Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comment Landuse topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident raises Bingo night and asks whether city can block proposed cannabis dispensary

City of Cleveland Board of Aldermen · June 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At public comment, a resident announced monthly Bingo nights at a local church and another resident asked whether the city can place a moratorium to stop a proposed Blue Sage Cannabis dispensary; aldermen said zoning rules and the UDO govern land use and noted ballot restrictions for CBD measures.

During the public‑comment portion of the June 16 meeting, Haider Nawaz and Jeff Zellar raised community items and questions for the board.

Haider Nawaz said the Christian Church at 303 W. Main Street started hosting Bingo and dinner nights on the first Friday of each month (except July); he reported 20 people attended the first event on June 6 and said the $3 dinner was enjoyable.

Jeff Zellar raised concerns about a proposed Blue Sage Cannabis dispensary and asked whether the City could place a moratorium on new businesses until local safeguards are established. Mayor Roberson responded that development is controlled through the city's zoning regulations. Alderman Muller cited the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) as the document that outlines permitted business types by zoning district. Alderman Goben added that a ballot question to limit CBD to medicinal use may only appear on a presidential election ballot and must pass by a simple majority (50%). Alderman Hull said potential tax revenue from proposed locations on D Highway would depend on whether the site was in the county or the city and that the city was not aware of further actions by Blue Sage regarding property purchase.

The board did not take formal action on the questions raised during public comment; staff and aldermen described the legal and procedural limits on what the city can do administratively.