Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Windy Hills council bans medical-cannabis businesses in 5–1 vote
Summary
After a second summary reading, the Windy Hills City Council adopted Ordinance 24-25 #2 to prohibit cultivation, processing and dispensing of medical cannabis within city limits, passing 5–1; one council member said she favored allowing dispensaries so qualifying residents need not travel.
The Windy Hills City Council adopted Ordinance 24-25 #2 on Aug. 12, 2024, prohibiting any business related to the cultivation, processing or dispensing of medical cannabis within the city limits.
The ordinance passed on a roll call vote of five in favor and one opposed. Councilwoman Julie Theiler cast the lone dissent. The reading followed a council discussion of how the action relates to 2024 state legislation (House Bill 829), which allows cities to opt out of hosting licensed medical-cannabis operations.
During discussion council members and staff emphasized that the ordinance concerns licensed medical-cannabis operations authorized under state law and is distinct from illegal, nonmedical marijuana. Meeting remarks summarized statewide licensing categories discussed at the meeting: 16 cultivation licenses, 10 processing licenses and 48 dispensing licenses; Metro Louisville was described as likely to receive two dispensing sites under anticipated statewide distribution. One councilwoman said she favored allowing dispensing in Windy Hills so that qualifying residents would not have to travel outside the city to obtain prescribed medication.
Supporters said local prohibition would keep regulated medical-cannabis businesses out of Windy Hills; opponents warned that limiting local access could create travel burdens for patients who qualify for treatment. The council did not attach exceptions or geographic limits to the prohibition in the adopted language.
Ordinance 24-25 #2 followed the council’s required second summary reading and took effect under local ordinance adoption procedures. The council did not identify an implementation date at the meeting; further administrative steps were not specified.
The council recorded the vote by name at the meeting: Councilwomen Helen Davis, Kate Greer, Marianne Rademaker and Susan Spencer and Councilman Steve Teaford voted yes; Councilwoman Julie Theiler voted no.
