Madison Shockley, owner of Cadre, a legal cannabis dispensary in South Central Los Angeles, expressed his concerns about the financial difficulties faced by cannabis businesses during his recent appearance on LAist’s radio show, AirTalk.
Shortly after his radio guest spot, Shockley’s dispensary was targeted by state police, who confiscated over $10,000 from ATMs and cash registers in the store.
Officers from the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) executed the seizure based on a warrant Shockley shared with LAist.
The warrant for the collection, signed on June 27, 2024, permitted the execution of property seizures linked to Shockley’s business debt.
During the operation, officers entered the dispensary around 7 p.m., instructing Shockley’s employees to access the cash registers and safe.
Shockley shared video evidence showing CHP officers using tools to destroy two ATMs to remove the money.
Ryan Townsend, a spokesperson for the CDTFA, commented that the agency coordinates with CHP for the execution of such warrants, which can be valid until all specified actions are completed.
Sgt. Dan Keene of the CHP’s Southern Division emphasized that the seizures conducted are in accordance with court mandates.
He clarified that the funds collected are meant to fulfill tax obligations, and the court system determines the final disposition of seized property.
In response to Shockley’s claims of retaliation, he voiced that his challenges with the tax authorities stem from ongoing burdens imposed by the city and state, exacerbating his operational challenges.
Shockley expressed concerns that the seizure of funds could lead to severe financial instability for his business, stating, “I’m gonna be late on my rent for sure this month. I hope to barely be able to pay my security on time tomorrow.”
Following his court appearance on July 25, where he sought a temporary restraining order against the city regarding licensing fees, Shockley plans to expand his legal actions.
Adverse financial conditions prompted Shockley to initiate lawsuits related to what he views as unjust tax and fee structures enforced by city officials.
He explained that a requirement for more than $15,000 in fees for a process he believes unnecessary is pushing him further toward financial ruin, highlighting a perceived lack of support for businesses within the city’s Social Equity Program.
This program aims to assist individuals previously impacted by drug-related policies, yet many entrepreneurs in the initiative have reported that the system’s promised benefits are failing to materialize.
Despite acknowledging his tax debts, Shockley articulated fears that the aggressive collection practices from the state could threaten the viability of his dispensary, noting how such actions are commonly perceived as punitive.
On the day of the seizure, neither the Los Angeles Department of Cannabis Regulation nor the Department of Cannabis Control was informed or involved in the operation.
A statement from the DCR disclosed that the agency was unaware of the location or specifics surrounding the seizure until informed by media reports.
Shockley, who described his business conditions as “barely scraping by,” indicated that the seizure’s impact may compromise his ability to maintain payroll for his employees.
The challenges faced by Shockley aren’t unique; many cannabis business owners navigating through similar hurdles point to the heavy financial burdens imposed by regulatory compliance as they attempt to operate legally.
As he contemplates future financial strategies, Shockley is preparing to advocate for broader protective measures for cannabis businesses ensnared in similar legal disputes with state regulations.
His story illustrates not only the labyrinth of regulations they face but also personal hardships that accompany the operation of legally sanctioned cannabis businesses.
The ongoing developments of Shockley’s situation underscore a critical need for reform in calibration between state taxation and support mechanisms for cannabis enterprises.
This conflict exemplifies the tension between regulatory intent and the real-world implications for business owners striving to remain compliant.
image source from：laist
