Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Yreka City Council adopts cannabis business permit fees after public questions on equity and costs
Summary
The Yreka City Council on Jan. 20 adopted Resolution 2026-04 to establish three fees for non-storefront cannabis businesses — $1,933 application-review, $850 permit, and $691 annual renewal — after staff described the hours and department rates used to compute costs and members of the public raised questions about equity applicants and product safety.
The Yreka City Council voted on Jan. 20 to adopt a comprehensive cannabis business permit fee schedule aimed at recovering the city’s administrative costs for regulating non-storefront cannabis operations.
Planning Manager Aliyia Roa Lera told the council staff propose three new fees: a $1,933 application-review fee, an $850 cannabis business permit fee due at initial issuance, and a $691 annual renewal fee. "These fees are intended to recover costs for staff time spent processing and issuing cannabis business permits," Roa Lera said, noting the application review reflects about 18 total staff hours across planning, building, public works, fire and police.
Council members pressed staff for the basis of those hours and the meaning of a "fully burdened hourly rate." Roa Lera said the packet lists departmental hours and rates used to produce the totals and that the application review combines roughly 10 hours in community development with additional hours in public works, fire and police to reach an 18-hour estimate.
Public commenters raised questions about how the fees would apply to equity applicants and whether dispensaries source product lawfully. One speaker said the state requires "seed-to-sale" tracking and that licensed dispensaries cannot legally purchase illicit product; another warned that commercial marijuana products lack the dosing and manufacturing standards of FDA-approved medicines.
During deliberation Council Member Middleton moved and Council Member McCoy seconded adoption of Resolution 2026-04. The roll-call recorded Council Member Davis voting no and Council Members McCoy, Middleton and Mayor Baker voting yes; the motion passed.
The council and staff framed the fees as cost-recovery for processing and compliance work; staff told the council that application-review fees are nonrefundable because they cover staff time spent reviewing materials. The resolution includes a finding that the action is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.
Next steps: the fee schedule takes effect as adopted; staff said materials listing hourly rates and the department-by-department time estimates are available in the agenda packet for applicants and the public.
