Cathedral City council adopts first-reading cannabis ordinance adding odor-control plan and stiffer penalties; council removes 22,000-sq.-ft. canopy cap

The Cathedral City Council voted unanimously on first reading to adopt a package of amendments to the Cathedral City Municipal Code that adds an odor-control permitting process, raises possible administrative fines and clarifies enforcement steps for cannabis businesses.

City planning staff presented the ordinance as a citywide update to cannabis tax, licensing, zoning and enforcement rules. "The ordinance that is before you this evening is being recommended for approval by city staff," said Andy Firestein, who led the staff presentation. He told the council the changes reflect a "balanced approach" intended to protect residents while giving businesses a path to comply.

The measure comes after a surge of cannabis-odor complaints in 2024 and early 2025, staff told the council. Firestein said the city received 38 complaints early in 2024 and more than 900 between April 1 and Dec. 31, 2024 (including more than 200 in November and about 500 in December). The city has used increased inspections, overtime patrols and a consultant, SCS Engineers, to study odor sources and mitigation technologies.

Why it matters: The ordinance creates a formal, performance-based odor-control plan review and ties that plan to the local licensing process. Under the proposal, businesses will be required to submit an odor-control plan and install mitigation equipment; the city will review those plans and inspect installation. Staff said the change fills a gap in the current entitlement process that approved businesses before their mechanical/ventilation specifications were finalized.

Major provisions and enforcement path - Odor-control plan requirement: The draft adds a new odor-control permit and requires an odor-control plan as a condition of a cannabis conditional-use permit (CUP). Businesses must have an approved plan on file by the time of local license renewal (staff said implementation of the requirement will begin Jan. 1, 2026, tied to renewals; earlier compliance may be required if a business triggers violations). - Performance-based approach: The city will not prescribe a single technical solution. Instead the plan must demonstrate administrative controls (maintenance schedules, filter changeouts, training) and engineering controls chosen for that site. The city contracted SCS Engineers as a subject-matter expert to help review technical plans and to train staff. - Fines and citations: Staff proposed higher administrative-citation levels to increase compliance: an initial administrative citation of $1,000 for cases where a business had an odor-control plan but failed to correct problems; higher citations of $5,000 for cases where businesses failed to file or maintain required plans. The council packet also included proposed fees for plan review ($4,264 for cultivation/manufacturing/consumption lounge plans; $760 for retail/distribution/testing plans) to cover third-party review and staff inspection time. Staff said the higher fine levels require designating the offense as a misdemeanor in code in order to legally assess amounts above the default $100/$200/$500 fine schedule. - Revocation pathway: The ordinance clarifies that repeated administrative citations can be used as a basis for a finding of good cause to suspend or revoke a local license; staff proposed a three-citation threshold within 12 months as a trigger for a revocation finding, while emphasizing that revocation is not automatic and that affected licensees have appeal rights. - Zoning changes: The proposal would remove cannabis cultivation as a conditional use in the city's PCC (planned community commercial) zoning district going forward; cultivation would remain permitted as conditional uses in CBP-2 (business park) and I-1 (light industrial) zones. Existing cultivation in PCC would become legal nonconforming uses subject to limits in code.

Public testimony and council response Dozens of speakers addressed the council during a lengthy public-comment period. Many speakers who identified themselves as employees or managers at large local cultivation and processing facilities described the industry as a source of stable employment and warned that strict rules could cost hundreds of jobs.

"This facility supports over 250 families," said David Bernard, who described himself as working with Live Happy (C4) and urged the council to weigh economic impacts alongside neighborhood concerns. Several other employees and managers, including Hubert Porras (post-processing manager) and Karen Lustman (HR manager), described training programs, benefits and community investments tied to the business.

Neighborhood residents and others told the council they have repeatedly detected cannabis odor at property lines and urged stronger regulation. Staff and the council referenced neighborhood complaints concentrated near Ramon Road and Deep Palm Drive.

Council action and amendment Mayor Pro Tem Gregory moved the ordinance forward, and Councilmember Gutierrez seconded. Councilmember Gregory also moved — and the council adopted — an amendment removing Section 23 of the draft ordinance, which would have limited future cultivation canopy to 22,000 square feet (a state threshold for "large indoor cultivation"). Staff and several council members said the planning-commission recommendation to impose a 22,000-sq.-ft. canopy cap could create many nonconforming uses, potentially blocking investments in the North City specific plan area and affecting businesses at different stages of permitting. The council voted unanimously to approve the ordinance on first reading with that amendment; the ordinance will return for a second reading and adoption at a later meeting. "Motion carries — all ayes," the mayor announced after the vote.

What the ordinance does not do yet The council left several implementation details to staff and to a separate fee resolution. Staff will formalize the odor-control permit review workflow, finalize consultant agreements (SCS Engineers was identified as a contracted reviewer), and return with a fee resolution that sets the technical-review and administrative fine levels by resolution. The council also discussed but did not adopt broader buffer proposals (for example, 1,000-foot residential buffers or 500-foot spacing between cannabis uses) because staff said those would create many nonconforming sites in the existing Perez Road corridor.

Next steps and timeline - Ordinance returns for second reading at the council's next regular meeting; if adopted on second reading the ordinance becomes effective 30 days after that adoption date. - Staff expects implementation of the odor-control plan requirement to be phased in with license renewals beginning Jan. 1, 2026. Third-party technical reviews and inspections will be scheduled when plan submissions are received.

Clarifying details from the hearing - 2024 odor complaints: staff reported 38 early complaints then more than 900 from April 1'Dec. 31, 2024 (including 200+ in November and ~500 in December). - Moratorium history: Council enacted an initial 45-day moratorium on new cannabis-buildout approvals in January (staff), later extended on Feb. 26, 2025 by 10 months and 15 days per the packet. - Administrative-citation thresholds discussed: $1,000 (first track), $5,000 (failure to file/maintain plans), and three citations in 12 months as basis for finding good cause to suspend/revoke a license (staff emphasized revocation is not automatic and includes an appeals path).

Provenance: The council's public hearing on the ordinance opened in the transcript at the city clerk's announcement of Public Hearing A regarding amendments to the Cathedral City Municipal Code (transcript segment starting 2411.8599) and the vote to approve first reading with the Section 23 removal is recorded later in the transcript where the mayor announced "Motion carries — all ayes" after the motion to approve as amended (transcript segment starting 11588.43).

Ending: The council left several discretionary items to staff for implementation, including a formal odor-control permit review process, fee resolution and training with consultant support. The ordinance now returns to the council for a second reading and final adoption vote; in the meantime staff said it will continue inspections, enforcement and technical outreach to businesses and residents.