Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Cannabis topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council removes cannabis prohibition from new B‑3 business district and adopts zoning change

5082321 · June 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Richmond Heights City Council voted 4‑3 on June 24 to adopt Ordinance 71‑2025 creating a new B‑3 General Business District and removing a clause that would have specifically prohibited cultivation, processing, testing and dispensing by medical and adult‑use cannabis entities.

Richmond Heights City Council voted 4‑3 on June 24 to adopt Ordinance 71‑2025, which adds a new B‑3 General Business District to the city’s zoning code and deletes language that would have specifically prohibited cultivation, processing, testing and dispensing by medical marijuana and adult‑use cannabis entities.

The action followed a required public hearing earlier in the meeting on amendments to the planning and zoning code and subsequent debate during third reading of the ordinance. Council approved the change after a motion to strike the prohibition passed 4‑3; the final ordinance was then approved with the deletion in place. The council noted the ordinance will take effect in 30 days unless a referendum petition is filed.

Why it matters: the change removes an explicit local ban on a set of cannabis uses in the new B‑3 district. City officials and the city’s legal adviser discussed the limits of local authority under state law during the discussion, including how state licensing interacts with local prohibitions.

City legal counsel Todd explained the state interaction directly when council members asked whether the city could allow or stop adult‑use cannabis if a state license were obtained: “But if we don't specifically prohibit it, it's permitted.” That explanation framed part of the council’s debate about whether to retain or remove the prohibition language from the proposed B‑3 regulations.

Council members debated procedure and substance before the roll calls. On the motion to strike the prohibition, the recorded votes were: Jordan — No; Justice — No; Lewis — No; Nelson — Yes; Robinson — Yes; Silver — Yes; Ursu — Yes. On final passage of Ordinance 71‑2025 with the prohibition removed, the recorded roll call returned the same 4‑3 outcome in favor of adoption.

Council also noted that related zoning and code changes, including a separate ordinance to amend definitions for marijuana entities and a map amendment to place parcels in the new B‑3 district, will require additional public hearings scheduled for July 8.

The ordinance as adopted creates the B‑3 General Business District (described by staff as combining elements of the existing B‑1 and B‑2 districts) and establishes permitted and conditionally permitted uses for the new district; the text that would have made cultivation, processing, testing and dispensing specifically prohibited in B‑3 was removed by the council vote.

The council held a public hearing on the zoning change earlier in the meeting and closed the hearing before continuing to the ordinance readings and votes. No member of the public spoke during the public hearing portion on this item.

The council identified the timetable for further steps: a map amendment (Ordinance 74‑2025) and an ordinance to revise definitions related to marijuana entities (Ordinance 80‑2025) were held for public hearings on July 8. The council also stated the adopted ordinance will become effective in 30 days unless a valid referendum petition is filed.

Ending note: the council’s vote narrows local prohibition language in the B‑3 district but does not by itself change state licensing or the broader municipal code beyond the provisions adopted in Ordinance 71‑2025.