAN MEDICAL MARIHUANA ACT (MMMA) 25. ‘The MMMA originally became effective in 2008 and was amended in 2016 with the stated purpose as follows: AN INITIATION of Legislation to allow under state law the medical use of marihuana; to provide protections for the medical use of marihuana; to provide for 219641654.1 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM a system of registry identification cards for qualifying patients and primary caregivers; to impose a fee for registry application and renewal; to make an appropriation; to provide for the promulgation of rules; to provide for the administration of this act; to provide for enforcement of this act; to provide for affirmative defenses; and to provide for penalties for violations of this act. 26. The MMMA specifically allows a certain class of individuals—qualifying patients and primary caregivers—to engage in the medical use of marihuana in accordance with state law. MCL § 333.26424 27. Asset forth in the MMMA a “primary caregiver” is defined as “a person who is at least 21 years old . .. and who has not been convicted of any felony within the past 10 years and has never been convicted of a felony involving illegal drugs or a felony that is an assaultive crime,” MCL § 333.26423(k). 28. As further set forth in the MMMA, “qualifying patient” means “a person who has been diagnosed by a physician as having a debilitating medical condition.” MCL § 333.26423(1). 29. The “medical use of marihuana” is defined by the MMMA as “the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, extraction, use, intemal possession, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marihuana . . . .” MCL § 333.26423(h) (emphasis added). Further, “[t]he medical use of marihuana is allowed under state law to the extent it is carried out in accordance with the provisions of this act.” MCL § 333.26427(a). 30. The MMMA allows a qualifying patient to cultivate up to twelve (12) marihuana plants in an enclosed, locked, facility and to possess a combined total of two-and-a-half ounces (2.5 oz.) of usable marihuana or usable marihuana equivalents. MCL § 333.26424(a). Per MCL. § 333.26424 qualifying patients and primary caregivers are “not subject to . . . penalty in any manner” and may not be “denied any right or privilege, including, but not limited to, eivil 219641684.1 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational...licensing board or bureau. . . for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act.” 31. A primary caregiver may assist up to five (5) patients with whom he or she is connected through the registration process. If a primary caregiver is assisting the maximum number of qualifying patients allowed under the MMMA and is also a qualifying patient, then he or she may cultivate up to seventy-two (72) plants and may possess a combined total of two-and- achalf ounces (2.5 07.) for each qual ng patient. MCL § 333.26424(b).. 32. Under the MMMA, the only statutorily defined locations where the possession and medical use of marihuana by patients and caregivers is prohibited by law are: (A) in a school bus; (B) on the grounds of any preschool or primary or secondary school; and (C) in any correctional facility. MCL § 333.26427(b)(2). “All other acts and parts of acts inconsistent with this act do not apply to the medical use of marihuana as provided for by this act.” MCL § 333.26427(6) 33. Defendant has granted approximately seventy-cight (78) occupancy permits that allow for medical marihuana care giver grow operations in the City in accordance with the MMMA. Ex. G. 34. Despite having already granted permits to Plaintiffs and others to operate in the City in accordance with the MMMA and under a Certificate of Occupancy, the City now seeks to improperly require these approved MMMA locations, including Plaintiffs’ locations, to obtain new licensure under the Ordinance. Id. 219641684.1 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM THE CITY OF TROY ORDINANCE 35, A “grow operation” under the Ordinance means “[aJny location where the cultivation of marihuana by a patient or caregiver, as defined in the [MMMA], takes place in the City of Troy.” Troy City Code, Chapter 104, § 2. Ex. J, Ordinance 36. The Ordinance prohibits registered qualifying patients and primary caregivers from cultivating medical marihuana at any location in the City unless the location has been licensed by the City, Id, at § 3(A). The number of grow operation licenses issued by the City is limited to thirty-six (36) licenses per year. Id. at § 3(B). 37. The Ordinance further provides that “[a]ll existing caregiver operations that as of January 1, 2018 were issued a City certificate of occupancy as part of the building permit process, with modifications specific to the growth, cultivation or storage of medical marihuana will be considered a “current facility.” Id Existing facilities are eligible to apply for a license, but “must apply for a license within 30 days of the effective date of the Ordinance and satisfy the criteria to be eligible for a license.” Jd. 38. Despite the fact that Plaintiffs have been operating at the Properties per a Certificate of Occupancy issued by the City, under the Ordinance, “[aJll existing caregiver operations that as of January 1, 2018 were issued a City certificate of occupancy . .. do not have a_vested right or nonconforming use right, and are required to_comply with this Ordinance.” /d. at § 3(E) (emphasis added). 39. Consequently, the Ordinance strips Plaintiffs of all rights that they currently possess in the permits and certificates of occupancy issued by the City. 219641654.1 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM 40. The Ordinance also provides that “any revocation, suspension, business interruption or rescission renders an applicant ineligible for a Medical Marihuana Grow Operation License.” Za, at 3(B). 41. Applicants for a license are required to pay a non-refundable applies City in the amount of one-thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500). Id. at § 3(C) and (D). 42. The license application requires patients and caregivers to submit information to the City in connection with an application, including, but not limited to: a, The marihuana grow operation history of the applicant, including information regarding the revocation or suspension of any business license; and b, A phone number or other means for the City to contact the applicant or his or her designee on a seven day, twenty four hour basis in the event that there is an urgent situation that requires immediate response or action. Id. at $4, 43, The Ordinance requires the City to conduct background checks of each individual applicant, Id. at § 5. 44, The Ordinance allows the City to deny an application for several reasons, including the following: a. The applicant is under the age of twenty-one (21) years of age; b. The applicant has made a false statement upon the application or has given false information in connection with an application; c. The applicant has had a business license revoked or suspended anywhere within the State of Michigan or any other state in the United States within one (1) year prior to the application; d. The applicant has operated a medical marihuana grow operation which was determined to be a public nuisance in the State of Michigan or any state, county, city or any other governmental subdivision in the United States within one (1) year prior to the application; 219641654.1 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM ¢, The applicant is overdue in the payment of City taxes, fees, fines or penalties assessed against him or her; and f The applicant has been convicted of any felony or drug related misdemeanor conviction. Id, at § 6, 45. Under the Ordinance, a primary caregiver who obtains a license is required to “cultivate cach individual registered patient’s plants in a separate locked facility that is enclosed on all sides with a floor, walls, and a ceiling or roof, and accessible only to the registered caregiver and registered patient.” Jd. at § 7. 46. The Ordinance regulates land use by districts and restricts the locations where qualifying patients and primary caregivers may establish a grow operation in non-residential areas to “locations that are zoned IB, Integrated Industrial and Business District under the City of Troy Zoning Ordinance.” Id. at § 8(A). 47. The Ordinance further regulates land use and restricts these permitted locations by establishing a distance requirement for licensed grow operations of one thousand feet (1,000 ft.) from any school, college, university, library, or playground, Jd. at § 8(B). 48. The Ordinance also contains additional requirements for grow operations and requires a licensee to submit to inspections of the property at any time. Jd, at §§ 9 and 10. 49. The Ordinance further requires licensees to provide emergency contact information to the City. If a licensee is notified that immediate access is necessary due to an emergency and either fails to respond or does not provide access to the property within fifteen (15) minutes, then the City “may take whatever reasonable means are necessary to access the property, and the City will not be responsible for any resulting damage.” Id. at § 10(C). 219641654.1 FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM 50. If the City determines that a licensee has violated any of provisions of the Ordinance, the City may immediately suspend the grow operation license and deny the ability of that qualifying patient or primary caregiver to engage in the medical use of marihuana in the City. Id. at § 11(A). Following a due process hearing, the City may revoke, suspend, of reinstate the license. /d. at § 11(C). 51. Qualifying patients and primary caregivers who are found to be in violation of the Ordinance are subject to a penalty: “a misdemeanor, punishable by up to 90 days in jail and/or fines up to $500” and “[eJach violation, and each day upon which a violation exists or continues, shall constitute a separate offense.” Id, at § 12. 52, The Ordinance attempts to regulate and prohibit conduct that has been previously authorized by the City and that is expressly authorized by state law since 2008, namely, the MMMA, MCL § 333.26421, et seq. COUNT 1- VIOLATION OF THE MICHI 53, Plaintiffs incorporate by reference and reassert here the allegations contained in the above paragraphs. 54, The Ordinance is a zoning ordinance because it limits the location of medical marihuana cultivation facilities to specifically zoned properties - IB (Integrated Industrial and Business) districts in the City, defined at Section 8 of the Ordinance, 58. The Ordinance was enacted in violation of the specific requirements set forth in the MZEA, MCL § 125.3101 et seq. 56, ‘The MZEA regulates how local governments may utilize zoning to differentiate uses of land within their incorporated territory. u 219641684. FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk 5/9/2018 9:45 AM 57. Specifically, MCL § 125.3401 mandates the procedures for enacting a zoning ordinance, 58, Moreover, MCL § 125.3306 requires that at least one public hearing be held on a zoning ordinance by the City’s Planning Commission after which it must recommend the zoning ordinance to the City Couneil. 59, There was no such public Planning Commission meeting and therefore, the City did not comply with MCL § 125.3306. 60. Under the MZBA, planning commission meetings must be preceded by published newspaper notice at least 15 days prior to the meeting, MCL § 125.3304; and the planning commission must make a recommendation to the City Council, MCL § 125.3305, and transmit a summary of comments received at the hearing with the proposed zoning ordinance and its recommendation to the legislative body, MCL § 125.3308. 61. The City failed to comply with MCL §§ 125.3304, 125.3305 and 125.3308. 62. For any amendment or new zoning ordinance, the legislative body must conduct a public hearing and publish notice of the hearing in a newspaper not less than 15 days before the hearing; and must provide personal notice to owners of property that are subject to the ordinance, MCL § 125.3103 and MCL § 125.3401(2). ‘The zoning ordinance may not take effect until 7 days after publication in a newspaper of general circulation, MCL § 125.3401(6)(7). 63. The City failed to provide personal notice (or any notice) to Plaintiffs and all other owners of property subject to the Ordinance and did not comply with MCL § 125.3103 and MCL § 125.34012). 64, The procedures of the MZEA must be strictly adhered to or the zoning ordinance in question is invalid, 12 219641684.1

Potrebbero piacerti anche