Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council advances ordinance to allow cannabis retail hours to match state; applicants warn lost hours cost revenue
Summary
The council introduced ordinance language expanding permitted retail cannabis hours to 6 a.m.–10 p.m., matching common state limits. The change passed on first reading 4–1. Local applicants and a newly opening retailer said the narrower current hours would reduce revenue and shift demand to neighboring cities.
The National City City Council voted on first reading to expand the allowable operating hours for storefront cannabis retailers from the present 9 a.m.–9 p.m. window to 6 a.m.–10 p.m., aligning local hours with the hours permitted under state guidance and with many neighboring jurisdictions.
The ordinance was introduced after Community Development staff briefed council members on how other nearby cities handle cannabis retail hours. Assistant Director Martin Reeder said several San Diego-area cities allow extended hours — including San Diego and Chula Vista at 6 a.m.–10 p.m. — and noted that National City’s tighter hour window would reduce operating time for local retailers by about 25 percent and could reduce local tax revenue.
Why it matters: Retailers told the council the shorter hours would diminish local tax receipts and economic activity and could push customers to neighboring cities or to unregulated markets. One applicant representing a planned National City cannabis lounge said aligning with state-permitted hours would protect local tax revenue and allow licensed businesses to compete with retailers in nearby jurisdictions.
Council action and vote: The council introduced the ordinance on first reading and approved moving it forward to a second reading; the motion passed 4–1. Council members voting to introduce and advance the ordinance said aligning with the state standard reduces cross-border leakage of sales and supports local businesses. One council member opposed, citing public-health and safety concerns expressed by community speakers during the hearing.
Public comments and safety concerns: Public comment was mixed. Several residents, public-health advocates and youth-education speakers opposed later evening hours and described concerns about youth exposure, impaired driving and community health impacts. Others — including at least one licensee preparing to open — urged the city to adopt the state-standard hours so legitimate businesses can survive and so the city captures tax revenue rather than losing sales to other cities.
Next steps: The ordinance will return for a required second reading; staff said they will prepare an analysis of likely fiscal impacts before final adoption. The council asked staff to provide an economic estimate for the lost or gained tax revenue tied to the hour change before second reading.
