Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medical Cannabis topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local advocates and officials discuss medical cannabis rules, planning commission to meet May 22
Summary
Advocates described years of work to legalize medical cannabis access for patients; county officials said state licensing allows operations unless the county takes action, and announced a May 22 planning commission meeting to begin local zoning rules. Commissioners signaled they are unlikely to pursue an outright ban and will consider fees and reasonable local restrictions.
Michelle Crawford, an advocate whose family has lobbied for medical cannabis access for more than a decade, told the Mason County Fiscal Court that state legislation and a governor's executive order have created a regulated pathway for patients to obtain tested medical cannabis products.
Crawford said the licenses were posted on the governor's cannabis website and warned that patients now must often travel outside the county to access tested, legal medicine. "We are hoping that Mason County would be friendly to medical cannabis businesses, so that we don't have to drive very far to get a safe, tested, legal product," she said.
Judge Owen McNeil and other commissioners summarized local options under state guidance: take no action (state law allows licensed operations), pass a local ordinance to prohibit operations, adopt a resolution to submit the matter to voters, or adopt zoning restrictions and fees. Zoning Administrator George Larger told the court the planning commission will hold a special meeting at 5:30 p.m. on May 22 to consider a tentative zoning map amendment indicating where the five types of state-licensed businesses (cultivator, processor, producer, safety compliance/testing facility and dispensary) could locate.
Larger said state Bill 829 (amendment to the statewide framework) moves up licensing and clarifies that local regulations cannot conflict with state rules; any local regulation must be reasonable and cannot create an undue burden that effectively blocks the state license. "Part of that bill as well, local legislative bodies can't pass regulations that conflict with state regulations, because the state regulations always take precedence," Larger said.
Commissioners discussed fees and expressed interest in a calibrated approach rather than an outright ban. One commissioner said the county could consider adopting fees allowed by statute, and the court's preference was to "keep an open mind" and avoid a special election now; several members said they would not support placing a countywide prohibition on the ballot at this time.
Crawford and supporters emphasized patient safeguards in the law: testing, limits on quantities, age restrictions and requirements for medical recommendations for minors. Crawford also noted law-enforcement and professional stakeholders who registered as neutral or supportive during the legislative process.
What happens next: the planning commission will review the proposed zoning amendment on May 22; any local zoning changes or fees would be decided by the planning commission and then the fiscal court. If the county takes no action, state-licensed medical cannabis businesses may operate once they obtain state licenses and comply with state and applicable local regulations.
