Immediately following the final resolution of the civil action, records subject to subdivision (a) shall be destroyed pursuant to subdivision (c) if more than two years have elapsed from the date of the conviction or arrest without conviction.
SECTION 8.7
Section 11361.8 is added to the Health and Safety Code to read:
11361.8
(a) A person currently serving a sentence for a conviction, whether by trial or by open or negotiated plea, who would not have been guilty of an offense or who would have been guilty of a lesser offense under the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act had that Act been in effect at the time of the offense may petition for a recall or dismissal of sentence before the trial court that entered the judgment of conviction in his or her case to request resentencing or dismissal in accordance with Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11362.1, 11362.2, 11362.3, and 11362.4 as those sections have been amended or added by this Act. (b) Upon receiving a petition under subdivision (a), the court shall presume the petitioner satisfies the criteria in subdivision (a) unless the party opposing the petition proves by clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner does not satisfy the criteria. If the petitioner satisfies the criteria in subdivision (a), the court shall grant the petition to recall the sentence or dismiss the sentence because it is legally invalid unless the court determines that granting the petition would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety. (1) In exercising its discretion, the court may consider, but shall not be limited to evidence provided for in subdivision (b) of Section 1170.18 of the Penal Code. (2) As used in this section, "unreasonable risk of danger to public safety" has the same meaning as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 1170.18 of the Penal Code. (c) A person who is serving a sentence and resentenced pursuant to subdivision (b) shall be given credit for any time already served and shall be subject to supervision for one year following completion of his or her time in custody or shall be subject to whatever supervision time he or she would have otherwise been subject to after release, whichever is shorter, unless the court, in its discretion, as part of its resentencing order, releases the person from supervision.
Such person is subject to parole supervision under Penal Code Section 3000.08 or post‐ release community supervision under subdivision (a) of Section 3451 of the Penal Code by the designated agency and the jurisdiction of the court in the county in which the offender is released or resides, or in which an alleged violation of supervision has occurred, for the purpose of hearing petitions to revoke supervision and impose a term of custody. 212Exhibit 4
Comprehensive
Adult Use of Marijuana Act – 2016
Proposition 64
Revised 03/06/2017
This document is a summary of statute, may not contain the most recent statutory language, and is not intended to serve as a legal document.
(d) Under no circumstances may resentencing under this section result in the imposition of a term longer than the original sentence, or the reinstatement of charges dismissed pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement.
(e) A person who has completed his or her sentence for a conviction under Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, and 11360, whether by trial or open or negotiated plea, who would not have been guilty of an offense or who would have been guilty of a lesser offense under the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act had that Act been in effect at the time of the offense, may file an application before the trial court that entered the judgment of conviction in his or her case to have the conviction dismissed and sealed because the prior conviction is now legally invalid or predesignated as a misdemeanor or refraction in accordance with Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11362.1, 11362.2, 11362.3, and 11362.4 as those sections have been amended or added by this Act.
(f) The court shall presume the petitioner satisfies the criteria in subdivision (e) unless the party opposing the application proves by clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner does not satisfy the criteria in subdivision (e). Once the applicant satisfies the criteria in subdivision (e), the court shall redesign ate the conviction as a misdemeanor or infraction or dismiss and seal the conviction as legally invalid as now established under the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act.
(g) Unless requested by the applicant, no hearing is necessary to grant or deny an application filed under subdivision (e).
(h) Any felony conviction that is recalled and resentenced under subdivision (b) or designated as a misdemeanor or refraction under subdivision (f) shall be considered a misdemeanor or infraction for all purposes. Any misdemeanor conviction that is recalled and resentenced under subdivision (b) or designated as an infraction under subdivision (f) shall be considered an infraction for all purposes.
(i) If the court that originally sentenced the petitioner is not available, the presiding judge shall designate another judge to rule on the petition or application. (j) Nothing in this section is intended to diminish or abrogate any rights or remedies otherwise available to the petitioner or applicant.
(k) Nothing in this and related sections is intended to diminish or abrogate the finality of judgments in any case not falling within the purview of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act.
(l) A resentencing hearing ordered under this act shall constitute a ''post‐conviction release proceeding" under paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution (Marsy 's Law).
(m) The provisions of this section shall apply equally to juvenile delinquency adjudications and dispositions under Section 602 of the Welfare and Institutions Code if the juvenile would not have been guilty of an offense or would have been guilty of a lesser offense under the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act.
(n) The Judicial Council shall promulgate and make available all necessary forms to enable the filing of the petitions and applications provided in this section.
213Exhibit 4
Comprehensive
Adult Use of Marijuana Act – 2016
Proposition 64
Revised 03/06/2017
This document is a summary of statute, may not contain the most recent statutory language, and is not intended to serve as a legal document.
SECTION 9. INDUSTRIAL HEMP.
Section 11018.5 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read as follows:
11018.5. Industrial hemp
(a) "Industrial hemp" means a fiber or oilseed crop, or both, that is limited to types of the plant Cannabis sativa L. having no more than three‐tenths of 1 percent tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contained in the dried flowering tops, whether growing or not; the seeds of the plant, the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds or produced therefrom. (b) The possession, use, purchase, sale, cultivation, processing, manufacture, packaging, labeling, transporting, storage, distribution, use and transfer of industrial hemp shall not be subject to the provisions of this division or of Division 10 (commencing with Section 26000) of the Business and Professions Code, but instead shall be regulated by the Department of Food and Agriculture in accordance with the provisions of Division 24 (commencing with Section 81000) of the Food and Agricultural Code, inclusive.
SECTION 9.2
Section 81000 of the Food and Agricultural Department Code is amended to read:
81000. Definitions
For purposes of this division, the following terms have the following meanings:
(a) "Board" means the Industrial Hemp Advisory Board.
(b) "Commissioner" means the county agricultural c01mnissioner. (c) "Established agricultural research institution" any institution that is either:
(1) A public or private institution or organization that maintains land or facilities for agricultural research, including colleges, universities, agricultural research centers, and conservation research centers; or
(2) An institution of higher education (as defined in Section 1001 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U S.C. 1001)) that grows, cultivates or manufactures industrial hemp for purposes of research conducted under an agricultural pilot program or other agricultural or academic research.
(d) "Industrial hemp" has the same meaning as that term is defined in Section 11018.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(e) "Secretary" means the Secretary of Food and Agriculture. (f) "Seed breeder" means an individual or public or private institution or organization that is registered with the commissioner to develop seed cultivars intended for sale or research. (g) "Seed cultivar" means a variety of industrial hemp. (h) "Seed development plan" means a strategy devised by a seed breeder, or applicant seed breeder, detailing his or her planned approach to growing and developing a new seed cultivar for industrial hemp.
214Exhibit 4
Comprehensive
Adult Use of Marijuana Act – 2016
Proposition 64
Revised 03/06/2017
This document is a summary of statute, may not contain the most recent statutory language, and is not intended to serve as a legal document.
SECTION 9.3.
Section 11018‐5 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:
81006. Industrial Hemp Growth Limitations; Prohibitions; Imports; Laboratory Testing (a)
(1) Except when grown by an established agricultural research institution or a registered seed breeder, industrial hemp shall be grown only as a densely planted fiber or oilseed crop, or both, in acreages of not less than one‐tenth of an acre at the same time, (2) Registered seed breeders, for purposes of seed production, shall only grow industrial hemp as a densely planted crop in acreages of not less than one‐tenth of an acre at the same time,
(3) Registered seed breeders, for purposes of developing a new California seed cultivar, shall grow industrial hemp as densely as possible in dedicated acreage of not less than one‐ tenth of an acre and in accordance with the seed development plan. The entire area of the dedicated acreage is not required to be used for the cultivation of the particular seed cultivar.
(b) Ornamental and clandestine cultivation of industrial hemp is prohibited. All plots shall have adequate signage indicating they are industrial hemp. (c) Pruning and tending of individual industrial hemp plants is prohibited, except when grown by an established agricultural research institution or when the action is necessary to perform the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) testing described in this section. (d) Culling of industrial hemp is prohibited, except when grown by an established agricultural research institution, when the action is necessary to perform the THC testing described in this section, or for purposes of seed production and development by a registered seed breeder.
(e) Industrial hemp shall include products imported under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (2013) of the United States International Trade Commission, including, but not limited to, hemp seed, per subheading 1207.99.03, hemp oil, per subheading 1515.90.80, oilcake, per subheading 2306.90.01, true hemp, per heading 5302, true hemp yarn, per subheading 5308.20.00, and woven fabrics of true hemp fibers, per subheading 5311.00.40. (f) Except when industrial hemp is grown by an established agricultural research institution, a registrant that grows industrial hemp under this section shall, before the harvest of each crop and as provided below, obtain a laboratory test report indicating the THC levels of a random sampling of the dried flowering tops of the industrial hemp grown. (1) Sampling shall occur as soon as practicable when the THC content of the leaves surrounding the seeds is at its peak and shall commence as the seeds begin to mature, when the first seeds of approximately 50 percent of the plants are resistant to compression.
215Exhibit 4
Comprehensive
Adult Use of Marijuana Act – 2016
Proposition 64
Revised 03/06/2017
This document is a summary of statute, may not contain the most recent statutory language, and is not intended to serve as a legal document.
(2) The entire fruit‐bearing part of the plant including the seeds shall be used as a sample.
The sample cut shall be made directly underneath the inflorescence found in the top one‐ third of the plant.
(3) The sample collected for THC testing shall be accompanied by the following documentation:
(A) The registrant's proof of registration.
(B) Seed certification documentation for the seed cultivar used. (C) The THC testing report for each certified seed cultivar used. (4) The laboratory test report shall be issued by a laboratory registered with the federal Drug Enforcement Administration, shall state the percentage content of THC, shall indicate the date and location of samples taken, and shall state the Global Positioning System coordinates and total acreage of the crop. If the laboratory tests report indicates a percentage content of THC that is equal to or less than three‐tenths of 1 percent, the words "PASSED AS CALIFORNIA INDUSTRIAL HEMP" shall appear at or near the top of the laboratory test report. If the laboratory test report indicates a percentage content of THC that is greater than three‐tenths of 1 percent, the words "FAILED AS CALIFORNIA INDUSTRIAL HEMP" shall appear at or near the top of the laboratory test report. (5) If the laboratory test report indicates a percentage content of THC that is equal to or less than three‐tenths of 1 percent, the laboratory shall provide the person who requested the testing not less than 10 original copies signed by an employee authorized by the laboratory and shall retain one or more original copies of the laboratory test report for a minimum of two years from its date of sampling.
(6) If the laboratory test report indicates a percentage content of THC that is greater than three tenths of 1 percent and does not exceed 1 percent, the registrant that grows industrial hemp shall submit additional samples for testing of the industrial hemp grown. (7) A registrant that grows industrial hemp shall destroy the industrial hemp grown upon receipt of a first laboratory test report indicating a percentage content of THC that exceeds 1 percent or a second laboratory test report pursuant to paragraph (6) indicating a percentage content of THC that exceeds three‐tenths of 1 percent but is less than 1 percent. If the percentage content of THC exceeds 1 percent, the destruction shall take place within 48 hours after receipt of the laboratory test report. If the percentage content of THC in the second laboratory test report exceeds three‐ tenths of 1 percent but is less than 1 percent, the destruction shall take place as soon as practicable, but no later than 45 days after receipt of the second test report.
(8) A registrant that intends to grow industrial hemp and who complies with this section shall not be prosecuted for the cultivation or possession of marijuana as a result of a laboratory test report that indicates a percentage content of THC that is greater than three‐tenths of 1 percent but does not exceed 1 percent.
(9) Established agricultural research institutions shall be permitted to cultivate or possess industrial hemp with a laboratory test report that indicates a percentage content of THC that is greater than three‐tenths of 1 percent if that cultivation or possession contributes 216Exhibit 4
Comprehensive
Adult Use of Marijuana Act – 2016
Proposition 64
Revised 03/06/2017
This document is a summary of statute, may not contain the most recent statutory language, and is not intended to serve as a legal document.
to the development of types of industrial hemp that will comply with the three‐tenths of 1 percent THC limit established in this division.
(10) Except for an established agricultural research institution, a registrant that grows industrial hemp shall retain an original signed copy of the laboratory test report for two years from its date of sampling, make an original signed copy of the laboratory test rep01i available to the department, the commissioner, or law enforcement officials or their designees upon request, and shall provide an original copy of the laboratory test report to each person purchasing, transporting, or otherwise obtaining from the registrant that grows industrial hemp the fiber, oil, cake, or seed, or any component of the seed, of the plant.
(g) If, in the Attorney General's opinion issued pursuant to Section 8 of the act that added this division, it is determined that the provisions of this section are not sufficient to comply with federal law, the department, in consultation with the board, shall establish procedures for this section that meet the requirements of federal law.
SECTION 9.5.
Section 81008 of the Food and Agricultural Code is amended to read:
81008. Attorney General reports; Requirements
(a) Not later than January 1, 2019, the Attorney General shall report to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Agriculture and the Assembly and Senate Committees on Public Safety the reported incidents, if any, of the following:
(1) A field of industrial hemp being used to disguise marijuana cultivation. (2) Claims in a court hearing by persons other than those exempted in subdivision (f) of Section 81006 that marijuana is industrial hemp.
(b) A report submitted pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c) Pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, this section is repealed on January 1, 2023, or four years after the date that the report is due, whichever is later.
SECTION 9.6.
Section 81010 of the Food and Agricultural Code is amended to read:
81010. Operation of division
(a) This division, and Section 221 of the Food and Agricultural Code, shall not become operative on January 1, 2017.
(b) The possession, use, purchase, sale, production, manufacture, packaging, labeling, transporting, storage, distribution, use, and transfer of industrial hemp shall be regulated in accordance with this division. The Bureau of Marijuana Control has authority to regulate and control plants and prod that fit within the definition of industrial hemp but that are produced, processed, manufactured, tested, delivered, or otherwise handled pursuant to a license 217Exhibit 4
Comprehensive
Adult Use of Marijuana Act – 2016
Proposition 64
Revised 03/06/2017
This document is a summary of statute, may not contain the most recent statutory language, and is not intended to serve as a legal document.
issued under Division 10 (commencing with Section 26000) of the Business and Professions Code.
SECTION 10.AMENDMENT
This Act shall be broadly construed to accomplish its purposes and intent as stated in Section 3. The Legislature may by majority vote amend the provisions of this Act contained in Sections 5 and 6 to implement the substantive provisions of those sections, provided that such amendments are consistent with and further the purposes and intent of this Act as stated in Section 3. Amendments to this Act that enact protections for employees and other workers of licensees under Section 6 of this Act that are in addition to the protections provided for in this Act or that otherwise expand the legal rights of such employees or workers of licensees under Section 6 of this Act shall be deemed to be consistent with and further the purposes and intent of this Act. The Legislature may by majority vote amend, add, or repeal any provisions to further reduce the penalties for any of the offenses addressed by this Act.
Except as otherwise provided, the provisions of the Act may be amended by a two‐thirds vote of the Legislature to further the purposes and intent of the Act.
SECTION 11. CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION
The provisions of this Act shall be liberally construed to effectuate the purposes and intent of the Control, Regulate and Tax the Adult Use of Marijuana Act; provided, however, no provision or provisions of this Act shall be interpreted or construed in a mam1er to create a positive conflict with federal law, including the federal Controlled Substances Act, such that the provision or provisions of this Act and federal law cannot consistently stand together.
SECTION 12. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision in this Act, or part thereof, or the application of any provision or part to any person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions and parts shall not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.
SECTION 13.CONFLICTING INITIATIVES
In the event that this measure and another measure or measures concerning the control, regulation, and taxation of marijuana, medical marijuana, or industrial hemp appear on the same statewide election ballot, the provisions of the other measure or measures shall be deemed to be in conflict with this measure. In the event that this measure receives a greater number of affirmative votes, the provisions of this measure shall prevail in their entirety, and the provisions of the other measure shall be null and void.
218Exhibit 4
ORDINANCE NO. 823-U
AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF BELL GARDENS DECLARING AND IMPOSING A CITYWIDE
MORATORIUM ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF
MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES
WHEREAS, during the past year, City staff has received an increasing number of inquiries from members of the public regarding the possibility of establishing and operating medical marijuana dispensaries within the City; and
WHEREAS, the Bell Gardens Municipal Code, including the Zoning Code, does not address or regulate in any manner the existence or location of inedical marijuana dispensaries; WHEREAS, after receiving inquiries from persons interested in establishing medical marijuana dispensaries, numerous other cities in the State of California have adopted ordinances prohibiting or heavily regulating such dispensaries; and WHEREAS, because a significant number of cities throughout the State of California have prohibited or heavily regulated medical marijuana dispensaries, there is a substantially increased likelihood that such establishments will seek to locate in the City of Bell Gardens; and WHEREAS, other California cities that have permitted the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries have witnessed an increase in crime such as burglaries, robberies, and the sales of illegal drugs in areas immediately surrounding such dispensaries; and WHEREAS, the United States Controlled Substances Act classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 illegal drug, with high potential for abuse; and WHEREAS, in 1996, California voters approved Proposition 215, which was codified as Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq., and entitled the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, which allows a patient or a patient's caregiver to possess or cultivate marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient; and
WHEREAS, as a result of the federal and state laws, California cities are currently caught in a conflict between the federal and state law as to the legality of marijuana for medical purposes and the interpretation of the state law as it relates to whether cities may prohibit the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and
WHEREAS, in Gonza/ez v. Raich, 125 S. Ct. 2195 (2005), the United States Supreme Court upheld Congress' authority to regulate and prohibit the manufacture and possession of marijuana under the Commerce Clause; the Federal Controlled Substance Act continues to prohibit marijuana use, distribution, and possession; and no medical exception to this prohibition exists. However, since the U.S. Supreme Court was not presented with and did not address the issue of whether federal law preempts state law with respect to medical marijuana dispensaries, the Court did not resolve the conflict between federal and California laws regarding the legality of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and
WHEREAS, the federal-state conflict and the interpretation of the scope of the state law continue to exist as the pending case of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim demonstrates; and
219Exhibit 5
Ordinance No. 823-U
WHEREAS, in Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, a medical marijuana group consisting of approximately 50 members, challenged the City of Anaheim's ban against medical marijuana dispensaries on the basis that the ban contravenes California's Proposition 215 and Health & Safety Code Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7, and violates Civil Code Section 51 ("Unruh Civil Rights Act"); and
WHEREAS, the medical marijuana group's argument is that they are a"primary caregiver" under the Compassionate Use Act and are allowed to operate medical marijuana dispensaries, whereas the City of Anaheim argues that the sale of marijuana is illegal under federal law and states do not have the authority to override federal law, and a dispensary is not a"primary caregiver" under the state law; therefore, the medical marijuana group is prohibited under federal and state law from dispensing an illegal drug and Anaheim's Ordinance should be upheld; and
WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim prevailed in the Orange County Superior Court, and Qualified Patients Association appealed; the case is now pending in the California 4th District Court of Appeals; and
WHEREAS, California cities expect that, with the currently pending appeal of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, the Courts will settle this conflict in late 2009, or at least shed some guidance on the issue of banning marijuana dispensaries so cities will better understand how to proceed and enact planning regulations; and WHEREAS, with respect to the City of Bell Gardens ("City"), the decision to prohibit or authorize the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries and, if permitted, the appropriate zone(s) and related development standards, has not been commenced or completed by the City; and
WHEREAS, the City currently does not permit such use, and as such, has not established any express criteria regarding the establishment, location or scope of operations for medical marijuana dispensary uses; and
WHEREAS, the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries before appropriate procedures and regulations are enacted has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and risks to the public health, safety and welfare of the City's residents and the general public and it is, therefore, urgent that the City have the opportunity to consider whether such facilities must or should be allowed or prohibited in the City and, if so allowed, to develop regulations governing the location and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries to prevent adverse impacts to the public health, safety and welfare that may result from unregulated placement and operation of such uses; and WHEREAS, the City intends to undertake a study of whether medical marijuana dispensaries must or should be permitted or prohibited, and if so permitted, the appropriate regulations for such uses, within a reasonable time. Given the time required to undertake the necessary study and planning, the City Council finds that it is necessary that this interim ordinance be immediately enacted to ensure that no medical marijuana dispensaries that may be in conflict with any state or federal law, or the City's general plan, zoning, and/or development policies are permitted in the interim; and 220Exhibit 5
Ordinance No. 823-U
WHEREAS, based upon the Recitals above, the City Council finds that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare presented by the unregulated development of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and
WHEREAS, further based upon the Recitals above, the City Council finds and determines that the current and immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare requires that this interim Ordinance be enacted as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 and take effect immediately upon adoption, and its urgency is hereby declared; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to adopt this interim Ordinance as an urgency ordinance, effective immediately, and prohibit the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries, as defined hereafter, in any zone of the City of Bell Gardens pursuant to the authority set forth in California Government Code Section 65858; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance should be adopted on an urgency basis pursuant to the authority in Government Code Section 36937(b), which provides that an ordinance passed by the City Council takes effect "immediately" if it is passed by a four-fifths vote of the City Council "for the immediate preservation of the public space, health or safety" and contains "a declaration of facts constituting the urgency;" and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Bell Gardens as follows:
SECTION 1. IMPOSITION OF MORATORIUM
A.The City Council of the City of Bell Gardens finds that the facts set forth in the Recitals of this Ordinance are true and correct.
B.In accordance with the authority granted to the City of Bell Gardens under Government Code Section 65858 from and after the date of this ordinance no use permit, variance, building permit, business license, or other applicable entitlement for use shall be approved or issued for the establishment or operation of a medical marijuana dispensary for a period of forty-five (45) days
C.For purposes of this Ordinance medical marijuana dispensary shall mean any facility or location where a primary caregiver intends to or does make available, sell, transmit, give, exchange for consideration, or otherwise provide medical marijuana to any of the following: a qualified patient a person with an identification card or a primary caregiver For purposes of this ordinance the terms primary caregiver qualified patient and person with an identification card shall have the same meanings as those set forth in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq.
D.For purposes of this Ordinance a medical marijuana dispensary shall not include the following uses as long as the location of such uses is otherwise regulated by applicable law and as long as such uses strictly comply with applicable law including but not limited to Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq.: (1) a clinic licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (2) a health care facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 of 221Exhibit 5
Ordinance No. 823-U
Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (3) a residential care facility for persons with chronic life threatening illness licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (4) a residential care facility for the elderly licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; or (5) a residential hospice or home health agency licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 of the Health Safety Code.
E.This Ordinance is an Interim Urgency Ordinance adopted pursuant to the authority granted to the City of Bell Gardens by Government Code Section 65858 and is for the immediate preservation of the public health safety and welfare. The facts constituting the urgency are:
1)California cities that have permitted the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries have found that such dispensaries have resulted in negative and harmful secondary effects such as an increase in crime including robberies burglaries and the sales of illegal drugs in areas immediately surrounding medical marijuana dispensaries; 2)After receiving inquiries from persons interested in establishing medical marijuana dispensaries numerous other cities in California have adopted ordinances prohibiting or heavily regulating such dispensaries and because a significant portion of the region has prohibited or heavily regulated medical marijuana dispensaries there is a substantially increased likelihood that such establishments will seek to locate in the City of Bell Gardens; 3)The City of Bell Gardens does not currently have standards in its City Code or Zoning Ordinance related to the location operation or concentration of inedical marijuana dispensaries within the City;
4)Absent the adoption of this Interim Urgency Ordinance the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries in the City of Bell Gardens would result in the negative and harmful secondary effects other cities have experienced as identified above; 5)Currently the state and federal laws related to medical marijuana dispensaries appear to be in conflict and;
6) As a result of the conflict in federal and state laws on the matter, the negative and harmful secondary effects associated with medical marijuana dispensaries, the current and immediate threat such secondary effects pose to the public health safety and welfare and the potential zoning conflicts that would be created by the establishment and operation of a medical marijuana dispensary, it is necessary to establish a temporary forty-five (45) day moratorium on the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries in the City pending resolution of the conflict between federal and state law, completion of the City's study of the potential impacts of inedical marijuana dispensaries and possible amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance.
F.City staff is directed to study the applicable legal and land use issues and develop appropriate zoning and licensing guidelines or regulations governing such uses, and/or a possible prohibition on such uses if that is authorized by law and desired by the City CounciL G.The violation of any the provisions of this Ordinance shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment for a period not to exceed six (6) months, or by both such fine and 222Exhibit 5
Ordinance No. 823-U
Page5of6
imprisonment. Each and every day such a violation exists shall constitute a separate and distinct violation of this Ordinance.
SECTION 2. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
The City Council on the basis of the whole record and exercising independent judgment finds that this Interim Urgency Ordinance is not subject to environmental review pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) pertain to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect change to the environment and that are not defined as a project under Section 15378 This Ordinance has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment directly or indirectly in that it prevents change to the environment pending the completion of the contemplated research and studies.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section subsection sentence clause or phrase or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction or preempted by state legislation such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance The City Council of the City of Bell Gardens hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section subsection sentence clause or phrase or word not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to any such decision or preemptive legislation.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Interim Urgency Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption if adopted by at least four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council and shall be in effect for forty five 45 days from the date of adoption unless extended by the City Council as provided for in Section 65858(a) of the Government Code.
SECTION 5. PUBLICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause it or a summary of it to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published within the City of Bell Gardens.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8T" day of June, 2009.
PRISCILLA FLORES, AYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM:TT ST:
Arn Id M. Alvarez-Glasman Vida Barone
City rney Interim City Clerk
223Exhibit 5
Ordinance No. 823-U
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS
CITY OF BELL GARDENS
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 823-U was duly adopted by the City of Bell Gardens City Council at their regular meeting of June 8, 2009 by the following vote:
AYES:Mayor Flores, Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez; Councilmembers Crespo, Infanzon and Aceituno.
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Vida Barone, Interim City Clerk
224Exhibit 5
ORDINANCE NO. 824-U
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF BELL GARDENS EXTENDING FOR AN ADDITIONAL
TEN (10) MONTHS AND FIFTEEN (15) DAYS A CITYWIDE MORATORIUM
ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA
DISPENSARIES
WHEREAS, during the past year, The City of Bell Gardens ("City") staff has received an increasing number of inquiries from members of the public regarding the possibility of establishing and operating medical marijuana dispensaries within the City; and WHEREAS, the Bell Gardens Municipal Code, including the Zoning Code, does not address or regulate in any manner the existence or location of inedical marijuana dispensaries; WHEREAS, after receiving inquiries from persons interested in establishing medical marijuana dispensaries, numerous other cities in the State of California have adopted ordinances prohibiting or heavily regulating such dispensaries; and WHEREAS, because a significant number of cities throughout the State of California, including many in Los Angeles County and nearby areas, have prohibited or heavily regulated medical marijuana dispensaries, there is a substantially increased likelihood that such establishments will seek to locate in the City of Bell Gardens; and WHEREAS, other California cities that have permitted the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries have witnessed an increase in crime such as burglaries, robberies, and the sales of illegal drugs in areas immediately surrounding such dispensaries; and WHEREAS, California cities that have permitted the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries have witnessed an increased number of complaints from residents, neighbors, business owners, and concerned citizens regarding the negative impacts of inedical marijuana dispensaries, including constant activity during all hours, patrons smoking marijuana outdoors, and flyers being distributed to passersby regarding marijuana; and WHEREAS, the United States Department of Justice's California Medical Marijuana Information Report has advised that large-scale drug traffickers have been posing as lawful caregivers to obtain and sell marijuana, thus increasing the likelihood that such persons would traffic in illegal drugs in the City, thereby endangering the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the United States Controlled Substances Act classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 illegal drug, with high potential for abuse; and WHEREAS, in 1996, California voters approved Proposition 215, which was codified as Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq., and entitled the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, which allows a patient or a patient's caregiver to possess or cultivate marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient; and
WHEREAS, as a result of the Federal and State laws, California cities are currently caught in a conflict between the federal and state law as to the legality of marijuana for medical purposes and the interpretation of the state law as it relates to whether cities may prohibit the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and
225Exhibit 6
Ordinance No. 824-U
Page2of6
WHEREAS, in Gonzalez v. Raich, 125 S. Ct. 2195 (2005), the United States Supreme Court upheld Congress' authority to regulate and prohibit the manufacture and possession of marijuana under the Commerce Clause; the Federal Controlled Substance Act continues to prohibit marijuana use, distribution, and possession; and no medical exception to this prohibition exists. However, since the U.S. Supreme Court was not presented with and did not address the issue of whether federal law preempts state law with respect to medical marijuana dispensaries, the Court did not resolve the conflict between federal and California laws regarding the legality of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and
WHEREAS, the Federal-State conflict and the interpretation of the scope of the State law continue to exist as the pending case of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim demonstrates; and
WHEREAS, in Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, a medical marijuana group consisting of approximately 50 members challenged the City of Anaheim's ban against medical marijuana dispensaries on the basis that the ban contravenes California's Proposition 215 and Health & Safety Code Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7, and violates Civil Code Section 51 ("Unruh Civil Rights Act"); and
WHEREAS, the medical marijuana group's argument is that they are a"primary caregiver" under the Compassionate Use Act and are allowed to operate medical marijuana dispensaries, whereas the City of Anaheim argues that the sale of marijuana is illegal under Federal law and states do not have the authority to override Federal law, and a dispensary is not a"primary caregiver" under the State law; therefore, the medical marijuana group is prohibited under Federal and State law from dispensing an illegal drug and Anaheim's Ordinance should be upheld; and
WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim prevailed in the Orange County Superior Court, and Qualified Patients Association appealed; the case is now pending in the California 4t" District Court of Appeals; and
WHEREAS, California cities expect that, with the currently pending appeal of Qualified Patients Association v. City ofAnaheim, the Courts will settle this conflict in late 2009, or at least shed some guidance on the issue of banning marijuana dispensaries so cities will better understand how to proceed and enact planning regulations; and WHEREAS, with respect to the City of Bell Gardens, the decision to prohibit or authorize the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries and, if permitted, the appropriate zone(s) and related development standards, has not been commenced or completed by the City; and WHEREAS, the City currently does not permit such use, and as such, has not established any express criteria regarding the establishment, location or scope of operations for medical marijuana dispensary uses; and
WHEREAS, the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries before appropriate procedures and regulations are enacted has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and risks to the public health, safety and welfare of the City's residents and the general public and it is, therefore, urgent that the City have the opportunity to consider whether such facilities must or should be allowed or prohibited in the City and, if so allowed, to develop regulations governing the location and operation of inedical marijuana 226Exhibit 6
Ordinance No. 824-U
dispensaries to prevent adverse impacts to the public health, safety and welfare that may result from unregulated placement and operation of such uses; and WHEREAS, the City intends to undertake a study of whether medical marijuana dispensaries must or should be permitted or prohibited, and if so permitted, the appropriate regulations for such uses, within a reasonable time. Given the time required to undertake the necessary study and planning, the City Council finds that it is necessary that this interim ordinance be immediately enacted to ensure that no medical marijuana dispensaries that may be in conflict with any state or federal law, or the City's general plan, zoning, and/or development policies are permitted in the interim; and WHEREAS, based upon the Recitals above, the City Council finds that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare presented by the unregulated development of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and
WHEREAS, further based upon the Recitals above, the City Council finds and determines that the current and immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare requires that this interim ordinance be enacted as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 and take effect immediately upon adoption, and its urgency is hereby declared; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to adopt this interim ordinance as an urgency ordinance, effective immediately, and prohibit the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries, as defined hereafter, in any zone of the City of Bell Gardens pursuant to the authority set forth in California Government Code Section 65858; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2009 the City Council adopted by a five (5) to zero (0) vote Urgency Ordinance No. 823-U declaring and imposing a forty-five (45) day Citywide moratorium on the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and WHEREAS, the moratorium enacted pursuant to Ordinance No. 823-U is scheduled to expire on July 23, 2009;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(a), after notice and a public hearing, the City Council may extend the interim ordinance for an additional ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(d), ten (10) days prior to extending the interim ordinance, the City Council on June 22, 2009 issued a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the establishment of the moratorium; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65090, notice of the public hearing for the moratorium extension was published in the Bell Gardens Sun on Thursday, July 2, 2009; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(a), a public hearing on this action was held by the City Council on July 13, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance should be adopted on an urgency basis pursuant to the authority in Government Code Section 36937(b), which provides that an 227Exhibit 6
Ordinance No. 824-U
ordinance passed by the City Council takes effect "immediately" if it is passed by a four-fifths vote of the City Council "for the immediate preservation of the public space, health or safety" and contains "a declaration of facts constituting the urgency;" and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this ordinance have occurred.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Bell Gardens as follows:
SECTION 1. IMPOSITION OF MORATORIUM. The City Council of the City of Bell Gardens finds and determines the following:
A.The City of Bell Gardens hereby declares and imposes the extension for an additional ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days of an existing citywide moratorium on the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries.
B.For purposes of this ordinance, "medical marijuana dispensary" shall mean any facility or location where a primary caregiver intends to or does make available, sell, transmit, give, exchange for consideration or otherwise provide medical marijuana to any of the following:
a qualified patient; a person with an identification card; or a primary caregiver. For purposes of this ordinance, the terms primary caregiver," qualified patient" and person with an identification card" shall have the same meanings as those set forth in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq.
C.For purposes of this ordinance, a medical marijuana dispensary shall not include the following uses, as long as the location of such uses is otherwise regulated by applicable law and as long as such uses strictly comply with applicable law including, but not limited to, Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq.: (1) a clinic, licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (2) a healthcare facility, licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (3) a residential care facility for persons with chronic life threatening illness, licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (4) a residential care facility for the elderly, licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; or (5) a residential hospice or home health agency, licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 of the Health and Safety Code.
D.This ordinance is an interim ordinance adopted pursuant to the authority granted to the City of Bell Gardens by Government Code Section 65858 and is for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. The facts constituting the urgency are:
1)California cities that have permitted the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries have found that such dispensaries have resulted in negative and harmful secondary effects such as an increase in crime including robberies, burglaries and the sales of illegal drugs in areas immediately surrounding medical marijuana dispensaries; 2)After receiving inquiries from persons interested in establishing medical marijuana dispensaries, numerous other cities in California have adopted ordinances prohibiting or heavily regulating such dispensaries, and because a significant portion of the region has prohibited or heavily regulated medical marijuana dispensaries, there is a substantially increased likelihood that such establishments will seek to locate in the City of Bell Gardens; 228Exhibit 6
Ordinance No. 824-U
3)The City of Bell Gardens does not currently have standards in the Bell Gardens City Code or Zoning Ordinance related to the location, operation or concentration of inedical marijuana dispensaries within the City;
4)Absent the adoption of this interim ordinance, the establishment and operation of medical marijuana dispensaries in the City of Bell Gardens would result in the negative and harmful secondary effects other cities have experienced, as identified above; 5)Currently, Federal and State laws related to medical marijuana dispensaries appear to be in conflict; and
6)As a result of the conflict in Federal and State laws on the matter, the negative and harmful secondary effects associated with medical marijuana dispensaries, the current and immediate threat such secondary effects pose to the public health, safety and welfare and the potential zoning conflicts that would be created by the establishment and operation of a medical marijuana dispensary, it is necessary to extend for ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days the existing moratorium on the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries in the City of Bell Gardens pending resolution of the conflict between Federal and State law, completion of the City's study of the potential impacts of inedical marijuana dispensaries and possible amendments to the City s Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 2. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
The City Council, on the basis of the whole record and exercising independent judgment, finds that this interim urgency ordinance is not subject to environmental review pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) pertain to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect change to the environment and that are not defined as a project under Section 15378. This ordinance has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly, in that it prevents change to the environment pending the completion of the contemplated research and studies.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction or preempted by State legislation, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Bell Gardens hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase or word not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to any such decision or preemptive legislation.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This interim ordinance extending the existing moratorium shall become effective immediately on July 23, 2009 and shall be in effect for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days (June 7, 2010) as provided for in Section 65858(a) of the Government Code.
229Exhibit 6
Ordinance No. 824-U
SECTION 5. PUBLICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and shall cause same to be posted as required by law, and it shall thereafter be in full force and effect until June 7, 2010, unless otherwise extended in compliance with state law
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July 2009.
PRISCILLA FLORE MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM:A ST~
Q~,
Ar Alvarez-Glasman Vida Barone
City Attorney Interim City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS
CITY OF BELL GARDENS
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 824-U was duly adopted by the City of Bell Gardens City Council at their regular meeting of July 13, 2009 by the following vote:
AYES:Mayor Flores, Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez; Councilmembers Crespo, Infanzon and Aceituno.
NOES:
ABSTAI N:
ABSENT:
Vida Barone, Interim City Clerk
230Exhibit 6
ORDINANCE NO. 835-U
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELL GARDENS
EXTENDING FOR AN ADDITIONAL ONE
YEAR A CITYWIDE MORATORIUM ON THE
ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF
MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES
WHEREAS, during the past year, the City of Bell Gardens ("City") staff has received an increasing number of inquiries from members of the public regarding the possibility of establishing and operating medical marijuana dispensaries within the City; and
WHEREAS, the Bell Gardens Municipal Code, including the Zoning Code, does not address or regulate in any manner the existence or location of inedical marijuana dispensaries;
WHEREAS, after receiving inquiries from persons interested in establishing medical marijuana dispensaries, numerous other cities in the State of California have adopted ordinances prohibiting or heavily regulating such dispensaries; and WHEREAS, because a significant number of cities throughout the State of California, including many in Los Angeles County and nearby areas, have prohibited or heavily regulated medical marijuana dispensaries, there is a substantially increased likelihood that such establishments will seek to locate in the City of Bell Gardens; and WHEREAS, other California cities that have permitted the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries have witnessed an increase in crime such as burglaries, robberies, and the sales of illegal drugs in areas immediately surrounding such dispensaries; and
WHEREAS, California cities that have permitted the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries have witnessed an increased number of complaints from residents, neighbors, business owners, and concerned citizens regarding the negative impacts of inedical marijuana dispensaries, including constant activity during all hours, patrons smoking marijuana outdoors, and flyers being distributed to passersby regarding marijuana; and
WHEREAS, the United States Department of Justice's California Medical Marijuana Information Report has advised that large-scale drug traffickers have been posing as lawful caregivers to obtain and sell marijuana, thus increasing the likelihood that such persons would traffic in illegal drugs in the City, thereby endangering the public health, safety, and welfare; and
231Exhibit 7
Ordinance No. 835-U
WHEREAS, the United States Controlled Substances Act classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 illegal drug, with high potential for abuse; and WHEREAS, in 1996, California voters approved Proposition 215, which was codified as Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq., and entitled the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, which allows a patient or a patient's caregiver to possess or cultivate marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient; and WHEREAS, as a result of the Federal and State laws, California cities are currently caught in a conflict between the federal and state law as to the legality of marijuana for medical purposes and the interpretation of the State law as it relates to whether cities may prohibit the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and WHEREAS, in Gonzalez v. Raich, 125 S. Ct. 2195 (2005), the United States Supreme Court upheld Congress' authority to regulate and prohibit the manufacture and possession of marijuana under the Commerce Clause; the Federal Controlled Substance Act continues to prohibit marijuana use, distribution, and possession; and no medical exception to this prohibition exists. However, since the U.S. Supreme Court was not presented with and did not address the issue of whether Federal law preempts state law with respect to medical marijuana dispensaries, the Court did not resolve the conflict between Federal and California laws regarding the legality of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and
WHEREAS, the Federal-State conflict and the interpretation of the scope of Federal preemption of the State law continue to exist as the pending case of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim demonstrates; and WHEREAS, the outcome of the currently pending Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim case will settle or at least provide additional legal guidance as to the degree of authority California cities possess to regulate or otherwise ban marijuana dispensaries , which will allow cities to better understand how to proceed and enact planning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed initiative to legalize marijuana scheduled to be considered by California voters at the November 2010 general election will undoubtedly have significant impacts on land use regulations already enacted or currently being considered by cities and will likely result in more litigation, specifically, on the issue of whether the initiative is pre-empted by Federal law as an illegal Schedule 1 Drug; and WHEREAS, with respect to the City of Bell Gardens, the decision to prohibit or authorize the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries and, if permitted, the appropriate zone(s) and related development standards, has not been commenced or completed by the City; and
232Exhibit 7
Ordinance No. 835-U
WHEREAS, the City currently does not permit such use, and as such, has not established any criteria regarding the establishment, location or scope of operations for medical marijuana dispensary uses; and
WHEREAS, the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries before appropriate procedures and regulations are enacted has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and risks to the public health, safety and welfare of the City's residents and the general public and it is, therefore, urgent that the City have the opportunity to consider whether such facilities must or should be allowed or prohibited in the City and, if so allowed, to develop regulations governing the location and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries to prevent adverse impacts to the public health, safety and welfare that may result from unregulated placement and operation of such uses; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to undertake a study of whether medical marijuana dispensaries must or should be permitted or prohibited, and if so permitted, the appropriate regulations for such uses, within a reasonable time. Given the time required to undertake the necessary study and planning, the City Council finds that it is necessary that this interim ordinance be immediately enacted to ensure that no medical marijuana dispensaries that may be in conflict with any State or Federal law, or the City's general plan, zoning, and/or development policies are permitted in the interim; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to adopt this interim ordinance as an urgency ordinance, effective immediately, and prohibit the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries, as defined hereafter, in any zone of the City of Bell Gardens pursuant to the authority set forth in California Government Code Section 65858; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2009 the City Council adopted by a five to zero vote Urgency Ordinance No. 823-U declaring and imposing a 45 day Citywide moratorium on the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and WHEREAS, on July 13, 2009 the City Council adopted by a five to zero vote Urgency Ordinance No. 824-U extending the existing medical marijuana dispensary moratorium for an additional 10 months and 15 days on the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and
WHEREAS, the moratorium enacted pursuant to Ordinance No. 824-U is scheduled to expire on June 8, 2010;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(a), after notice and a public hearing, the City Council may extend the interim ordinance for an additional one year; and
233Exhibit 7
Ordinance No. 835-U
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(d), 10 days prior to extending the interim ordinance, the City Council on April 26, 2010 issued a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the establishment of the moratorium; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65090, notice of the public hearing for the moratorium extension was published in the Bell Gardens Sun on Thursday, April 29, 2010; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(a), a public hearing on this action was held by the City Council on May 10, 2010; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance should be adopted on an urgency basis pursuant to the authority in Government Code Section 36937(b), which provides that an ordinance passed by the City Council takes effect "immediately" if it is passed by a four-fifths vote of the City Council "for the immediate preservation of the public space, health or safety" and contains "a declaration of facts constituting the urgency;" and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this ordinance have occurred.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Bell Gardens as follows:
SECTION 1. IMPOSITION OF MORATORIUM. The City Council of the City of Bell Gardens finds and determines the following:
A.Based upon the above Recitals, staff's report and presentation, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference, the City Council finds that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare presented by the unregulated development of inedical marijuana dispensaries; and B.The City Council also finds and determines that the current and immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare requires that this interim ordinance be enacted as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 and take effect immediately upon adoption, and its urgency is hereby declared C.The City of Bell Gardens hereby declares and imposes the extension for an additional one year of an existing Citywide moratorium on the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries.
D.For purposes of this ordinance, medical marijuana dispensary" shall mean any facility or location where a primary caregiver intends to or does make available, sell, transmit, give, exchange for consideration or otherwise provide medical 234Exhibit 7
Ordinance No. 835-U
Page5of7
marijuana to any of the following: a qualified patient; a person with an identification card; or a primary caregiver. For purposes of this ordinance, the terms "primary caregiver," qualified patient" and "person with an identification card" shall have the same meanings as those set forth in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq.
E.For purposes of this ordinance, a medical marijuana dispensary shall not include the following uses, as long as the location of such uses is otherwise regulated by applicable law and as long as such uses strictly comply with applicable law including, but not limited to, Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq.: (1) a clinic, licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (2) a healthcare facility, licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (3) a residential care facility for persons with chronic life threatening illness, licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; (4) a residential care facility for the elderly, licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; or (5) a residential hospice or home health agency, licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 of the Health and Safety Code.
F.This ordinance is an interim ordinance adopted pursuant to the authority granted to the City of Bell Gardens by Government Code Section 65858 and is for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. The facts constituting the urgency are:
1)California cities that have permitted the establishment of inedical marijuana dispensaries have found that such dispensaries have resulted in negative and harmful secondary effects such as an increase in crime including robberies, burglaries and the sales of illegal drugs in areas immediately surrounding medical marijuana dispensaries;
2)After receiving inquiries from persons interested in establishing medical marijuana dispensaries, numerous other cities in California have adopted ordinances prohibiting or heavily regulating such dispensaries, and because a significant portion of the region has prohibited or heavily regulated medical marijuana dispensaries, there is a substantially increased likelihood that such establishments will seek to locate in the City of Bell Gardens;
3)The City of Bell Gardens does not currently have standards in the Bell Gardens Municipal Code or Zoning Ordinance related to the location, operation or concentration of inedical marijuana dispensaries within the City; 4)Absent the adoption of this interim ordinance, the establishment and operation of inedical marijuana dispensaries in the City of Bell Gardens would result in the negative and harmful secondary effects other cities have experienced, as identified above;
235Exhibit 7
Ordinance No. 835-U
5)Currently, Federal and State laws related to medical marijuana dispensaries appear to be in conflict; and
6)As a result of the conflict in Federal and State laws on the matter, the negative and harmful secondary effects associated with medical marijuana dispensaries, the current and immediate threat such secondary effects pose to the public health, safety and welfare and the potential zoning conflicts that would be created by the establishment and operation of a medical marijuana dispensary, it is necessary to extend for one year the existing moratorium on the establishment and operation of medical marijuana dispensaries in the City of Bell Gardens pending resolution of the conflict between Federal and State law, completion of the City's study of the potential impacts of inedical marijuana dispensaries and possible amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance.
G.City staff is directed to study the applicable legal and land use issues and develop appropriate zoning and licensing guidelines or regulations governing such uses, and/or a possible prohibition on such uses if that is authorized by law and desired by the City CounciL
H.The violation of any the provisions of this Ordinance shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars 1,000.00) or by imprisonment for a period not to exceed six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each and every day such a violation exists shall constitute a separate and distinct violation of this Ordinance.
SECTION 2. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council, on the basis of the whole record and exercising independent judgment, finds that this interim urgency ordinance is not subject to environmental review pursuant to Title 14, Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) pertain to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect change to the environment and that are not defined as a project under Section 15378. This ordinance has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly, in that it prevents change to the environment pending the completion of the contemplated research and studies.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction or preempted by State legislation, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Bell Gardens hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase or word not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to any such decision or preemptive legislation.
236Exhibit 7
Ordinance No. 835-U
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This interim ordinance extending the existing moratorium shall become effective immediately upon the expiration of Urgency Ordinance No. 824-U on June 8, 2010 and shall be in effect for a period of one year June 8, 2011) as provided for in Section 65858(a) of the Government Code.
SECTION 5. PUBLICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and shall cause same to be posted as required by law, and it shall thereafter be in full force and effect until June 7, 2011, unless otherwise extended in compliance with State law.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of May 2010.
J
l C~~vU-
PRISCILLA FLORES, AYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM:AT
Arn Id Alvarez-Glasman Vida Barone
City Attorney Interim City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS
CITY OF BELL GARDENS
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 835-U was duly adopted by the City of Bell Gardens City Council at their regular meeting of May 10, 2010 by the following vote:
AYES:Mayor Flores, Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez; Councilmembers Crespo, Infanzon and Aceituno.
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
EXCUSED:
Vida Barone, Interim City Clerk
237Exhibit 7
ORDINANCE NO. 840
A N ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCILHCIL F THE CITY
F BELL GARDENS, CALIFORNIA AMENDING THE CITY
F BELL GARDENSS , HING CODE TO PROHIBIT THE
OPERATIONATIN AND ESTABLISHMENT OF MEDICAL
MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES WITHIN CITY LIMITS AND
PROHIBIT LAND USES NOT EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED
UNDER THE CITY OF BELL GARDENS ZONING CODE
WHEREAS, the City of Bell Gardens "City" is a general law city, incorporated under the lams of the state of California;
WHEREAS, pursuant to its police poorer, the City may enact and enforce laws within its boundaries which promote the public health, morals, safety, or general welfare of the community, and are not in conflict with general lavers; WHEREAS, comprehensive zoning regulations lie within the police power of the City;
WHEREAS, the possession, dispensing, cultivation, or transportation of marijuana n i generally a crim under California Law;
WHEREAS, in 2006 Californian voters approved Proposition 215, which was codified in Health and Safety Code Section 1 '1 362.5, and entitled the Compassionatessionate Use Act of 1996 "C AS' ;
WHEREAS, the CUA allows a patient or a patient's caregiver to possess or cultivate marijuanan for the personal medicall purposes of the patient; WHEREAS, marijuana is a Schedule 1 Drug pursuant to the Federal United States Controlled Substances Act "CSA" and thus the use, sale, cultivation, or possession of manju nals illegal under Federal law;
WHEREAS, CSA schedule 1 Drugs are categorized as such because of their high potential for abuse, lack of any accepted medical use, and absence of any accepted safety for use in medically supervised treatment; WHEREAS, there is no exception under Federal lair for the growth, cultivation, use or possession of marijuana for medical use and all such activity remains illegal; WHEREAS, California cities are currently caught in conflict between the Federal and state laver as to the legality of marijuana for medical purposes; 238Exhibit 8
Ordinance N. 840
Page No.
WHEREAS, EAS, the City enacted a moratorium n June, 2009, through Ordinance No. 823 -u, prohibiting the establishment of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries " I MU within City limits ("Moratorium") ;
WHEREAS, EAS, the Moratoriumrium eras enacted because the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries before appropriate procedures and regulations were approved had the potential for causing adverse impacts to the surrounding community and risk to the public health, safety, and welfare of City residents and the general public; WHEREAS, EAS, the Moratorium was extended by subsequent City Council action and is set to pir on June 9, 2011;
WHEREAS, according to California Police Chiefs Association's Task Force Task Force"), MMD's have significant adverse secondary effects and impacts on the surrounding community;
WHEREAS, most MMUs are `cash only" businesses and the presence of large amounts of cash and marijuana make there, their employees and qualified patients the target of a disproportionate amount of violent crime;
WHEREAS, the Task Force identified criminal secondary effects of MMUs as:
armed robberies, murders, burglaries, traffic, noise, drug dealing, organized crime, firearmss vi larti ns; and poisonings;
WHEREAS, MMD's attract loitering and marijuana smoking on or near the Y" premises which negatively affects the quality of life in the community; WHEREAS, li MD's attract an illegal resale marketet for marijuana in light of the prevalent use of marijuana for non-medical purposes;
WHEREAS, AHD's are linked to large marijuana grog operations, organized criminal gangs, money 1 :.indering operations, an increase in driving under the influence incidents, loss of trade for surrounding businesses; property damage, and the sale of illegal drugs ether than marijuana;
WHEREAS, MMUs and pharmacies are not "similarly situated" for public health and safety purposes and need not be treated equally;
WHEREAS, the Federal Food and Drug Administration "FDA) issued an advisory concluding that no sound scientific studies have supported marijuana use for treatment in the United States;
WHEREAS, the FDA has approved safe and effective drugs providing superior treatment for many medical problems for which medical marijuana use is endorsed; 239Exhibit 8
Ordinance No. 840
Page fro.
WHEREAS, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment of the California Environmental Protection EHHA agency added marijuananay smoke to the Safe Drinking Water rid Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 {Proposition 6 list; WHEREAS, r ariju nay smoke was considered by the Carcinogen Identification Committee f the OEHHA Science Advisory Board and determined that marijuana smoke was clearly shown to cause cancer;
WHEREAS, EAS, the American Medical ss ciati n, the rational Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, and the National Multipl Sclerosis Society do not support the smoked form of marijuana ass medicine;
WHEREAS, the daily use of ma rijuana compromises lung function and increases the risk for respiratory diseases, similar to those associated with cigarettes; WHEREAS, marijuana has a high potential for abuse and addiction; WHEREAS, chronic use of marijuana may increase the risk of psychotic symptoms in people with a past history of schizophrenia; WHEREAS, marijuana use by young people may lead to severe impairment of higher brain function and neurpsychiatric disorders, as well as a higher risk for addiction and polydrug abuse problems;
WHEREAS, in 2003 the Californian Legislature added the "Medical Marijuana Program Act" ("MMPA")to the Health & Safety Code which includes guidelines for implementation of the CU A;
WHEREAS, the MMPA in Health & Safety Code Section 11362.83 provides that cities and other local governments may adopt and enforce lags consistent with the C UA;
WHEREAS, Health & Safety Code section 11362.768(f) grants local governments authority to adopt ordinances or policies that further regulate and restrict a medical marijuana dispensary, cooperative, collective, operator, establishment or provider within its jurisdiction;
WHEREAS, the GHA does not create a broad right to use marijuana without regard to local zoning and business licensing laws;
WHEREAS, a medical marijuana dispensary within City limits would be inconsistent with the General Plan of the City;
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to prohibit those uses of lard which are not expressly permitted under the land use matrixes; and
240Exhibit 8
Ordinance No. 840
Page N.
WHEREAS, S, pr ssly prohibiting those uses which are not expressly permitted under the land use matrixes provide greater land use controls and serve the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents and businesses within the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELL GARDENS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1, Findings & Purpose. In adopting this Ordinance, the City Council finds as follows:
i. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporate them herein by this reference.
ii. The City Council finds that the City's prohibition of medical marijuana dispensaries is consistent with Federal laver because Federal law expressly prohibits use, sale, or dissemination of marijuana; the City's prohibition of medical marijuana dispensaries is also consistent with State lair because State lair does not specifically permit medical marijuana dispensaries and this Ordinance will not impact a qualified patient or primary caregiver's right to cultivate and possess medical r ari uana pursuant to State laver. iii. This Ordinance serves the public health, safety, and welfare f the residents and businesses within the City and to prohibit the operation or establishment of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries within the City. iv. This Ordinance is consistent rith the City's General Plan.
SECTION 2. Title 9, Division 3 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code entitled SPECIAL USES" is hereby amended and re-named as follows:
SPECIAL USES AND PROHIBITED SES
I$
SECTION 3. Chapter 9.21, entitled "Prohibited Uses," is hereby added to Title 9, Division 3, of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code.
SECTION 4., Section .21. llentitled "Medical Marijuana Dispensaries, is hereby added to Title 9, Division 3, Chapter 9.21 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code and enacted as follows:
Section 9.21.010 A De in i n .
Identification card" is a document issued by the California Department of Public Health which identifies a person authorized to engage in the medical use of marijuana and the person's designated primary caregiver, 241Exhibit 8
Ordinance N. 840
Page Flo.
if any. This term shall have the sane meaning as in California Health and Safety Cade section 11362. g as it m ay be amended from time to tine.
Medical Marijuana" is .marijuana used for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, Albs, chronic pain, spastiity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other serious medical condition for which marijuana is deemed to provide relief as defined in subsection h of Health and safety Cade section 11 362.7.
Qualified Pa ienf' is a person who is entitled to the protections of the California Health and safety Code Section 1 362.5, but who does not have an Identification card issued by the State Department of Health Services. This term shall have the sane meaning as in California Health and safety Code Section 11362.7(o as it may be amended from time to time.
Primary C rye, iv&' is the individual, designated by a qualified patient or by a person with an identification card, who has consistently assumed responsibly for the housing, health, or safety of that patient or person.
This term shall have the same meaning as in California Health and Safety Code Section 11362. 7 (d as it m ay be amended from tine to tine.
Physician" is an individual who possesses a recognition in good standing to practice .medicine or osteopathy issued by the Medical Board of i California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California and who has taken responsibility for an aspect of the .medical care, treatment, diagnosis, counseling, or referral of a patient and who has conducted a medical examination of that patient before recording in the patient's medical record the physician's assessment of whether the patient has a serious .medical condition and whether the medical use of marijuana is appropriate. Thi- *term shall have the sane .meaning as in California Health and safety Code Section 11362.7(a) as it may be amended from time to tine.
Medical Mar#uana Dispensary or Dispensary means any location, structure, facility, store, residence, or similar facility where medical marijuana is made available, sold, traded, exchanged, bartered, or otherwise distributed to three or more of the following; a qualified patient, a person with an identification card, or a primary caregiver.
Section 9.21.010 (B) Medical Marijuana dispensaries Prohibited:
It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to own, manage, establish, conduct, or operate any medical .marijuana dispensary anywhere within the City of Bell Gardens or to participate as an employee, contractor, 242Exhibit 8
Ordinance No. 840
Page No.
agent, or volunteer, r in any ether manner or capacity, in any medical marijuana dispensary anywhere within the City of Bell Gardens. section 9,2'1,010 C Use o r Activity Prohibited by state and Federal Lair.
Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to permit or authorize any use or activity prohibited by any State or Federal lair.
Section 9.21.019 D ) Enforcement.
Violation of any provision of this section is declared to be a public nuisance and contrary to the public interest and may be abated pursuant to Section 1.12.920.
Section 9.21 .010 (E) Exceptions.
Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to preclude a person with an identification card, qualified patient, or a patient's primary caregiver, from using, possessing, or cultivating marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the mitten /oral recommendation or approval of a physician, se long as such use, possession or cultivation strictly complies with applicable law, including but not limited to, Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5.
SECTIONS.: Section 9.08.939 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Cede entitled Permitted Land Uses," establishing the permitted land uses in Open Space Zones, is hereby repealed in its entirely and replaced with the following:
Section 9.08 ..939 Permitted Land .Uses.
The following Open Space Land Use Matrix, Table 9.08A, establishes the land uses that are permitted, conditionally permitted, permitted as accessory uses only, temporarily permitted, or strictly prohibited in the Open Space Zone. Uses that are not listed in Table 9.A shall be expressly prohibited. Uses not listed but similar to those permitted or conditionally permitted may be found to fall within the intent and purpose of this zone by the Planning Commission. The Commission must find that the use(s) will net be more obnoxious or materially detrimental to the public welfare and must be comparable in nature and of the sane class as the uses enumerated in this section.
SECTION _ Section 9.'1 .030 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code entitled Permitted Land Uses," establishing the permitted land uses In residential Land Zones, is hereby repealed in its entirely and replaced with the following:
243Exhibit 8
Ordinance No, 840
Page No.
Section 9.' 0.030 Permitted Land Uses,
The following residential Land Use Matrix, Table 9.10A, establishes the land uses that are permitted, conditionally permitted, permitted as accessory uses only, temporarily permitted, or strictly prohibited in the residential zones. Uses that are not listed in Table 9.10A shall be expressly prohibited. Uses not listed but similar to those permitted or conditionally permitted may be found to fall within the intent and purpose of this zone by the Planning Commission. The Commission rust find that the uses will not be more obnoxious or materially detrimental to the public welfare and must be comparable in nature and of the sane class as the uses enumerated In this section.
SECTION! 7. Section 9.12.030 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code entitled NEW
Permitted Land Uses,, establishing the permitted land uses in Commercial Land Zones, is hereby repealed in its entirely and replaced with the followings Section 9.12 ;030 Permitted Land Uses.
The following Commercial Land Use Matrix, Table 9.12A, establishes the land uses that are permitted, conditionally permitted, permitted as accessory uses only, temporarily permitted, or strictly prohibited in the commercial zones. Uses that are not listed in Table 9.12A shall be expressly prohibited. Uses not listed but similar to those permitted or conditionally permitted may be found to fall within the intent and purpose i of this zone by the Planning Commission. The Commission must find that the use(s) will not be more obnoxious or materially detrimental to the public welfare and rust be comparable In nature and of the sane class as the uses enumerated in this section.
SECTION! 8. Section 9.14.030 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code entitled MEN
Permitted Land Uses," establishing the permitted land uses in the Industrial Land Zone, is hereby repealed in its entirely and replaced with the following:
Section 9.14.030 Permitted Land Uses,
The following Industrial Land Use Matrix, Table 9.14A, establishes the land uses that are permitted, conditionally permitted, permitted as accessory uses only, temporarily permitted, or strictly prohibited in the commercial zones. Uses that are not listed in Table 9.12A shall be expressly prohibited. Uses not listed but similar to those permitted or conditionally permitted may be found to fall within the intent and purpose of this zone by the Planning Commission. The Commission must find that the use(s) will not be more obnoxious or materially detrimental to the public welfare and must be comparable in nature and of the sane class as the uses enumerated in this section.
244Exhibit 8
Ordinance No. 840
Page fro.
SECTION 9, section 9.1 6.030 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code entitled Permitted Land Uses," establishing the permitted land uses in Institutional Zones, is hereby repealed in its entirely and replaced with the following:
Section 9.16.030 Permitted Lard Uses.
The following Institutional Land Use Matrix, Table 9.16A, establishes the land uses that are permitted, conditionally permitted, permitted as accessory uses only, temporarily permitted, or strictly prohibited in the Institutional Zone. Uses that are not listed in `able 9.16A shall be expressly prohibited. Uses not listed but similar to those permitted or conditionally permitted may be found to fall within the intent and purpose of this zone by the Planning Commission. The Commission must find that the use(s) will net be more obnoxious or materially detrimental to the public welfare and must be comparable in nature and of the sane class as the uses enumerated in this section.
SECTION 10. Section 9.01 .050 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code entitled `Prohibited Uses" is hereby amended as follows:
Section 9.01.050 Prohibited Uses.
person shall not use any premises in any zone except as hereafter specifically permitted in this title and subject to all the regulations and conditions enumerated in this title. Wherever this title prohibits the use of any premises for any purpose, such premises and any building, structure, or improvement on such p remises shall not be used, occupied, altered, or improved for such purpose, and no building, structure, or improvement on such premises shall be erected, constructed, established, maintained, allowed to remain, altered, moved onto, or enlarged which is designed, Whapearranged, or intended to be occupied or used for such purpose. r
SECTION 11, Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council finds Lthat this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 15060(c)(2) constituting an activity that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and pursuant to Section 15060(b)(3) constituting an activity that is not a project as defined in Section 15378.
SECTION 12. Severability. if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reasons held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall net affect the invalidity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares 245Exhibit 8
Ordinance No. 840
Page No.
that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 13. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause this ordinance to be published or posted as required by law, which shall take full force and effect thirty 3 days from its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th
day of April, 2011.
TEST:
Rosalia A. C de, CMC
City Clerk
A P ROVED , To F
A nold M. Af ar -Glass n
City Attorney
1, ROSALIA A. CON DE, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Bell Gardens, hereby CERTIFY that ordinance Igo. 840 was introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the Bell Gardens City Council held April 11, 2011, and that thereafter said Ordinance was duly adcrpted at a regular meeting of the City Council held April 25, 201 , and was approved and passed by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members
Mayor Rodriguez
Nos; None
ABSTAIN- None
ABSENT: None
Aceituno, Cr spo, Flores, Mayor Pro -Teri Infan on,
246Exhibit 8
11 11'161101372101=
WHEREAS, the City of Bell Gardens ("City") is a general law city, incorporated inder the laws • the State of California;
WHEREAS, pursuant to its police power, the City may enact and enforce laws within its boundaries which promote the public health, morals, safety, or general welfare of the community, and are not in conflict with general laws; r X 11 Ma, ; Mcs 3
Vii?
WHEREAS, in 1996, the voters of the State of California approved Proposon 215 (codified as California Health and Safety Code § 11362.5 and entitled "The Compassionate Use Act of 1996" or "CUX);
WHEREAS, in City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness 1 Center, Inc. (2013) 56 Cal.4 th 729, the California Supreme Court held that "nothing in 247Exhibit 9
74-Iffew-Im
WHEREAS, the limited immunity from specified state marijuana laws provided by the Compassionate Use Act and Medical Marijuana Program does not confer a land use right or the right to create or maintain a public nuisance; WHEREAS, the MMRSA contains language that requires the City to prohibit cultivation uses by March 1, 2016 either expressly or otherwise under the principles of permissive zoning, or the State will become the sole licensing authority. The MMRSA also contains language that requires delivery services to be expressly prohibited by Om
248Exhibit 9
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on December 16, 2015 at which time it considered all evidence presented, both written and oral and at the end of the hearing voted to adopt a resolution recommending that th,,.
City Council adopt this Ordinance;
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this Ordinance tn January 11, 2016, at which time it considered all evidence presented, both written d oral.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Bell Gardens does hereby ilrdain as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings and Purpose. In adopting this Ordinance, the City Council Rids a-m* declares as follows:
That the above recitals are true and correct and hereby incorporates therr herein • this reference.
Ti. Ordinance No. 873 serves the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents and businesses within the City to regulate the development of industrial land use within the City.
iv. Ordinance No. 873 amending the City of Bell Gardens Municipal Cod'iwillnotpresentanyrisktothepublichealthandsafety.
SECTION 2. Authority. This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to the authori granted by the California Constitution and State law, including but not limited to Artic XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution, the Compassionate Use Act, the Mediq-1 Marijuana Program, and The Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act. I R WIN maz&=6W' '1.1 INUAW100111 01 IMA-114 111,44 1kTK(qX11Q;10 1 E 1: 1111' G 1-3 Tii
CrIlm
249Exhibit 9
Cannabis" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Caregiver" or "primary caregiver" shall have the same meaning as sel forth in Health & Safety Code »};262, ache same may be amended from time to time.
Commercial cannabis activity" shall have the same meaning as that set forth in Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(k) as the same may be amended from time to time.
Cooperative" shall mean two or more persons collectively or cooperatively cultivating, using, transporting, possessing, administering, efivering or main © available medical marijuana, with or without compensation.
Cultivation" shall have the same meaning as set forth inr Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(l) as the same may be amended from time to time.
Cultivation site" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Professions Code § ]9200.5; <) as the same may be amended from time to time.
Delivery" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(m) as the same maybe amended from time to time.
Dispensing" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(o) as the same may be amended from time to time.
am
250Exhibit 9
Distribution" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(p) as the same may be amended from time to time,
Distributor" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business Z Professions Code § 19300.5(q) as the same may be amended from tim,-., i• time.
Manufacturer" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(y) as the same may be amended from time Lo time.
Manufacturing site" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business Professions Code § 19300.5(af) as the same may be amended from time to time.
Medical cannabis," "medical cannabis product," or "cannabis product" ghall have the same meanings as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(ag) as the same may be amended from time to time.
Medical Marijuana RegWation and Safety Act" or "MMRSA" shafl mean the following bills signed into law on October 9, 2015 as the same may be amended from time to fime: AB 243, AB 246, and SB 643.
Nursery" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(ah) as the same may be amended from time to titie.
Qualifying patient" or "Qualified patient" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Health & Safety Code § 11362.7 as the same may ba. amended from time to t4te.
Testing laboratory" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business Professions Code § 19300.5(z) as the same may be amended from time to time.
Transport" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 19300.5(am) as the same may be amended from time to time.
Transporter" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business is Professions Code § 19300.5(aa) as the same may be amended from time to time.
NMI
251Exhibit 9
1. Commercial cannabis activities • all types are expressly prohibited in all zones, all specific plan areas, and all overlay districts in the City of Bell Gardens. No person shall establish, operate, con di: c)i or allow a commercial cannabis activity anywhere within the City.
2. To the extent not already covered • subsection A above, deliveries of medical cannabis are expressly prohibited within t City of Bell Gardens. No person shall conduct any deliveries th either originate or terminate within the City.
3. This section is meant to prohibit all activities for which a Sta license is required. Accordingly, the City shall not issue any perm license or other entitlement for any activity for which a State licen is required under the MMRSA.
C. Public nuisance. Any use or condition caused, • permitted to exist, in violation • any provision • this Section 9.21.010 shall be, and hereby is declared to be, a public nuisance and may be summarily abated by the City pursuant to Code • Civil Procedure Section 731, BGMC 1.12,020, or any other remedy available to the City.
SECTION 4. Nothing in this Ordinance shall be interpreted to mean that the City's permissive zoning scheme allows any other use not specifically listed therein. 252Exhibit 9
Ordinance No. 873
Ordinance. Therefore, this Ordinance has no impact on the physical environment as it will not result in any changes.
SECTION 7. To the extent the provisions of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code as amended by this Ordinance are substantially the same as the provisions of that Code as they read immediately prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, then those provisions shall be construed as continuations of the earlier provisions and not as new enactments.
SECTION 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance an* cause the same to be published in the manner prescribed by law.
UNN
Kristina Santana
City Clerk
V-7-3
khnolii M. Alvarez-Glasman
orney
r,
7&
RTSTlRA SAR I ARA, City Clerk • the City • Bell Gardens, hereb 869 was introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the Bell Gardens Ci Council held January 11, 2016 and that thereafter said ordinance was duly adopted at a regul meeting of the City Council held January 25, 2016, and was approved and passed by the followi vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Flores, Mendoza, Pulido; Mayor Pro Tern Aceituno; Mayor Rodriguez NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
7 of 7
Kristina Santana
City Clerk253Exhibit 9
1: W, 41, 1 Val 01 -0 Z1, A WNK, 1140011-1 1
6 1 1 i9mm
WHEREAS, on November 5, 1996, the voters of the State of California approved Proposition 215, codified as Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq., and entitled the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 ("CUX). The CUA exempted qualified patients and their primary caregivers from criminal liability under state law for the possession and cultivation • marijuana for personal medical use; WHEREAS, the intent of the CUA was to enable persons in the State of California who are in need of marijuana for medicinal purposes to use it under limited, specified circumstances;
WHEREAS, the State enacted Senate Bill 420 in October 2003, codified at Health itnd Safety Section 11362.7 et seq., ("Medical Marijuana Program Act," or "MMPA") to clarify the scope of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 and to allow cities and other overning bodies to adopt and enforce rules and regulations consistent with SB 420; WHEREAS, the MMPA created a state-approved voluntary medical marijuana identification card program and provided for certain additional immunities from state marijuana laws. Assembly Bill 2650 (2010) and Assembly Bill 1300 (2011) amended the Medical Marijuana Program to expressly recognize the authority of counties and cities to a)dopt local ordinances that regulate the location, operation, or establishment of a medical marijuana cooperative or collective" and to civilly and criminally enforce such ordinances;
WHEREAS, the CUA and MMPA did not "legalize" marijuana, but provided limiteii defenses to certain categories of individuals with respect to certain conduct and certair state criminal offenses;
WHEREAS, in City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center, Inc. (2013) 56 CalAth 729, the California Supreme Court held that "[n]othing in the CUA or the MMP expressly or impliedly limits the inherent authority of a local jurisdiction, by its own ordinances, to regulate the use of its land . . . ." Additionally, in Maral v. City of Live Oak (2013) 221 Cal.AppAth 975, the Court of Appeal held that "there is no right - and certainly no constitutional right - to cultivate medical marijuana. . . . ." and affirmed local government's authority to prohibit the cultivation of marijuana under its land use authority;
WHEREAS, the Federal Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq., classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 Drug, which is defined as a drug or other substance 254Exhibit 10
Ordinance No. 890
that has a high potential for abuse, that has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United State, and that has not been accepted as safe for use under medical supervision;
WHEREAS, the Federal Controlled Substances Act makes it unlawful und-"-' federal law for any person to cultivate, manufacture, distribute • dispense, or posse with intent manufacture, distribute or dispense, marijuana and contains no exempti • for medical purposes;
WAEREAS, on November 8, 2016, the voters of the State of California passem, Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA decriminalizing possession and use • marijuana under California law and regulating t ccultivation, processing, manufacture, distribution, testing and sale of nonmedi marijuana, including marijuana products, for use by adults 21 years of age or older; WHEREAS, AUMA expressly preserves local control over the regulation of marijuana-related businesses and maana-related land uses, including the authority • completely prohibit any marijuana business licensed under Division 10 within its jurisdiction pursuant to Business & Professions Code § 26200 et seq.; WHEREAS, although marijuana-related land uses and activities are already technically prohibited pursuant to the City's permissive zoning regulations, the proposed ordinance would expressly state that all such uses are prohibited in all zones, districts, and specific plan areas throughout the City;
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2018 the Bell Gardens Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing in connection with this Ordinance and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2018-02 recommending approval to the Bell Gardens City Council;
WHEREAS, on August 13, 2018 the Bell Gardens City Council held a duly notic public hearing and introduced this Ordinance amending Chapter 9.21 of the Bell GardelMunicipalCode; and Ti"111HEREAS, on September 10, 2018 the Bell Gardens City Council adopted tht Ordinance.
255Exhibit 10
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELL GARDENS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
A, The City Council hereby finds the above recitals accurate and true and makes them a part of the findings.
C. In Colorado, where recreational marijuana is legal and commercialized, marijuana-related traffic deaths increased 92% from 2010 to 2014 while all traffic deaths increased only 8 percent during the same time period. (The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact, Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, Vol. 3, September 2015, pp.
E. Based on these facts and other evidence, there is a concern that the proliferation of marijuana -related uses and activities in the City would result in increased crime and other negative secondary effects like those experienced in other communities throughout California and around the country.
F. To safeguard against these deleterious secondary effects, the City Counci', finds it is necessary for the City to prohibit marijuana-related uses and activities in alT,
zones and specific plan areas to the maximum extent permissible under State law.
G. This Ordinance is adopted in accordance with the authority conferred pursuant to the California Constitution and State law, including but not limited to Article X1, Section 7 of the California Constitution, the Compassionate Use Act, the Medical Marijuana Program Act, the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act, and the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act.
SECTION 2. Section 9.21.010 of the Bell Gardens Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the following:
Em
256Exhibit 10
A *- -* ;#
1WHO
INTW S
Delivery" means the commercial transfer of marijuana or marijuana products to a customer. "Delivery" also includes the use by a retailer of any technology platform owned and controlled by the retailer, or independently licensed under this division that enables customers to arrange for or facilitate the commercial transfer by a licensed retailer of marijuana or maana products.
Dispensary" means a facility or location, whether fixed or mobile, where marijuana, marijuana products, or devices for the use of marijuana are offered, made available to, or provided, either individually or in any combination, with or without remuneration, for medical, recreational, or other purposes.
Distribution" means the procurement, sale, and transport of marijuana and narijuana products between entities for commercial use purposes.
Manufacture" means to compound, blend, extract, infuse, or otherwise make or prepare a marijuana product.
WWW
257Exhibit 10
Marijuana cultivation facility" means a facility where marijuana is cultivated, prepared, and packaged for sale to marijuana dispensaries, to marijuana product manufacturing facilities, or to other marijuana cultivation faces, but not to consumers.
Marijuana establishment" means a marijuana cultivation facility, marijuana storage facility, marijuana testing facility, a marijuana product manufacturing facility, or marijuana dispensary.
Marijuana product manufacturing facility" means a facility where marijuana and marijuana products are manufactured, prepared and packaged for sale to other marijuana product manufacturing facilities or to marijuana dispensaries, but not to consumers.
Marijuana products" means marijuana that has undergone a process whereby the plant material has been transformed into a concentrate, 258Exhibit 10
gl'
I'SILPIWIRLStIL91011
Marijuana storage facility" means a facility used for the storage of marijuana, marijuana products or marijuana accessories.
Marijuana testing facility" means a facility where marijuana is analyzed and certified for safety and potency.
Private residence" means a house, an apartment unit, a mobile home, or other similar habitable dwelling.
C. Marijuana Cultivation for Personal Use.
RIM
259Exhibit 10
1-
low
willow"
Unapter 670-7, Tne MeMINFIMM 75*1Z U I 1ei(di ktla wm[ t cuuu-1.11tut Chapter 16.44.
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or any part thereof, is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remag portions of this Wrow,
260Exhibit 10
91PRUM-3254MI
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of thlOrdinance, causing it to be posted as required by law and it shall be effective thirty (3 days after its adoption.
Iiii-i;1I 'Jill Jill, I
1111.041, J0. -V W A J "'
Maria Pulido, Mayor
111
AYES: Council Member Rodriguez; Mayor Pro Tom Mendoza; Mayor Pulido NWES Ione
ABSTAIN*: None
ABSENT: Council Members Acelituno, Flores
RIM4111111TIFUR-019. WM
N WIN =
261Exhibit 10
CITY OF BELL GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL
CLOSED SESSION AND REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2020, 6:00 PM
MINUTES
LOCATION: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER, 7100 GARFIELD AVENUE, BELL
GARDENS, CA
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability -related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (562) 806-7704. Notification 48 business hours prior to the m CC Minutes 2019-11-11 Closed Session & Regular Meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Cortez called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m.
ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
Present: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Pro Tern Flores (Arrived at 5:12 p.m.), Mayor Cortez
Absent: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS ONLY
Three minutes per person, subject to a total period of 30 minutes) Mayor Cortez opened the public comment period. There were no speakers. Mayor Cortez closed the public comment period and asked City Attorney Rick Olivarez to announce the Closed Session items. City Attorney Olivarez announced that the Council would recess to discuss the item posted on the agenda. The Council then recessed to the Council Chamber Conference Room (see page 2 for report on Closed Session) at 5:03 p.m. to discuss the following matter:
CLOSED SESSION: (Item. No. 1)
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
One case: People of the State of California v. Jennifer Rodriguez, Case No.
BC694949.
Closed Session adjourned at 5:22 p.m.
1of15
262Exhibit 11
CITY OF BELL GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL
CLOSED SESSION AND REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2020, 6:00 PM
MINUTES
LOCATION: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER, 7100 GARFIELD AVENUE, BELL
GARDENS,CA
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability -related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (562) 806-7704. Notification 48 business hours prior to the m CC Minutes 2019-11-11 Closed Session & Regular Meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Cortez called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.
INVOCATION — was given by Pastor Reynaldo Leal Jr.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — was led by the Girl Scout Brownie Troop #2543.
ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Present: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Pro Tern Flores, Mayor Cortez
Absent: None
City Attorney Rick Olivarez announced due to Mayor Pro Tern Flores impending birth of her child in early March, she would be absent for the next two regular meetings and would be given the courtesy of excused absences. Mayor Pro Tern Flores will be in communication with the City Attorney if a third or fourth excused absence is needed and the City Council would be informed.
The Mayor called for any objections for excused absences for the next two regular meetings and there were none.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney, Rick Olivarez announced that the City Council recessed into Closed Session, all Council Members were present with the exception of Mayor Pro Tern Flores who arrived in Closed Session at 5:12 p.m. With respect to the item, No. 1 City Council received an update from outside legal counsel, Mr. Bacio on the status. There was no direction given. There was no final action to report.
263Exhibit 11
PRESENTATION
VSAP VOTING EXPERIENCE
PowerPoint presentation was given by Jeff Klein, Manager of Civic Engagement, Community Relations and Legislation, Los Angeles County, Registrar -Recorders/ County Clerk on the new voting system. PUBLIC
HEARING (Item No. 1) 1.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FY 2020-2021 Approval of Community Development Block Grant Program 2020-2021 Fiscal Year Budget upon consideration of public testimony and discussion. Recommendation:
It
is staffs recommendation that the City Council conduct a public hearing on the proposed budget for the Community Development Block Grant Program 20202021 Fiscal Year, and upon consideration of public testimony and discussion of relevant issues, approve the proposed budget by adopting the attached Resolution. City Manager Michael O'Kelly introduced the item. Community
Development Director Gustavo Romo stated that the Block Grant program budget allocation this year identified $200,000 for a beautification program. The beautification program would bring about commercial rehab along different portions of the city.
Staff has looked at most needs, identified the northern border to the southern border. The commercial rehab guidelines have been approved by the LACDA approved. If commercial rehab guidelines go forward, they will be brought before Council's approval. For this budget allocation, total funds available are $629,000, in the past it has been used for residential rehab, graffiti removal, code enforcement activities and the aquatic center. We will continue to do that, by taking a portion, $200,000 again, for the beautification program.
City
Manager Mr. O'Kelly stated that there was an agenda item No. 8 CalHome grant program requesting authorization to submit a grant application on the residential side. Mayor Cortez opened the public comment period at 6:23 p.m. Pastor Leal inquired if the grant would be available for homeowners and if the church would fall under this program. Community
Development Director Gustavo Romo stated the church would fall in the commercial area as long as it was in the target areas and was restricted to the eastern avenue.
City
Manager Mr. O'Kelly stated that it would not be available for residential, but item no. 8 would be. 3of15
264Exhibit 11
Mayor Cortez closed the public comment period at 6:24 p.m.
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, second by Council Member Barcena to approve the proposed budget by adopting Resolution No. 2020-08.
The motion carried 4-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Pro Tern Flores; Mayor Cortez NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS ONLY
Alma Jiminez spoke in opposition of marijuana.
Maria Cardiel resident of 30 years; requested good examples from the Council for the community
Jennifer Rodriguez spoke about cannabis issues to be placed on the ballot; STAR program; Seniors exercise equipment; lifted sidewalks and campaigns Norma Flores supported Jennifer Rodriguez' comments; value of community; and cost of police officers at meetings
Esteban Figueroa — 25-year resident of Bell Gardens; expressed his opposition of marijuana
Rogelio Rodriguez — resident since 1986; expressed his opposition of marijuana Maria Martin — resident since 1990; expressed her opposition of cannibas dispensaries; supports the DARE program
Mayor Pro Tern Flores — thanked the community in attendance; sought the support of the Council to adopt an Ordinance prohibiting voting for an excused absence in open session.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Michael O'Kelly thanked the Police Chief and department for addressing a recent situation.
CONSENT CALENDAR (Items No. 2-8)
Council Member Aceituno pulled Item No. 7 and 8 for further discussion.
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Flores, to approve the consent calendar with the exception of Item No. 7 and 8. 4of15
265Exhibit 11
The motion carried 4-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Pro Tern Flores; Mayor Cortez NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
2. GENERAL MOTION TO WAIVE FULL READING AND APPROVE
ORDINANCES BY TITLE ONLY PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT PAI'1C CATIA\I 9LA7A
In order to expedite the conduct of business at City Council meetings, California State Law (California Government Code Section 36934) allows Ordinances to be read by title if a majority of the legislative body supports the motion to waive the full reading.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council approve a general motion to waive full reading and approve Ordinances by title only pursuant to California Government Code Section 36934.
3. WARRANT REGISTERS AND WIRE TRANSFERS
In approving the action of receiving and filing the warrant registers, the official minutes of the Bell Gardens City Council should state that each individual member of the City Council is not voting on, influencing the outcome of, or participating in approving, accepting, receiving or filing any warrant which bears the name of the same council member, or pays for any costs or expenses, or otherwise benefits the same named council member. Each council member will not be participating, influencing or voting on any such warrant bearing their name or which benefits the same named council member, but with that exception is voting in favor of receiving and filing all other warrants contained in this report, unless otherwise noted on the record at the time of the approval of the action required by this report.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council receive and file the warrant registers, wire transfers, and net payrolls dated 01/14/20, 01/16/20 and 01/21/20.
4. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 13 2020 AND JANUARY 27 2020
CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION AND REGULAR MEETING
January 13 and January 27, 2020 - Closed Session and Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council approve the attached minutes.
5. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO.903 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE Adoption of the 2019 California Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Residential, Green Building, and Fire Codes.
5of15
266Exhibit 11
It is recommended that the City Council consider the adoption of Ordinance No. 903 adopting by reference Titles 26 through 31, 2019 Los Angeles County Building Codes and Title 32, 2019 Los Angeles County Fire Code.
517-M. N 1 .1 rew-1 a R F41 0 1 Rzi I r0u W01 1-V eva-'ra City Council relayed resident's concerns pertaining to the intersection of Purdy Avenue and Lubec Street. Residents state that there have been several traffic collisions at this location and request the addition of stop signs on eastbound and westbound Lubec Street. Several factors must be warranted in order to add stop signs and after careful review of the field configuration, analyzing the volume and speed data and traffic accident collision reports, it is staffs recommendation to deny the request to add stop signs on eastbound and westbound Lubec Street.
However, staff is recommending the installation of 10' feet of red curb from the back of curb returns on the northeast, southwest and southeast corners of Lubec Street and Purdy Avenue.
Recommendation:
tWe Cit% Couticil, bg gotinji:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2020-10 authorizing parking restrictions in Bell Gardens; and
2. Authorize the installation of ten (10') feet of red curb (no parking) from the back of the curb returns on the northeast, southwest and southeast corner of Lubec Street and Purdy Avenue.
NOTICE OF TERMINATION OF MOU FOR REf1B1RSE11IEi1T OF
PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT COSTS ASSOCIATED
WITH INVESTIGATIONS OF VIOLENT CRIMINAL STREET GANGS
In January 2020, the Bell Gardens Police Department served both written and oral notification to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), terminating the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between The City of Bell Gardens and ICE. The purpose of the MOU, which was approved by the Bell Gardens City Council at the April 22, 2019 City Council Meeting, was to establish an agreement for ICE to reimburse the City of Bell Gardens for the cost associated with a criminal investigation pertaining to violent gang crimes that were taking place in the City.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council receive and file this report.
MUMS inr-Ti
267Exhibit 11
worked with other outside agencies, and were able to come to a quick resolution of that case; therefore, never utilized the MOU. In January #. ICE was served and gal notification
rWi motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and second by Council Member Barcena, to 7-pprove Item No.
V,U Ann o, #; ! i- 4
AYES: Council Members Aceltuno, Bercene; Mayor Pro Tern Flores, Mayor Cortez ABSTAIN:
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
A Resolution authorizing the submission of a grant application to obtain funding from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) under the o, Program.
Recommendation:
It is Staff recommendation that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2020-11 authorizing the submission of an application to HCD for funding under the CalHome Program; authorize the City Manager to execute a Standard Agreement with HCD if selected to receive CalHome Program funding and any amendments necessary to participate in the CalHome Program.
Council Member Aceituno asked for clarification on the grant the City is applying for and what the restrictions are for b , homes?
single-family homeowners , havingproperty that need rehab and mobileoowners. Homeowners- , - , i, need to apply and dqualify. The
motion carried 4-0 with the following vote. AYES:
it Members Aceituno,9 Mayor Pro Tern Flores; Mayor Cortez ABSTAIN, NOES-
None ABSENT,
None 7of15
268Exhibit 11
DISCUSSION (items No. 9-16)
9. UPDATE REGARDING LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENTS
Update on general legislative enactments, including new housing legislation.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council receive and file this report.
City Manager Michael O'Kelly introduced the item.
Veronica Tam, Principal, Veronica Tam Associates, Inc., and Assistant City Attorney Norma D. Tabares gave a PowerPoint presentation with the following updates: AB 648 Gaming Room Employed; AB571-Default Contribution Limits; AB1100 — EV-vehicle charging stations; AB931 -Local Boards and Commission; AB201 -Campaign Disclosure; AB377-Micro-enterpise Kitchens; A131486-Surplus Land Act; A131763-Density Bonus; AB68,671, 881, 587 and SB13 —Accessory Dwelling Units; A131483-Housing Data; AB SB300 — Housing Crisis Act; AB1 01 -Housing Development and Financing.
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and a second by Mayor Pro Tern Flores, to receive and file the report.
The motion carried 4-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Pro Tern Flores; Mayor Cortez NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Mayor Pro Tern Flores left the dais at 7:16 p.m.
10. BELL GARDENS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE UPDATE
Chamber of Commerce 4th Quarter Activity Report.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council receive and file the report.
City Manager Michael O'Kelly introduced the item.
Chamber of Commerce President Michael Salazar gave a PowerPoint presentation, summarizing the activities the Chamber conducts throughout the year. Upcoming events for 2020 include:2020 State of the City Address; Job Fair — will work with Mr.
Romo; Annual Golf Tournament — late August or early September; Ms. Bell Gardens Pageant; BGHS Homecoming Fair — will work with the high school and Coffee Connections (Every Wednesday)
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and seconded by Council Member Barcena, to receive and file the report.
The motion carried 3-0 with the following vote.
8 of 15
269Exhibit 11
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Cortez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tern Flores
ABSTAIN: None
11. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING DANG
PUBLIC PROPERTY INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMTTE
OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Staff provided a presentation on the City's sidewalk policy on April 22, 2019. A sidewalk update presentation was given to City Council on July 8, 2019 and a memo on sidewalk repairs was provided on December 4, 2019. Sidewalk inspections, in accordance with this program, are done approximately every twelve months. Public Works repairs sidewalks throughout the year, if weather permits.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council receive and file this update on the City's sidewalks.
City Manager Michael O'Kelly introduced the item.
Director of Public Works Chau Vu gave an oral presentation summarizing the repairs being done throughout the year. Ms. Vu reported that back in April 2019 we provided you with a policy as well as guidelines that the City was advised by California JPIA our insurance carrier. They advise us on how to protect the City on lawsuits. We were advised to do sidewalk surveys, keeping inventories, establish a policy, do inspections, we do a sidewalk survey once a year, we identify a lift, repair, fix and grind sidewalks throughout the year. In the last six months, Public Works crews have repaired 107 yards of concrete within the sidewalks. Back in 2018, we received three slip and fall claims and those claims are still pending. Our insurance provider has also confirmed that in the course of 2013-2017 there have been no loss payments. This demonstrates the program's success Director Vu stated.
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and seconded by Council Member Barcena, to receive and file the report.
The motion carried 3-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Cortez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tern Flores
ABSTAIN: None
12. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING SPEED LIMITS ON
CERTAIN CITY STREETS TO REDUCE THE INCIDENCE OF
AUTOMATIVE AND PEDESTRIAN RELATED INJURIES AND FATALITIES Staff was requested to provide an update on traffic safety as it relates to speeding in the City. The survey for speed limits is regularly conducted every (5) five years for the purpose of complying with the California Vehicle Code. The last speed 9of15
270Exhibit 11
survey was conducted in February 2015. The engineering and traffic surveys are essential in maintaining a safe and orderly movement of traffic by setting speed limits that are reasonable and enforceable by the use of radar by police officers.
Staff has prepared a Complete Street Plan which includes evaluating existing conditions, identifying low stress networks, corridor improvements, project prioritization and implementation strategies. There are proposed projects to discourage speeding and improve crossings at specific streets in the Plan. The Complete Streets Plan will be presented for adoption at the February 24, 2020 City Council Meeting. Speed Humps were recently approve by City Council: five (5) on Colmar and three (3) on Specht. The following stop signs were approved by the City Council within the last two (2) years: Priory and Purdy on January 8, 2018; Loveland and Granger on July 8, 2019.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation to receive and file this update City Manager Michael O'Kelly introduced the item.
Director of Public Works Chau Vu gave an oral presentation summarizing items that are currently being worked on or have been completed: traffic safety measures, speed surveys which are done every 5 years; the last one was completed in 2015 and currently in the process of doing another one which is being done by a traffic engineer. There will be a Complete Street Plan before Council on February 24, 2020. Two stops signs were installed, which are recommended by a traffic engineer and there have been two approved speed humps.
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and seconded by Council Member Aceituno, to receive and file the report.
The motion carried 3-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Cortez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tern Flores
ABSTAIN: None
13. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING THE STAR PROGRAM GARDEN A program overview of the Community Garden located at Ford Park and inclusion of STAR Program programming.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council receive and file the report.
City Manager Michael O'Kelly introduced the item.
Director of Recreation and Community Services Rozanne Adanto gave an oral presentation. She reported that the garden is Y2 acre, 74 plots, 5 vacant, two assigned to the STAR program. There are adjustments being made to the plots, our participants to the STAR program with some being wheelchair bound, therefore the terrain is being adjusted. Director Adanto stated that there is a 10 of 15
271Exhibit 11
purchase for raised plots with delivered shortly. We are also looking at a grant from AARP to make additional improvements to the site. We have contracted with a contractor with a birdhouse, and have had a discussion with Little Green Fingers.
Other needed improvements have been identified such as: umbrellas, benches, security lighting, signage, irrigation, just to get some direction; we are looking at what we can do to improve. She hopes to have some type of a celebration once the participants start there
Mayor Cortez thanked Mrs. Adanto for the improvements she had made and were echoed by Council Member Barcena.
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and seconded by Council Member Barcena, to receive and file the report.
The motion carried 3-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Cortez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tern Flores
ABSTAIN: None
14. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING SENIOR CENTER EXERCISE
EQUIPMENT
Update of gymnasium equipment at Senior Center(s).
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that City Council receive and file this report.
City Manager Michael OKelly introduced the item.
Director of Recreation and Community Services Rozanne Adanto gave an overview of equipment at both centers. There are two centers one at Veterans Park and the other at Clara Street. The equipment is about ten years old. The City has contracted with a company that works on the equipment and will be accessing to see what is required to repair any of the equipment. The maintenance contract is $95.00 per month. The company will provide an assessment and she will keep the Council apprised of the report. Director Adanto also stated that she had been contacted by AARP noting that the City is being considered for a fit lot at no expense.
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and seconded by Council Member Barcena, to receive and file the report.
The motion carried 3-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceltuno, Barcena; Mayor Cortez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tern Flores
11 of 15
272Exhibit 11
15. REQUEST FOR DIRECTION ON CONSIDERATION OF AN INITIATIVE
PERTAINING TO CANNABIS -RELATED USES CITYWIDE
Request for Direction on Consideration of a Ballot Initiative Pertaining to Cannabis Related Uses Citywide.
Recommendation:
It is staff recommendation that the City Council consider whether or not to begin a ballot initiative process that would put the question of permitting or prohibiting cannabis -related uses citywide to voters, and provide direction to staff regarding whether to prepare materials for a City Council -sponsored ballot initiative.
City Manager Michael O'Kelly introduced the item.
Director of Community Development Gustavo Romo gave an oral presentation. He stated the report was to inquire if City Council would like to consider a ballot measure at the next general election. City Council at previous meetings decided not to take any further action. At the request of Mayor Pro Tern Flores the item was being presented to City Council.
Director Romo stated that the question was being posed, again. Does City Council want the decision left up to the voters? Director Romo stated that based on two past ordinances the City Council's position is they do not want cannabis, whether it is the cultivation side or retail in dispensaries.
Council Member Aceituno stated that an individual is misleading the community as if this City Council is moving forward with the cannabis industry. He asked what actions City Council had taken previously.
Director of Community Development Gustavo Romo responded that the record of the City Council is against any type of cannabis operation. The first ordinance was approved there would be no cultivation - no manufacturing. The second ordinance was to further clarify that no other type of operation would be permitted in the City of Bell Gardens. As it stands the Council has a record of not permitting any type of cannabis operation in the city.
Council Member Aceituno, asked that the translator interpret in Spanish the Council's position on cannabis.
The translator reiterated the City's position on cannabis.
Mayor Cortez thanked Council Member Aceituno for clarifying the record. She stated that she was not seated as a Council Member at the time the action was taken. This is a product that was banned in the community. An individual is misleading our community. The reason we have not touched this subject is that it is not up for consideration. The Council has not discussed it, why put an item on the agenda when it doesn't pertain to the community? She added that any questions the public has, they may make an appointment with the City Council. 12 of 15
273Exhibit 11
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and seconded by Council Member Aceituno, to receive and file the report.
The motion carried 3-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Cortez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tern Flores
ABSTAIN: None
16. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING LOCAL ST
STRATEGIES AND PROGRAMS TO COMBAT THE
Update on Homelessness Crisis and State Legislation per Council Member request.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction on the next steps they would like to see with regards to the homeless crisis and receive and file this report.
City Manager Michael O'Kelly introduced the item.
Director of Community Development Gustavo Romo introduced Kim Barnett, Manager at Los Angeles Housing Authority (LAHSA).
Director Romo gave a PowerPoint presentation. He stated that Governor Newson had signed several bills to assist agencies with regard to the homeless crisis in the state. The bills became effective January 1, 2020, to assist agencies with emergency shelters and programs in order to assist the homeless. The new legislation included CEQA exemptions. Mr. Romo there were concerns in the communities that continue to impact them, such as trespassing, littering and vandalism as well as concerns for the health and safety that homeless individuals suffer. The Bell Gardens Police Department has worked with LA County Mental Health Department and (LAHSA) to help homeless individuals and their families. They have been able to assist 360 homeless/mentally ill individuals in 2019.
The Police Department and Public Works have worked to clean up some homeless encampments.
Director Romo added that the General Investigation Unit Detectives have assisted the Public Works during the cleanup of the Florence Avenue Bridge and Rio Hondo riverbed bike path. They have disposed of several truckloads of debris after there were public health and safety concerns.
Director Romo further stated that the governor's budget includes grants that jurisdictions can apply for. The grants included: $650 million to local governments for homelessness emergency aid; $120 million for expanded Whole Person Care services, $150 million for strategies to address the shortage of mental health professionals in the public mental health system, $25 million for Supplemental Security income advocacy and $40 million for student rapid rehousing and basic needs initiatives for students that are homeless, 13 of 15
274Exhibit 11
20 million in legal assistance for eviction prevention and $400 million to increase grants to families in the CalWORKs program. Director Romo stated, that based on the 2019 data from Los Angeles County, the homeless population in the County grew by 6,171 from 52,765 in 2018 to 58,936 in 2019.
Kim Barnett, manager of LAHSA responded to Council Member, Aceituno's question regarding homeless individuals that are affecting business owners. She thanked the City Council for their efforts to address homelessness. There is a web portal for businesses and residents that anyone can enter information. Ms. Barnett stated that she would be happy to come back to a future Council Meeting and show the Council how the homeless delivery system works.
Ms. Barnett will be coming back to City Council on a report on how Measure H money is being spent within the City.
A motion was made by Mayor Cortez, and seconded by Council Member Aceituno, to receive and file the report.
The motion carried 3-0 with the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Aceituno, Barcena; Mayor Cortez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Flores
ABSTAIN: None
Mayor Cortez requested a break at 8:00 p.m.
Meeting resumed at 8:05 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS UNDER THE SUBJECT MATTER
JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Jennifer Rodriguez spoke in support of a cannabis ballot measure on the 2020 ballot.
Rogelio Rodriguez spoke in opposition of cannabis and commented on police officers in attendance.
Maria Cardiec spoke on the senior citizen's exercise equipment.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS
Council Member Aceituno thanked staff for the manner in which they dealt with the meeting. He stated that an individual and family will not take ownership for their actions regarding a recent court ruling.
Council Member Barcena thanked members of the public that spoke in a respectful manner. He encouraged the public to approach him and invited everyone to get to know 14 of 15
275Exhibit 11
their Council Members. He suggested that residents report to the City if they have a problem.
Mayor Cortez stated that the reason for police presence was for the purpose of conducting a civilized meeting which is a mutual. benefit to the Council and citizens. She clarified a statement that was made about the City Council receiving money. She stated that the public could request copies of expenditures and it is a matter of public record. Mayor Cortez commented on an individual that has been absent from City Council Meetings that was removed by a court judgement entered on February 5, 2020. She stated that it is a matter of public record. She announced that there is an immigration workshop at Suva Intermediate on February 26, 2020. Lastly, she thanked Chief Fairfield for all his work and efforts.
ADJOURNMENT — Mayor Cortez adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:35 p.m. in memory of Jake Cortez an advocate for Los Angeles County and cities, AA4."
JQn-e,Aalstead
City Clerk
15 of 15
276Exhibit 11
Table 1. Los Angeles County Municipalities Permitting Commercial Cannabis Activity
Municipality Storefront Delivery Distribution Manufacturing Cultivation Testing Artesia Allowed Allowed Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Avalon (Catalina Island)Prohibited LMO Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Baldwin Park Prohibited Prohibited Allowed Allowed Limited Prohibited Bell Prohibited Prohibited LMO LMO LMO LMO
Bellflower Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Carson Prohibited Prohibited Allowed Allowed Limited Allowed Commerce Prohibited Allowed Allowed Allowed Limited Allowed Cudahy Allowed Allowed LMO LMO LMO LMO
Culver City Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Limited Allowed El Monte Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Limited Allowed Huntington Park LMO Allowed Prohibited Allowed Allowed Prohibited Lancaster Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Long Beach Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Los Angeles Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Lynwood Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Limited Allowed Malibu Allowed Allowed Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Maywood*Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Limited Allowed Monrovia Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Allowed Montebello Prohibited Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Pasadena Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Pomona Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Limited Allowed
Rolling Hills Prohibited LMO LMO Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Santa Monica LMO Prohibited Prohibited LMO Prohibited Prohibited West Hollywood Allowed Allowed Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Source: https://cannabis.ca.gov/cannabis-laws/where-cannabis-businesses-are-allowed/ LMO: Limited Medical Only
* Maywood no longer permits cannabis operations as of August 28, 2019 (pursuant Maywood Ordinance No. 12-03).
All cannabis licenses issued, and businesses established prior to this date are considered legal nonconforming uses. No new licenses have been issued.
277Exhibit 12
Figure 1: Schools and Parks Locations
Figure 1 - This depiction demonstrates areas known to have sensitive receptors that currently exist, excluding day care centers and youth centers, which would restrict locations where commercial cannabis activity could potentially occur.
278Exhibit 13
Figure 2: Approximate Potential Commercial Cannabis Activity Locations based on Distancing and Siting Criteria Presented in Exhibit 1
Figure 1 is an Illustration of potential commercial cannabis activity locations with approximate distance and zoning criteria considered.
279Exhibit 14
Resident Art & Yard Sale
(Item No. 7)
May 8, 2023
BACKGROUND
Staff were made aware of a need for:
A space for residents to sell their personal art and other personal property As a means of meeting this need staff are considering a pilot project:
For residents to sell their art, home goods and personal property at Veterans Park Host the event during the current Farmers Market hours Fridays 11am –3:30pm
Program Details
•Purpose
•Assist residents who can’t sell their art or personal property at a traditional yard sale. •For residents only
•Free of charge
•Application process
•First come, first served
•Guidelines will be implemented
Conclusion and Recommendation
This pilot project will help staff
Better understand the needs of the residents
Assess the effectiveness of the services being provided Staff hope to meet the needs of those in the community who are unsuccessful or unable to sell their personal art and property
It is staff’s recommendation that the City Council, by motion, provide staff direction to host a Resident Art and Yard Sale pilot program.
Questions?
Request for Direction
regarding Commercial
Cannabis Activities
Bell Gardens City Council Meeting
May 8, 2023
(Item No. 8)
State Law and Regulation
The Adult Use of Marijuana Act (“AUMA”) regulates
personal conduct related to cannabis
The Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and
Safety Act (“MAURSCA”) and related regulations address
all commercial cannabis
Local Authority to Regulate Commercial
Cannabis
City laws and regulations must not conflict with state law A conflict arises when the law is:
Duplicative;
Contradicts; or
Regulates an area already occupied by state law
How do municipalities regulate
cannabis?
Land Use and Zoning address land use impacts associated with cannabis uses
Business Permitting Requirements regulate business
operations; impose industry-standards
Potential Revenue -Taxation
Cities may impose taxes to receive revenue
Often based on gross receipts
Staff research shows one SELA city predicted an intake of $250,000-450,000 per location and well exceeded
that prediction
Potential Revenue –Development
Agreements
Development Agreements allow cities to receive
extraordinary benefits in return for assurances that their land use approvals will remain vested
Negotiated on a case-by-case basis
Potential Financial Resources -Grant
Funding
State Department of Cannabis Control (“DCC”) has a $20 million grant available to implement regulatory systems for cannabis activities
Applicants that propose to use existing constructs and permitting systems are awarded preferential points
Awardees for Phase 1 ($10 million) will be announced in June If awarded, the City Council will need to formally accept the grant funding
Source: Department of Cannabis Control
Regulation in Los Angeles County
23 cities permit some form of
commercial cannabis retail activity
20 permit retail sales of cannabis
Los Angeles County is also
implementing framework that
would permit commercial cannabis
activities within the unincorporated
portions of the County Permits some
cannabis activities
Cannabis activities
not permitted
How could the city
potentially regulate
cannabis activities?
Sample Draft Ordinance Discussion
Sample Draft Ordinance
Potential Land Use Controls
Conditionally permits a retail use in the industrial and commercial zoned properties
Imposes siting requirements, such as:
600-foot distance from day cares, youth centers, schools, and parks 250-foot distance requirement between cannabis retail uses A prohibition of such use in the Civic Center Overlay District Design and Development Standards
Limits the use mirrored, reflected, or tinted glass in order to provide more transparency Provides prescriptive standards for decorative railings and grilles Conditional Use Permits
Subject to specific findings, including compatibility with the surrounding community Limited lifespan
Additional conditions may be imposed
rrh
Zoning Map
Illustration of Possible
Cannabis Business
Locations, pursuant to
CA State guidelines
Zoning Legend
r.; City Boundary
•
Zoning
_ l R-1 ;Low Density Residential),
R-2 (Medi,imn Densrty Residential)
I j R-3 ;Pion Density ResidenbaC1
R-3 (Very High Density Residential)
oMiced 03e CommercinlfResldenaall
,4, C -S (Cen1mercral Service and Professional),
- C-4 {Heavy y Commercial I
CAI {Corn merc.a&Manufacturing)
0 500 1,©00 2,000 ILighlIndustnal
MPD gManufacturing Pmnned Cevelopmenrl
Feet j O -S (Open SpacelPart+s)
P -I i Put lIcllnstituhonali
Sample Draft Ordinance
Potential Business Permit Regulations
Proposes the following standards for retail operations Adequate security and lighting, including licensed security guards Requires odor absorbing ventilation and exhaust equipment Prohibits onsite consumption
Requires compliance with all state laws, regulations and conditions of approval associated with a CUP
Requires a business to open within one year of issuance of a business regulatory permit
Staff Recommendation
Council may:
Direct staff to prepare an ordinance authorizing and
regulating commercial cannabis activities; or
Take no further action and receive and file this report.
From:Vanessa Quiroz
To:PublicComments
Subject:FW: City Council Agenda Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 12:41:33 PM
From: Julio Zendejas
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 12:34 PM
To: Daisy Gomez ; Vanessa Quiroz
Subject: City Council Agenda Item 8
I am writing in support of Legal Cannabis in the City of Bell Gardens. Providing safe, legal access to cannabis product for ADULTS is the right thing to do.
States that have legalized commercial cannabis saw a decrease in the likelihood of underage cannabis use. Authorizing commercial cannabis businesses has been shown to reduce neighborhood crime, increase property values and spur economic development.
A successful commercial cannabis program can bring millions of dollars in new revenue to our city for much needed programs and other improvements.
This is a LEGAL industry that requires potential sites to be away from schools, churches, youth centers and other sensitive uses. Nobody under 21 is allowed to enter these potential storefronts let alone purchase any cannabis products.
We already have illegal dispensaries in the community which is where crime actually occurs. We have already had a shooting and death at the illegal dispensary on Florence near Ajax.
Permitting legal cannabis dispensaries will make it easier for residents to legally obtain products in a safer environment and will assist in getting rid of the illegal operations.
From:Tucker Investments
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8 Public Comment
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:37:28 PM
Dear Councilmembers,
As a member of the community, I strongly believe that legalizing cannabis and allowing for its sale in a regulated environment will benefit the local economy and provide safe access to a product that has been regulated and tested.
Given the recent news of illegal dispensaries operating in our city, I am impressed by the responsible approach that the Councilmembers are taking tonight in order to regulate the industry. Their commitment to the safety of our community and implementing security measures to prevent diversion and underage access is imperative to our community.
I am confident that a regulated industry will operate with integrity, provide quality products, and contribute positively to the local community. I urge you to continue to work for the betterment of our community and move forward in approving dispensaries.
Thank you
Ronnie Konishi
Sent from my Rotary-Dial Desk Phone®
From:Zhi Huang
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8 public comments
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:48:56 PM
Dear Council Members,
The legalization of cannabis can bring significant economic benefits to the city, such as job creation and increased tax revenue. Additionally, the taxes generated from the sale of cannabis can be used to fund important public services, such as education and healthcare.
The enforcement of cannabis laws has disproportionately affected minority communities, despite similar rates of usage across different racial groups.
Legalizing cannabis can help to address these inequities by reducing the number of people who are needlessly caught up in the criminal justice system.
Legalizing cannabis can help to ensure that consumers are getting a safe, regulated product. Currently, individuals who purchase cannabis on the black market have no way of knowing what they are getting, which can put their health at risk. By legalizing cannabis, the city can regulate the quality of the product and ensure that consumers are getting a safe, consistent product.
Overall, the legalization of cannabis can bring significant benefits to the city, including economic benefits, medical benefits, reduced crime, social justice, and consumer safety. By legalizing cannabis, the city can create a safer, healthier, and more just society for all its residents.
Thank you
Roberto Garcia
Sent from my Rotary-Dial Desk Phone®
From:J G
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8 Support
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:22:45 PM
Dear Councilmembers,
As a member of the community, I strongly believe that legalizing cannabis and allowing for its sale in a regulated environment will benefit the local economy and provide safe access to a product that has been regulated and tested.
Given the recent news of illegal dispensaries operating in our city, I am impressed by the responsible approach that the Councilmembers are taking tonight in order to regulate the industry. Their commitment to the safety of our community and implementing security measures to prevent diversion and underage access is imperative to our community.
I am confident that a regulated industry will operate with integrity, provide quality products, and contribute positively to the local community. I urge you to continue to work for the betterment of our community and move forward in approving dispensaries.
From:Mark Medrano
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8 Support
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:03:34 PM
I am writing this letter to express my strong support for the establishment of a legal dispensaries.
As you are aware, there are many people who suffer from chronic pain, debilitating illnesses, anxiety, depression and other mental health conditions. These individuals often rely on cannabis as a form of medication to manage their symptoms and improve their quality of life.
Unfortunately, many of them are forced to purchase cannabis from illegal sources, which not only puts them at risk of legal repercussions but also exposes them to potentially dangerous products.
By allowing a legal dispensary to operate in our community, we can ensure that those who require cannabis for medicinal purposes have access to a safe and regulated product. This would not only benefit the individuals themselves but would also be a positive step towards reducing the demand for illegal cannabis and promoting public safety.
Moreover, a legal dispensary can also have a positive impact on our local economy. It has been
shown that legal cannabis businesses can create jobs and generate revenue for the community through taxes and other fees.
I understand that some people may have concerns about the establishment of a dispensary in our community. However, I believe that the benefits far outweigh any potential negative impacts, if any. With appropriate regulations in place, a legal dispensary can operate responsibly and safely, serving as a valuable resource for those in need.
I strongly urge you to consider approving the establishment of legal dispensaries in our community.
Sincerely,
Mark Medrano
From:i Board
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 5:14:35 PM
Council members,
The prohibition of cannabis has been in place for nearly a century, yet it has not achieved its intended goals of reducing use or eliminating the black market. Instead, it has led to numerous negative consequences, including the disproportionate incarceration of communities of color, the waste of limited law enforcement resources, and the continued proliferation of dangerous black market drugs.
Legalizing and regulating cannabis will is essential in order toproperly control it and tax it. Allowing legalized cannabis will create new jobs and revenue streams for states, reduce the burden on our criminal justice system, and increase public safety by eliminating the dangers posed by the black market.
Additionally, legalization will allow for proper regulation and safety standards that have been established, ensuring that the public is protected from contaminated or mislabeled products.
The time has come to end the failed policy of cannabis prohibition and embrace a new approach that prioritizes public health and safety, generates revenue, and promotes justice for all.
Thank you
Ramses Garcia
From:Mikasa Realty
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:49:04 PM
The prohibition of cannabis has been in place for nearly a century, yet it has not achieved its intended goals of reducing use or eliminating the black market. Instead, it has led to numerous negative consequences, including the disproportionate incarceration of communities of color, the waste of limited law enforcement resources, and the continued proliferation of dangerous black market drugs.
Legalizing and regulating cannabis will is essential in order toproperly control it and tax it. Allowing legalized cannabis will create new jobs and revenue streams for states, reduce the burden on our criminal justice system, and increase public safety by eliminating the dangers posed by the black market.
Additionally, legalization will allow for proper regulation and safety standards that have been established, ensuring that the public is protected from contaminated or mislabeled products.
The time has come to end the failed policy of cannabis prohibition and embrace a new approach that prioritizes public health and safety, generates revenue, and promotes justice for all.
Thank you
Ricardo Ortiz
Sent from my Rotary-Dial Desk Phone®
From:American 1st
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 5:04:48 PM
Dear Council Members,
Prohibition of cannabis has been in place for nearly a century. It has led to numerous negative consequences, including the disproportionate incarceration of communities of color, the waste of limited law enforcement resources and the continued proliferation of dangerous black market drugs.
Legalizing and regulating cannabis is essential in order to properly control it and tax it. Allowing legalized cannabis will create new jobs and revenue streams for our city, reduce the burden on our criminal justice system and increase public safety by eliminating the dangers posed by the black market.
Additionally, legalization will allow for proper regulation and safety standards that have been established, ensuring that the public is protected from contaminated or mislabeled products.
The time has come to end the failed policy of cannabis prohibition and embrace a new approach that prioritizes public health and safety, generates revenue, and promotes justice for all.
Thank you
Sergio Torres
Sent from my Rotary-Dial Desk Phone®
From:Mountain View Investments
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 5:11:05 PM
Dear council members,
I am writing this letter to express my strong support for the establishment of a legal dispensaries.
As you are aware, there are many people who suffer from chronic pain, debilitating illnesses, anxiety depression and other
health conditions. These individuals often rely on cannabis as a form of medication to manage their symptoms and improve their quality of life. Unfortunately, many of them are forced to purchase cannabis from illegal sources, which not only puts them at risk of legal repercussions but also exposes them to potentially dangerous products.
By allowing a legal dispensary to operate in our community, we can ensure that those who require cannabis for medicinal purposes have access to a safe and regulated product. This would not only benefit the individuals themselves but would also be a positive step towards reducing the demand for illegal cannabis and promoting public safety.
Moreover, a legal dispensary can also have a positive impact on our local economy.
It has been shown that legal cannabis businesses can create jobs and generate revenue for the community through taxes and other fees. I understand that some people may have concerns about the establishment of a dispensary in our community. However, I believe that the benefits far outweigh any potential negative impacts, if any. With appropriate regulations in place, a legal dispensary can operate responsibly and safely, serving as a valuable resource for those in need.
I strongly urge you to consider approving legal dispensaries in our community.
Sincerely,
Steve Zeledon
From:Executive Banker
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 5:13:00 PM
Dear Councilmembers,
As a member of the community, I strongly believe that legalizing cannabis and allowing for its sale in a regulated environment will benefit the local economy and provide safe access to a product that has been regulated and tested.
Given the recent news of illegal dispensaries operating in our city, I am impressed by the responsible approach that the Councilmembers are taking tonight in order to regulate the industry. Their commitment to the safety of our community and implementing security measures to prevent diversion and underage access is imperative to our community.
I am confident that a regulated industry will operate with integrity, provide quality products, and contribute positively to the local community. I urge you to continue to work for the betterment of our community and move forward in approving dispensaries.
Sincerely
Antonio Gonzalez
From:Enrique Vega
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:17:46 PM
I am writing in support of legal cannabis dispensaries in the City of Bell Gardens.
There is much misinformation being spread in the community regarding the nature of cannabis businesses and their impacts on the community.
Cannabis Dispensaries cannot be next to Schools or Churches.
Dispensaries do not sell to minors and legal dispensaries do not lead to more crime. They actually reduce crime in areas where dispensaries are permitted.
Our City can bring in millions of dollars in revenue that can be used for much needed youth and senior programs as well as be used to fund arts programs, city facilities maintenance, infrastructure improvements and a variety of other city services.
California Voters have already decided this issue. Please provided patients and recreational cannabis users with a safe and legal way to obtain the product they desire.
From:buraq group
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 5:08:02 PM
To the city council of Bell Gardens,
I am writing this letter in support of cannabis and its legalization. Over the past few years, there has been a growing movement advocating for the legalization of cannabis, and I believe it is a step in the right direction.
Cannabis has been proven to be effective in treating various medical conditions, such as chronic pain, seizures, and anxiety. In fact, many studies have shown that cannabis can be a safer alternative to prescription drugs that can be addictive and have harmful side effects.
Legalizing cannabis can have significant economic benefits. Legalization can create new jobs, generate tax revenue, and reduce law enforcement costs associated with the criminalization of cannabis. This revenue can be used to fund important social programs, such as education and healthcare.
It is important to note that legalization does not mean a free-for-all. Regulations can be put in place to ensure that cannabis is used responsibly and is not accessible to minors. Legalization can also help to reduce the black market for cannabis and decrease drug-related crime.
In conclusion, I strongly support the legalization of cannabis. It has numerous medicinal benefits and can have significant economic benefits. Legalization can also help to reduce crime and create a safer society. I urge you to consider the positive impact that legalization can have and to support the movement for change.
Sincerely
Gustavo Valenzuela
From:Good Vibrations
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 5:00:34 PM
Permitir la legalización del
cannabis creará nuevos
empleos y fuentes de ingresos
para la ciudad.
Además, la legalización
permitirá la regulación
adecuada y los estándares de
seguridad que se han
establecido, asegurando que el
público esté protegido de
productos contaminados.
Ha llegado el momento de
enfoquarse en la salud y la
seguridad pública. Pot favor
aprueben los dispensarios.
Gracias
Henry Santiago
From:Zhi Huang
To:PublicComments
Subject:Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:50:12 PM
I am writing this letter in support of cannabis and its legalization. Over the past few years, there has been a growing movement advocating for the legalization of cannabis, and I believe it is a step in the right direction.
Cannabis has been proven to be effective in treating various medical conditions, such as chronic pain, seizures, and anxiety. In fact, many studies have shown that cannabis can be a safer alternative to prescription drugs that can be addictive and have harmful side effects.
Furthermore, legalizing cannabis can have significant economic benefits.
Legalization can create new jobs, generate tax revenue, and reduce law enforcement costs associated with the criminalization of cannabis. This revenue can be used to fund important social programs, such as education and healthcare.
It is important to note that legalization does not mean a free-for-all. Regulations can be put in place to ensure that cannabis is used responsibly and is not accessible to minors. Legalization can also help to reduce the black market for cannabis and decrease drug-related crime.
In conclusion, I strongly support the legalization of cannabis. It has numerous medicinal benefits and can have significant economic benefits. Legalization can also help to reduce crime and create a safer society. I urge you to consider the positive impact that legalization can have and to support the movement for change.
Sincerely,
Jerry Lohman
Sent from my Rotary-Dial Desk Phone®
From:amy sanchez
To:PublicComments
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:49:24 PM
Hello,
Good Evening Members of the City Council . My name is Amy Sanchez and I strongly oppose the sale of marijuana in the city of bell gardens . I would not like to witness our young kids getting their hands on marijuana or other drugs . We should invest more in youth programs and bring back programs such as the Star program and others that were promised . Thank you and have a blessed day.
From:Voters Rights
To:PublicComments
Subject:Public Comment Item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:30:35 PM
Dear Councilmembers,
The criminalization of cannabis has been in place for nearly a century, yet it has not achieved its intended goals of reducing or eliminating the black market. Instead, it has led to numerous negative consequences, including the disproportionate incarceration of communities of color, the waste of limited law enforcement resources, and the continued proliferation of dangerous black market drugs.
As a member of the community, legalizing and regulating the cannabis industry will bring the market out of the shadows and into the light, where it can be properly controlled, taxed, regulated and tested. This will create new jobs and revenue streams for the city, reduce the burden on our criminal justice system, and increase public safety by eliminating the dangers posed by the black market.
Given the recent news of illegal dispensaries operating in our city, I am happy to see the responsible approach in sound public policy that the Councilmembers are taking tonight. I am confident that a regulated industry will operate with integrity, provide quality products, and contribute positively to the local community.
By allowing legal dispensaries to operate in our community, we can ensure that those who require cannabis for medicinal purposes have access to a safe and regulated product. This would not only benefit the individuals themselves but would also be a positive step towards reducing the demand for illegal cannabis and promoting public safety.
The time has come to end the failed policy of cannabis and embrace a new approach that prioritizes public health and safety, generates revenue, and promotes justice for all. I urge you to continue to work for the betterment of our community and move forward in approving this item.
Patricia Hernandez
From:Telegraph Investments
To:PublicComments
Subject:Public comment item 8
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:41:52 PM
Dear council members,
I am writing this letter to express my strong support for the establishment of legal dispensaries.
As you are aware, there are many people who suffer from chronic pain, debilitating illnesses, anxiety, depression and other
mental health conditions. These individuals often rely on cannabis as a form of medication to manage their symptoms and improve their quality of life.
Unfortunately, many of them are forced to purchase cannabis from illegal sources, which not only puts them at risk of legal repercussions but also exposes them to potentially dangerous products.
By allowing a legal dispensary to operate in our community, we can ensure that those who require cannabis for medicinal purposes have access to a safe and regulated product. This would not only benefit the individuals themselves but would also be a positive step towards reducing the demand for illegal cannabis and promoting public safety.
Moreover, a legal dispensary can also have a positive impact on our local economy.
It has been shown that legal cannabis businesses can create jobs and generate revenue for the community through taxes and other fees.
I understand that some people may have concerns about the establishment of a dispensary in our community. However, I believe that the benefits far outweigh any potential negative impacts, if any. With appropriate regulations in place, a legal dispensary can operate responsibly and safely, serving as a valuable resource for those in need.
I strongly urge you to consider approving the establishment of a legal dispensaries in our community.
Sincerely,
Pedro Gomez
Sent from my Rotary-Dial Desk Phone®
From:Phillip Nazaryan
To:PublicComments
Subject:Public Comment
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:44:22 PM
Cities that allow cannabis sales can reap significant benefits for their communities. By creating a legal and regulated cannabis market, cities can reduce the harm associated with black market sales, generate new sources of revenue, and create jobs in a growing industry.
Allowing cannabis sales can be particularly beneficial for cities that are struggling financially or looking for new sources of revenue. By imposing taxes on cannabis sales, cities can generate significant revenue streams that can be used to fund public services and infrastructure. These tax revenues can be particularly important for cities facing budget shortfalls or struggling to provide essential services to their residents.
Furthermore, legalizing and regulating cannabis sales can create new job opportunities in the cannabis industry.
From dispensary owners and employees to cultivators and transportation professionals, the cannabis industry can create a wide variety of employment opportunities for local residents. This can help to reduce unemployment, stimulate the local economy, and provide a sense of pride and ownership within the community.
Moreover, allowing cannabis sales can help to reduce the harm associated with black market sales. When cannabis is sold illegally, it can be associated with violence, organized crime, and other negative outcomes. By creating a legal and regulated market for cannabis, cities can provide consumers with a safe and legal alternative to the black market, which can help to reduce criminal activity and improve public safety.
Finally, legalizing cannabis sales can help to promote public health and safety. When cannabis is sold legally and regulated by the government, consumers can be assured of its quality and safety. This can help to reduce the risk of contaminated or dangerous products, and ensure that consumers are getting the appropriate dosage and strain for their needs.
In conclusion, there are many compelling reasons why a city should consider allowing cannabis sales. From economic benefits to public health considerations, the potential advantages of legalizing and regulating cannabis sales are numerous and varied. By carefully considering the needs and desires of their community, and implementing thoughtful regulations and policies, cities can successfully integrate cannabis sales into their local economies and improve the lives of their residents.
Thank you.
Phillip Nazaryan
From:Artin Khodagulyan
To:PublicComments
Subject:Public Comment
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 4:26:06 PM
The prohibition of cannabis has been in place for nearly a century, yet it has not achieved its intended goals of reducing use or eliminating the black market. Instead, it has led to numerous negative consequences, including the disproportionate incarceration of communities of color, the waste of limited law enforcement resources, and the continued proliferation of dangerous black market drugs. ီLegalizing and regulating cannabis is essential in order to properly control and tax it. Allowing legalized cannabis will create new jobs and revenue streams for states, reduce the burden on our criminal justice system, and increase public safety by eliminating the dangers posed by the black market. ီAdditionally, legalization will allow for proper regulation and safety standards that have been established, ensuring that the public is protected from contaminated or mislabeled products. ီThe time has come to end the failed policy of cannabis prohibition and embrace a new approach that prioritizes public health and safety, generates revenue, and promotes justice for all.
Thank you.
Artin Khodagulyan
Questions?
From:Romelia Garcia
To:PublicComments
Subject:Evictions
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 2:38:10 PM
Hello everyone
I’m Sandra Garcia resident in bell gardens for all my life and wanted to let ya know that it’s not fair for many tenants to be threaded like we don’t matter by landlords or manegment companies..mom and pop landlord is one thing but manegment co.. are bad and threat tenants poorly I speak for r experience because it’s going to be almost 3 years they been trying to evicts me and my family with no cause ..after many years of harassing and re oh m Sent from my iPhone
From:Romelia Garcia
To:PublicComments
Subject:Evictions part two
Date:Monday, May 8, 2023 2:45:48 PM
Many years harassing this shouldn’t ever be allowed they stole our peace our safe home our sleep by all the harassing all the dwelling all the violations they brought upon us they took our parking all our parking when we have a disable son n husband they took down all my trees plants with no reason or cause just cause they can they broke my heart my trees were all fruit trees no mas acoso now they want my garage when they haven’t won evictions at all ..I have bad insomnia and bad anxiety no one that pays rent should live con acoso no one just because they own property please help make changes for our communities and families no kids should witness harassment thank you ..I’m a Vecina unida.
Sent from my iPhone