Youth commission refers cannabis-ordinance concerns to substance-abuse subcommittee after public comments

Public commenters at a Redondo Beach Youth Commission meeting urged commissioners to study the local implications of permitting retail cannabis businesses and to include youth voices in the discussion. After public comment, commissioners voted to refer the topic to the commission’s substance-abuse subcommittee for a focused review.

Resident Jonathan Svetco, a District 1 resident and Redondo Beach native, asked the commission to agendize consideration of whether the city should move forward with allowing cannabis retailers and “what it means for youth in our city.” He said state testing had failed to identify hazardous contaminants in some products, citing recent Los Angeles Times reporting, and asked the commission to involve young people in discussions about mitigation and local programs.

A Zoom commenter identified only as Melissa, who said she is a bench-trained immunologist and referenced a California State PTA resolution she helped draft, encouraged youth commissioners to attend the full City Council meeting when the council holds a first reading of the draft cannabis ordinance and suggested the commission agendize the topic.

Commission action and scope

Vice Chair Van Pelt moved, and a second was called, to refer the cannabis-ordinance discussion to the substance-abuse subcommittee. The motion passed by voice vote. The commission clarified the referral’s scope: the subcommittee should return with information on how the city’s cannabis ordinance and the opening of retail cannabis shops could affect teens in the community.

Staff and procedural context

A staff member noted the City Council had already taken actions to allow retail cannabis in the city and was working on permitting details and operator requirements; staff cautioned that the council’s current steps are primarily about how businesses will be permitted rather than whether retail cannabis will be allowed. The staff member said the commission may forward recommendations to the council, and the council may choose whether to pursue ordinance amendments.

Why it matters: Commissioners directed the substance-abuse subcommittee to evaluate potential youth impacts and return with findings that the full commission could forward to City Council if desired. The referral does not itself change city ordinance or permitting.

Public comment excerpts

- Jonathan Svetco (resident): Asked the commission to formally agendize discussion of cannabis retailers and youth impacts, cited concerns about contaminated products, and requested youth participation in the conversation. - Melissa (Zoom participant): Urged youth commissioners to attend the City Council meeting for the first reading of the draft ordinance and referenced research and a California State PTA resolution on youth cannabis impacts.

Next steps

The substance-abuse subcommittee is expected to investigate connections between the city’s draft ordinance and youth impacts and return to the commission with information; commissioners did not set a specific deadline at the meeting. Staff reiterated that any commission recommendations to the City Council would be advisory and that ordinance amendments would require council action.