Loading...
Ordinance No. 895 - Interim Ordinance Continuing the provisions of Ordinance 877 and 879 for an Additional period of 1 year to Continue the Moratorium on Medical Marijuana DispensariesORDINANCE NO. 895 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, CONTINUING THE PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 877 AND ORDINANCE NO. 879 FOR AN ADDITIONAL PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR TO CONTINUE THE MORATORIUM ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN THE CITY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. Based on information contained in the record, the City Council makes the following findings: A. At a duly noticed public meeting on June 30, 2009, and after hearing and considering public testimony, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 877, an interim urgency ordinance establishing a moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries in the City for a period of 45 days pending a resolution of the conflict in Federal and State law on this issue. B. At a duly noticed public hearing on August 11, 2009, and after hearing and considering public testimony, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 879 extending the moratorium for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days, or until June 25, 2010. C. Government Code Section 65858(a) authorizes the City Council to continue the effect of Ordinance Nos. 877 and 879 for an additional period of one (1) year. D. The findings made in Ordinance Nos. 877 and 879 are herby reaffirmed, readopted and incorporated by reference as though they were fully restated herein. E. Pursuant to Government Code § 65858(d), 10 days prior to the expiration of Ordinance No. 879, the City Council issued a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions which led to the adoption of Ordinance Nos. 877 and 879. F. The immediate threat to and specific adverse impacts upon the public health safety and welfare that would result from unregulated development of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries justifies an additional extension of the interim urgency moratorium. G. It remains necessary for the City to complete its study of the appropriate type of local regulation required for medical marijuana dispensaries together with the potential impact medical marijuana dispensaries may have on the public's health, safety and welfare. LA #4830-6519-0149 v I 1. Currently the City's Municipal Code does not expressly permit or prohibit the establishment and operation of medical marijuana dispensaries but applicants could require a use determination from the City pursuant to Section 17.12.030 of the City's Municipal Code, thus allowing the potential for the establishment or prohibition of such uses within the City on a case by case basis. 2. There exists a potential for inconsistent project review in that absence of clear policy direction based upon a thorough review of the City's land use goals and policies as well as information obtained from other cities and counties regarding the potentially positive and negative impacts that operation of such facilities may have on the community. 3. The current status of the state and federal law is fraught with inherent inconsistencies and pending judicial and administrative interpretations and the status of existing litigation and proposed legislation indicates a high level of community and statewide concerns regarding the establishment of medicinal marijuana dispensaries, warrants further review and consideration by the City in the establishment of appropriate local regulation for medical marijuana dispensaries. 4. The United States Supreme Court in Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (2002) 535 U.S. 302 has upheld interim planning processes and determined that they are an essential tool of successful development. H. The City finds that an interim prohibition on medical marijuana dispensaries and the issuance of any such applicable entitlements is necessary for an additional period of one (1) year. 1. The inconsistencies between state and federal law continue to require study before thorough regulation of medical marijuana dispensaries is possible. In addition, there remains no definitive judicial or administrative analysis of medical marijuana dispensaries on which the City can base any regulation of that use. Specifically, the appellate decision in Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim has been delayed due to the appellate court seeking additional briefing on the matter. This case turns on whether medical marijuana dispensaries are required by or protected by the Compassionate Use Act and/or Senate Bill 420 and the decision is expected to resolve whether municipalities have the authority to prohibit dispensaries. A decision in the matter had been anticipated before the end of calendar year 2009 but will now not be issued until after the effectiveness of Ordinance No. 879 has expired. Thus, there remains substantial uncertainty about the extent to which the City may regulate medical marijuana dispensaries and that uncertainty will remain until the decision is issued. 2. An additional period of one (1) year will permit City Staff to complete its investigation of matters relating to medical marijuana dispensaries, LA 94830-6519-0149 v l including but not limited to the Qualified Patients decision, and recommend a course of action to the City Council. 3. Government Code § 65858 authorizes the City Council to extend, as an urgency measure, an Interim Ordinance prohibiting any uses which may be in conflict with its existing or proposed General Plan, Zoning Ordinance or land use policies and which the City is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time. SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. The City Council finds that: That this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; rather it prevents changes in the environment pending the completion of the contemplated Municipal Code review. SECTION 3. IMPOSITION OF MORATORIUM. The City Council. orders as follows: A. In accordance with the authority granted the City of Rosemead under Government Code § 65858(a), and pursuant to the findings stated herein, Ordinance No. 877 is hereby extended and the moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries, as set forth fully in Ordinance No. 877, shall remain in effect for an additional period of one (1) year (May 10, 2010). SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION. Pursuant to Government Code § 65858(a) this Ordinance shall take effect immediately but shall be of no further force and effect one (1) year from its date of adoption. SECTION 5. PUBLICATION. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published and posted pursuant to the provisions of law in that regard and this Ordinance shall take effect immediately and shall be in effect for a period of one (1) year (May 10, 2011). LA #4830-6519-0149 vl INTRODUCED at the regular meeting of Rosemead City Council on May 11, 2010. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of May, 2010. . A-4141~19Z~ Gary T "Plr, Mayo ATTEST: Gloria Mol eda, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: i_ Josep ' o ter, City Attorney LA #4830-6519-0149 vl STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF ROSEMEAD 1 I, Gloria Molleda, City Clerk of the City of Rosemead, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Urgency Ordinance No. 895 was duly and regularly approved and adopted by the City Council on the11 m of May, 2010 by the following vote to wit: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Gloria Molleda City Clerk 10 DAY REPORT ON THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD'S MORATORIUM ON THE APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES BACKGROUND On June 30, 2009, pursuant to Government Code section 65858, the Rosemead City Council enacted Urgency Ordinance No. 877, which imposed a moratorium on the approval of applications for land use entitlements for medical marijuana dispensaries for a period of 45 days (the "Initial Ordinance"). On August 11, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 879, which continued the moratorium for an additional period of 10 months and 15 days (the "First Extension"). The City Council is now considering a second extension of the moratorium, this time for one year. This report is submitted in compliance with subsection (d) of Government Code section 65858, which requires the issuance of "a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions which led to the adoption of the ordinance." UPDATE ON THE MEASURES TAKEN TO ALLEVIATE THE CONDITIONS THAT LED TO THE ADOPTION OF THE INITIAL ORDINANCE 1. In the limited time allotted under the Initial Ordinance and First Extension, City staff has begun to compile and study the substantial health and safety issues, as well as the inconsistencies between State law and Federal law, regarding the approval of and location of medical marijuana dispensaries. This includes but is not limited to a review of the Qualified Patients Association et al. v. City of Anaheim lawsuit currently pending before the California Court of Appeals, Fourth District. 2. Staff, in conjunction with the City Attorney's office, has identified the Qualified Patients case as key to determining the ultimate legality of commercial operation of medical marijuana dispensaries. In addition to analyzing the impact of the Qualified Patients decision on the City's future regulation of dispensaries, City staff has identified immediate health and safety concerns related to the siting of medical marijuana dispensaries, including but not limited to burglaries, robberies, and sales of illegal drugs in the areas surrounding dispensaries. Staff has determined that these concerns represent an immediate threat to the safety and health of the neighborhood which would be located close to medical marijuana dispensaries. 3. Unfortunately, the appellate decision in Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim has been delayed due to the appellate court seeking additional briefing on the matter. The case turns on whether medical marijuana dispensaries are required by or protected by the Compassionate Use Act and/or Senate Bill 420 and the decision is expected to resolve whether municipalities have the authority to prohibit dispensaries. A decision in the matter had been anticipated before the end of calendar year 2009 but will now not be issued until after the effectiveness of the Initial Ordinance and the First Extension has expired. Because of this, Staff needs additional time to obtain the court's decision, analyze it, and craft the best and most-responsive permanent ordinance for the City. ATTACHMENT D Report on Marijuana Moratorium Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATION Due to the on-going Qualified Patients case and to the health and safety concerns noted in this report, staff recommends adoption of the Extension Ordinance. If adopted by the City Council, the Extension Ordinance would extend the moratorium on the approval of applications for land use entitlements for medical marijuana dispensaries for a period of 1 year. This will be the final extension allowed under the law. LA #4845-0254-3366 v1 ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: JEFF ALLRED, CITY MANAGER DATE: MAY 11, 2010 SUBJECT: EXTENSION OF INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE 877 TO PROHIBIT THE APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES SUMMARY On June 30, 2009, pursuant to Government Code section 65858, the Rosemead City Council enacted Urgency Ordinance No. 877 (Attachment A), which imposed a moratorium on the approval of applications for land use entitlements for medical marijuana dispensaries for a period of 45 days. On August 11, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 879 (Attachment B), which continued the moratorium for an additional period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days. Ordinance No. 879 is set to expire on June 25, 2010. During the one year moratorium period, staff has begun to compile and study the substantial health and safety issues, as well as the inconsistencies between State law and Federal law, regarding the approval of and location of medical marijuana dispensaries. This includes, but is not limited to, a review of the Qualified Patients Association et al. v. City of Anaheim lawsuit currently pending before the California Court of Appeals, Fourth District. A decision on the Qualified Patients Association et al. v. City of Anaheim lawsuit had been anticipated before the end of calendar year 2009, but will now not be issued until after the effectiveness of Ordinance Nos. 877 and 879 has expired. The outcome of this lawsuit is expected to resolve whether municipalities have the authority to prohibit dispensaries. Therefore, such factors warrant the City Council's consideration of the adoption of Interim Urgency Ordinance 895 (Attachment C) to extend the Interim Urgency Ordinance adopted by Ordinance 877 for an additional period of one year (May 10, 2011). STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council introduce and conduct the first reading (by title only) of a City Council Ordinance in Attachment C, and adopt, as an urgency measure pursuant to California Government Code section 65858 (b) Ordinance No. 895 entitled ITEM NO. APPROVED FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: