Warren council approves first reading to amend marijuana ordinance, shifts licensing to administrative process

Warren City Council approved the first reading of an amendment to Chapter 19.5 of the city code on March 11 that changes how the city handles marijuana licensing, appeals and renewal extensions.

City staff and council members said the draft ordinance is intended to close a litigation loop, remove discretionary review that drew Open Meetings Act challenges, and rely on existing zoning rules to limit where retail establishments may locate.

Staff summarizing the draft told the council the revision would: remove the marijuana review committee created in 2019 and the closed-door decisionmaking associated with it; permit the building department to grant a one-time 60-day administrative extension of a license renewal when delays are beyond the applicant’s control; route construction-code appeals to the city’s Construction Board of Appeals rather than the council; and remove the numerical cap on adult-use retail licenses while leaving the zoning restrictions (industrial or C-3 zones, 1,000 feet from schools, 500 feet from residences, parks, religious institutions and daycares) in place.

“This thing went to the Supreme Court twice...the closed door meetings violated the Open Meetings Act,” staff said, describing prior litigation and the city’s legal exposure. The speaker noted the litigation has cost the city “over a half million dollars, probably over a million dollars” in legal fees and insurance-related expenses.

Members of the public addressed the council before the vote. Laurie Harris, who identified herself as a nurse, said she is “distressed” by removing limits on dispensaries and said, “marijuana is not harmless.” Greg Donahoe urged the council to put the issue to voters, saying, “let us be heard” and arguing the city should hold public hearings before changing the ordinance. Boyd Morrison, a resident, asked the council to consider how marijuana smoke could affect residents of multiunit housing and urged rules to protect non-smoking neighbors.

Industry representatives and attorneys who spoke urged clarity and reasonable timelines for applications. Attorney Aaron Geyer urged the council to review related sections of Chapter 19.5 (definitions, prohibitions, licensing and establishments) and to clarify application and denial timelines. Cannabis-industry attorney Chris Aiello asked the council to allow a reasonable window after enactment before applications become effective and noted that neighboring jurisdictions have used later closing hours as a competitive tool.

A license-holder who identified himself as holding an early cannabis license thanked the council for advancing the revision and said the market is competitive in the region.

Council member Lafferty said placing the item on the agenda begins the public-notice process and that prior zoning public hearings and maps remain in force. Lafferty said the local market has changed since 2018 and that removing the committee and moving licensing decisions to an administrative track was intended to remove political discretion that prompted lawsuits.

Council members asked for flexibility on operation hours to be considered administratively over time rather than reopening the full ordinance. The measure passed first reading by voice/roll-call vote. Recorded votes during the final call were: Mr. Dwyer — yes; Mr. Lafferty — yes; Mr. Boiki — yes; Ms. McGee — yes; Mr. Noonan — yes; Council President Rogansee — yes. The motion carried.

What changes were approved at first reading

- Eliminate the marijuana review committee and its role in selecting retail winners. The council said the committee’s closed-door interviews previously led to Open Meetings Act violations. - Remove the numerical cap on adult-use retail licenses; retain zoning-based location limits (industrial or C-3, distance buffers from schools, residences, parks, religious institutions and daycares). - Move one-time 60-day renewal-extension authority to the Building Division, available only when the failure to renew is beyond the applicant’s control. - Route construction-code appeals to the Construction Board of Appeals rather than the City Council.

What the ordinance does not change (as presented)

- The zoning map and distance buffers adopted in 2019 remain in effect; the council said those zoning limits are the “soft cap” that will restrict how many retail outlets can physically open. - Applicants must still meet state background checks, be current on taxes and property maintenance, and comply with fire and building codes.

Next steps

The amendment passed first reading and will return for further readings and public comment as the ordinance process continues. Council members and staff said they expect to refine some administrative details — application forms, timelines for staff review and possible operational rules such as hours of operation — in subsequent steps.

Votes and formal action

An ordinance-first-reading motion to approve the draft amendment (motion language: “motion to approve with discussion”) was recorded as supported and carried; recorded yes votes were Dwyer, Lafferty, Boiki, McGee, Noonan and Council President Rogansee.

Comments from meeting participants cited in this story are taken verbatim from the March 11, 2025 council transcript.