Redondo Beach council introduces amended cannabis ordinances after hours of public comment

The Redondo Beach City Council on Feb. 4 held a public hearing and voted to introduce, by title only, three amended ordinances and a companion resolution to regulate commercial cannabis activity in the city.

City staff said the changes refine an ordinance package originally adopted in September 2022 and are intended to fill gaps identified since December 2023.“Tonight, we have our public hearing for introduction and first reading of the cannabis regulatory ordinances,” City staff member Elizabeth House told the council as she opened the presentation.

Under the package before the council are three separate ordinances that together establish zoning and operating rules for cannabis businesses: two zoning ordinances (one for coastal zones and one for inland zones) and a separate operating/permit ordinance. Staff asked the council for direction on two specific points: whether to retain a 1,000-foot separation between retail cannabis operators (a Planning Commission recommendation) and a clarifying rewrite of language that would bar a permitted retailer from locating where illegal cannabis-related activity has occurred.

More than three dozen members of the public, industry representatives and business applicants spoke during the hearing. A large block of residents, parents and local school‑community members urged the council to prohibit storefront retail and to allow only delivery, arguing storefronts normalize cannabis for youth and raise public‑health and safety concerns. Other speakers who represented cannabis operators or related businesses argued a regulated retail presence helps displace illegal operators, improves public‑safety cooperation with police and generates local tax revenue.

Council debate focused on three adjustments: keeping the Planning Commission’s 1,000‑foot separation between retailers, limiting the number of retail permits by geography so there would be no more than one in each ZIP code (90277 and 90278) and explicitly excluding a segment of Artesia Boulevard (west of Inglewood Avenue to Aviation) from eligible retail locations. Council members also approved the staff language clarification that a permitted retailer may not operate from a location “where illegal cannabis‑related activity has occurred.” City staff and the City Attorney agreed to refine the language as a non‑substantive edit to match existing code forms.

City Attorney Mike Webb and Assistant City Attorney Cheryl Park answered council questions about delivery and state preemption. Webb said he was still researching the interaction between state law and local rules for delivery and noted the state’s prior legislative measures on medicinal delivery; he said he would provide more detail at the subsequent meeting.

After deliberation the council voted to introduce the three ordinances and adopt the related coastal‑certification resolution as amended. The roll call on the introduction motion was: Council member Narenheim — No; Council member Lowenstein — Aye; Council member Kalajarovich — Aye; Council member Obagi — Aye; Council member Barron — Aye. The motion passed 4–1.

Council members emphasized that introduction and first reading do not open the city to applications; staff told the council that a later step would be required to accept applications or to start a request‑for‑proposals process. Staff also flagged that future hearings would include detailed application procedures, scoring criteria and environmental/design review steps.

Next steps identified on the record: staff will bring back refined ordinance text consistent with the amendments voted tonight, continue legal review on delivery preemption questions, and prepare materials if and when council later directs the city to accept operator applications.