Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Marijuana Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends allowing marijuana deliveries, asks staff to clarify neighboring jurisdictions' positions
Summary
The commission voted unanimously to forward a zoning ordinance amendment to allow on-site dispensary delivery within town limits, asking staff to correct and expand the council packet on neighboring jurisdictions and to note a recommendation for public-education use of any incremental tax revenue.
The Chino Valley Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to forward Zoning Ordinance Amendment ZOA-25-002 to Town Council recommending that the town code (Section 13-08-040) be amended to allow delivery of marijuana and marijuana products, and asked staff to correct the council packet to reflect other jurisdictions' current positions on delivery.
"The amendment request is to amend town code section 13 dash 0 8 dash 0 4 0 to allow for delivery of marijuana and marijuana products within town boundaries," said Chris Norlock, development services urban planner II, at the start of the public hearing.
The proposed change would remove local code language prohibiting off-site deliveries so that licensed dispensaries can deliver to customers within town limits, aligning the town's rules with recent statewide changes that permit delivery. Norlock presented a timeline noting voter-approved measures (Proposition 203 for medical in 2010 and Proposition 207 for adult use in 2020), the town's 2021 ordinance (Ordinance 887) that allowed dispensaries, and a 2024 statewide change that legalized delivery.
Deputy Town Attorney Lindsay Shuby, representing a local dispensary, described state delivery controls to the commission: deliveries must be performed by a licensed facility agent in an unmarked vehicle equipped with GPS and video recording; products must be in tamper-evident, child-resistant packaging and delivered only to the purchaser after ID verification; drivers must be employees holding facility agent cards; and the Arizona Department of Health Services may require a delivery vehicle to return within two hours for inspection. "It is heavily regulated," Shuby said, describing driver logs, GPS tracking and twice-yearly unannounced state inspections.
Commissioners asked staff about surrounding jurisdictions. Commissioner Huot noted that Prescott and Yavapai County language appeared to prohibit deliveries and asked staff to verify. Chief Tyser (law enforcement) was consulted and "they're perfectly fine" with delivery, Norlock said, adding the town chief had been contacted.
Public comment included a request from Jason Knox that the issue be handled at the county or state level rather than city by city. Several commissioners expressed the desire that incremental sales-tax revenue from delivery be suggested for drug-education programs aimed at parents; Commissioner Rutherford specifically proposed that additional revenue be directed toward drug education.
The commission's motion forwarded ZOA-25-002 to Town Council with a recommendation for approval and a request that staff update the council packet to correct and document adjacent agencies' ordinances and positions on delivery. Commissioner Bordone made the motion; Commissioners voted unanimously to advance the item.
Why this matters: allowing delivery affects the town's only local dispensary and could shift taxable sales that currently occur via deliveries originating outside town limits. Supporters argued delivery increases local sales tax, employment and town oversight; opponents and at least one public commenter urged a broader county or state-level approach to avoid jurisdictional inconsistencies.
No final local regulation or tax allocation was adopted at the Planning and Zoning meeting; the commission's action was a recommendation to the Town Council, which will consider ordinance language and any related conditions.
