Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Aztec planning commission denies conditional use permit for proposed cannabis grow at 2700 Pepsi Way
Summary
The Planning & Zoning Commission voted to deny a conditional use permit for a cannabis cultivation operation at 2700 Pepsi Way after staff presented a petition from the Cannabis Control Division alleging multiple violations, including unpermitted plants discovered on site; the applicant was not present to respond.
The City of Aztec Planning & Zoning Commission on an unanimously voted to deny Conditional Use Permit 2402, a proposal to operate a cannabis cultivation facility at 2700 Pepsi Way.
City staff told the commission that the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department’s Cannabis Control Division, acting through the eleventh judicial district, filed a petition for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction naming applicant Irving Ray Yu Lin. Staff said the petition alleges extensive regulatory failures, including that the operator was growing ‘‘far and away beyond and above what they were allowed to grow’’ and that required inspections, security plans and filtration systems were not in evidence. ‘‘The investigator found that marijuana was there and that marijuana has been growing there,’’ staff told the commission.
Staff also said a license the applicant presented did not reference an address in the City of Aztec and that one license associated with the individual is under review by the state. Given those allegations and the absence of the applicant, staff recommended denial. A commissioner moved to deny the permit; after a roll‑call vote the commission upheld staff’s recommendation.
Commissioners discussed enforcement options and jurisdiction before voting. Staff said law‑enforcement authority rests primarily with state police and with the Cannabis Control Division, but that San Juan County has filed a motion to intervene that could expand local enforcement options. Commissioners asked how and when any plants on site would be removed; staff said removal would depend on the outcome of the temporary restraining‑order and injunction process and on which law‑enforcement agency obtains jurisdiction.
Next steps: the commission’s denial will be reflected in the record forwarded to the city commission and to the county as appropriate. The docketed petition and any state enforcement action could proceed in parallel with the city’s decision. The applicant was not present to respond to the allegations during the hearing.
