From: Felicia Accomazzo
To: Damien O"Bid; Michael Parish; Noah Housh; Jon-Paul Harries; Angela Courter Cc: Brandon Levine; Andrew Longman; Craig Litwin; Sydney Roach Subject: Re: Proposed Cannabis Ordinance Revisions
Date: Thursday, February 17, 2022 4:18:12 PM
Hi Damien,
The 421 Group and our team each took a look at your suggested edits for the Cotati Cannabis Ordinance. Here are our suggested changes to the RED-LINE DRAFT ordinance as you requested:
In Table 2-2: Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements – Cannabis Uses, the Microbusiness section is currently labeled as MICROBUSINESS (with delivery), but we feel it would be thorough to label it as MICROBUSINESS (with delivery and/or Cannabis Café/Consumption Lounge)
Under 17.42.200.A.4.c, we edited the word “gases” to “gasses”.
Under 17.42.200.A.6.b, we edited the word “gases” to “gasses”.
Under 17.42.200.A.8. we added the word “unauthorized” before the word “transfer” if your goal is to allow authorized transfers as the previous line in this section states.
Under 17.42.200.A.8.c. we added the words “without authorization” after the word “transferred” if your goal is to allow authorized transfers.
Under 17.42.200.A.9, we edited the word “gases” to “gasses”.
Under 17.42.200.B.5.a, we edited the word “multitenant” to “multi-tenant”.
Under 17.42.200.C.9.o, we added two paragraphs for numbers 12 and 13:
“12. Deliveries may be managed on the same premises of a microbusiness location through a pneumatic tube as long as only employees of the licensed facility are sending and receiving cannabis, it stays in a confined and controlled secure space, and only employees touch the product before providing to their customers.”
“13. For any period of time that state law prohibits non-cannabis food and beverage from being prepared and sold on-site, adjustments to a Cannabis Consumption Café/Lounge application related to the preparation and sale of non-cannabis food and beverages are permitted, subject to confirmation by the City Manager or his designated reviewing authority. Permissible adjustments may include, but are not limited to, the replacement of a commercial kitchen in a Cannabis Consumption Café/Lounge with the option for food delivery to the premises from a third-party business.” Under 17.200.D.3.e we added the word “unauthorized” before the word “transfer” if your goal is to allow authorized transfers.
Here are some questions that we have:
1. Assuming the ordinance amendments pass and we are able to amend our cannabis permit to add in a Cannabis Café/Consumption Lounge we hope to go directly to the City Council as the reviewing authority to avoid the time and cost of a public hearing first with the Planning Commission. Is this process outlined in the ordinance?
2. We dug into what a CCP, or Commercial Cannabis Permit designation is. We did not find it in the Cotati Municipal Code as a definition, nor did we see a definition in the Ordinance. Can you explain the process here? Is this how we could go directly to the City Council for an amendment to our local permit versus having to first go the Planning Commission? Is dropping the Use Permit requirement what triggers us going directly to the City Council with any proposed permit amendments?
3. It appears that transferring one’s cannabis dispensary permit is allowed with the authority of the City but in other places it says differently. We tracked changes in the attached to allow for authorized transfers only. We do not have intention to transfer our local cannabis permit, but out of curiosity what is the transfer-process? Is it an administrative review?
4. Edits to 17.42.200.C.3.a and 17.42.200.C.5 eliminate language surrounding the limit on retail dispensaries in the City, yet 17.42.200.C.4 states clearly that the dispensary limit is set at a maximum of two: “Limit on Number of Dispensaries. No more than two (2) cannabis retail facilities Dispensaries shall be permitted within the city at any one time. All facilities authorized under this section must maintain a storefront which is open to the public. No more than one of these shall be a microbusiness with a Type 12 state license.” Were the edits to the cap language in
17.42.200.C.3.a and 17.42.200.C.5 simply to eliminate redundancy, or is the City interested in raising the dispensary cap to more than two locations? Thank you for asking for our feedback! We look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
FELICIA ACCOMAZZO
Operations Director
text: 707.495.2687
www.mercywellness.com
@mercywellness2
On Sun, Feb 6, 2022 at 2:48 PM Damien O'Bid <[email protected]> wrote:
Good Afternoon,
I am reaching out to you because you have an active commercial cannabis permit with the City of Cotati. The City is currently in the process of updating our Cannabis Land Use Ordinance (Title 17.42.200 and related sections). The changes are generally minor cleanup, but also include the ability for storefront retailers/microbusiness to add an associated Cannabis Consumption Café/Lounge through an amendment to their commercial cannabis permit. Additionally, the City Council will be renewing the tax resolution. The proposed tax resolution has no changes in the tax rate, but adds a tax rate for stand alone distribution facilities. This only applies if the distribution activity is not associated with another City issued commercial cannabis permit.
We are currently planning to take the changes in the attached documents to the Planning Commission in March, followed by City Council for final approval. If you have any comments, suggestions, or concerns regarding the proposed changes, please provide those to me no later than end of day on Friday, February 18, 2022.
Sincerely,
Damien O'Bid
City Manager
City of Cotati
Under the Public Records Act (California Government Code §6250-6270), e-mail messages of local agencies are public records which are subject to disclosure to the public or may be subpoenaed.
Under the Public Records Act (California Government Code §6250-6270), e-mail messages of local agencies are public records which are subject to disclosure to the public or may be subpoenaed.