- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Disjointed Council Opinion Sends Marijuana Ordinance Back to Committee
The attention-getting discussion about Santa Barbara’s marijuana ordinance is headed back to the Ordinance Committee for the most fundamental of reasons: to better define a dispensary.
There were more than 60 speakers during the public comment period, a staff presentation and hours of City Council discussion, but the long and short of Tuesday’s five-hour council meeting is that there still isn’t enough consensus on the ordinance revisions for adoption.
The focus of public concern was mostly as it has been throughout the proceedings, with opposition mounting from neighborhoods and groups involved in youth and special-need populations. Many wore red to the meeting, and concerns centered on easy access to children, the potential for increased crime and law enforcement resources — and the possibility of Santa Barbara becoming some sort of marijuana tourism destination, as one of only a few cities allowing dispensaries on the Central Coast.
Goleta adopted a moratorium, with three or four existing now, City Administrator Jim Armstrong said.
“We care about the health, safety and vitality of our town, our home,” said Janet Rowse, one of many residents who sent a letter to the council calling for a ban.
Jeff Roland, a Paseo Chapala resident who has attended all or nearly all meetings on the subject, said the council must be living in a bubble if it thinks dispensaries don’t influence the overall availability of marijuana.
“Do you know any teenagers?” he asked.
Like many others, Roland said the proposed citywide cap of seven dispensaries is too high. Population, land mass and potential client numbers of the city make a cap of two or three more reasonable, he said.
Many dispensary owners and patients attended Tuesday’s meeting as well, and urged the council to adopt an ordinance that promoted safe operational guidelines and allowed safe access for those in need of medical marijuana.
Councilman and former Ordinance Committee member Dale Francisco voiced concerns about the vague definitions included in the ordinance and state statutes, and said it was necessary to “specify something the state has failed to specify” before moving forward.
His original motion was brushed aside by fellow former Ordinance Committee member Das Williams, and the two butted heads just as often Tuesday as they did during previous meetings on the subject. Now, they both serve on the Finance Committee.
Williams made a substitute motion, calling for immediate action to adopt the ordinance and force existing dispensaries to comply with it sooner. Though there’s a moratorium in place that could be extended for nearly another two years, nonconforming dispensaries don’t have to comply until 2011.
Mayor Helene Schneider shared Williams’ sense of urgency, saying the status quo allows dispensaries to operate without as much regulation or enforcement.
Committee member Frank Hotchkiss went back on his previous vote and called the proposed ordinance revisions — which he supported at the last meeting — a “shaky foundation.”
Member Michael Self also opposed the ordinance, saying the city hasn’t shown its ability to control dispensaries — as many operate illegally to this day — and is rightfully having a difficult time maneuvering the legal landscape.
“Do we always need to be the first guy out there sticking his finger in the light socket?” she said.
The council was clearly split, and Schneider called for a straw vote — during which all members make their potential votes known, though they don’t count.
Williams, Schneider and Ordinance Committee members Grant House and Bendy White approved of Williams’ motion, with Francisco, Hotchkiss and Self opposing it.
With five votes necessary to adopt any kind of action, Schneider appealed to Francisco and Williams to amend their motions.
Eventually, Francisco modified his motion, and the council unanimously supported it. The Ordinance Committee must bring the issue back to the council within 60 days, during which it’ll hash out more specific definitions for “dispensing collectives” and changes to locations, including buffer zones around recovery areas, excluding the Mesa area, and lowering the proposed citywide cap to five.
Important distinctions in defining what’s allowed under state law includes where the marijuana comes from and whether people are making a profit, City Attorney Stephen Wiley said. Under current guidelines, it appears that marijuana can be provided by patients and employees of a dispensary — or dispensing collectives, as the storefronts are sometimes called — can be reasonably compensated and still be called a nonprofit organization.
— Noozhawk staff writer Giana Magnoli can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use.
» on 02.24.10 @ 11:25 AM
This is actually really good coverage of how it went down. I have to applaud Councilman Francisco’s cool head and articulate comments. He’s right - without defining WHAT collectives and cooperatives really are and how they operate, they’re going to hamstring dispensary operators trying to comply. It’s not fair to permit them, and then tell them in 6 months, hey, sorry, but the business model is changing…Williams, by contrast, was petulant and stung, and Schneider didn’t know how to placate him. Neither did House, though they both tried really hard. Francisco was the compromise-builder last night - kudos to him. Parents and schools FINALLY managed to get the message of ‘do no harm to our youth’ to land to a council with no school-age children. Kinda thought that sort of thing would be obvious to city leaders, but not so. Also, they FINALLY agreed to protect the recovery facilities with which downtown is entrenched. Since the city decided to get in the homeless / rehab enterprise and put them all down below Canon Perdido, it makes sense not to shove dispensaries next to them.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 02.24.10 @ 07:23 PM
Oh, great! Looking for consensus when there is none.
Why not have an ordinance to stop the sale of cars or cigars. More people die in a car accidents - BTW children are literally killed in car accidents. Cigars cause plenty of common throat cancers.
These people (Jeff Roland) make me sick with their opinions that have nothing to do with the issues yet undo months of work by city officials.
I’d love to know if any of these people drink alcohol or take anti-depressants - far more dangerous and certainly more accessible than marijuana - especially for children.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 02.25.10 @ 09:11 AM
Comparing marijuana to alcohol shows either a bias toward usage or a lack of knowledge about the drug. It stays in the system for up to 30 days, numbs the brain and nerve endings (remember why it has been approved for medical use in the first place) and statistically serves as the #1 entry drug to more extensive drug use.
One dispensary connected with and overseen by our local medical personnel is all a community of this size should ever need.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Authorities Locate SBCC Student Reported Missing
His mother had asked for the public's help finding her 20-year-old 'special needs' son
Red Flag Warning Canceled; Wind Advisory Still in Effect
Sunny skies are expected to give way to some clouds over the weekend
Santa Barbara Breaks Record With High of 86 Degrees
Previous mark for May 23 was 82, set in 1949, according to the National Weather Service
Santa Maria Man Facing Child Molestation Charges
Victim reports being sexually abused over a period of time by the suspect
Police Seek Public’s Help Identifying Suspect in Retail Thefts
Surveillance photo shows person wanted in connection with thefts at two Santa Barbara stores
Weather: Partly Cloudy 52.0º
Search Noozhawk »
