Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Cannabis Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Board to restore pre-review of cannabis ordinance recommendations before Planning Commission
Summary
Two public commenters said county staff did not follow the Board of Supervisors’ March instruction to present a summary of cannabis ordinance task force recommendations to the board before forwarding to advisory bodies and the Planning Commission, and asked supervisors to delay the Planning Commission review set for June 12.
Tom Lasik and Margo Kambara told the Board of Supervisors during public input that the Community Development Department did not follow the board’s earlier direction to present a summary of cannabis ordinance task force recommendations to the board before those recommendations went to advisory bodies or the Planning Commission.
Lasik said he reviewed the March 18 transcript of a board discussion about the cannabis ordinance task force and that several supervisors — including Supervisor Subratri, Supervisor Pyska, Miss Owen, Vice Chair Rasmussen and Chair Bridal — had requested seeing proposed changes before the Planning Commission did. He said Director Turner confirmed she could do that at the time. "It is on the agenda for Thursday, and I do not believe the board has yet seen it," Lasik said, and asked that the item be pushed to a date uncertain so the board could review it first.
Margo Kambara said the board’s Vision 2028 priority of "maintaining transparent and fair government" was undermined because the Community Development Department did not bring the task force recommendations to the board before other bodies, and she called it premature for the Planning Commission to weigh in on the cannabis ordinance. "If the only avenue of public comment on the cannabis ordinance is in 3-minute increments ... community concerns will not be adequately addressed," Kambara said.
Both commenters asked the board to restore its March 18 direction to the Community Development Department to present the summary to the board first, then to the Ag Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission. The transcript records no formal board response or motion to delay the Planning Commission item during the public-input portion.
The transcript identifies the Planning Commission meeting date as June 12 ("2 days from now" in the recording), and commenters said community concerns listed for consideration were still missing from the draft materials. The Community Development Director (Turner) was referenced as having previously agreed to present the summary to the board; the transcript does not include Director Turner’s remarks on the record in this public-input segment.
