Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Cannabis Buffer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Snohomish committee advances proposal to study cutting Clearview cannabis buffer from 10,000 to 5,000 feet
Summary
After hours of public comment both opposing and supporting the change, the Planning and Community Development Committee agreed May 19 to send motion 26-155 (a citizen-initiated docket to reduce the Clearview CRC cannabis separation rule) to GLS for a public hearing; staff recommended further evaluation while the executive's office develops a separate ordinance.
The Snohomish County Council Planning and Community Development Committee on May 19 agreed to send motion 26-155 to the Governmental, Legal and Policy (GLS) agenda to set a public hearing on a citizen-initiated request to reduce cannabis retail separation in the Clearview Rural Commercial Corridor (CRC).
Public comment filled the meeting with dozens of residents, business owners and advocates urging opposite outcomes. Opponents said the 10,000-foot buffer preserves rural character and protects agricultural lands; one caller cited the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) and asked the council to reject what they called an illegal or ill-advised change. "Please vote no on this ill advised and illegal motion 26-204," said William Leiter, an online caller who argued religious and land-use rules must protect long-term agricultural conservation.
Others urged the county to reduce the separation requirement to prevent local monopolies and restore what they said was a fair regulatory baseline. Josh Estes, representing a competing cannabis operator, told the committee the proposal "appears to create a special opportunity for one operator after the fact" and would unfairly advantage a business that did not have the same opportunity as other license holders.
Applicant supporters, including in-person speaker Marissa Gan, said the owner of the proposed store, Hangar 420, is local and has contributed to area charities. Gan said online narratives that the family were outsiders were "simply untrue" and described filing a complaint with the attorney general over what she called defamatory statements.
Snohomish County Planning and Development Services long-range planner Shannon Byrd told the committee the proposal (submitted by J and L Properties and PG Management LLC) would amend County Code 30.28.120 to reduce separation for marijuana retail use in the CRC from 10,000 to 5,000 feet. Byrd said PDS's initial evaluation finds the proposal is consistent with the Growth Management Act and county policies and recommended it be evaluated under the final docket.
Tom Teigen of the county executive's office said the executive is reviewing zoning options and confirmed the office is working on a separate ordinance that could cover a different geographic scope or separation metric. Executive staff later clarified there are two parallel processes: the citizen docket before the committee, which would follow the docket timeline, and an executive-initiated ordinance that could move faster through the planning commission.
Committee members repeatedly emphasized that sending the motion to GLS is a procedural step to allow further study and public hearings, not a decision to change code. After questions about timing and public-notice history, Chair Nehring and the committee placed motion 26-155 on the GLS agenda for May 27 to set a time and date for a public hearing.
What happens next: If the council sets a public hearing, the proposal will undergo planning commission review and additional staff analysis before any final council vote; the executive's draft ordinance, if filed, could run a separate but overlapping process.
