ORDINANCE NO THE CITY OF WOODLAND, WASHINGTON

Similar documents
ORDINANCE NO WHEREAS, the CSA is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any conflicting State enactments; and

Req. # SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE NO

IMPERIAL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM

/ 8 ~Qb ORDINANCE NO.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Choteau, Montana, that:

DEWITT CHARTER TOWNSHIP CLINTON COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO.

Agenda Item A.2 CONSENT CALENDAR Meeting Date: June 16, 2009

Gerald L. Hobrecht, City Attorney (Staff Contacts: Gerald Hobrecht (707) and Scott Whitehouse, (707) )

WHEREAS, the City of Westminster, pursuant to its police power, may adopt

ORDINANCE NO The City Council of the City of Manteca does ordain as follows:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY ADDING CHAPTER 6

STATE OF MICHIGAN COUNTY OF WAYNE CITY OF ALLEN PARK

STATE OF MICHIGAN COUNTY OF WAYNE CITY OF ALLEN PARK

ORDINANCE NO The Board of Supervisors of the County of Sonoma, State of California, ordains as follows:

ORDINANCE NO

City Attorney s Synopsis

ORDINANCE NO. C.S AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND ADOPTING CHAPTER 9.86 OF THE STANISLAUS COUNTY CODE PROHIBITING CANNABIS ACTIVITIES

ORDINANCE NO ; CEQA

Draft ORDINANCE for Option 3; Reduced scale collective garden in a qualified patient s residence

ORDINANCE NO. City Attorney s Synopsis

ORDINANCE NO WHEREAS, the City of Grover Beach is a General Law city organized pursuant to Article XI of the California Constitution; and

OSHTEMO CHARTER TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE NO Effective: Upon Publication After Adoption Published: March 16, 2011 OSHTEMO CHARTER TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA, CALIFORNIA REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTIONS AND OF CHAPTER 18.

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION

ORDINANCE NO

CITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT. Jonathan P. Hobbs, City Attorney

Recommendation to Adopt Proposed Ordinance Relating to Pain Management Clinics

BLAIR TOWNSHIP MEDICAL MARIHUANA ORDINANCE #140-12

INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 1417

AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION TO THE EL DORADO COUNTY CODE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES

ORDINANCE NO. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Yolo hereby ordains as follows:

Ordinance No. 544 Public Hearing to Renew the Moratorium on Single Family Residential Subdivisions That Do Not Meet Minimum Lot Sizes

STATE OF MICHIGAN COUNTY OF WASHTENAW ANN ARBOR CHARTER TOWNSHIP

SUMMARY: BILL NUMBER: ORDINANCE NUMBER:

ORDINANCE NO

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAMAR, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS:

17 WHEREAS, on November 8, 2016, Florida voters approved an amendment to the

THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ELDORADO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

require that cities provide for or allow the establishment and or operation of medical marijuana

ORDINANCE NO. 730 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA AMENDING THE CALISTOGA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 8

CITY Of RANCHO SANTA MAR GAR IT A CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

ORDINANCE NO IT IS ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of San Carlos as follows:

ORDINANCE NO WHEREAS, cannabis remains a controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. Ch.

CITY OF MERCER ISLAND ORDINANCE NO

Agenda Item Meeting of ORDINANCE 14-

I. CALL TO ORDER & FLAG SALUTE at 7:00 p.m. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT - Please keep to 3 minutes

TOWN OF KIOWA ORDINANCE NO

TOWNSHIP OF WILBER IOSCO COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO ADOPTED: January 7, 2013 PUBLISHED: January 16, 2013

Summary of 2017 Arkansas Legislation Involving the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment of 2016

CITY OF MERCER ISLAND ORDINANCE NO

ORDINANCE NO

FILE OF THE CITY CLERK ADMINISTRATION ORDINANCE NO (AS AMENDED) ADMINISTRATION BILL NO INTRODUCED SEPTEMBER 11, 2018

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and Council of the City of Peoria, Arizona as follows:

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODINVILLE, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

TOWNSHIP OF CHESTER OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN

ORDINANCE NUMBER (()'1 - /(o

Draft CITY OF KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO.

CITY OF MASON 201 West Ash St. City Hall Mason, MI Fax

ORDINANCE NO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF FRESNO CENTRAL DIVISION UNLIMITED CIVIL CASE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

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

AS PASSED BY SENATE S Page 1 S.76 AN ACT RELATING TO THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA

ORDINANCE NO The City Council of the City of Moreno Valley does hereby ordain as follows:

ACT 228 S.B. NO. 862

NO. 2 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ARTICLE X, SECTION 29 (INITIATIVE) Ballot Title: Use of Marijuana for Debilitating Medical Conditions

AGENDA. Rules of Decorum. Under the Government Code, the City Council may regulate disruptive behavior that impedes the City Council Meeting.

BOROUGH OF OLD TAPPAN ORDINANCE NO

ORDINANCE No. 17- WHEREAS, the City of Grover Beach is a General Law city organized pursuant to Article XI of the California Constitution; and

PEOPLE v BYLSMA. Docket No Argued October 11, Decided December 19, 2012.

CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE ORDINANCE NO. 2645

ORDINANCE NO A

ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PERRIS ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE

GIC Consolidated with GIC County of San Diego v. San Diego NORML. Tentative Ruling re Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings

SCC NO. The Board of Supervisors of the County Of Sacramento ordains as follows:

TOWN OF RAYMOND ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON REGISTERED CAREGIVER RETAIL STORES

RESOLUTION No. ~.4-140

2.12 MEDICAL MARIJUANA Purpose and Intent

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE AMENDING SECTIONS 35-2 AND 35-5 TO CHAPTER 35 OF THE BUTTE COUNTY CODE ENTITLED THE RIGHT TO FARM ORDINANCE.

Staff Report. Susanne Brown, City Attorney Victoria Walker, Director of Community and Economic Development Laura Simpson, Planning Manager

Draft 4/3/13 CITY OF FRANKFORT, BENZIE COUNTY, MICHIGAN Title: Medical Marihuana Caregiver Facility Zoning Ordinance April, 2013

RE: ORDINANCE NO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT CPT TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT

ORDINANCE NO

MEDICAL MARIHUANA FACILITIES LICENSING ORDINANCE. (Adopted December 4, 2017, Amended January 8, 2018)

ORDINANCE NO. ORD-17-19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

CITY OF OCEAN SHORES ORDINANCE NO. 972

CITY OF ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: September 12, 2012

A Bill Regular Session, 2017 HOUSE BILL 1026

INC. VILLAGE OF MANORHAVEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES PUBLIC HEARING FEBRUARY 28, p.m. - AGENDA

ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, Resolution called for studies on how to reduce Seattleites use of hard-torecycle

Ordinance No. ***-16 Introduced: Adopted: Chapter RECREATIONAL AND MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Medical Marihuana Facilities Ordinance

ORDINANCE NO

WHEREAS, Part 10, Chapter 2, Section requires that a Special Use Permit be obtained to operate a school, private or special; and

WINDSOR CHARTER TOWNSHIP EATON COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND PERMITTING COMMERCIAL MEDICAL MARIHUANA FACILITIES ORDINANCE NO.

Assembly Bill No. 243 CHAPTER 688

CITY OF READING COUNTY OF HILLSDALE, STATE OF MICHIGAN. ORDINANCE NO ADOPTED: November 14, 2017 EFFECTIVE: December 1, 2017

Commission Memorandum

ORDINANCE WHEREAS, there exists the potential for misappropriation and diversion of medical marijuana to non-medical uses; and

ANIMAL NEGLECT REGISTRY Ordinance No O-090

Transcription:

ORDINANCE NO. 1320 THE CITY OF WOODLAND, WASHINGTON AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING INTERIM ZONING CONTROLS TO PROHIBIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA COLLECTIVE GARDENS WITHIN THE CITY OF WOODLAND CITY LIMITS AND AUTHORIZE PUBLICATION BY SUMMARY. FINDINGS Since 1970, federal law has prohibited the manufacture and possession of marijuana, designating it a Schedule I drug. This prohibition is based on the federal government's finding that marijuana has a "high potential for abuse, lack of any accepted medial use, and absence of any accepted safety for use in medically supervised treatment." Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 14 (2005), Controlled Substance Act (CSA), 84 Stat. 1242, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq; In 1998, the voters of the State of Washington approved Initiative 692 (later codified as RCW 69.51A in November 1998), an initiative to de-criminalize the use of medical marijuana; The intent of Initiative 692 was to permit qualifying "patients with terminal or debilitating illnesses who, in the judgment of their physicians, would benefit from the medical use of marijuana, to not be subject to state criminal sanction, RCW 69.51A.005. However the Initiative also stated that nothing in the law "shall be construed to supersede Washington state law prohibiting the acquisition, possession, manufacture, sale or use of marijuana for nonmedical purposes." RCW 69.51A.020; and, as a result, "medical marijuana" does not violate state criminal law if maintained in accordance with the statute. "Medical marijuana" violates federal criminal law because the Federal law does not characterize marijuana by its use; The Federal Government has not issued formal assurances that local government officials and employees will be immune from prosecution for their roles in zoning, permitting and licensing collective gardens. In fact, the Department of Justice has given written notice that local government officials and employees could be subject to criminal charges; The Washington legislature later took further action regarding medical marijuana in SB 5073. Washington's Governor, in her partial veto letter, of SB 5073, of April 29, 2011, indicated cooperative medical marijuana organizations should be exempted from state criminal penalties "conditioned on compliance with local government location and health and safety specifications", creating a need to balance the interests of federal law, Washington medical marijuana patients and the health, safety and welfare of the community. The un-vetoed Act authorizes "collective gardens" which would authorize certain qualifying patients the ability to produce, grow and deliver Cannabis for medical use; RCW 69.51A.140 allows local jurisdictions to adopt regulations for zoning requirements, business license requirements, health and safety requirements, and business taxes, however ORDINANCE No. 1320-1

only "so long as such requirements do not preclude the possibility of siting licensed dispensers within the jurisdiction"; The adoption of zoning regulations requires the study and identification of the land use impacts of collective gardens in the context of the legality; The production, growth and delivery of Cannabis in collective gardens present issues of public safety for surrounding properties as well as for the property on which the collective gardens exist. Furthermore, the location of such collective gardens near schools, day care facilities and other lawful uses presents issues relating to the public welfare and the protection of minors; During 2012 the City held two council workshops and staff spent time studying the issue of collective gardens. Staff and the Mayor attended training sessions, including webinars, on the collective garden issues. No clear direction was determined through these efforts. In June 2012, the Planning Commission was presented with an interim zoning ordinance, based on a model ordinance from the Association of Washington Counties. The Commission unanimously voted to send the interim zoning ordinance to the City Council for review. The proposed ordinance failed during a City Council meeting in July 2012. In November 2012, voters passed Initiative 502 legalizing the recreational use of marijuana for people over 21 years of age. The Washington State Liquor Control Board has been tasked with establishing regulations for the sale of marijuana and to complete the regulatory and administrative process no later than December 1, 2013. Regulations may include siting criteria which could pre-empt local zoning of collective gardens. At this time no Washington legislative act reconciles Initiative 502 and RCW 69.51A. At this time no Washington legislative act reconciles Washington law with applicable Federal law; The City has received no applications for the operation of a collective garden within the Woodland city limits. The City has held public hearings on previous moratoria and no person has given testimony objecting to a zoning moratorium on collective gardens; On November 19, 2012, following the passage of Initiative 502 the Mayor met with department heads to discuss the status of the moratorium then in effect and to examine possible next steps. City Staff was directed to continue to research the question and review the responses of other cities; On January 14, 2013, the City Council held a public workshop to discuss options for regulating collective gardens. The options considered included an ordinance extending the existing moratorium, an ordinance banning collective gardens as done by the City of Kent, or an ordinance similar to ordinances of the cities of Pasco and Kennewick prohibiting land uses inconsistent with State and Federal law; ORDINANCE No. 1320-2

On May 20, 2013, the City Council held a public meeting to further discuss and provide staff direction as to the regulation of collective gardens. The options considered still included an ordinance extending the existing moratorium, an ordinance banning collective gardens, or an ordinance prohibiting land uses inconsistent with State and Federal law; On June 3, 2013, the City Council held a public meeting, which included a first and final reading of interim zoning regulations for collective gardens. The approach used was essentially prohibiting land uses inconsistent with State and Federal law. The proposed ordinance failed. Given the convoluted status of the State and Federal Law and the unknown scope and breadth of potential regulations for the WSLCB, the Woodland City Council does not have sufficient information to consider the potential impacts from collective gardens, the regulations that should be enacted, or the legal implications of taking pre-mature action. The City of Woodland Council therefore believes that interim zoning regulations are necessary to address collective gardens and remain compliant with RCW 69.51A and Federal law while the City considers the land use impacts of collective gardens and viable legal options under the State regulations process, Washington Supreme Court review and Federal criminal statutes; The Court of Appeals decision for the City of Kent declared that collective gardens are illegal and that cities can ban them. This decision may go to the Washington Supreme Court for further review or the Legislature may make changes. The City of Woodland has continued moratoriums on collective gardens, with the current Ordinance 1302 expiring on February 1, 2015. During a City Council workshop on December 8, 2014, it was decided that the City will ban collective gardens altogether and staff was directed to prepare an ordinance stating such. However, Growth Management Act requires the City of Woodland to submit proposed development regulations to the Department of Commerce at least 60 days prior to Council adoption. The City must also issue SEPA, have the Planning Commission review the proposed regulations, and hold a public hearing, all before the City Council adopts any permanent regulations. Therefore, the City of Woodland is enacting these interim regulations to allow the necessary time for permanent regulations. RCW 36. 70A.390 authorizes the use of interim zoning regulations to be in effect for not more than six (6) months. RCW 36.70A.390 requires the Woodland City Council to hold a public hearing on proposed interim zoning ordinance within at least sixty days of its adoption. The required public hearing will occur at an open public Woodland City Council meeting on January 20, 2015. ORDINANCE No. 1320-3

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND AS FOLLOWS: 1. Formal Repeal of Moratorium. Ordinance 1302, a six-month moratorium on medical cannabis collective gardens, is hereby repealed. 2. Collective Gardens Defined. Collective Garden means those gardens authorized under RCW 69.51A.085, which allows qualifying patients to assume responsibility for acquiring and supplying the resources required to produce and process cannabis for medical use such as, for example, a location for a collective garden; equipment, supplies, and labor necessary to plant, grow, and harvest cannabis; cannabis plants, seeds, and cuttings; and equipment, supplies, and labor necessary for proper construction, plumbing, wiring, and ventilation of a garden cannabis plants (as limited below). Qualifying patients may create and participate in collective gardens for the purpose of producing, processing, transporting, and delivering cannabis for medical use subject to the following conditions: 1. No more than ten qualifying patients may participate in a single collective garden at any time; 2. A collective garden may contain no more than fifteen plants per patient up a total of forty-five plants; 3. A collective garden may contain no more than twenty-four ounces of usable cannabis per patient up to a total of seventy-two ounces of usable cannabis; and 4. A copy of each qualifying patient's valid documentation or proof of registration with the registry established in state law (now or in the future), including a copy of the patient's proof of identity, must be available at all times on the premises ofthe collective garden; and 5. No usable cannabis from the collective garden may be delivered to anyone other than one of the qualifying patients participating in the collective garden. 3. Collective Gardens Prohibited: Collective gardens, as defined above and in RCW 69.51A.085, are prohibited in all zoning districts within the City of Woodland. 4. Public Hearing on Interim Zoning. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390, a public hearing on the proposed interim ordinance must be held within sixty days of its adoption. The required public hearing will take place on January 20, 2015. 5. Ordinance to be Transmitted to Department. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, this interim Ordinance shall be transmitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce as required by law. 6. Findings and Conclusions Adopted. The City Council hereby adopts the recitals set forth above, as their Findings and Conclusions as required by RCW 36.70A.390. ORDINANCE No. 1320-4

7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity of constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective immediately on adoption on January 20, 2015. Adopted in an open public meeting this ;tq~ day of January, 2015. CITY OF WOODLAND, WA Approved: r B. Laseke, Attest: Apr:tofo I f ORDINANCE No. 1320-5

SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 1320 OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND, WASHINGTON On January 20, 2015 the City Council of the City of Woodland, Washington, approved Ordinance No. 1320 the main point which may be summarized by its title as follows: AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING INTERIM ZONING CONTROLS TO PROHIBIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA COLLECTIVE GARDENS WITHIN THE CITY OF WOODLAND CITY LIMITS AND AUTHORIZE PUBLICATION BY SUMMARY. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. APPROVED by the City Council at their meeting on 20 1 h day of January, 2015. MariE. Ripp, Clerk-Trea er Published: Effective: January 28, 2015 February 2, 2015