County of Sonoma Agenda Item Summary Report



Similar documents
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT. DEPARTMENT: City Attorney MEETING DATE: December 15, 2015

ORDINANCE NO. 447U. Commerce Clause powers gave Congress the authority to enact the Controlled Substances Act, commerce; and

County of Sonoma Agenda Item Summary Report

LEGISLATIVE ANALYST REPORT

A. MARIJUANA LAND USE IN MULTNOMAH COUNTY: CURRENT STATUS

Preprinted Logo will go here

DISCLAIMER. Electronic versions of the exhibits in these minutes may not be complete.

ORDINANCE NO AMENDING THE SAN MATEO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 7.46 REGARDING MEDICAL MARIJUANA COLLECTIVES REGULATIONS

ORDINANCE #18 MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS PROHIBITED

Chapter 8.24

Denver City Council. David W. Broadwell, Assistant City Attorney

Speakers for the Town Hall include: Rachel Allen, staff attorney, Colorado Municipal League Sean Paige, former City council member Don McKay,

The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

~l~~~ CITIES. LEAGUE OF CALI FOR la. December 3, To: City and County Officials

FAQs Recreational Marijuana in Oregon

HOW TO DO A CITY REFERENDUM

How to do a City Referendum

Amendment 64 Use and Regulation of Marijuana

Medical Marijuana Ordinances: Problems Local Governments Are Facing

Florida Department of Health Use of Marijuana for Debilitating Medical Conditions Constitutional Amendment Analysis

Letter of Determination

An Act to tax and regulate the production, sale, and use of marijuana.

Memorandum. Council Meeting: 5/13/14 Agenda Item: 8.1 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

Medical Marijuana Dispensaries, Hookah Bars, and Head Shops

EDB ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD

Internal Audit. Sonoma County

Municipal Lobbying Ordinance

Community Choice Energy for Alameda County

CHAPTER 20 COUNTY PERMISSIVE MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE TAX

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS. SECTION 6. Article XIX C is added to the California Constitution, to read: SECTION 7. CONFLICTING BALLOT MEASURES.

COUNTY AND DISTRICT INITIATIVE & REFERENDUM PETITIONS

Seattle City Attorney Peter S. Holmes

Internal Audit. Sonoma County

CITY OF SURREY BY-LAW NO

The primary focus of state and local government is to provide basic services,

ORDINANCE NO. 72 THE TOWNSHIP BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF LANSING HEREBY ORDAINS:

Proposition 172 Facts A Primer on the Public Safety Augmentation Fund

County of Stanislaus Public Health

AN OVERVIEW OF FUNDING SOURCES

REGIONAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Executive Summary & Recommendations

CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF DOUGLAS ALLEGAN COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO

ESSB H AMD TO APP COMM AMD (H /13) 388 By Representative Taylor FAILED 04/12/2013

Local Taxes on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages in California

CITY OF SANTA ROSA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 2012 APPLICANT FILE NUMBER CUP12-042

H 5815 S T A T E O F R H O D E I S L A N D

County Ballot Issues General Election November 4. Alachua County. Brevard County

CITY OF WABASHA REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR LEGAL SERVICES

78th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session. House Bill 3400 SUMMARY

SAN IPSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY

ISBA Professional Conduct Advisory Opinion

Summary of SB 107 (Budget and Fiscal Review) Chapter 325, Statutes of 2015

77th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session. House Bill 3460

Support AB 312 To Establish An Office of Citizen Complaints for the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) Police Department

Internal Audit. Sonoma County

Health Impact Assessment

when the following proceedings, among others were held and done, to-wit: ORDINANCE NO. 13

COUNTY OF SONOMA AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY REPORT

A Citizen s Guide to PARtiCiPAtion

A REGULATION TO ENSURE SAFE ACCESS TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN THE CITY OF BOSTON

MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN SAN DIEGO

State Law in Minnesota affecting Local Codes & Ordinances

RESOLUTION NO THE EDUCATION PROTECTION ACCOUNT

Zoning Most Frequently Asked Questions

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

SENATE BILL No. 625 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 4, Introduced by Senator Beall. February 22, 2013

REFERENDUM PETITION PROCESS

A JOINT RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. Section 5, Article VII, Texas Constitution, is amended to read as follows:

DECRIMINALIZATION OF CANNABIS. An overview of national, state and local government policy considerations

ADOPTED REGULATION OF THE DIVISION OF PUBLIC AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. LCB File No.

2014 County Ballot Issues Results General Election November 4th

County Of Sonoma Agenda Item Summary Report

PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATION. Joint Academic Senate Student Affairs Committee

SECOND CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT BRIEF SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 2281

Home Rule Charter. Approved by Hillsborough County Voters September Amended by Hillsborough County Voters November 2002, 2004, and 2012

State Law in North Carolina affecting Local Codes & Ordinances

Senate Calendar FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 05, 2016 SENATE CONVENES AT: 11:30 A.M. TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE ON SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES UNDER THE CalWORKs PROGRAM

State Board of Directors for Community Colleges A.R.S

Cleburne County Commission Meeting Cleburne County, Alabama April 13, There were absent: Commissioner Dwight Williamson

Medical Cannabis. July 13, 2011

Second Regular Session Seventieth General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO INTRODUCED HOUSE SPONSORSHIP SENATE SPONSORSHIP

Florida Senate SB 528

Financial Impact Estimating Conference. Use of Marijuana for Certain Medical Conditions Serial Number 13 02

CHAPTER VII ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

BALLOT PROPOSITION I FISCAL ANALYSIS

No OZ and Drug Dealer List

MEDICAL MARIJUANA: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN CALIFORNIA AND FEDERAL LAW AND ITS EFFECT ON LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ORDINANCES

Kansas Legislator Briefing Book 2015

What brings you to the work of the Blue Ribbon Commission, and marijuana?

Article 3 - Administrative Services (Language taken from Caro Charter Chapter 7)

What Does It Mean To Be A Home Rule Township?

DATE: JUNE 19, 2007 CMR: 265:07 REQUEST TO INCREASE THE CITY OF PALO ALTO S TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX

Home Rule Handbook. For County Government Supplement File With the 2013 Home Rule Handbook. Published by South Carolina Association of Counties

Approval of Agenda The May 14, 2013 agenda approved as presented.

Proposed Charter City Measure: Frequently Asked Questions

Chapter No Emergency Government

City of Eugene Initiative Process

CHAPTER SECURITY ALARM SYSTEMS

Wisconsin Library Law: Chapter 43. Summaries of Sections

162 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12231

Transcription:

County of Sonoma Agenda Item Summary Report Agenda Item Number: 39 (This Section for use by Clerk of the Board Only.) Clerk of the Board 575 Administration Drive Santa Rosa, CA 95403 To: Sonoma County Board of Supervisors Board Agenda Date: February 2, 2016 Vote Requirement: 4/5 Department or Agency Name(s): County Administrator s Office / Permit and Resource Management Department Staff Name and Phone Number: Veronica Ferguson, 565.2431 Tennis Wick, 565.1925 Title: Supervisorial District(s): Countywide Interim Urgency Ordinances for Medical Marijuana Cultivation and Resolution of Intention Recommended Actions: 1. Adopt Urgency Ordinances and make specific findings to maintain current local regulations regarding marijuana cultivation (4/5 vote). 2. Adopt a Resolution of Intention directing staff to develop new zoning regulations to permit marijuana cultivation, storage, distribution, deliveries, manufacturing and other marijuana regulations (Majority vote). Executive Summary: These actions would maintain Sonoma County s current laws related to medical marijuana in light of new State legislation, and direct staff to engage in community outreach and policy analysis to develop comprehensive local land use regulations for continued safe access to medical marijuana. On January 1, 2016, the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (MMRSA) took effect, setting forth a deadline of March 1, 2016, for local governments to regulate the cultivation of marijuana. The Urgency Ordinances (Attachments A and B) are necessary to maintain local control over land use, which is critical to the public safety, health and welfare, and will provide the time necessary for the due diligence and thoughtful deliberation required for sound policy development. Background In 1996, voters adopted Proposition 215, entitled the Compassionate Use Act, which allowed for the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes by qualified patients and for caregivers to provide medical marijuana and receive reimbursement for their costs. Following adoption of the state proposition, many new land uses evolved, but the interplay between federal, state, and local law was unsettled. More recently, the law has established some statewide parameters for maintaining local land use controls.

In 2005, the Board adopted an urgency ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries to allow the County time to engage the community, study the issue, and produce an appropriate permitting and land use policy. While the dispensary ordinance was being developed, the Board enacted Resolution No. 06-0846 in 2006, which set Sonoma County limits on dried marijuana and plants (3 pounds of dried marijuana and 30 plants per qualified patient) above the state default possession and cultivation limits (8 ounces of dried marijuana in addition to no more than 6 mature plants or 12 immature plants per qualified patient). In 2007, the Board adopted Ordinance 5715 amending the zoning code to permit medical marijuana dispensaries as a conditional use within certain commercial zoning districts, and setting minimum location and operational standards. In 2012, the Board adopted another amendment to the zoning code establishing a maximum limit of nine dispensary permits within the unincorporated area of the County. New State Law The Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act ( MMRSA ), consisting of AB 243 (Wood), AB 266 (Bonta) and SB 643 (McGuire), was signed into law by Governor Brown on October 9, 2015. This legislation constructs a comprehensive framework for the regulation of commercial marijuana, covering a broad array of topics including cultivation, delivery, transportation, manufacturing, environmental standards and enforcement, general enforcement, advertising and labeling, employer/workplace restrictions, appellation/organic standards, fees and taxation, safety standards, criminal penalties, and tracking and tracing systems. MMRSA also establishes a dual licensing scheme under which anyone engaged in commercial cannabis activity must first obtain a local license or permit, and then a state license. While MMRSA took effect on January 1, 2016, the estimated start date for the new State licensing program is not until January 1, 2018. Once the State s licensing scheme is developed, only qualified patients or primary caregivers who cultivate no more than 500 square feet (or 100 square feet for each qualified patient) will be exempt from commercial licenses. While MMRSA replaces cooperative and collective cultivation with licensed commercial cultivation, growing cooperatively/collectively remains a defense to prosecution until the State s licensing scheme is implemented. March 1 Deadline to Regulate Cultivation Despite MMRSA s January 1, 2018, start date for state licensing, AB 243 specified that if a local government does not have land use regulations or ordinances regulating or prohibiting the cultivation of marijuana... then commencing March 1, 2016, the [State] shall be the sole licensing authority for medical marijuana cultivation. (Health & Safety Code 11362.777(c)(4)). This has been interpreted to mean that if the local government does not explicitly regulate cultivation by March 1, 2016, it will lose its opportunity to do so. As a result, many local governments have taken action to regulate cultivation since the passage of MMRSA. Local Regulations Sonoma County currently has two local regulatory mechanisms that impact medical marijuana cultivation: 1) Resolution No. 06-0846, which adopted local Guidelines establishing limits on

possession and cultivation of marijuana under the Compassionate Use Act; and, 2) the Zoning Code, which regulates land use. Guidelines In September 2006, the Board adopted Guidelines per Resolution No. 06-0846, which established limits for possession and cultivation of 3 pounds of dried marijuana and 30 plants per patient, above the State default limits of 8 ounces and 6 mature plants or 12 immature plants. Both the State and the County set the square foot limit at 100 square feet per qualified patient. The Resolution is available as a defense to prosecution for qualified patients or caregivers who cultivate or possess medical marijuana in accordance with the prescribed limits except when: 1) the cultivation occurs in zones where the growing of legal plants is not already allowed; 2) a nuisance is created; or 3) the cultivation is for profit or distribution. Zoning Code Sonoma County, like most local jurisdictions, has a permissive zoning code, which means that any use not expressly allowed by the code is not permitted. Currently, the zoning code does not contain any provisions allowing for the cultivation of marijuana or any other controlled substances, so it is therefore not considered an allowed land use. However, the County has recognized the above defense to prosecution with regards to local land use violations. The lack of explicit cultivation regulations drives staff s recommendation for an urgency ordinance, a process many other jurisdictions have taken to ensure local land use authority. The explicit language within the proposed urgency ordinance provides an unambiguous statement of current conditions, while allowing the County to maintain the status quo. Other Jurisdictions Actions Regulating Cultivation Several other counties and cities have taken actions in response to MMRSA in order to maintain local control. Alameda County, which has a permissive code, introduced an ordinance on January 12 prohibiting cultivation of medical marijuana. Similarly, the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors directed staff to prepare an urgency ordinance prohibiting cultivation in the unincorporated areas of the county. Napa County is also considering a similar ordinance prior to the March 1 deadline. Humboldt County recently passed a cultivation ordinance after completing a comprehensive planning process similar to the one proposed in the Resolution of Intention included in this item. Lake, Mendocino, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties already regulate marijuana cultivation. The City of Sonoma adopted a resolution explicitly reaffirming that the city s existing permissive code prohibits cultivation. On January 4, Petaluma adopted an ordinance banning commercial cultivation, in addition to setting other requirements for personal grows. The Rohnert Park City Council is considering an urgency ordinance prohibiting the issuance of entitlements for marijuana cultivation facilities; and Cloverdale will consider a cultivation ordinance prohibiting commercial cultivation and requiring a permit for personal grows of more than three plants. The Town of Windsor will be considering a reaffirmation of its prohibition as a placeholder. Santa Rosa City Council has directed staff to develop an ordinance that would establish a use permit for commercial cultivators. Sebastopol and Healdsburg already regulated marijuana cultivation prior to the passage of MMRSA.

Recommended Urgency Ordinance Pursuant to Government Code section 65858, to protect the public safety, health, and welfare, the County may adopt a zoning ordinance as an interim measure prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with contemplated policy. The measure requires a 4/5th vote and would be effective immediately for a duration of 45 days, at which point it could be extended for up to two years. Urgency ordinances are not required to go through the Planning Commission, but any subsequent local land use regulations will be required to have a recommendation from the Planning Commission prior to adoption by the Board. To maintain local control over cultivation, staff recommends that the Board adopt urgency ordinances confirming and articulating the County s status quo, which is that the cultivation of marijuana is not permitted under the County Zoning Code. The recommended Urgency Ordinances would incorporate the Guidelines, ensuring that the defense to prosecution for possession and cultivation of medical marijuana remains in place, and continue unchanged the local regulatory and enforcement framework. The only change resulting from adoption of the Urgency Ordinances is that the County would have acted before March 1 st, preserving its ability to maintain local land use controls over the emerging marijuana industry. Alternative Options to Adoption of the Urgency Ordinances The Board may still have a possibility of maintaining local control should it decline to pass the urgency ordinances. First, the provision of MMRSA imposing the March 1 deadline recognizes the principles of permissive zoning as a prohibition meeting the requirement for retaining local control. However, relying on permissive zoning leaves the County open to challenges that marijuana cultivation is similar to a permitted use and thus allowed under the Zoning Code. Further, the proposed Urgency Ordinances maintain the status quo dictated by the permissive code, so the outcome would be equivalent for practical purposes. Second, the State legislature is considering a bill that would eliminate the March 1 deadline and thus the chance of losing local control. In January, Assemblymember Jim Wood, the author of AB 243, introduced AB 21 to strike the entire provision at issue. Although AB 21 is currently moving through the Legislature, the fact and timing of its adoption are open questions. Given the extended timeline of adopting any alternative zoning ordinance, staff does not find that any other action exists to develop a land use regulation for marijuana cultivation prior to March 1. Recommended Resolution of Intention / New Land Use Regulations In addition to the urgency ordinances, staff further requests Board adoption of a Resolution of Intention (Attachment B), initiating the process for developing more comprehensive land use regulations regarding all facets of the emerging marijuana industry, including cultivation, dispensaries, deliveries, distribution, and manufacturing of edibles and other medical marijuana products. Among other specific issues, staff will identify and recommend ways to provide Sonoma County cultivators with preferred status under MMRSA, which would allow privileges related to state licensing applications.

On the near horizon is a set of ballot measures to legalize marijuana recreationally statewide, similar to measures that have passed in other states. The Draft Project Work Plan (Attachment D) presents the major tasks and a recommended process for development and consideration of new zoning regulations for medical marijuana, and provides an opportunity to consider regulations for recreational use in the event a more general legalization takes place. The Work Plan includes a robust public outreach process working with the Board Ad Hoc Committee, other County departments and local agencies, as well as hosting several public workshops in the affected communities and focus groups with other stakeholders. The Work Plan envisions an 18 to 20 month process for policy development, including public hearings before the Planning Commission, culminating in the presentation of a full range of policy options for Board consideration in the Summer of 2017. At the community meeting hosted by the Medical Marijuana Ad Hoc on Monday January 25 th, many in attendance expressed the desire for an expedited timeline. Staff is currently examining the additional resources that would be required to complete the planning process in a shorter timeframe. Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution of Intention directing staff to develop new land use regulations to permit continued safe access to marijuana addressing cultivation, storage, distribution/dispensaries and manufacturing, as well as to address the impacts any new ballot measures or state legislation. Prior Board Actions: January 31, 2012: The Board enacted Ordinance No. 5967. March 20, 2007: The Board enacted Ordinance No. 5715. September 26, 2006: The Board enacted Resolution No. 06-0846. May 17, 2005: The Board adopted an urgency ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries. Strategic Plan Alignment Goal 1: Safe, Healthy, and Caring Community Establishing comprehensive marijuana policies is necessary to preserve our environmental resources, protect the health and safety of our communities, and ensure the industry contributes positively to the economic vitality of our County. Expenditures Fiscal Summary - FY 15-16 Funding Source(s) Budgeted Amount $ $ Add Appropriations Reqd. $ State/Federal $ $ Fees/Other $ $ Use of Fund Balance $ $ Contingencies $ $ $ Total Expenditure $ Total Sources $

Narrative Explanation of Fiscal Impacts (If Required): PRMD staff time has been included in the PRMD Comprehensive Planning Work Plan. Any additional resources required will be included when staff returns to the Board with the Medical Marijuana Ad Hoc Charter. Staffing Impacts Position Title (Payroll Classification) Monthly Salary Range (A I Step) Additions (Number) Deletions (Number) Narrative Explanation of Staffing Impacts (If Required): None Attachments: Attachment A: Draft Urgency Ordinance Attachment B: Draft Urgency Ordinance Coastal Zone Attachment C: Draft Resolution of Intention Attachment D: Draft Project Work Plan Related Items On File with the Clerk of the Board: