HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_09282016 - Final 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 September 28, 2016
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Mike Whetzel, Chair
7 Christopher Watt
8 Laura Christensen
9 Mark Hilliker
10 Linda Sanders
11
12 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
13 Kevin Thompson, Interim Planning Director Listed below, Respectively
14 Darcy Vaughn, City Attorney's Office
15 Chris Dewey, Director of Public Safety
16 Councilmember Mulheren, Medical Marijuana Ad Hoc Committee
17 Councilmember Brown, Medical Marijuana Ad Hoc Committee
18 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
19
20 1. CALL TO ORDER
21 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Whetzel at
22 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California.
23
24 2. ROLL CALL
25
26 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
27
28 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —The minutes from the September 14, 2016 meeting will be available
29 for review and approval at the next regular meeting.
30
31
32 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
33
34 6. APPEAL PROCESS
35 Chair Whetzel read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting the final date to appeal is
36 October 10, 2016 at 5:00 p.m.
37
38 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION
39
40 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE—Confirmed by Staff.
41
42 9. PUBLIC HEARING
43 9A. Proposed Medical Marijuana Ordinance.
44 Staff recommends the Planning Commission review, conduct a public hearing and provide a
45 recommendation of approval of the Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance to the City Council. The Ordinance
46 would create a new section (§5700) to the Municipal Code establishing a Use Permit process and
47 associated development and operational standards for the establishment of Medical Marijuana
48 Dispensaries.
49
50 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
51 • Gave a PowerPoint presentation the contents of which are included in the minutes as attachment
52 1.
53 • Attachments 2 and 3 are emails staff received after the Planning Commission packet for this
54 meeting was distributed.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 1
1 • On September 14, 2016, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to gather public
2 input and provide comments on the proposed Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance. The
3 Medical Marijuana Ad-Hoc committee met to discuss the comments and the following
4 summarizes the Planning Commission's comments and the Ad-Hoc committee's response:
5
6 1. Section 5706 Imposition of Fees. The Planning Commission had questions regarding what
7 an appropriate fee for a Dispensary Use Permit should be. They stated the fee should cover
8 all the staff processing costs. Ad-Hoc Comments: The Ad-Hoc committee agreed with staff's
9 recommendation that a time and material cost recovery fee structure is best suited for
10 processing Dispensary Use Permits. The deposit for a Major Use Permit is $2,000, plus any
11 additional time and materials needed to complete the processing. Dispensary Use Permits
12 will be charged and processed using the cost recovery method.
13
14 2. Section 5707 Limitation on Location of Dispensary (A) The Planning Commission had
15 questions regarding conflicts with the Downtown Zoning Ordinance and the proposed
16 Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance. Adoption of the proposed ordinance will require an
17 amendment to the Downtown Zoning Ordinance, which currently prohibits dispensaries within
18 any of the three downtown zoning designations (GU, UC, DC). Ad-Hoc Comments: The
19 Ordinance adaption by the Council will include an amendment to the Downtown Zoning Code
20 allowing dispensaries with a Dispensaries Use Permit in the GU, UC and DC zoning districts.
21 This amendment is considered implementation of the Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance.
22
23 3. Section 5707 Limitation on Location of Dispensary (C)(1) The Planning Commission
24 suggested greater distances for dispensary locations from youth-oriented facilities than the
25 proposed 250 feet. Ad-Hoc Comments: Subsequent research revealed that State Health and
26 Safety Code Section 11362.768 stipulates a dispensary shall be a minimum distance of 600
27 feet from any school, but is silent on a minimum distance from youth-oriented facilities. The
28 Ad-Hoc Committee suggested two standards specifying minimum distance be incorporated
29 into the Ordinance as follows:
30 1. 600 feet from a school
31 2. 250 feet from any youth-oriented facility(as defined in the Ordinance)
32
33 4. Section 5708 Operating Requirements (F)(1) Consumption Restrictions The Planning
34 Commission believes that this provision contradicts the prohibition on consumption of inedical
35 marijuana on the premises by patients. Ad-Hoc Comments: Remove sections allowing
36 employees or volunteers to smoke or vaporize on-site.
37
38 5. Section 5708 Operating Requirements (G)(1) Retail Sales and Cultivation The Planning
39 Commission requested clarification on the amount of square footage allowed for on-site
40 cultivation and details on the off-site cultivation provisions. Ad-Hoc Comments: Reduce the
41 maximum interior square footage that can be devoted to cultivation from 1,500 to 500.
42 Cultivation areas can be used for either immature starter plants for sale or for plants intended
43 to produce medical marijuana for sale on-site. References to off-site cultivation facilities
44 were eliminated.
45
46 6. Section 5708 Operating Requirements (G)(2) Retail Sales and Cultivation The Planning
47 Commission requested clarification on provision in the Ordinance requiring Planning
48 Commission approval for additional retail square footage. Ad-Hoc Comments: Remove the
49 section that references Planning Commission approval for increased retail space. The
50 maximum retail space for retail paraphernalia will be limited to 150 square feet.
51
52 7. Section 5708 Operating Requirements (5) Retail Sales and Cultivation The Planning
53 Commission requested clarification on the provision regarding the maximum amount a
54 dispensary can pay for medical marijuana. Ad-Hoc Comments: Remove the statement that
55 the dispensary shall not pay supplier(s) of inedical marijuana more than the cost incurred for
56 cultivation and preparation.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 2
1
2 8. Section 5708 Operating Requirements (J)(K) Patient and Employee Records The
3 Planning Commission had questions regarding how this provision will be enforced. Ad-Hoc
4 Comments: It was discussed that the City wanted to establish a system for annual
5 inspections conducted by the Code Enforcement division of the Police Department. This
6 inspection would include a brief review of the records and will likely occur prior to the
7 dispensary's renewal request. No change is suggested for this section.
8
9 9. Section 5709 Application Preparation and Filing (12) Statement of Need The Planning
10 Commission asked how an applicant would demonstrate a statement of need for a
11 dispensary. Ad-Hoc Comments:Remove this section.
12
13 10. Section 5710 Criteria for Review Section Zoning Administrator The Planning
14 Commission indicated they wanted Dispensary Use Permits to be reviewed by the Planning
15 Commission with a public hearing. Ad-Hoc Comments: The Ordinance is very prescriptive, if
16 an applicant meets all the standards the application should be approved and not subject to a
17 political process. No change is suggested for this section.
18
19 11. Section 5713 Effect of Denial The Planning Commission pointed out that this provision, if
20 the reason for denial of the permit is not due to a criminal background or fraud, could be
21 excessively punitive. Ad-Hoc Comments: Remove the word "denial"from the provision. This
22 means only dispensary operators whose permit was not renewed due to violations of the
23 Ordinance would be subject to three year waiting period.
24 • The Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ad Hoc Committee was very appreciative of the Planning
25 Commission comments from the September 14, 2016 meeting.
26 • Correction necessary from a recent Ukiah Daily Journal article that stated City Council wanted the
27 Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance adopted before the November election and the
28 correction is the Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ad Hoc Committee made that statement rather
29 than Council.
30 • Referenced the `Revenue Comparison' table that was part of the PowerPoint presentation and
31 talked about tax revenue generated for the cities compared.
32 • To get an idea the City roughly receives 1.5% of gross sales tax generated.
33 • One of the first questions raised related to imposition of fees is what should the City charge for
34 processing a medical marijuana dispensary use permit. The Ad Hoc Committee agreed with
35 staff's recommendation that a time and material cost recovery fee structure is best suited for
36 processing dispensary use permits. The deposit for a major use permit is $2,000 plus any
37 additional time and materials needed to complete the processing. Dispensary Use Permits will be
38 charged and processed using the cost recovery method.
39 • Related to limitation on location of dispensary, the Planning Commission suggested greater
40 distances for dispensary locations from youth-oriented facilities than the proposed 250 feet. The
41 Ad Hoc Committee research indicates that according to the State Health and Safety Code a
42 dispensary shall be a minimum distance of 600 feet from any school, but is silent on a minimum
43 distance from youth-oriented facilities. The Ad Hoc Committee suggests two standards specifying
44 minimum distance be incorporated in the Ordinance: 600 feet from a school; 250 feet from any
45 youth-oriented facility as defined in the Ordinance.
46 • Related to criteria for review, the Planning Commission wanted dispensary use permits to be
47 reviewed by the Planning Commission with a public hearing. The Ad Hoc Committee is of the
48 opinion the Ordinance is very prescriptive so if an applicant meets all the standards the
49 application should be approved and not subject to a political process. No change is suggested.
50
51 Commissioner Sanders:
52 • The dispensary type that was discussed at the September 14 Planning Commission meeting was
53 similar to a pharmacy and should State law change to legalize recreational marijuana with
54 Proposition 64 will this potential pharmacy also be used for recreational intentions like one would
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 3
1 go into a liquor store? How would the State law changes affect the Medical Marijuana Dispensary
2 Ordinance?
3 • Requested clarification it is too early to know how to proceed as it relates to Proposition 64
4 because the Planning Commission wanted to look at a Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance
5 after the November election.
6 • Would changes to the Ordinance go the Planning Commission or City Council?
7
8 Darcey Vaughn:
9 • If Proposition 64 is enacted, the City would obviously need to decide whether it is going to either
10 completely ban recreational marijuana sales, which it could do, or could consider allowing
11 regulated recreational sales where a permitting process would likely be adapted to recreational
12 marijuana. Would need to read Proposition 64 more closely in order to provide more informed
13 information in this regard. Her current interpretation is that the City could require medical and
14 recreational marijuana not to be sold in a `City facility.' Prop. 64 contemplates two separate but
15 mirrored tracks, i.e., a medical track and a recreational retail track, which both allow for some
16 local regulation control, if not outright prohibition. If the Ordinance were to be adopted we can add
17 additional provisions that also apply to the permitting process to recreational marijuana.
18 • Approval of changes would go to the Planning Commission because those changes are related to
19 the zoning ordinance.
20
21 Commissioner Watt:
22 • Requested clarification the proposed Ordinance would affect the sales of inedical marijuana and
23 would not allow recreational marijuana to be sold at the medical facility?
24 • Inquired regarding State law, Medical Marijuana Regulation & Safety Act (MMRSA) and how this
25 law would affect how it regulates to the dispensaries. In other words, what is the State regulation
26 over the dispensary?
27 • Requested clarification the Ordinance represents the land use aspect of it and as such, will there
28 be State agencies that will have other regulatory authority over the dispensaries? Do we know
29 what State agencies will have regulatory authority over the dispensaries yet?
30
31 Darcey Vaughn:
32 • Regarding the aforementioned question, not as currently written.
33 • MMRSA essentially gave regulatory response that created a number of agencies and
34 corresponding responsibility for regulating medical marijuana. These agencies are still writing the
35 regulations for dispensaries so she is unable to disclose what that regulatory restriction is. While
36 there are marijuana regulations in association with AG regulations and/or similar regulations the
37 data in these regulations have not been published.
38 • Confirmed the Ordinance does address the land use aspect and there will be State regulatory
39 agencies that have authority over the dispensaries.
40 • Confirmed do not know what State agencies will have regulatory authority over dispensaries.
41 Acknowledged there is some degree of regulatory integration regarding licensing of the
42 dispensary and explained the function.
43
44 Commissioner Hilliker:
45 • Has some questions about the ordinance, as written:
46 • Will dispensaries regulate the number of patients allowed per day and/or using the facility and
47 close once it reaches the maximum number allowed. How would the City go about regulating
48 this?
49
50 Commissioner Christensen:
51 • Asked why we have this urgency to adopt a Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance when we
52 are potentially looking at another change should recreational marijuana be legalized. As such, do
53 we gain something by adopting an ordinance or preventing something that could potentially
54 happen if we do not adopt the Ordinance before the November election. Are we afraid of not
55 doing something? Does not understand the urgency of adopting such an ordinance.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 4
1 Darcey Vaughn:
2 • Asked that Commissioner Hilliker cite a specific section in the Ordinance.
3 • It is likely the Ad Hoc Committee could better address the reason for wanting to adopt the
4 Ordinance prior to the November election. Could look at it as way to keep the momentum going
5 so that we do not fall through the cracks and ultimately end up effectively waving regulatory
6 authority over the State. There have been amendments to the MMRSA that imposed certain
7 deadlines and that happened after the proposed Ordinance was being drafted that essentially
8 produced some urgency to have an ordinance. The City would need to have a regulatory
9 structure in place by the end of 2017. While 2017 seems like a long time, we may want to take
10 our time to craft something that is possible and works.
11
12 Councilmember Mulheren:
13 • As a Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance Ad Hoc Committee member asked about the most
14 effective approach to answer questions concerning the Ordinance posed by the Commission and
15 public.
16
17 It was the consensus of the Commission for Councilmember Mulheren to answer questions as they come
18 up.
19
20 Commissioner Watt:
21 • Is pleased Councilmembers Mulheren and Brown are present to answer question since they are
22 part of the Ad Hoc Committee.
23
24 Councilmember Mulheren:
25 • Will answer questions about the ordinance as a representative of the Ad Hoc Committee.
26 • The Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ad Hoc Committee was created on July 1, 2015. There has
27 been some discussion whether or not there was an urgency to adopt a Medical Marijuana
28 Dispensary Ordinance. Is of the opinion having an ordinance in place right now is the opposite of
29 urgency and there is no rush to have it completed before the November election. The Ad Hoc
30 Committee has been discussing the Ordinance for over a year. There is a process we as
31 councilmembers go through when serving on an Ad Hoc Committee where tasks are completed
32 and the corresponding findings submitted. The Ad Hoc Committee is of the opinion that medical
33 marijuana and recreational marijuana should be regulated in the same manner.
34 • MMRSA was enacted into on January 1, 2016 and created a statewide regulatory structure for
35 the medical marijuana industry that also allows local governments to regulate the operation of
36 marijuana businesses within their jurisdiction pursuant to local ordinances. MMRSA allows the
37 City to issue permits or licenses to operate marijuana businesses or prohibit their operation to
38 regulate or prohibit the delivery of inedical marijuana within its boundaries and to regulate or
39 prohibit the cultivation of marijuana within its boundaries. Pursuant to MMRSA, if the City opts not
40 to expressly prohibit or regulate the cultivation, processing, delivery and/or dispensing of inedical
41 marijuana, the State will be the sole licensing authority for these activities in the City.
42 • When the Ad Hoc Committee was created it was to discuss MMRSA and how this law could have
43 an effect in the City limits through the process of creating a Medical Marijuana Dispensary
44 Ordinance. Initially, there was some understanding of urgency but with the AB 266, AB 243, and
45 SB643 which together comprise MMRSA decreased that rush of urgency where the Ad Hoc
46 Committee was able to take some time to look at options and through that process it became
47 apparent to the Committee there were rules in MMRSA including the delivery aspect such that the
48 Ad Hoc Committee wanted to have more regulation and control over medical marijuana
49 dispensaries. It is for this reason the Ad Hoc Committee opted to bring forward a medical
50 marijuana dispensary ordinance and the corresponding regulations thereof.
51 • The persona about marijuana has changed over time. The intent of the Ordinance is to offer
52 enough regulations with some controls without having too many controls as to what a business
53 owner does with his/her business and/or patients.
54 • The Ad Hoc Committee talked to medical dispensary owners to get some information about the
55 operational aspects more or less how this would relate to an annual review.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 5
1 Commissioner Christensen:
2 • Once the proposed Ordinance is in place what would happen if there was a dispensary that was
3 operating and a preschool and/or daycare is proposed in close proximity to the facility and the
4 use is allowed in that particular zoning district.
5 • Do Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) laws apply to patient
6 confidentiality for medical marijuana patients in a dispensary?
7 • Understands while the intent is to have zoning districts that allow dispensaries with approval of a
8 use permit so as to not limit dispensaries such that they have to be located some place out of
9 sight, is not sure it should be allowed in the DZC districts. A lot of time and effort went into
10 carefully looking at the uses that would be allowed by right, allowed with approval of a use permit
11 or prohibited outright in the Downtown area. The DZC specifically prohibit smoke shops, formula
12 fast foods restaurants and alcohol sales. Noted a public member from the last Planning
13 Commission meeting concerning the Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance is of the opinion
14 regulations for the dispensary should be no more stringent that those for regulating alcohol or
15 tobacco, etc.
16
17 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
18 • The aforementioned inquiry would have to be researched.
19
20 Darcey Vaughn:
21 • Even though the dispensary meets the 250-foot location setback regulation it may be if the
22 preschool and/or daycare facility is an allowed use, the onus to relocate may be on the part of the
23 medical marijuana dispensary.
24 • HIPAA laws do apply to dispensaries to some extent but are not enforceable because marijuana
25 is considered illegal at the Federal level.
26
27 Commissioner Hilliker:
28 • Had the following questions/comments regarding the Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance:
29 • Page 9, Item D2, `A dispensary shall not be increased in size (i.e., floor area or number of
30 patients) without a prior approval amending the existing Dispensary Use Permit,' and is
31 this statement related to the number of patients a dispensary can have because this is
32 the impression he gets from reading this section of the Ordinance.
33 ■ Does not perceive a dispensary as any different than going to a drug store to purchase
34 aspirin. While marijuana and its use has a history marijuana can be used for medicinal
35 purposes. Looking at the proposed ordinance and regulations has to take the point of
36 view that marijuana is medicine. Of the two dispensaries he visited found one to be rather
37 oppressive that felt as though he was checking into a jail cell and found the other
38 dispensary to be operated by educated people having a lot of information to give.
39 ■ The Ordinance appears to restrict what a dispensary business can do and makes a lot of
40 decisions for the business.
41 ■ Related to medical records and tracking patients asked the dispensary businesses and
42 found that the records are not open and/or available to anyone.
43 ■ Page 13, Item K, Patient Records, last sentence reads, `Such records may be maintained
44 on or off-site, and shall be made available for inspection by any City officer or official for
45 purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this Chapter,' and is of the
46 opinion these City officials need to have distinguished titles and/or be specifically
47 identified. Is okay with the officials being a fire marshal or policeman asking what is being
48 sold at the dispensary, how is business and/or other like questions, but a City meter
49 reader and City employee, for instance, should not be able to ask dispensary-related
50 questions unless it is an emergency. Is of the opinion the Fire Department should be able
51 to go and inspect the premises.
52 ■ Page 14, Item R, Reporting and Payment of Fees, finds there is a lot of information
53 required on the part of a dispensary in terms of reporting. A dispensary is becoming a
54 legal business but it carries a `dark shadow'/reputation that the selling of marijuana even
55 for medicinal purposes is illegal, a violation of the law. This is something that needs to be
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 6
1 clarified. Managing a dispensary would be difficult if we do not recognize the purpose of a
2 dispensary. Is of the opinion the Ordinance has a lot of restrictions.
3 • It may be the City does not necessarily need a Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance
4 prematurely until after the November election and the outcome of Proposition 64.
5 ■ Page 16, item 12 Plan of Operations (c), Controls that will ensure limitations the numbers
6 of patients is adhered to, and interprets this as the Ordinance will establish the number of
7 patients that can be served. One of the dispensaries he visited indicated some days only
8 seven or so persons come while on other days 30 or 40 persons come to the dispensary.
9 Questions how we can have an Ordinance that tells a business how many people it can
10 serve.
11
12 Chair Whetzel:
13 • As part of the provision process, it will be the City Fire Marshal who will determine how many
14 people can occupy the building at one time.
15 • Asked how the Ad Hoc Committee came up with `Controls that will ensure limitations on numbers
16 of patents is adhered to?'
17
18 Councilmember Mulheren:
19 • The aforementioned rule is likely a carryover from the Sebastopol Medical Marijuana Dispensary
20 Ordinance. The goal of the Ad Hoc Committee was not to try and tell people how they could run
21 their dispensary but rather to make sure that the dispensary is a safe and secure place for people
22 to get their medication. If the Planning Commission desires a change to the Ordinance, this is the
23 reason we are here tonight for later review by City Council.
24
25 Darcey Vaughn:
26 • The Ordinance does not provide for regulating the number of patients a dispensary can have.
27
28 Councilmember Brown:
29 • Noticed of the proposed Ordinance there is not a number of dispensaries recommended because
30 of the supply and demand situation. We do not know how many people are going to take
31 advantage of the medical marijuana dispensary. The intent is to have the best operating
32 dispensaries, professional and structured that are maintained under local control without State
33 intervention.
34 • One of the reasons for requiring annual review of dispensary operations is to see how well they
35 are doing. If there are too many people for a specific location for a particular dispensary operation
36 this has to be looked at during the use permit renewal time.
37
38 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
39 • The matter of the number of patients might be related to when we ask the dispensary applicant to
40 demonstrate the need for the dispensary that somehow ties back to the number of patients.
41
42 Chair Whetzel:
43 • The matter of number of patients is basically going to be determined by the occupation of the
44 building rather than the number of patients per se. The Fire Marshal will determine how many
45 people can occupy the building at one time.
46
47 Councilmember Brown:
48 • His understanding of other dispensaries is that they only allow so many people in the lobby at one
49 time and this is how they maintain control of the number of people in the dispensary so they can
50 keep an eye on them. Certainly the Fire Marshal would play a role in this.
51
52 Chair Whetzel:
53 • As part of the Ordinance provision it might be important to quantify the number of persons that
54 can be in a dispensary at any given time, such as five patients at one time.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 7
1 Councilmember Brown:
2 • When a dispensary submits its initial application for a use permit, the size of the operation and
3 number of employees will also dictate how many people the dispensary can service.
4 • If a large number of persons go to a particular dispensary, this is an indication another dispensary
5 may be necessary or a need for more regulations. Number of patients is directly correlated to a
6 supply and demand situation.
7
8 Commissioner Hilliker:
9 • Interprets the Ordinance as `we' are going to control the number of patients in total that a
10 dispensary business can serve. The number of patients that come to a particular dispensary also
11 depends upon the operation of the dispensary.
12 • Referred to page 19 of the Ordinance, Section 5711 Investigation and Action on Applications, and
13 noted the process appears to be thorough and well thought out. Questions whether there should
14 be some kind of timeline associated with the permitting process for establishing a dispensary
15 business because it is likely applicants have money invested in the business and desires to get it
16 operational. Is of the opinion timeline for processing a dispensary use permit should be
17 reasonable. The dispensary business needs to be able to move forward.
18
19 There was Commission/staff discussion concerning the filing process for a dispensary use permit and that
20 it should be `a normal' procedure.
21
22 Commissioner Sanders:
23 • It appears a timeline for process is already established in the Ordinance.
24
25 Chair Whetzel:
26 • Referenced the `Revenue Comparison' data sheet that was part of the PowerPoint presentation
27 and requested clarification that medical marijuana is not subject to sales tax.
28 • If Proposition 64 passes it is likely sales tax to the City will be reduced to essentially`nothing.'
29 • Would like to know how the Ad Hoc Committee came up with 250-foot dispensary location
30 requirement from a youth-oriented facility for a marijuana dispensary.
31
32 Darcey Vaughn:
33 • Medical marijuana would not be subject to sales tax if Proposition 64 passes unlike recreational
34 marijuana, but will be subject to the State excise tax.
35 • It is essentially true sales tax to the City would be reduced to practically no revenue for medical
36 marijuana should Proposition 64 pass.
37
38 Councilmember Mulheren:
39 • One of the discussions the Ad Hoc Committee had is where a medical marijuana dispensary
40 might be located and it was the opinion of the Committee that dispensaries should be located in
41 the most visible places possible. The discussion included the Downtown area and when looking
42 at the DZC map surrounding most of this area it is residential. The DZC was adopted about five
43 years ago where things have changed since then, such as new Councilmembers, allowing for live
44 music in certain zoning districts in the area, working on parking in the Downtown, etc. Is of the
45 opinion the DZC was not meant to be a `historical endeavor,' but rather meant to be adaptive and
46 subject to changes overtime as necessary as the community changes.
47 • Related to the 250-foot location Ad Hoc Committee discussion advised the measurement is linear
48 footage not aerial and talked about a dispensary could occur on State Street where it would have
49 sufficient line-of-site for law enforcement purposes and would not be located in an area where
50 children activities would occur.
51 • The Ad Hoc Committee was not trying to limit people from what they can do with their dispensary.
52 The Ad Hoc Committee is of the opinion the 250-foot location for a dispensary to operate was
53 adequate. Acknowledged there is a low vacancy rate currently in the Downtown so there are very
54 few places where a dispensary could operate in this area. However, businesses come and go in
55 our powntown.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 8
1 Chair Whetzel:
2 • The Downtown area has churches where youth-oriented activities occur and/or other areas that
3 have youth-oriented activities occur during the day and evening and questioned how to define
4 those areas that could be well within the 250-feet location of the dispensaries?
5
6 Councilmember Mulheren:
7 • Regulating people's businesses is something she wants to avoid, especially how frequently
8 businesses turn over in our community. The community has businesses that have been in
9 existence for a long time while other businesses come and go within six months. A possible
10 business that could be a good business and a good neighbor in our community should be given
11 the opportunity.
12
13 Chair Whetzel:
14 • Pointed out in a few months it is possible the City will receive no sales tax benefit from a business
15 that sells medical marijuana should Proposition 64 pass. It appears the overall intent was for the
16 City to receive sales tax revenue from medical marijuana dispensaries businesses in addition to
17 the revenue generated from the permitting process that would allow a dispensary to operate.
18 • Did not see any information in the Ordinance about operational hours, i.e., would a dispensary
19 operate 24 hours a day, for instance? 12 hours? From 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.?
20
21 Councilmember Mulheren:
22 • Acknowledged that while the City may potentially not receive a sales tax benefit from the sale of
23 medical marijuana at dispensaries, people need dispensaries for medicinal purposes so there is a
24 need for such dispensaries. There is a separate group of business people and community
25 members that truly would like to legitimize medical marijuana use. The Medical Marijuana
26 Dispensary Ordinance is not a new discussion and confirmed there is not a push to get the
27 Ordinance adopted before the November election.
28 • The Ad Hoc Committee did discuss operational hours but again the intent was not to try and
29 regulate hours for businesses. Business owners are going to have a plan that works best for
30 them.
31
32 Chair Whetzel:
33 • The Planning Commission regulates hours for use permit projects. Supports putting restrictions
34 on hours of operation for dispensary businesses.
35
36 Councilmember Mulheren:
37 • We are here tonight to review the Ordinance and for the Planning Commission to make
38 comments and recommendations.
39
40 Commissioner Sanders:
41 • How many visits of dispensaries did the Ad Hoc Committee make before working on the
42 proposed Ordinance?
43
44 Councilmember Brown:
45 • Did not visit any dispensary but relied on information from many people who frequent/operate
46 dispensaries.
47 • Has learned that there are a lot of dispensaries where most of the business was conducted at the
48 back door.
49 • Well run dispensaries keep very good records, are very structured and maintain clientele that is
50 professional. This is the goal of the Ad Hoc Committee.
51
52 Councilmember Mulheren:
53 • Does not exactly know how dispensaries run. Did visit two dispensaries and did a considerable
54 amount of research online concerning medical marijuana dispensaries. There are rules about
55 what happens to poorly run medical marijuana dispensary businesses.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 9
1 Commissioner Sanders:
2 • Are there any poorly run dispensaries located in the Mendocino County area?
3 • Is still unclear why the Planning Commission is being asked to vote on the Medical Marijuana
4 Dispensary Ordinance before the November election. Are there any further comments to some of
5 the concern of the Commissioners as to why the Commission is being asked to complete the
6 Ordinance so quickly.
7 • At the last Planning Commission meeting regarding the Medical Marijuana Dispensary
8 Ordinance there was concern among the Commissioners about the area where dispensaries
9 could be located near youth-oriented activities and schools. Since this time the Ordinance has
10 been updated to 600 feet from a school and 250 feet from any youth-oriented facility (as defined
11 in the Ordinance). Some of the Commissioners including herself have a problem with the
12 250-foot distance rule from any youth-oriented facility that is in the Ordinance. Has concern
13 about how many dispensaries are going to be in our community and has received a lot of public
14 feedback about this. Staff and probably Councilmembers have also heard comments from those
15 persons questioning the 250-foot distance rule in the Ordinance. Understands the Planning
16 Commission would not be involved in the permitting process for medical marijuana dispensary
17 projects but rather the Zoning Administrator because the Planning Commission is a political body
18 and the Zoning Administrator is not. Understands the intent for the Ordinance is to stay clear of
19 political overtones as much as possible. The Commissioners are here to look at health and
20 safety including preservation of property values and other considerations of our community and
21 asked the Ad Hoc Committee if thought was given for all the constituents that live in our
22 community that a distance of 250 feet is appropriate.
23
24 Commissioner Christensen:
25 • What is the definition of a youth-oriented facility? Does this definition include movie theaters,
26 dance/theater studios, museums, libraries etc.?
27
28 Councilmember Mulheren:
29 • Confirmed there is one poorly run dispensary in the Ukiah area.
30 • Confirmed the Ad Hoc Committee is not asking the Commission to complete the Ordinance
31 process before the November election. Recreational marijuana differs from medical marijuana.
32
33 Councilmember Brown:
34 • Finds it important to plan and not delay having a Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance in
35 place should Proposition 64 pass the State will dictate what we can and/or have to do. We have
36 time to adopt an Ordinance that effectively works well for the dispensary businesses and
37 community.
38 • The 600 feet from where children congregate on a regular basis is 250 feet from youth-oriented
39 facilities. Looking at a map using the 600 feet from schools rule and 250 feet from youth-oriented
40 facility there is not a lot of areas where a dispensary could be located.
41 • Acknowledged the location of a dispensary is a concern. Would not particularly want a dispensary
42 located right across the street from his house. This is the reason we have to carefully take a look
43 at locations appropriate for a dispensary.
44
45 Darcey Vaughn:
46 • Schools are not included in the definition of youth-oriented facilities. According to Ordinance
47 Section 5702, item S, Youth-Oriented Facility is defined as a public park, church, and licensed
48 daycare facility.
49 • It may be the Planning Commission could recommend an expanded definition of Youth-Oriented
50 Facilities to include museums and libraries.
51
52 Councilmember Mulheren:
53 • As a parent and business owner understands the importance of dispensaries following the
54 regulations set forth in the Ordinance as it pertains to health and safety and preservation of
55 property values.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 10
1 Commissioner Watt:
2 • Likes that the Ad Hoc Committee is present to answer questions.
3 • Was the Ad Hoc Committee approached by perspective dispensary operators during the period
4 concerning consideration of this Ordinance?
5 • Is there a market demand for a dispensary in Downtown Ukiah?
6 • Has the Ad Hoc Committee talked to people that are unable to legally obtain medical marijuana
7 and therefore, there is a demand for that service to be in Downtown Ukiah? Did the Ad Hoc
8 Committee find that people in need of inedicinal marijuana were unable to obtain it in a legal
9 fashion, therefore, supporting the need for a dispensary in Downtown Ukiah?
10 • Again, has the Ad Hoc Committee found there is a need for medical marijuana dispensaries
11 because people are not able to obtain what they need?
12 • Is it the opinion and intent of the Ad Hoc Committee that this Ordinance will give the City the
13 opportunity to encourage potential dispensary business owners to want to go through a very
14 prescriptive process to obtain a use permit to operate a highly reputable enterprise.
15
16 Commissioner Hilliker:
17 • Talked to dispensary owners/management in another location other than Ukiah and it appears
18 people come to the facility because it is clean and respectable and they cannot get what they
19 need in Ukiah. Cited an example of an elderly couple that use medical marijuana and the
20 problems they experience travel-wise of not being able to get what they want in Ukiah.
21
22 Councilmember Brown:
23 • Acknowledged the Ad Hoc Committee was approached early on by one of the local dispensaries
24 and the owner would like to see dispensaries be able to operate `up front' and professionally all
25 conforming to the rules of the Ordinance so that patients get the help they need and are
26 effectively served.
27 • Is of the opinion there a market demand for a dispensary in the Downtown area. Marijuana is
28 more readily being recognized as medicinal for many people.
29 • As he understands it, if a person has a medical need for marijuana there are numerous doctors
30 that will write a prescription.
31 • Again, is of the opinion there is a need for a medical marijuana dispensary in Downtown Ukiah
32 that is of high quality.
33
34 Councilmember Mulheren:
35 • She was approached by existing dispensary owners, potential owners desiring to open a
36 dispensary, talked to other dispensary owners in other communities as well as medical marijuana
37 advocates in an effort to obtain information and found there are people who use marijuana for
38 medicinal purposes and there are people who cultivate marijuana for medical use. The Ordinance
39 gives them the opportunity to legitimize their business.
40 • People want to be able to obtain medical marijuana in a place that is safe and provides for a
41 professional environment.
42 • The intent of the Ad Hoc Committee is to make it workable for potential medical marijuana
43 dispensary owners to be able to go the permitting and associated developmenUoperational
44 standards process for the establishment of dispensaries that are reputable.
45
46 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:40 p.m.
47
48 Steely Anohe:
49 • Was the General Manager of a medical marijuana dispensary in Berkeley, one of the most
50 heavily regulated cities in this regard.
51 • Has a lot of experience and understanding about medical cannabis and how important it is for
52 communities to have reputable and professional medical dispensaries that are managed/operated
53 well.
54 • Has read the City of Ukiah Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance and appreciates the work
55 done to make this working regulatory document one that effectively protects the health, safety
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 11
1 and general welfare of its citizens and provides the necessary standards so that medical
2 marijuana users can get what they need in a highly professional and reputable environment.
3 Finds the City of Ukiah Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance to be one of the best crafted
4 ordinances that he has looked at.
5 • Related to questions about recreational marijuana in connection with questions about why we
6 should not wait to have a medical marijuana Dispensary Ordinance adopted, Proposition 64
7 basically the way it is written merges like a puzzle piece perfectly with medical marijuana. There
8 are only a few components that are different. Finds that many cities are drafting ordinances
9 before the public votes on Proposition 64 in November because it complements the medical
10 aspect of marijuana. The state of Colorado was a good model because the people that were able
11 to get recreational permits first were the operators that were already operating medical marijuana.
12 The way it works is that a person discloses whether he or she is recreational or medical. If the
13 marijuana use is recreational, this is taxed differently. If the use is medical there may be a longer
14 consultation. In cities where medical marijuana dispensary ordinance have been adopted prior to
15 the November election it will take a while for each city and State to figure out what approach to do
16 in the event Proposition 64 passes.
17 • Related to the question of whether to wait or not wait on adopting an Ordinance, it has been his
18 experience and knowledge of ordinances is that it really fits `right into medical.' Related to
19 MMRSA in association with the State's assessment of how MMRSA is different than the medical
20 aspect and as such, cities have the authority and control to dictate what they want by way of a
21 Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance for themselves and this may be another reason why the
22 City of Ukiah should adopt an ordinance that works effectively for the City and also complies with
23 the State MMRSA statewide regulatory structure for the medical marijuana industry that allows
24 local governments to regulate the operation of marijuana businesses within their jurisdiction
25 pursuant to local ordinances.
26 • Berkeley has a huge population and it is located in the Bay Area and this city did fine with three
27 medical marijuana dispensaries. Recommends the City think about limiting and/or having some
28 kind of language component that addresses the number of dispensaries it wants to see. If
29 orchestrating dispensaries within a local jurisdiction is done right and operated by people who are
30 experienced then the business will likely be successful. There is the question as to why medical
31 dispensaries are more heavily regulated than other businesses and it has been his experience it
32 is related to security, law enforcement, cash-only operation components in addition to specialized
33 employee training and depth of knowledge that one should have in order to help patients.
34 Because of the very nature of the dispensary operation this merits certain regulations.
35 • Related to the distance factor, has yet to find a compelling argument of why a dispensary needs
36 to be any greater than 250 feet. What would requiring another 100/150 feet to the distance factor
37 really do? Dispensaries monitor who comes and goes and whether or not there is loitering and
38 this is a favorable thing. One benefit, dispensaries located in downtown areas are closer to law
39 enforcement.
40 • The City should well-receive a dispensary business that is willing to go through the rigorous
41 permitting process and/or all other necessary hoops in order to establish a professional and
42 highly reputable business that will serve their patients fittingly.
43 • Many uncertain/unanswered questions regarding cannabis can be done in an advisory manner
44 and he is open to assisting in this regard with his experience.
45 • Again, legalization of recreational marijuana is not going to 'change anything' and the
46 corresponding proposition/associated regulations are actually crafted very well to merge with
47 MMRSA and/or medical cannabis. The recreational marijuana initiative is a very well written
48 component where the only change is going to be how it is taxed.
49
50 Teri Johnson:
51 • She and her husband use Compassionate Heart, a local medical marijuana dispensary for
52 medicinal purposes. Her husband is terminally ill and it is imperative he has access to medical
53 marijuana.
54 • Well operated medical marijuana dispensaries offer mercy and compassion to their patients and
55 emphasized the importance for the Ukiah of City to be open to allowing professional and
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 12
1 legitimate medical marijuana dispensary(s) that serves the citizens of Ukiah. Many of the
2 patients that also use Compassionate Heart live in the City limits so there is already an
3 established need in this community for a medical marijuana dispensary.
4
5 Pinky Kushner:
6 • With the possible onset of recreational marijuana being legalized with Proposition 64, important
7 the City look closely about what an appropriate fee for a dispensary use permit should be that
8 would be sufficient to cover the all of the costs with everything the process involves.
9 • Referenced the Ordinance and commented:
10 ■ Page 5, Section 5702, L, Person with an identification card, does the County/City have a
11 system to issue these card?
12 ■ Page 6, Section 5704 (Terms of Permits and Renewals as Required), should refer to
13 Section 5709, F, because Section 5704 addresses renewals and the actual application
14 preparation and filing is Section 5709 and is of the opinion this requires public
15 notification. Also is of the opinion an original application requires neighborhood and
16 newspaper notification for a dispensary within the 250 feet location requirement. Likewise
17 for the application to renew the use permit for a dispensary operation should require both
18 neighborhood and newspaper notification. The notification for renewal should include any
19 complaints/calls that have been submitted/received within the 250 feet location
20 requirement.
21 ■ Page 8, Section 5707, Limitation on Location of Dispensary, related to the DZC and
22 noted the DZC has a residential as well as a commercial use component. By allowing a
23 medical marijuana dispensary in GU, UC, and DC zoning districts of the DZC you are
24 allowing a dispensary in locations where there is residential and has no solution in this
25 regard. Referred to Commissioner Christensen's comments that the 250-foot location
26 limitation should extend to public libraries and museums and/or other places she
27 mentioned and agrees with this concept.
28 ■ Page 8, Section 5708, Operating Requirements, F, Consumption Restrictions, regulations
29 say no smoking or vaporization of marijuana on the premises and/or any public place that
30 should include no onsite ingestion of marijuana either by pill or in some other form.
31
32 G, Retail Sales and Cultivation, regulations state, `except for immature nursery stock
33 marijuana plants, marijuana plants grown by the dispensary shall only be utilized for
34 production of processed marijuana to dispense to patients.' Would like to see a definition
35 for`immature nursery stock.'
36 ■ Page 19, Section 5711, Investigation and Action on Application, and asked if the Ad Hoc
37 Committee reviewed the requirements under `ABC' requirements and are there any
38 situations under ABC that take into account things the Ad Hoc Committee has not
39 considered?
40 ■ Is of the opinion it is important that dispensary business owners are required to describe
41 what they are selling. Will the marijuana sold be checked for pesticides, mold and/or
42 other contaminants?
43 ■ Page 24, Section 9254, Marijuana Cultivation, (amended version), the City of Ukiah will
44 not allow cultivation for more than 12 mature plants. Consideration should be given to
45 how many ounces 12 mature plants represents and/or can produce. Important to
46 consider the problems with growing marijuana in the City limits and finds it not a good
47 thing to do.
48 ■ All those involved with crafting and bringing the Ordinance forward has done a wonderful
49 job and is very impressed with the Ad Hoc Committee's work on the Ordinance.
50 ■ Now is the opportunity to determine whether or not the City of Ukiah should allow
51 marijuana cultivation within the City limits on a private parcel.
52
53 Michael Rubinstein:
54 • Is the owner and operator of Passionate Heart and has been doing this for almost 10 years.
55 • Is of the opinion should not compare the operation of a liquor store to a marijuana dispensary
56 because dispensaries distribute medicine to people in need, i.e., cancer patients, persons
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 13
1 suffering from post-dramatic stress disorder, anxiety, etc. Patients seek recommendations from
2 medical doctors who prescribe marijuana for medicinal purposes.
3 • Sees that his patients are getting high quality cannabis from local farmers.
4 • The community has the opportunity to establish a medical marijuana dispensary ordinance that
5 will provide regulations for the operation of high quality dispensaries and with keeping this under
6 local jurisdiction and with keeping the integrity high as a service to our community.
7
8 Roseanne Ibarra, Executive Director of First Five Mendocino:
9 • Requests the Planning Commission consider expanding the 250 limitation on location to include
10 youth center services, childcare centers and/or other similar child-related facilities to match that
11 limitation of 600 feet from a school.
12
13 Susan Boling:
14 • Supports dispensary limitation on location of 600 feet from a school.
15 • Most of the cities, counties, and states she looked at regarding medical dispensaries ordinances
16 did not differentiate the distance between dispensaries and schools and matched the
17 corresponding regulations to ABC requirements and to the State's public health and safety laws.
18 As such, sees no reason to differentiate that.
19 • Plans to vote `yes' on legalizing recreational marijuana.
20 • Has no problem with allowing a medical marijuana dispensary in the City limits. Her concern is
21 how the dispensaries are operated that would include such questions as: 1) hours of operation 2)
22 what kind of signage would be allowed. Is concerned about the effect of using signage to
23 advertise marijuana may have on the impression of children just like the advertising of tobacco in
24 retail establishments.
25 • Wants to make certain related to limitation on location of dispensary that children are protected
26 and the way to do this is to regulate distance from schools, parks, libraries, daycare centers, etc.
27 Children are very impressionable and this is reason it is so important that dispensaries are not
28 located close to youth-oriented activities, schools or daycare centers.
29
30 Jennifer Steger:
31 • Son is a dispensary patient because he had reconstructive knee surgery and does not take
32 prescription drugs.
33 • Supports that medical marijuana dispensaries are allowed in the City limits.
34 • Talked about number of persons that can potentially be allowed in a dispensary at one time and
35 the reason for possible regulation in this regard, distance limitation on location, signage, and
36 noted signage as it relates to tobacco, for instance, is a big problem.
37 • Uses marijuana for medicinal purposes and not recreational.
38 • Has observed patients in medical marijuana dispensaries and finds them to be responsible
39 people.
40
41 Virgil Garden:
42 • Supports adoption of the Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance.
43
44 Casey Steger:
45 • Has a school-related knee injury and uses marijuana for medicinal purposes.
46 • Is dependent upon other persons to get his medicinal marijuana such that having a dispensary in
47 town would be very beneficial for him and/or for other persons living in the City limits.
48 • Supports the adoption of a Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance.
49
50 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:18 p.m.
51
52 Commissioner Hilliker:
53 • With the people he has spoken to and after listening to the public testimony tonight sees there is
54 a need for a dispensary in the City limits and a corresponding Medical Marijuana Dispensary
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 14
1 Ordinance. It is important we have some sort of facility in the City that can provide marijuana for
2 medicinal purposes for people in need whatever the case may be.
3 • Related to the matter of concern of protecting children in connection with the 250 distance
4 limitation restriction for dispensaries, if the Ordinance is followed children walking by a dispensary
5 should not really know any more than there is a single sign identifying the business. The
6 Ordinance does address signage for those persons concerned about signage for dispensaries.
7 As such, does not know if dispensaries are even going to be a draw to children. Is of the opinion
8 people come to a dispensary to get what they need and go home. They are not smoking,
9 vaporizing, ingesting, etc., marijuana on the premises. The contamination and/or explosion
10 concerning the use of drugs is related to prescription drugs and/or'hard drugs.' While he can see
11 the association of labeling a dispensary as a place where `drugs' are sold, the drug is not
12 considered a `hard drug' such as the ones found in households that often are mismanaged.
13 Cannot make the connection of correlating marijuana for medicinal use with prescription hard
14 drugs.
15 • Councilmember Brown is correct in saying that the City needs to plan ahead for having a Medical
16 Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance in place in order to preserve City policies objectives with regard
17 to the medical marijuana industry given the proliferation of inedical marijuana businesses within
18 the County's jurisdiction. If the City has an adopted Ordinance that is sound and works well, we
19 are a step ahead should recreational marijuana be legalized.
20 • Supports adoption of the Ordinance, as written with perhaps some changes as discussed tonight.
21
22 Commissioner Christensen:
23 • As a Commissioner, it is her job to represent the community and to look at the Ordinance as
24 closely as possible and to make certain every question has been asked so what we adopt is
25 useful.
26 • There are many reasons why allowing for a dispensary is a good thing.
27 • We are talking about medical marijuana dispensaries tonight that function more like a pharmacy
28 and not about recreational marijuana or liquor stores. We do not worry about our children walking
29 past CVS or Rite Aid, for instance. There is still this perception/understanding that marijuana is
30 not an acceptable medicine because it is not legal. There is the idea that people who use
31 marijuana for recreational purposes obtain it through a dispensary.
32 • Many people are of the opinion Proposition 64 will pass. We are looking at an Ordinance in
33 conjunction with a medical dispensary but her concern is by enacting this Ordinance now will we
34 be looking at recreational dispensaries less closely? We already have marijuana dispensaries
35 operating in the County but if Proposition 64 passes we will be considering/adding another level
36 of regulation as to whether or not we want to allow recreational dispensaries in the Downtown.
37 The Ordinance does not talk about recreational marijuana but rather only talks about medical
38 marijuana dispensaries when maybe with the onset of recreational marijuana being legalized we
39 should think about what happens next. If we only think about today then we will likely end with an
40 Ordinance that is not well planned.
41 • Definitely wants people to be able to get their medicine. While Mendocino County is known for
42 marijuana cultivation, we currently do not allow medical marijuana dispensaries in our town. With
43 Ukiah being the `Mendocino County seat' we should to be able to get ahead of what we want to
44 allow in terms of marijuana medicinally and/or recreationally in our town. We ought to have a
45 medical marijuana dispensary in our town.
46 • Has a concern particularly for those persons advocating for children with allowing dispensaries in
47 the City limits. Is of the opinion children would not be drawn into a dispensary. Acknowledged the
48 importance of talking about the distance limitation for schools and youth-oriented facilities to
49 narrow this down as to what is appropriate. Does not support the concept of waiting and seeing
50 how the rules in the Ordinance play out having to possibly make modifications after-the-fact, but
51 rather make sure the Ordinance is comprehensively and adequately covers all possible issues
52 with regard to distance limitation for dispensaries and the like.
53 • Would like the Commission to talk about the distance limitation for dispensaries from schools and
54 youth-oriented facilities and be specific whether or not we should allow recreational marijuana
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 15
1 dispensaries in the Downtown area. When the DZC was adopted it was very specific that while
2 pharmacies are allowed smoke shops/liquor stores are not.
3
4 Commissioner Watt:
5 • Many good comments came out of the public hearing.
6 • Sees that while the proposed Ordinance relates to medical marijuana there is still the element of
7 recreational marijuana that will likely have to be addressed in an ordinance of some kind should
8 Proposition 64 pass so there is a potential future that will have to be looked at that concerns the
9 possible need to allow for recreational marijuana dispensaries in the City limits and/or how this
10 should be portrayed.
11 Regarding Medical Marijuana Dispensaries:
12 ■ Could possibly support approval of the Ordinance with a few changes and questions.
13 ■ Related to distance limitation for dispensaries concerning `Youth-oriented facility' needs
14 to be further defined to include libraries, museums.
15 ■ Asked if there is a revised map showing potential locations for dispensaries and what is
16 the setback? Does the map include the library or museum? Asked if the parcels from the
17 distance location map that are in pink meet the requirement?
18 • Supports a larger setback for the youth-oriented facilities same as for a school, but does
19 not know what that means on the potential locations for dispensaries map.
20 ■ Is of the opinion the hours of operation are an important consideration.
21 ■ It appears the matter of signage has been sufficiently addressed.
22 ■ Acknowledged the discussion concerning the need to publicly notice for the initial and
23 renewal of use permits for dispensaries and to make certain notification is part of the
24 process.
25 ■ When the State rules go into effect that regulate medical marijuana dispensaries is the
26 City going to have a role in this regard or is this going to be entirely up to a State agency?
27 ■ The regulations we are talking about are related to land use. Would like to know about
28 the other aspects of the regulations that the State will have over a dispensary and will the
29 City have a role or not as it concerns testing, records, tracking/all of those aspects that
30 are not land use. Is there a need to have something in the Ordinance that says we have
31 to comply with what the State rules are or is this already covered?
32 ■ There are times when people come in and get a City permit for something and they also
33 have to get permits from other entities. It may be the City cannot issue a particular permit
34 until permits are obtained from other entities. Do we have to indicate in the Ordinance
35 that other relevant and necessary State permits must be obtained before an initial
36 dispensary use permit can be approved? Is of the opinion if the aforementioned to
37 include language concerning possible necessary State permits is not covered in the
38 Ordinance, it should be.
39 ■ Questions whether or not to allow medical marijuana dispensaries in the DZC district
40 since marijuana is not recognized as legal nationally and there exits that persona and/or
41 'shadow of black market' image about marijuana where he might have a lot different
42 opinion if, in reality, this were not the case. The proposed Ordinance has many rules
43 because marijuana is not legal nationally and again, there is still that `dark shadow of
44 black markeY representation about marijuana even though this concept is starting to
45 change. We do not know what is going to happen regarding legalization of recreational
46 marijuana so he understands it is difficult to formulate a Medical Marijuana Ordinance
47 that is adaptive and functions well when there are many unknown variables yet to be
48 defined.
49 ■ Is of the opinion the initial use permit for a medical marijuana dispensary should be
50 reviewed by the Planning Commission rather than the Zoning Administrator.
51 ■ Again, the definition of youth-oriented facilities needs to be expanded upon and supports
52 the 600-foot distance setback for a dispensary for a school. Would like to see the hours
53 of operation clearly specified.
54 ■ Related to consumption of marijuana on site, supports prohibiting the smoking of
55 marijuana on-site but is okay with ingesting marijuana on-site.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 16
1 ■ Providing for public notification pertinent to the initial and renewal of a medical marijuana
2 dispensary use permit is important.
3
4 Darcey Vaughn:
5 • There will be State regulations but the purpose of the MMRSA was to leave a lot of room for local
6 control. The City can still regulate dispensaries and dispensary operations as long as the way the
7 City regulates is it at least as stringent as how the State regulates it. Sometimes the State will
8 grandfather in local regulations that predate the regulations.
9 • Has knowledge the City does have a role in the aforementioned and of course all of these things
10 have to be regulated at the State level. City and County ordinances usually refer to the State
11 laws so as to give constituents notice that there are also State regulations.
12 • MMRSA and proposed Proposition 64 require applicants to have a certain kind of marijuana
13 licenses to show they have complied with local regulations.
14
15 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
16 • Presented the map that shows potential locations for dispensaries based on 250-foot setback
17 and 600-foot setback. Confirmed the map does not take into consideration the library or
18 museum. The map is pretty representative of where dispensaries could go. Confirmed the parcels
19 in pink do meet the requirement.
20
21 Commissioner Sanders:
22 • Does understand the rationale for all the rules to obtain a medical marijuana dispensary use
23 permit.
24 • Appreciates comments made by the Commissioners above in terms of the regulation and why a
25 dispensary business is really different than all other businesses in the City of Ukiah. The Federal
26 government recognizes marijuana as illegal and this is the reason for all the regulations.
27 • Is of the opinion it is premature to adopt a Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance until 2017 so
28 there is time to put something effective together.
29 • Understands there is a need to have a reputable dispensary so that people can have access to
30 their medicine.
31 • Cannot support recommending adoption of the Ordinance in its current form with the 250-foot
32 distance limitation for dispensaries for youth-oriented facilities and supports this distance be
33 increased to 600 feet.Would like to see an updated map showing this distance limitation.
34
35 Chair Whetzel:
36 • Will the City limit the number of permits available or will they be unlimited? How will applications
37 be processed if there are a significant number of applications submitted?
38 • His preference would be to limit the number of permits that become operational businesses
39 because if a business fails then another permit can be considered.
40 • Preference would be to allow for a minimum of 10 permits available. It is doubtful the City would
41 even be able to accommodate 10 dispensaries. It is not likely there is space for 10 dispensaries.
42 • Recommends a 500-foot distance limitation on everything, schools, library, museum, youth-
43 oriented facilities and understands the 600-foot distance limitation for dispensaries is the State
44 regulation. The City is looking at 250 and 600-foot distance limitations for the Ordinance and he
45 supports a 500-foot setback from all youth-oriented activities, school, museums, and libraries.
46 • If Proposition 64 passes, the City will not receive any sales tax revenue from medical marijuana
47 dispensary sales and will only receive the use permitting fees.
48 • Thanked the public for their comments and input regarding the discussion concerning the Medical
49 Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance.
50 • Would like the Commission to review the Ordinance a third time with the changes being made to
51 it.
52 • Would like hours of operation to be considered.
53
54 Interim Planning Director:
55 • The number of permits will be limited at this point.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 17
1 • While there may be no sales tax gain on medical marijuana there is the potential for retail sales
2 tax with the sales of paraphilia and other associated devices sold at the dispensary.
3
4 Councilmember Brown:
5 • The Ad Hoc Committee considered allowing two dispensaries three at the most in the City limits
6 and these dispensaries would have to be quality and the best professionally operated.
7 If we do go to the 600-foot distance limitation this would limit the number of dispensaries that can
8 operate in the City limits. Related to the concept of supply and demand, the 600-foot distance
9 limitation for dispensaries would definitely reduce the supply and demand. For instance, if 15
10 dispensary applications are received, it is unlikely this number of dispensaries would be able to
11 open a business because there is no room with the proposed distance limitations for
12 dispensaries.
13 • It may take some time to craft an Ordinance that works well for everyone.
14 • Out of 10 dispensaries, it is likely only two dispensary businesses will survive and this represents
15 capitalism at its best.
16
17 Commissioner Hilliker:
18 • Would like to see a better definition for`Youth-Oriented Facilities.'
19 • Would like to see some kind of description what dispensaries will be selling in addition to medical
20 marijuana.
21
22 There was Commission discussion regarding hours of operation, what type of products are typically sold
23 in dispensaries likely requiring a larger building footprint for retail operations other than marijuana for
24 medicinal purposes.
25
26 Public Hearing Re-Opened: 8:52 p.m.
27
28 Steely Anohe:
29 • The dispensary he is affiliated with in Berkeley operates from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The Oakland
30 dispensary is open until 8:30 p.m. This gives people commute time to go and get their medicine.
31 • Since Ukiah is essentially a rural area, would recommend an earlier start time.
32 • Talked more about dispensary operating hours and what seemed to typically work for clients.
33
34 Michael Rubinstein:
35 • Recently changed his dispensary operating hours to 7:00 p.m. at the request of his patients.
36 Being open later in the evening allows his clients not have to rush to get to the dispensary. The
37 dispensary opens at 10:00 a.m.
38
39 Commissioner Mulheren:
40 • Is pleased to see that the public came to speak.
41 • It may be the Planning Commission should review the ordinance again for the changes made
42 thereof. The Planning Commission can either choose to recommend adoption with the suggested
43 changes to Council or not recommend approval.
44
45 There was discussion about the process and whether or not the Planning Commission needs to look at
46 the draft ordinance again.
47
48 Commissioner Christensen:
49 • Related to medical marijuana dispensary versus recreational marijuana dispensary if and when
50 Proposition 64 passes how much does the medical portion of that law change what we are
51 discussing now and would it be necessary to look more closely at the Ordinance in terms of new
52 State regulations or is the Ordinance intent to pretty much get us on the right track?
53 • Does Proposition 64 in any way and/or sort of by rights give a medical dispensary the opportunity
54 to just become a recreational dispensary? Would like to have a whole other conversation about a
55 recreational dispensary. A medical dispensary is different from a recreational dispensary.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 18
1 • Asked if the Commission moves the Ordinance forward to City Council do we include language
2 that says this excludes future recreational marijuana dispensary. Does not want to really say in
3 the Ordinance document that we can never have recreational facilities and/or retail sales outlets
4 per se but also does not want to leave the door necessarily open to have this component tagged
5 onto the back of the Ordinance that pertains to medical marijuana dispensaries and asked should
6 there be language written into the ordinance prohibiting this from happening?
7 • Is not against recreational marijuana dispensaries/facilities, but the Ordinance we are currently
8 reviewing concerns medical marijuana dispensaries and this is what we are considering at this
9 point.
10
11 Commissioner Sanders:
12 • Related to the distance setback limitation for dispensaries and the added language for libraries
13 and museums and youth-oriented facilities could support a minimum distance of 500 feet for all
14 these facilities/activities.
15
16 Darcey Vaughn:
17 • Her interpretation concerning Proposition 64 is that it was drafted to be compatible with the
18 medical marijuana regulation safety act. As such, would use the same State agencies that are
19 already authorized to regulate health and safety testing, laborer issues and that provide for
20 regulations that address taxation and licensing. Is of the opinion, we do not have to `reinvent the
21 wheel' when it comes to discussing recreational marijuana. In fact, the City could ban
22 recreational dispensaries entirely or recreational retail space within a dispensary.
23 • Council will make the final decision concerning what they want to see in the Ordinance but the
24 Planning Commission can make recommendations. It is important that all possible legal loop
25 holes are adequately addressed particularly for having to regulate the existence of recreational
26 marijuana retail spaces. The aforementioned can be included in the Commission's
27 recommendation to Council for consideration.
28
29 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:55 p.m.
30
31 The Planning Commission made the following comments, recommendations regarding the Medical
32 Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance:
33
34 1. Section 5702 Definitions: The Planning Commission recommended an expanded definition
35 of youth oriented facilities to include: museums and libraries.
36 2. Section 5707 Limitation on Location of Dispensary (C)(1): The Planning Commission
37 recommended an increase the minimum distance a dispensary can locate from a youth
38 oriented facility from 250-feet to 500-feet.
39 3. Section 5708 Operating Requirements (�: The Planning Commission recommended the
40 inclusion into the Operating Standards section, hours of operation of: 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
41 4. Section 5703 Dispensary Use Permit Required to Operate (c): The Planning Commission
42 recommended the addition of strong language that indicates approval of a Medical
43 Dispensary does not automatically entitle the permit holder to a recreational retail outlet for a
44 marijuana permit, and that the regulation of inedical marijuana dispensaries in the City does
45 not allow or permit recreational marijuana businesses or activities.
46 5. Section 5701 Interpretation and Applicability (b): The Planning Commission
47 recommended the addition of language requiring compliance with the Fire Code.
48 6. Section 5710 Criteria for Review Section Zoning Administrator (b): The Planning
49 Commission recommended that Dispensary Use Permits should be heard by the Planning
50 Commission, not the Zoning Administrator.
51 7. 5704 Term of Permits and Renewals Required: The Planning Commission recommended
52 inclusion of a public notice requirement for renewal applications.
53 8. The Planning Commission recommended limiting the number of dispensaries allowed within
54 the City limits to five. The Ad Hoc indicated it did not want to limit the number of dispensaries
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 19
1 based on the notion that the annual renewal process will weed out the bad dispensaries, and
2 limiting the number could prevent the well-operated dispensary the opportunity to apply for a
3 Dispensary Use Permit.
4 9. 5703 Dispensary Use Permit Required to Operate: The Planning Commission
5 recommended amending the Ordinance to require that applicants for a Dispensary Use
6 Permit obtain all applicable State licenses and permits prior to applying for a Dispensary Use
7 Permit.
8 Commissioner Watt was not supportive of the Ordinance as presented at the September 14, 2016
9 Commission meeting and cannot support the document even with the changes incorporated from the last
10 meeting and the way it is currently written still does not address his concerns.
11 M/S Christensen/Hilliker to adopt Initial Environmental Study and proposed Negative Declaration for the
12 Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance. Motion carried (5-0) by all AYE voice vote.
13 M/S Christensen/Hilliker to recommend City Council approve the Medical Marijuana Dispensary
14 Ordinance with the changes made above. The motion carried with the following roll call vote:
15 AYES: Commissioners Hilliker, Christensen, Sanders, Chair Whetzel
16 NOES: Commissioner Watt
17 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
18 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
19 • Gave an update on upcoming planning projects.
20
21 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
22 Commissioner Hilliker:
23 • Has observed the four single family units that were approved on Ford Street are progressing
24 nicely and noted some of them have been sold.
25 • Noted the Redwood Tree Car Service Station has begun work on the approved renovation project
26 for the site.
27
28 12. ADJOURNMENT
29 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:42 p.m.
30
31
32 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
33
34
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2016
Page 20
i
_ ..�
.. ,:
, :�.
�
� . : . -�..
�
c
��
� �.
�
G
� � �
� �
� O
� •�
� �
•�
� >
� �
� �
� r�
� �
� V
� �
� �
� �
.�
' ^ �. ,_
� �
� o
�
�
�
.�
�
�
.�
.�
U
_-.,� ��
�'".�~--. �r;'�
- --.a.
.. ...-. -� ' "'' wTn-�.
. . . . ..... ._ ... . :.5:'`` !cj�.'F!x
. . . . .. . , . �i.���:1�'��.-.-`T.+�
-.:.. ....�.
. .. - � . � . �;fa+{'. -•:�. .�.nx.y1�':-°or,
...... . .. . .
�..;....,:� .. .. .
. �. . .... ...
. .. ..� .. .::.
..
..
-.... :. ��:��. .::, .
. ... ........ ..._...-. . ....-'---�._:.:... . . . . . �A4.�.�•�w'=
. . .. . . ...--'...--'..µ��...�-'-'-'--'----- ''�e--_ -"_-. .�_-
��� ,.
�,..�
..-:��3?'�?3..i:3�•;r..
'��°�;��j.3.::'�.�3�° i3�e�.�i.
.� '�'7'7'•�7 7:1�7�3�o g•c,�'�a��'.3 g3��3.Si.
.-;.:;��ey33i.�3 i3=:�3.��3 3 ,3:.ri°
d��?q3.:�i:ic,d
�;: i:
�
O
�
V
4�
�
.^
4� �
� � .
� .�
O �
N � �
� � � �
� ,� � .+..�
� � �
�
�
O � .�
-� 4— � �
Q O +� O
� � � V
•� •� 1 V
V � � �
, V O =
� j, � �
t�n 4� � Q
� � � �
> o �- �
� >. v, � •�,
� i •i '� 'i
� � � � �
� 0 V � �
� � � ♦ �
�
_ _ �. .,...... :.. :� �.
ar. -.�'"'ii.��.,'3:'�:i'.�7�.
!�_.:��7;'�r: - .ii � '�:::��'.
•�i�'�••• ;.�;. .l. .. "•'
-." :�'� , .. '' `•', ""
O
� � N � � � � �
O� �1 1 �1
� � 0�0 O O 1 1 � O
• � � M M �O � M �
� t/� i/� i,/? t/'� i,/1� i,/} iJ'F i,/?
O
�
•�
�
�V �
LJ� •
� . � � � N 1 1 1 p�p
O � i/1� ih i,/l� i,/?� i,/?� i./'} i�h i..�
V
4�
�
� � � a�
� � � � a�
o a � �, �
� � ° � `� � w �
f� N +� L � j N
� � � � � � � � �
e •.� cn cn U C7 v�i a t7 �
..., - �:�.
. . -- -- — - - .-: -:�._�. -'� -
::�-.���-
:.;�=:i'�.;:: :::;;"
':;:::::»�• g.:;:�:-::;:;:�:•..
S::i???�i�';;i�';??:i3'???:i 3';�:d�..�x;:;,,
• ...�t.:i:ya�i:f3i:ii;�3�i:��:;-'�'?'�:iii:. . ..
:F. ...
fD � '�"� Ol �. Q1
0 N � '� O �
N v � V � �
� +-+ � 0 a' �
� — � � p` o�
� � o�.i p p �
�L 41 � `� � �
0 0 � � � �
�. " o a' �, a, .°c
t/'! � � v � �-, 'y v
� �� � v �
� � � � � � � �
� � N � v v O �
i� � � a Q j
LL � � O
� � � 3 .v � a, v
O � v
�
� � v .� o � o
� � �
� � � o
L v °�' � � � v
O `� � � � � s
•� �' � v " ° ° a,
�..� N � �, v � o ,c
•� C 4J ,+�., `� `� '`'' �
O � H � i N � v
� � � j O � �n
�' � � � v c �
� � �
� � � v v = �
� o � n F�- a �
� � N Q � � Q Q
O � - = � �
� �' � a � v
� •� � 'v v -a a�
�
Lf� � a � a a a �
o �, � v �, �
�
� c.� �, N � � � °'
0 � � �
� � o o � � _ _
.� '� L a4 v ° a Q 3
� � � .� � a, � o �
V `° N tn ° � v ;�
c �n
� a = �, a p �
Q1 N
Q.
H
� � o Q Q o o a a
rl ,
..:.-. _�..�.-�-�;.��
_ . -._-. ,. ; :;;;:-:�:�;�:
.�..K}.�....,.. _._...��:��:..:.y:�::s�:�-.�.
�.';:-j��' �;.
I II II
II I I
L II I I I I i
I �
�{. I
Ilili
:',} V_����,. I
j I
'}; � .i�.�.�....._:
I I
y '" (' a 7 � I li I I I
. ;i'�d�...y_�3�.�,.,�i.ii`i��.. • ' '
� � �
� v
�-.+
� •L
Q o � a
�
� � o � � v v
� ° Q � � � �
V � o o � � p �,
O � a � c p � c
� � v � O
J � a � p � ;"' ,�=
� c 'v° c � 3 +.'
+� c� c � � �n c
4� �
� � � � O � � �
�' � O �
O '�
.� � �
O Q � 3 � v
N � L � �
� U � O � � �. a O.i
O = � � � �
� N � � C.�
c a1 .c •_
•� � Q, +�-+ � Q� .� � �
� � � � � � 3 �
� +-+ +., vi L
� � � � � � V �
� N � � i
.� � � � � p � '^ Q
� L •L � � � O � �
� � a� � O v Q
•� o � E � a � '� ,�
� +� � � .�' •_ o �
Q � °N' � f° c � v c
� N
�' Q � � O � � O
0 `� L .� = 3 � �
.� �. s � � ° o �o
� � o � v � U Q 3 � �
�A L +�-+ . � � � � 41
1.[ J �t v�ni '� � � � Q � �
``+ � c� � O � N � � `�
� � v � � = v �
O � U � � � N � ,'Ci., �
� U � � �` (� � � 0
� � �
'� tzo c � = v� � � �, °
V � � � o � � o � �
� � � v � � o � v �
•� ti,o � � a �
� � a' � a � .� _ °' a, o.
� o ° � v Q o � ,�
. � F- N � � �
�'�I � .
_ : _ . _..��.�_ _.__,_��
�: :� �3�:fi�z� '3�.
a.�.k"';,3 ;a,i �i'3.
a:::� ��:�;�;�ir ...���:},..�a,T:'"`.-.
� , ;;-��-:
- - �
�
v � �; v
� � � °1 °' �
� U `ti ;�, -�
O O � U v
•� � +�` � � � �
� � Q Q
� � Q v� � � �
� v t� � � 'O �
V o � °; v c� O
� � a ° o � �
t �
f° � � � �c c
� v v � o � �
� � _ � � o� c
� �
c
� � • c� '�, v
.+., � o � �
� � '� � � �,
� �, �' a, �' a.
O a o � �
U .'� C � .i.�'+
.� � +.; � � Q � �
N t� i U
� N `� o a -a ° 4°
� � a
� L ° � � � � v
v �
�� � -� � � � � � v
� �� v v � a '� o o '�
i N
� � o o v � 3 0 °
J �� � � v � o � � o �
�� °��' a � a � � a o 0
� � � � c a ° v °�' � ''
`� � � � v c � a � �
O N � � �, _ � � o a
� � c � ��„ ° � � � � �
� � +� ,� � � v L O o
� 'N '^ � �- � +v,, � `ti `►�
� N � `� � � = °' v v
�/'! � •� � � � � � � �
� � o � v ^ o o ° o 0
O � U -� � � = V '� � N
�� � � � M y �' 0�.► �-i N
� C O +.,
� � '� v U° � �• � o ♦ �
� � �L V �
� �� � O O O � � �
� 0 °- � � �
+� c� � v �
� O Q � � � ,�
. �, f- �
� � .;.
.i}
... .._.......ax..,
:...�-.�
<:,:�;.i:�� , I ��
-
- _ -- '�;°' �
:.::Y... :1:•, �_ ..
...+i:j{�I .. . .�... ._
W
�
� �
� O
N � �+
� �
N9 0 � �
� u o �
� .L L `I.�
�i/ '�"� �- a,,,� _
� � � C �'
� � � O
W C a-�+ � O
o � a
•� }+ �v �' v
� � a � v o
� E �,
� � � N �
� p � o �� a
� � u° � � °�'
V � a
.... .�
�
� .� � •� � •�
� � � ° � o
.^
� a � �
N ; �, � v
� � � -� � c
� � � � � ,o
� � � � �^ v
� .^ .�-� � v�i
O O � > � >
.�
� � � N � O .4;
'^ U
� � dJ � � .�n
O ^ � v � o
� � �
I.n � � '� `'- � N
V� a � � � 'i
� � � � o E °s�
�
.O O o o a o °
+� V � � � � o
V .-� o •c � ° °Y'
� r— +; � � = o
� U
N �� !%1 � p Q �
• �
V �� ♦
:.. ......- --• ••�y�
-::w"t:
... -.;.-.i.�j��"rr,'�'
�.::- - - ;�z��,:
:!�'c�.. � .7: - ..... . , . ..
� ..
Q1 i"i
�+ �
� O O
tw v 4
� �
� � � � `ti
� � O � i
� � ,N p �
� � v
� o � Q
� � Q � �
�
4- C 4�''i `�
L � O O � �
c cB a
'� O � > O Q
O ±�+
O
�
.� � � i �
� � � � � a v c
� �= � � :� °
+� � o- � �
� .F+ � o � �, o E
0
� � c v •° � o, �
� � O � � � � v
•- V � � � � � �
a-+ � ° �� � � �
� � L — � �� a �,
� � V � � � � �
Q
� � � � o v �� �
O� � � � � p � ° ,o
�. � .� � �
� � o v o v a o
w � � � � O � � �
Op > 'O O � � v
(� 'N .�' O.i � �
� � � � ti a 0.� ,+��-+
�
� A •� � N +� � C� � �n
Y )
� � }+ � O � � ``ti
� � o � �+ � Q°, o 0
O � � � � � a � o
� �,o o � o
'� •= o U° a ° 'a �
V �� � � o � ° � v
� � a 3 = � � a�i v
� � o � � � a`�,
t!� ^ � - Q ° v .� �
.
� � �
�1 �..� �:
.. -- --_�.��
, �
x
N � �
v O O
�
� ,� v
c
V'f � � o
+� � o ``�
� � v
� ,�, o a, o
o c a
� '� ° c
c �
� � v o a
� � o � a �
.N � o�,,
•� .� •� � � �
Q• �..� Q co. v �
� � i
� � � `ti �C
/�/ O � p� O
Y� •� � C �
� � � O r.,
}' a v
C � ' -� � � o
.^
V � � `�
•�•� �� o o a
� � V � V �
L � � � � a a-
�^ � N � �' � �
i�.f. � Q +�., H
O � s � Q �
�
� � � ° o �' v
� o �^ � =
O N •� �� � � •�
� � �, _
� � � � � v �
� O � � �
U .� 3
O � � � i .Q
�
�� � � � O `ti a
� •� � � O G�.i
V � � � �
� N °" �L = ° a
. /� `� '� � Q �
v ' /�\ � � Q O Q
• [ '
� `� e
.,.;.�
>>*s-
�::•i
i�
�
`� �
�A � O
� �° ° o
_ � �.
Q� � o °
� � �
� _ =
� a �
� N �
i ° �, w°
.� •> c � �a
� � o�
O � � i
�• � v
._
•� a. �
� � f° � •�
� +-� E .�
= o v �
� O U � O
� � � �
� �_ O � .� �
�
� � U � � �
� �
� � � ° v +�
L � u Q v o
� � � � a �
� � N ° � a
� V � L � Q
s � v �
� '� � � , 'i
0
� � � � v �
� t� �N � �c o
� � � `� � �
^' +' � 4�
� W U O � �
O � 4A � � � �
'1 O
+� N � E v � a
� � � c'
4� i
A� �� p,. � = a. 4
W � 'X �' Q C.i
V� � � � Q � a
� �C .
��
:�_.�
�
.;� �sa.
..,.:::' :;�::•*:r.
"';:'i=ii:'�f' .u:.:;c�.i.
.r._'�.� �::;. .:::::.x..:.ry..�:
'�� •�� ••�ti i�ii...ti�.�.:..... 'T�,..
.. a'._3�'�3]':. .x::..' 7=.s...:.�.:
_:T...]�. :�] �" ' . .-.. ..+ i
��.: .
� =^,
� W
L O �
� � � �
� � 3
�
� � � o a �
� _ �
�
a
� Vf 3 ° v � �,
'� � y '�_-' � O,
� � � o v �
L. '� -Q
L� �> ° c v �
.� 0 � '^ o -c .�
� V �- o •"- �
� v
� N a-+ � O �
� � a � 3 a
� � � � v
s
�C 4� L 3 � v o
� � � � � � z
� � � v c � a,
'�'� O � +J °' � c.a,
L i.+ �
a
� L
L � c ,� v � a
� � � a, •� 3
Q W � v � a °'
a� �
0 � a � � 3 �
� � � v .
�
00 � � � ° �
� � 0 3 � a�, a�,
� � �� � o � �-
� —
I.C� '� � � •� �
v
� �� o �' � � �
O "�"� U � v O
•� � � � Q �; �.
a..� a '� �°., .c � •°
V .� � _ � a o. c
� � � o
� � c a. � �
N ^ ~ Q o � o °�'
. �
� � :�
~ - . �A'�:
.---s�
)::A-;..
�':�:_7S_.:::-::L:
.a e?::::�7',� :_.":i' _ .:�'i;i-
i':'r:.-::._:rs:::-'-i''-::,'• :,y:...
--=�: 7::.:�.::=•c'==:� _.- ..
--^���..;.5.=''-':7='_::'I:-Y'
_ "1_ _'' •
.- ._-.-i-�- •-- ••-
� 4�
� O
`{"d
� �^,
W
� �
O ,v
�
��� N
� �
� �
a--+
� �
L
� �
N
� �
�
w �
L �
�
� �
� � �
0 �
�
•�— c�
� `■_�__ U
� T •�
V p �
� �
� +� � o
�. � � �
� � ° �'
� �
Q � ��
�
� �
� � N v
� �
� � � v
� N � � �
.� N �
c
� N c°� � �
N
•� � � � �
.�.J `..� '� c0 U
V L v
� � � o 0
� a =
� .� � � Q
� H c
• .^
� � �:•
d•�Yj
I
,�,��- ,r�.}'. Y°" '?#"-_3�r'`......
�'•.:i_;,7,'�;1'{��� �-:�3-�:i . ..
v N
� � a,
v
� o �
� �
�� o v o
� N � :j
�--+ �
/�� i..i �
W � � �-
� � � �
°' '- o
a� Q �
L L � a a`',
� � L � � ��
� � a �
N '� .`ti v�
� N � v. �.+
� � �- � � �
�
•� � Q � p. �
� � �
�
•� � Q v �
� v
� � � Q �
L •� 3 � � O
V � � � ; a �
a o
� � o •`= v �
oa � �� � � v
� � � �
r � � � o �
� � � o � � �
� � ' v O � 4°
•� o � a, ° �
� _ +�
.c v
� � c ~ a v
0 0 � a c a o°'i
•� N o a °' ° �
� � � � _ ,�
u � � � o *'' v
� O •� �
-� v �
� �1-� a � = c =
, V �, .� -� a o
� � � � Q � z
� ��y .
;
,
�
,.:. �a;.t.�,�;�:;
�
� � ^� '� _�r a ��� ��� �1•.�.�Y'<
.l.'� 'r y�;��i;�'" ..�.i ,� .. -
�t-'.::'3:. .. s:.• ... i i
� �� Q.!
fD .� � �
�' � �
� � � O
Q. Q!
p � � ,O
� � � �
�� � •� -� �
� p �n � O
� � ��
•� � X O �
� �
� � .�
� � � � 0.�
Q � � � �
o ° s v
*'' o
� N
3 '�
-a v
v
.Q � � � Q
`�'d � , a., �
V � � o � :�
� � o
4— � � v � 3
�I-- � � � � a
}' � v
W �' � � � �
� U �
M � � 3 v �
� � v a .�
r � •� � �, o
� •� U O t v
� c � � 3 ��
°- v �
� �N ° � � �
� �� � � ° �
� a�, v �
� v c � o �
V '_° �' `o � �
� � c
� a v = v ,c
Q. i Q �
� i
� � � Q O O
r
.���
�:7.
:�:.:�
.-,.,
��.
_ ',�' ; _ � I � II II
.�r _..,..�. ''.F.. r;:;:.:-.;.`.:V I I �I � �' ��
-
� �
� �
�1-J (�
� �
� .�
� �
� �
� �
Q �
Q �
� �
�
� O
� �
L
� �
� � V
.�
� � 0 V
� � � � �
.�
V � � �
a--� �
.� ,^
� � � � �
� Q � a o
� � z
4� � � � i
� V � N �
� � � 0 �
O � �o p �
� u � � o
� 6+� �.�
. ... . ..._.....'......�.���
�k— " �-�i-Si�..i�-.L
� � �. � �
� � � ♦ ��
.�isa � � _'_ '
r - — -
� � ���
V
l � � � �
�
[}
f
1
:`
1
�
I
4 ' ":'T 7::
1�' �'� � �..i
I � 1
� �- { `� n.:!.V -'�—
- l �� -
_ ���� � :, '.
.` � •.E k -_J_
i ' �fy;i`<
`.ti�� �.��r:
. �:N•�_ 1 i , � t.
,.au �'i .Yiz.i'�i' ; ��
6�j.. =:.t-'„-'`-�� -' .''��:r
_ 5'i�..•�ie�•
��- ir.r]n�. _ .�..�
..' :Rr:o'�� —• �...-�'_' ,
C'a.l�= i�s.° .
_q::p _ w` �� ,�:;" '
i. :�'� ,�'yw•
'E� -y'� �Y: - . .
..er�!�' '.�e:f,�,°s �_:;,' _
}?�:.I � �:u1 'Sr�'• ,;1'1,, _.'���- .
� � ' " '_..!:�. - ��i�, �,r i.��a:� �� _
.} '�t� ,� j• P }'_,z-in.n'
�. fi, . i :d '�.t::�v _.
::_�.. 1 � ..t,��-'` _
r?��.d• --�. � �a �i �i, •rY �.,�JJ - .
' � f�� �'� ' r.'`:;y', :;,. , f
,H- ri� '�;�t;��S��r�,:� 1�'.f.,,: - ' �..
- ' • '�(lyln'F�': <'. ��i,
..i; �LC �6' '°�
•� T'L�,.1��L4�. _�:r
� '. + - � 1 �'�.�:
`` �6ii 1� � Y_ j� �y�.��: c
ry- „�., �.4a�'.� �,,.
��:�� - .;�FnY '� ��;.^�=-... ::���
; "�--�:�.3 .:
�. :,�.y�x. - .
�-:� . :�
,
:.;^' , , s
^�'� s
� !J Y�
••y.ie':.' !�r..i�:� e.:
�' �
- L.ri= t,�;.� _
� ' ��'�����
'��. �;:::�:� �
�
� � � � � 1 � � � 1 �
A'°cschm��t # ��_�
Kevin Thompson
From: Maureen Mulheren <themoyouknow707@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 11:10 AM
To: Kevin Thompson
Subject: Fwd: Cannabis
Can you please forward this to the Planning Commission Members for tonight's discussion.
Thanks in advance.
Mo
---------- Forwarded message----------
From: City of Ukiah Website<webmaster�citvofukiah.com�
Date: Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:04 AM
Subject: Cannabis
To: themovouknow707�g�nail.com
�
Councilmember Mulheren,
Someone has sent you a message using the City of Ukiah's website. The details are below.
Regards,
City of Ukiah
From : Michael K Johnson�micro-inike�sbcglobal.net�
Subject : Cannabis
Message Body :
�
� �
Hi Jim. I met�vith you and Jim several months ago about dispensaries in Ukiah. I am sick with liver cancer and
probably will not be able to attend the meeting tonight but want to restate my desire to have a good location in
town where my elderly patients feel safe while getting their medicine. Forcing your sick elders to go to truck
stops and industrial neighborhoods to get their medicine isn't much better than Lawes Ave. after dark. It is cruel
and our sick and elders deserve better. Please allo�v us to contribute to Ukiah with our sales taxes and the
support we bring to a community. Thank you. Michael Johnson 743-1384
Maureen Mulheren
Connect Insurance
Lic#OG38950
304 N State Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
ph 7073913664
facebook.com/tin kconnectinsurance
�
��+F��hm�nt # 3
Kevin Thompson
From: Sage Sangiacomo
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 3:36 PM
To: Darcy Vaughn; Chris Dewey; Kevin Thompson;lim O. Brown; 'Maureen Mulheren
Wattenburger(themoyouknow@gmail.com)'
Subject: FW: Marijuana dispensary ordinance
See correspondence received (below) related to the Planning Commission meeting.
Sage Sangiacomo
City Manager
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
P)707-463-6221
F) 707-463-6740
ssangiacomo@cityofukiah.com
www.cityofukiah.com
www.visitukiah.com
-----Original Message-----
From: deborahse@att.net [mailto:deborahse@att.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 10:43 AM
To: Christopher Watt<wattc@lacoassociates.com>; Linda Sanders<kaderli@juno.com>
Cc: Kevin Thompson<kthompson@cityofukiah.com>;Sage Sangiacomo<ssangiacomo@cityofukiah.com>
Subject: Marijuana dispensary ordinance
Dear Commissioners Watt and Sanders,
I am writing as a resident of the City of Ukiah to express my strong objection to allowing dispensaries of any kind in the
downtown core (Zone DC)or the General Urban or Urban Center zones (GU, UC)that surround the DC.The downtown
core and the streets that surround it are a key part of the lovely small town feel that Ukiah has retained year after year
and were a major reason my husband and I decided to move to Ukiah. We enjoy bringing our family to the restaurants
and shops, but I cannot image Pumpkinfest or the Friday night movies with dispensaries right there. It will change the
spirit of Ukiah permanently. Relying on police reports and the like to determine if a given business can stay will prove to
be difficult. Once established, any given business will be hard to dislodge.
I recognize that there is a desire to capture tax revenue. However,there are plenty of other locations within the city
limits that can accommodate dispensaries. Why destroy a lovely functioning downtown if you don't have to?
I recognize that the public comment period on this ordinance has passed but I was unaware of it until very recently and
will be unable to attend the meeting tonight.
Thank you for your consideration of this email.
Sincerely,
Deborah Stanger Edelman