Councilmember seeks added disclosure requirement in cannabis ordinance; measure to be edited before second reading
Loading...
Summary
A councilmember proposed adding a disclosure requirement to ordinance 2025:2 that would require applicants to disclose ownership interests in cannabis businesses; council voted to introduce the edit and to discuss it further at the ordinance second reading and public hearing.
At the council’s March 4 agenda meeting a councilmember asked to modify ordinance 2025:2 to require that anyone with an ownership interest in a proposed cannabis business be disclosed and said the change should be a condition of use.
What was proposed: The councilmember described the edit as a “boilerplate” transparency provision modeled on other municipalities: that applicants disclose ownership interests, and that disclosure be a condition of municipal approval. The clerk, Colette Madden, and administration staff indicated the proposed edit would be introduced and that further discussion would occur at the formal vote and second reading.
Why it matters: Council members said the intent is to increase transparency and avoid situations where undisclosed outside interests hold influence over locally licensed operations. One councilmember asked whether the disclosure would apply to council members or would be limited to applicants; staff said state licensing rules already require certain disclosures during the state process and that municipal requirements may overlap with state requirements.
Next steps: The council moved to introduce the proposed edit so that it can be reviewed and debated at the ordinance’s second reading and public hearing. The amendment was not adopted at the meeting; it was introduced for review and will return for formal action on the council agenda.
