Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Medical Marijuana topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council deadlocks on ordinance to bar new medical‑marijuana treatment centers
Summary
On first reading the council considered an ordinance to redefine 'medical marijuana treatment centers' (MMTCs) to include cultivation, processing and dispensaries and to prohibit new MMTC uses citywide; after extended debate about water use, local land availability and state preemption, the first reading failed to pass.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Medical Marijuana topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Zephyrhills City Council on Dec. 8 considered ordinance 1510‑25, which would update the city's land‑development code to mirror the state definition of medical‑marijuana treatment centers (MMTCs) — covering cultivation, processing, distribution and dispensaries — and remove those uses as permitted in city zoning. Todd Vandenberg, the city's planning director, told council staff and the city attorney reviewed the change and that the updated statutory definition led staff to recommend prohibiting the uses rather than piecemeal regulation.
"The legislature updated the definition, and we have mimicked that definition in our ordinance," Vandenberg said. He explained the change would bring cultivation and dispensary activities under the same definition and that the city could either allow the full set of uses or exclude them entirely.
Council members debated competing priorities. Proponents of the ordinance cited water‑use concerns, the desire to avoid a proliferation of cultivation facilities and local character considerations; opponents highlighted potential jobs and argued the city might miss economic opportunities if it bans cultivation and distribution entirely. Some council members said the city has limited large parcels suitable for cultivation and that facilities might locate in the county or annexed areas if not allowed here.
After discussion and a first‑reading motion, council held a vote and the ordinance failed to pass on first reading.

