Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Marijuana Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Clemens commission approves first reading of marijuana ordinance amendment, sets Jan. 17 second reading
Summary
The Mount Clemens City Commission approved the first reading of an amendment to Section 24.117 of the city marijuana business ordinance and set a Jan. 17, 2023 second reading. The amendment establishes new time frames and a ministerial process—handled by the city clerk—for accepting and ordering applications; residents raised concerns about fairness and potential litigation.
The Mount Clemens City Commission approved the first reading of an amendment to Section 24.117 of the city marijuana business ordinance and set Jan. 17, 2023 for the second reading and possible adoption.
City Attorney/administration presented the amendment as a response to litigation and prior procedural irregularities: the commission had previously rescinded a second reading to allow time to investigate the application review process, and staff said the litigation has been resolved. The draft sets new deadlines for accepting and evaluating applications and establishes a process to determine the order in which applications are reviewed, relying on distance measurements that can result in ministerial denials if applications violate separation rules.
“We had the commission rescind the second reading because of suspected difficulties and irregularities in the application review process,” the city attorney explained during the discussion, noting the amendment focuses on time frames and a map‑based, ministerial process so there is no subjective scoring by staff.
Several members of the public urged greater transparency about how the process will operate. One resident asked whether locations subject to the ordinance’s 1,500‑foot distance restrictions will be announced or mapped so applicants and neighbors can determine eligibility. Another attendee warned that some applicants feel the process remains unfair and suggested litigation could follow if perceived advantages exist.
During public comment, one speaker challenged the reliability of public materials tied to related projects and questioned conflicting cost figures that had circulated earlier; another said the amended ordinance appears to give the city clerk the authority to decide which applications are accepted and approved and asked why such discretion had been shifted from the city manager. City staff and the city attorney said the clerk’s duties are intended to be ministerial—accepting and numbering applications, measuring distances and referring applications that comply with statutory criteria—rather than discretionary awarding of permits.
The motion to approve the first reading and set Jan. 17 for the second reading was made by a commissioner and supported on a roll call that recorded affirmative votes. There were no recorded no votes in that roll call.
Next steps: the city will hold the second reading and possible adoption on Jan. 17, 2023, and staff said administrative responses to outstanding public questions will be provided at an upcoming meeting.
