Council reviews clinic-lease status, asks for cannabis zoning clarifications and sets floodplain hearing

The Virginia City Council on Jan. 28 discussed three policy items: an ongoing review of a clinic lease, requested clarifications to a draft cannabis ordinance, and the scheduling of a public hearing to update the city’s flood-plain ordinance.

Unfinished business: clinic lease City staff reported the clinic lease remains in an investigative stage after a special meeting earlier in the day. The council said additional meetings will be scheduled to determine whether the building can be sold; no decision was made and the item remains under study.

Cannabis ordinance: zoning and edibles Councilor Paulson requested several clarifications to the city’s updated cannabis information and draft ordinance. She asked that definitions and zoning references for "micro business," "mezzo business" and retail endorsements be reconciled between the chart distributed to council and the ordinance language, and recommended that the micro and mezzo categories be placed in I‑1 or I‑2 industrial zoning, with further specification about whether a retail endorsement is allowed at an I‑1 site.

Paulson also asked the city to revisit the issue of low-potency hemp edibles currently sold within the city, expressing concern about accessibility to children and asking for more discussion at a Committee of the Whole meeting. Jenny (planning staff) said the chart was compiled from state guidance and the draft ordinance language and asked for follow-up with counsel and staff to clarify how the chart might be integrated into ordinance text.

Flood plain ordinance: public hearing scheduled The council set a public hearing for the flood-plain ordinance on Feb. 4, 2025 at 8:30 a.m. in order to meet code and deadline requirements. The council moved and supported the hearing date and time.

Personnel committee: commissioner training In personnel committee reports the council moved to require commissioners to receive training at least once during each three-year term on respectful workplace expectations, data practices, and open‑meeting law. Councilor Paulson amended the committee’s original motion to specify “once per term,” and the motion was adopted.

Procedural note from city attorney City Attorney Mister Lindsey outlined the procedural posture regarding items previously tabled: absent exigent circumstances such as imminent delivery, a tabling motion typically defers a matter to the next committee meeting. Lindsey advised the council that a recalled item could be considered if circumstances (for example, pending delivery of equipment) create an urgency.

No ordinance was adopted on cannabis at this meeting; staff will return with clarified language and zoning recommendations for further Committee of the Whole consideration.