Napa City Council
January 18, 2022

955 School Street
Napa, CA 94559
www.cityofnapa.org
3:30 PM Held via ZoomTuesday, January 18, 2022
3:30 PM Afternoon Session
6:30 PM Evening Session
The Meeting was conducted as a teleconference in compliance with California Government Code Section 54953(e), and members of the City Council, City Staff, and the public participated in the meeting telephonically or electronically. 3:30 P.M. AFTERNOON SESSION

1. CALL TO ORDER: 3:31 P.M.

1.A. Roll Call:

Councilmember Alessio, Councilmember Narvaez, Councilmember Painter, Vice Mayor Luros, and Mayor Sedgley

Present: 5 -

2. AGENDA REVIEW AND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS:

City Clerk Carranza announced the following supplemental items:

Item 4.: Email from Jarvis William Peay
Item 7.A.:
- PowerPoint Presentation from City Staff
- Email from Bob Archibald
(Copied of all supplemental documents are included in Attachment 1)

3. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:

3.A. 445-2021
Proclamation of Local Emergency to Respond to the Coronavirus (COVID-19)
City Manager Potter provide the staff report.

Mayor Sedgley called for public comment; there were no requests to speak.

CITY OF NAPA

MEETIN
G MINUTES - Final

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPA

Mayor
Scott Sedgley

Vice M
ayor Mary Luros

Counc
ilmember Liz Alessio
Councilmember Bernie Narvaez

Council
member Beth Painter

January 18, 2022CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NAPA
A motion was made by Councilmember Alessio, seconded by Councilmember Painter, to adopt a Resolution R2022-001 ratifying and continuing the Proclamation of Local Emergency to respond to the Coronavirus (COVID-19), and authorizing the use of remote teleconferencing provisions for City Council meetings pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e). The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: Alessio, Narvaez, Painter, Luros, and Sedgley5 -

Enactment No: R2022-001

4. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
(See supplemental document in Attachment 1)

5. CONSENT CALENDAR:

Approval of the Consent Agenda
A motion was made by Vice Mayor Luros, seconded by Councilmember Narvaez, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: Alessio, Narvaez, Painter, Luros, and Sedgley5 -

5.A. 11-2022
City Council Meeting Minutes
Approved the January 4, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutes.

5.B. 474-2021 Emergency Replacement of Oak Street Storm Drain Determined there was a need to continue the emergency action to execute and implement construction contracts for the replacement of the Oak Street Storm Drain from Franklin Street to Brown Street, and determine that the actions authorized by this item are exempt from CEQA.

5.C. 478-2021
Annual Report on Development Impact Fees for Fiscal Year 2021 Received the Annual Report on Development Impact Fees with Required Five-Year Findings for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021.

5.D. 8-2022 Monthly Budget and Investment Statement
Received the Monthly Budget and Investment Statement as of October 31, 2021.

5.E. 10-2022 2021 Annual Fire Inspection Compliance Report Adopted Resolution R2022-002 acknowledging receipt of the 2021 Annual Fire Inspection Compliance Report prepared pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Sections 13146.2 - 13146.4 (SB 1205).

Enactment No: R2022-002

5.F. 6-2022
Acceptance of Homeless, Housing Assistance and Prevention Grant

MEETING MINUTES - Final

January 18, 2022CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NAPA
Authorized the City Manager to: (1) execute all documents necessary to accept a grant from the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency for the Homeless, Housing Assistance and Prevention Program Round 3 in the amount of $96,387; and (2) approve the increase of revenue and expenditures budgets by $96,387 in the Non-Recurring General Fund, as documented in Budget Adjustment BE2201501.

6. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:

6.A. 480-2021
Quarterly Recruitment Update & Human Resources Spotlight Human Resources Director Heather Ruiz provided the staff report.

Discussion was brought back to Council; individual comments and questions ensued.

Mayor called for public comment; there were no requests to speak.

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS/APPEALS:

7.A. 409-2021 Annual Update to Speed Limits on City Streets (See supplemental documents in Attachment 1)
Mayor Sedgley opened the public hearing.

Tim Wood, Senior Civil Engineer, and Ed Moore, Supervising Engineering Assistant, provided the staff report.

Mayor Sedgley asked for disclosures; Councilmembers provided them.

Mayor Sedgley opened public testimony.

Maureen Trippe, Co-founder of Slow Down Napa - spoke in support of the Ordinance amendment and provided remarks regarding current and planned traffic safety and enforcement efforts and traffic calming measures.

Carlotta Sainato, Program Manager, Napa County Bicycle Coalition - spoke in support of the Ordinance amendment and provided remarks regarding Safe Routes to School and desire to see future resource allocation for additional traffic calming measures.

A motion was made by Councilmember Painter, seconded by Councilmember Narvaez to close public testimony. The motion carried unanimously.

Discussion was brought back to Council; individual comments and

MEETING MINUTES - Final

January 18, 2022CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NAPA
questions ensued.

A motion was made by Councilmember Alessio, seconded by Councilmember Painter, to:
(1) Approve the first reading and introduction of an ordinance amending Napa Municipal Code Section 10.20.040 related to the establishment and enforcement of speed limits; and
(2) Adopt Resolution R2022-003 determining that a Declared Speed Limit is justified based on an Engineering and Traffic Survey for identified City streets and roadway segments, and determining that the actions authorized by this resolution are exempt from CEQA. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: Alessio, Narvaez, Painter, Luros, and Sedgley5 -

Enactment No: R2022-003

8. COMMENTS BY COUNCIL OR CITY MANAGER:

Councilmember Alessio ask if Council would support a request to ask staff to prepare a proclamation to recognize the care givers at the Queen of the Valley Medical Center, to acknowledge care givers. Brief discussion ensued between members. Council supported the future proclamation with the request to broaden the recognition to include additional local heath care service providers.

CITY COUNCIL RECESS: 4:57 P.M.
6:30 P.M. EVENING SESSION

9. CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 P.M.

9.A. Roll Call:

Councilmember Alessio, Councilmember Narvaez, Councilmember Painter, Vice Mayor Luros, and Mayor Sedgley

Present: 5 -

10. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

11. AGENDA REVIEW AND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS:

City Clerk Carranza announced the following supplemental items:

Item 14.A.:
- Emails from "Getting it Right from the Start," S.M. Carranza, Laren Neihaus, Lenor Hirsch, Janet Mendelsohn, Constance Finegan, Keith and Joan Piper, Catherine Hoffman.
- Voicemail from Lavern Berg
- Email and 2018 Presentation from Dr. Relucio
(Copies of all supplemental documents are included in Attachment 2)

MEETING MINUTES - Final

January 18, 2022CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NAPA

12. PUBLIC COMMENT:

Robbie Meyer - commented regarding homelessness. He shared a recent incident and raised concerns regarding the Police Department's response to the incident and requested updates to existing policies.

Justin Hamilton Hole - asked that the agenda packets be included in the City's newsletter.

13. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:

13.A. 419-2021
Creative Space and Local Manufacturing Action Plan (Make It In Napa Initiative)
Neal Harrison, and consultants Teri Deaver of Artspace, and Gina Falsetto with PlaceMade provided the report.

Mayor called for public comment; there were no requests to speak.

Discussion was brought back to Council; individual comments and questions ensued.

14. PUBLIC HEARINGS/APPEALS:

14.A. 463-2021
Adult-Use Cannabis Ordinance.
(See supplemental documents in Attachment 2)
Mayor Sedgley opened the public hearing.

Community Development Director Vin Smith Provided the staff report.

Mayor asked for disclosures; Councilmembers provided them.

Mayor opened up public testimony.

Jerred Kiloh, co-owner if Abibe Napa - spoke in support of the ordinance.

Zachary Gilmore - representing workers in Cannabis - spoke in support of the ordinance and asked for fair labor practices.

Claire Courtney - Cannabis organizer for UFCW Local 5 - spoke in

MEETING MINUTES - Final

January 18, 2022CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NAPA
opposition of the ordinance. Suggested an amendment to include a Labor Peace Agreement (LPA).

Ricardo, and Billy S, Herbivor Cannabis Dispensary in Napa - asked Council to impose a moratorium to protect the number of dispensaries that are allowed in the market place.

Celeste Gonzales with the Napa County Office of Education, on behalf of Babara Nemko, Napa County Superintendent of Schools, read letter in opposition of the ordinance as was submitted to the written letter.

Caity Maple, in behalf of Perfect Union - spoke in support of the ordinance.

Lauren Niehaus, Director of Government Relations for Harvest Napa - spoke in support of the ordinance.

Danny Bernardini, on behalf of the Napa Solano Building Trades - spoke in support of a Labor Peace Agreement.

John Gomez, representative of United Food Commercial Workers UFCW 5 - spoke in opposition of the ordinance as written and suggested Labor Peace Agreement language added.

Craig Litwin, CEO of 421 Group - spoke in support of the ordinance.

Alfredo Delgado, UFCW Local 5 - suggested amendment to the ordinance to include a Labor Peace Agreement with a minimum of 10 employees.

Aimee Henry - owner of Napa Cannabis Collective and member of Napa Business Alliance - spoke in support of the ordinance.

Deanna Garcia - Napa Cannabis Collective - spoke in support of the ordinance.

Micah, Co-Owner of Abide - spoke in support of the ordinance.

A motion was made by Councilmember Alessio, seconded by Vice Mayor Luros to close public testimony. The motion carried unanimously.

Discussion was brought back to Council.

Individual Council comments and questions ensued. Community Development Director Smith, Police Chief Gonzales, and City Attorney Barrett responded to questions and provided further clarification.

MEETING MINUTES - Final

January 18, 2022CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NAPA
A motion was made by Councilmember Luros, seconded by Mayor Sedgley, to approve the first reading and introduction of an Ordinance, amended to include Labor Peace Agreement language, amending Napa Municipal Code Section

17.52.275 (Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Ordinance) to authorize the issuance of cannabis clearances for adult-use cannabis retailers and manufacturers. The motion failed by following vote:

Aye: 2 - Luros and Sedgley
No: 3 - Narvaez, Painter and Alessio
Brief discussion ensued.

A motion was made by Councilmember Painter, seconded by Vice Mayor Luros, to: (1) approve the first reading and introduction of an Ordinance amending Napa Municipal Code Section 17.52.275 (Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Ordinance) to authorize the issuance of cannabis clearances for adult-use cannabis retailers and manufacturers and (2) direct staff to return to Council to a future City Council meeting with information on next steps including Labor Peace Agreement language, distance between facilities, and number of facilities.The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: Narvaez, Painter, Luros, and Sedgley4 -
No: Alessio1 -

15. COMMENTS BY COUNCIL OR CITY MANAGER:

Councilmember Narvaez acknowledged the Lighted Arts Festival and encouraged the public to attend.

16. ADJOURNMENT: 8:44 P.M.

Submitted by:
_______________________________
Tiffany Carranza, City Clerk

MEETING MINUTES - Final

ATTACHMENT 1

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
Office of the City Clerk
City Council of the City of Napa
Regular Meeting
January 18, 2022
FOR THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPA:

AFTERNOON SESSION:

4. PUBLIC COMMENT:
1) Email from Jarvis William Peay received on January 6, 2022.

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS/APPEALS:

7.A. Annual Update to Speed Limi
ts on City Streets
 PowerPoint Presentation from City Staff.

1.) Email from Bob Archibald received on January 18, 2022.

From:

Sent: Thur
sday, January 6, 2022 7:14 AM
To: Clerk
Subject: Public Comment
Aachments: NEW MADDEN.r
[EXTERNAL]
Thank you.

Item 4. Public Comment

Back in the sixties, during a summer visit to my eldest brother's home in the nation's capital, he took me on a tour of the White House. I was in awe of the splendor and majesty of the building and all of it's magnificent appointments . However, it was not until I moved to California, Merced California in particular, that I had the opportunity to enjoy the company of not one, but two US presidents. Myself and 500 of my neighbors had an old fashioned town hall meeting with President J immy Carter. Being a huge fan of the US Secret Service and its methods and practices, I was thrilled to be selected to join in the festivities. Several years later, in the same little town of Merced, I was a part of the local GOP apparati getting it done, when we learned that the VP George Herbert Walker Bush would be visiting, and we went in to overdrive regarding the prep, because the later victorious presidential candidate would be toting along Chuck Norris and members of the Beach Boys. Heaven. I still have the business card of Bush's military aide who asked that I send him one of the " Read My Lips " tee shirts that we were giving to our staff. Now fast forward to the time when I am driving, again, driving along in Pleasanton one weekday afternoon, and I hear this booming, familiar voice, and my brain recognizes it as none other than the recently departed John Madden. It was weird, because music was on in my vehicle, and besides, there were no NFL games on a weekday afternoon. I looked to my right, and there he was much to my amazement. I parked and hustled over to meet the man, who was very cordial, and he was saying that he had come down from his perch in Blackhawk to see his dentist. I joked about him flying, and he was kind enough to give me his autograph and one heck of an adrenaline rush. My point is, and I am sure that I am not succumbing to recency bias, my point is that I got a greater joy and appreciation of my moments with the late great coach, then the other two luminaries. Jarvis William Peay, Napa

NAPA MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 10.20 SPEED LIMIT

REVISIONS
January 18, 2022
City Council Meeting
1/18/2022
Supplemental I - 7.A.

From: City Staff

• City Staff recognizes the importance of Traffic Safety and improving Traffic Safety as a priority of the City Council. • Setting legally defensible and appropriate speed limits is a small but key piece of Traffic Safety
• We are here because:
 The City is authorized to conduct Engineering and Traffic Surveys to deviate from Statutory Speed Limits
 The City, by ordinance, may adopt and post Declared
Speed Limits for roadways under its jurisdiction
 NMC Chapter 10.20 SPEED LIMITS grants the city the
authority to set, post and enforce declared speed limits on its streets
• Staff will go through the process of setting the speed limits through Engineering and Traffic Studies and the results of those studies
• Staff Report also lists a number of active Public Works and Police Department initiatives in the staff report that should improve Traffic Safety
Speed Limits – A Small Piece of Traffic Safety

GENERAL TERMS & TOPICS
Speed Limits
• Basic Speed Law
• Maximum Speed Limits
• Prima Facie Speed Limits
• Declared Speed Limits
• Engineering and Traffic Surveys
• Speed Surveys and Adjustments
• Council Recommendation and Questions

The California Basic Speed Law states that
“No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.” (CVC 22350)
Speed Limits – Basic Speed Law

The California Vehicle Code (CVC) sets 2
Maximum Speed Limits for roadways:
– 65 mph, or
– 55 mph for 2‐lane, undivided roadways
The CVC also sets 6 Prima Facie Speed Limits:
– “Prima Facie” is a Latin term meaning “at first appearance” , meaning no speed limit is posted.
– 15 mph for 3 conditions (including alleys), and
– 25 mph for 3 conditions (including Residence Districts) • Only certain streets and conditions satisfy the Vehicle Code’s definitions in Districts for Prima Facie 25 mph. All remaining streets fall under the Maximum 65/55 mph State Limits.

Any deviations from State Limits must be
declared, based on an Engineering and Traffic
Survey
Speed Limits – Maximum & Prima Facie Speed Limits

The Vehicle Code permits local authorities, to declare a decrease (or an increase) from maximum and prima facie speed limits within their jurisdictions on the basis of Engineering and Traffic Surveys
“Declared Speed Limits” are:
• between 25 and 65 mph,
• effective when signs giving notice are installed, and • enforceable by radar or laser equipment
Speed Limits – Declared Speed Limits

Engineering and Traffic Surveys consists of measurements and consideration of (CVC 627):
– the measurement of prevailing speeds on the roadway segment, – the review of reported collision history, and
– Roadway, traffic and roadside conditions not readily apparent to a driver Also considered are:
– residential density, and
– pedestrian and bicyclist safety
ETS are valid for 5, 7 or 10 years under certain CVC conditions Speed Limits – Engineering and Traffic Surveys

Speed Limits – ETS

Speed Limits to Remain
Eighteen (18) roadway segments with recommended speed limits that already match existing posted speed limits: (mph)
Dry Creek Rd (40) Redwood to Trower Jefferson St (30) Calistoga to  L inc oln Dry Creek Rd (40)  Trower to N City Limit Main St (25) Pearl to Ja cks on Linda Vista Ave (25) W Pueblo to Redwood Pearl St (25) Franklin to  Soscol Redwood Rd (30) W City Limit to Dry Creek Third St (25) Jefferson  to Sos col Solano Ave (35) Lincoln to Redwood Fourth St (25) Third to Coombs El Centro Ave (30) Byway to Jefferson Coombs St (25) Spruce to Fir st El Centro Ave (30) Jefferson to E City Limit S Jefferson St (30) S  Terminous to Imola Big Ranch Rd (45) Trancas to N City Limit Terrace Dr (30) Shurtlef f t o C oombsv ille Golden Gate Dr  (30) S C ity  Limit to Imola Shur tleff Av e (25) Imola  to Terrace

Speed Limit Reductions
Twelve (12) roadway segments with recommended speed limits that are 5mph lower than existing posted speed limits: (mph)
S Jefferson St (25) Imola to Old Sonoma Soscol Ave (35) Silverado  to Thi rd Jefferson St (25) Old Sonoma to Laurel Soscol Ave (35) Third to Li ncoln Jefferson St (25) Laurel to Calistoga Linda Vista Ave (25) Trower  to N City Limits Main St (25) Jackson to Lincoln Wine Country Ave (30) Linda Vista  to Hwy 29 Main St (25) Lincoln to Pueblo Kansas St (25) Gasser to Soscol L aure l St  (25) Griggs t o First Im ola A ve  (30) Soscol t o Shurt le ff

Speed Limit Increases
Zero (0) roadway segments with recommendations that are higher than existing posted speed limits:

Speed Limits – Staff Recommendation
Recommendation:
(1)  Approve the first reading and introduction of an ordinance amending Napa Municipal Code Section 10.20.040 related to the establishment and enforcement of speed limits.
(2)  Adopt a resolution determining that a Declared Speed Limit is justified based on an Engineering and Traffic Survey for identified City streets and roadway segments, and determining that the actions authorized by this resolution are exempt from CEQA.

QUESTIONS

Speed Limits – Speed Limit Enforcement
City of Napa Police Officers use visual estimation of a potential speeding vehicles and use one of the following evidence collection methods:
• pacing the vehicle (following in a calibrated patrol vehicle), or • use of certified Radar or Lidar equipment in accordance with CVC Valid ETS are used in Court as evidence for all speed violations that are not covered by Prima Facie and Maximum Speed Limits
Without a valid ETS and adoption into the Municipal Code, Napa Police Officers have limited evidence to support citations for unsafe speeding violations

Traffic Calming Objectives are met through a
combination of parallel strategies known as the “3 E’s”:
• Education – information awareness
• Engineering – Physical measures
• Enforcement – targeted enforcement
Traffic Calming and Neighborhood Traffic Management

Resources
www.cityofnapa.org

January 18, 2022CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NAPA
A motion was made by Councilmember Luros, seconded by Mayor Sedgley, to approve the first reading and introduction of an Ordinance, amended to include Labor Peace Agreement language, amending Napa Municipal Code Section

17.52.275 (Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Ordinance) to authorize the issuance of cannabis clearances for adult-use cannabis retailers and manufacturers. The motion failed by following vote:

Aye: 2 - Luros and Sedgley
No: 3 - Narvaez, Painter and Alessio
Brief discussion ensued.

A motion was made by Councilmember Painter, seconded by Vice Mayor Luros, to: (1) approve the first reading and introduction of an Ordinance amending Napa Municipal Code Section 17.52.275 (Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Ordinance) to authorize the issuance of cannabis clearances for adult-use cannabis retailers and manufacturers and (2) direct staff to return to Council to a future City Council meeting with information on next steps including Labor Peace Agreement language, distance between facilities, and number of facilities.The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: Narvaez, Painter, Luros, and Sedgley4 -
No: Alessio1 -

15. COMMENTS BY COUNCIL OR CITY MANAGER:

Councilmember Narvaez acknowledged the Lighted Arts Festival and encouraged the public to attend.

16. ADJOURNMENT: 8:44 P.M.

Submitted by:
_______________________________
Tiffany Carranza, City Clerk

MEETING MINUTES - Final

ATTACHMENT 2

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
Office of the City Clerk

City Council of the City of Napa
Regular Meeting
January 18, 2022

FOR THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPA:

EVENING SESSION:

SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL MEETING

14. PUBLIC HEARINGS/APPEALS:

14.A. Request City Council Adoption of an Ordinance creating Adult-Use Cannabis Ordinance Dispensary Regulations
1) Email from Getting it Right from the from the Start received on October 29, 2021. 2) Email from S.M. Carranza received on November 14, 2021. 3) Email from Lauren Niehaus received on January 12, 2022. 4) Voicemail from Laverne Berg received on January 17, 2022. 5) Email from Lenore Hirsch received on January 17, 2022. 6) Email and 2018 Presentation from Dr. Relucio provided by Councilmember Alessio, forwarded on January 18, 2022.
7) Email from Janet Mendelsohn received on January 18, 2022. 8) Emails from Constance Finegan received on January 17, 2022. 9) Emails from Keith and Joan Piper received on January 18, 2022. 10) Email from Catherine Hoffman received on January 18, 2022. 11) Email from Rebecca Schenck received on January 18, 2022.

SUBMITTED DURING OR AFTER THE COUNCIL MEETING

14. PUBLIC HEARINGS/APPEALS:

14.A. Request City Council Adoption of an Ordinance creating Adult-Use Cannabis Ordinance Dispensary Regulations
1) Email from Debbie Klimeck received on January 18, 2022. 2) Email from Debbie Klimeck received on January 19, 2022.

From: Geng it Right from the Start
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021 3:56 PM
To: Sco Sedgley; Tiffany Carranza;Michael Allen
Cc: Aurash Soroosh;Alisa Padon;Lynn Silver
Subject: Review Requested: Napa 2021 Cannabis Policy Scorecard Aachments: Napa 2021.pdf; 2021 Cannabis Policy Scorecard Methodology Summary & Best Pracces in Acon Map.pdf [Some people who received this message don't oen get email from ge[email protected]. Learn why this is important at hp://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdenficaon.] [EXTERNAL]
Dear Mayor Sedgley and Mr. Allen,
On behalf of Geng it Right from the Start<hps://gcc02.safelinks.protecon.outlook.com/? url=hps%3A%2F%2Fgengitrighromthestart.org%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7Ctcarranza%40cityofnapa.org%7C29319d2ede134c9a36b108d99b2f4090%7C7c2235c73aee4099a6c4bde6470cfa85%7C0%7C0%7C637711450165951885%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=ijvUZpaj7XI9x%2BXmMzJcBcZK6kXdqGZ41juABZO9PSY%3D&amp;reserved=0>, a project of the Public Health Instute, we would like to offer you an opportunity to review our evaluaon of your local cannabis policies in effect as of January 1, 2021. Our project works with cies and counes throughout California, as well as community organizaons and other states, to protect against youth and problem cannabis use, beer reduce other cannabis-related harms, and promote social equity in jurisdicons that have opted to allow commercial cannabis acvity.

Since 2018 we have collected informaon on the cannabis retail, markeng and taxaon laws passed by all cies and counes in California, using resources including CannaRegs (a commercial database), databases of municipal codes and jurisdicon websites. Using these resources, we have developed a series of “scorecards” for every California jurisdicon that allowed cannabis storefront, and this year we added those that allow only delivery retail sales.

These scorecards measure how far your jurisdicon has gone beyond state law to promote public health and advance social equity. Today we would like to give you an opportunity to review the 2021 scorecard for your jurisdicon to check for accuracy, and as a way for you to benchmark your local adopon of best pracces for cannabis regulaon. Please note, changes to your laws made aer January 1, 2021 are not reflected in this scorecard - they will be in the 2022 scorecard.

The scores are based on six public health and equity focused categories, that capture recommended policies to protect youth, reduce problem cannabis use, and promote social equity. A summary of the methodology is enclosed. We are happy to share our full methodology, upon request, which details how we came to these measures and scores. Also enclosed is a map with concrete examples of best pracces adopted by your fellow California cies and counes on the back page.

Please address any quesons or feedback on your scorecard to Aurash Soroosh, at [email protected]< mailto:[email protected]>. If we do not hear from you by November 5, 2021, we will assume our record of the cannabis regulaons passed in your jurisdicon through January 2021 is accurate. We will be publicly releasing the 2021 scorecards in mid-November, which will be shared with you as well.

Lastly, we also provide free technical assistance, supported by the Conrad N. Hilton Foundaon, and have developed tools and resources including three model local ordinances for California on cannabis retail, markeng and taxaon, available at: hps://gcc02.safelinks.protecon.outlook.com/?url=hps%3A%2F%2Fwww.gengitrighromthestart.org%2Four-model- ordinances&amp;data=04%7C01%7Ctcarranza%40cityofnapa.org%7C29319d2ede134c9a36b108d99b2f4090%7C7c2235c73aee4099a6c4bde6470cfa85%7C0%7C0%7C637711450165961846%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=TxrzDfzpAB0MzWV1hk000fi7hlZg32MOjz943RmRtPs%3D&amp;reserved=0. We hope these resources help jurisdicons to allow legal sale without promong the development of a new tobacco-like industry in our state.

Please let us know if you have any quesons, or if we can be of assistance to your jurisdicon.

The Geng it Right from the Start team:

Alisa A. Padon, PhD
Research Director
Aurash J. Soroosh, RD, MSPH
Policy Associate
Lynn Silver, MD, MPH, FAAP
Director
Kiara Gonzalez Garcia
Program Coordinator
Geng it Right from the Start
Public Health Instute
555 12th Street, Ste 290
Oakland, CA 94607
Item 14.A.

This scorecard analyzes local cannabis ordinances passed prior to January 1, 2021, in each California city or county that legalized storefront retail sales, to assess policies in effect going into 2021. It evaluates to what extent potential best practices were adopted to protect youth, reduce problem cannabis use and promote social equity beyond those
already in state law. Scores fall into six public health and equity focused categories for a total maximum of 100 points.

Napa

RETAILER

REQUIREMENTS

TAXES &
PRICES

PRODUCT

LIMITS MARKETING SMOKE-FREE
AIR

EQUITY &

CONFLICTS OF

INTEREST
Limit # of
retailers
(max. 10 pts)
0 Local
retail tax
(6 pts)
0 Limit high
potency
products
(max. 6 pts)
0 Limit
billboards
(max. 6 pts)
6 Prohibit
temporary
event permits
(5 pts)
0 Licensing
priority for
equity
applicants
(3 pts)
0 Require
distance >600
ft. from
schools
(5 pts)
0 Revenue
dedicated to
youth,
prevention or
equity
(max. 6 pts)
0 Prominent
health
warnings on
ads
(4 pts)
0 Prohibit
on-site
consumption
(3 pts)
3 Equity in
hiring
requirements
(3 pts)
0 Require
distance
between
retailers
(2 pts)
0 Tax by THC
content
(5 pts)
0 No flavored
products for
combustion or
inhalation
(max. 5 pts)
0 Limit
therapeutic or
health claims
(3 pts)
0 Cost deferrals
for equity
applicants
(1 pt)
0 Other location
restrictions
(max. 3 pts)
3 Prohibit
discounting
(2 pts)
0 No cannabis-
infused
beverages
(4 pts)
0 Business
signage
restrictions
(3 pts)
3 No prescriber
on retail
premises
(1 pt)
1 Health
warnings
posted
in store
(4 pts)
0 Minimum
price
(1 pt)
0 Limit other
products/
packaging
attractive to
youth
(2 pts)
0 Limit
marketing
attractive to
youth
(2 pts)
0 No prescriber
in ownership
(1 pt)
0 Health
warnings
handed out
(4 pts)
0 3 0 0 9 3 1
TOTAL SCORE = 16

THE STATE OF CANNABIS
POLICY IN CALIFORNIA’S

CITIES & COUNTIES
2021 SCORECARD METHODOLOGY
Based on the best available research, we identified six primary categories of policies where local government can act to protect youth, public health, and equity if they opted to allow cannabis retail commerce. Criteria with the greatest potential for achieving these goals receive higher points, based on evidence from tobacco, alcohol and/or cannabis research. Cannabis laws of all California cities and counties passed by January 1st, 2021 were scored, using legal databases including Municode and Cannaregs, as well as municipal websites, accompanied by direct outreach to county or city clerks when needed. The maximum score possible was 100.

1) RETAILER & DELIVERER REQUIREMENTS: Strategic limits on cannabis retailers can decrease youth use and exposure to cannabis.
• Caps on Retailers (10 points max). Limit the number of licensed retailers, we used the ratio to number of inhabitants • Distance from Schools (5 points). Mandate a distance greater than 600 feet between K-12 schools and retailers • Retailer Buffers (2 points). Mandate a required distance between retailers • Other Location Restrictions (3 points). Mandate required distance between retailers and other youth serving locations not covered by state law such as parks, playgrounds, or universities, or other locations such as residential areas. • Health Warnings Posted in Stores OR Handed Out to Customers (4 points each). Mandate retailers post and/or hand out health warnings informing consumers of relevant risks at point of sale Delivery-only requirements:
• Local Permit (12 points max). Mandate a local permit be obtained by deliverers originating within and outside the jurisdiction
• Medical Cannabis Sales (3 points). Allow delivery sales of medicinal cannabis • Independent ID Verification Process (10 points max). Mandate use of an independent age and identity verification process before cannabis delivery
• Delivery Destinations (10 points max). Limit where deliveries can terminate, i.e., no delivery to college dormitories

2) TAXES & PRICES: Taxes & higher prices can decrease youth access while raising valuable revenue for local communities. • Local Cannabis Tax (6 points). Impose a local tax on cannabis retail • Dedicated Tax Revenue (6 points max). Dedicate tax revenue to youth, prevention, or reinvestment in communities most affected by the war on drugs
• Tax by THC Content (5 points). Impose higher tax rates for high potency (high THC) products (if sale is allowed) • Discounting (2 points). Prohibit discounting on cannabis such as coupons or discount days • Minimum Price (1 point). Establish a minimum price floor for cannabis

3) PRODUCT LIMITS: End the Cannabis Kids Menu of products that appeal to youth and limit products which increase adverse effects. • Limit Potency (6 points max). Prohibit sale of high potency cannabis flower and products through bans or ceilings • Flavored Products (Non-Edibles) (5 points). Prohibit sale of flavored combustible or inhalable (non-edible) products • Cannabis-Infused Beverages (4 points). Prohibit sale of cannabis-infused beverages • Products Attractive to Youth (2 points). Prohibit sale of products attractive to youth more clearly than state law

4) MARKETING: Limited exposure to marketing to decrease youth use and provide accurate warnings to inform consumers. • Billboards (6 points max). Restrict or prohibit the use of billboards to advertise cannabis • Health Warnings on Ads (4 points). Require health warnings on all cannabis advertisements • Therapeutic or Health Claims (3 points). Prohibit the use of therapeutic or health claims on cannabis products, packages, or ads • Business Signage Restrictions (3 points). Restrict on-site business advertising • Marketing Attractive to Youth (2 points). Detailed restrictions on packaging or advertising attractive to youth

5) SMOKE-FREE AIR: Smoke-free air policies can improve air quality, protect kids, and reduce secondhand smoke exposure. • Temporary Events (5 points). Prohibit temporary cannabis events such as at county fairs or concerts in parks • On-Site Consumption (3 points). Prohibit on-site cannabis consumption, whether by smoking, vaping or use of edibles

6) EQUITY & CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Cannabis policy can promote social equity and reduce conflicts of interest. • Priority in Licensing (3 points). Prioritize equity applicants when issuing cannabis business licenses • Equity in Hiring (3 points). Require hiring to prioritize low-income, transitional, or other workers from communities disadvantaged by the war on drugs
• Cost Reduction/Deferral (1 point). Reduce/defer the costs of cannabis business licenses for equity applicants • Prescribers (1 point each). Prohibit on-premises patient evaluations and prescriber ownership of retailers

Getting it Right from the Start is a project of the Public Health Institute. The Project has worked with experts from across the nation and within the state to identify potential best regulatory practices and develop model regulatory and taxation frameworks to protect youth, public health and social equity. Visit us at www.gettingitrightfromthestart.org.

THE STATE OF CANNABIS
POLICY IN CALIFORNIA’S
CITIES & COUNTIES in 2021

Examples of what your neighbors are doing to protect youth, public health , and social equity

Del Norte County: Protected youth by increasing the buffer between schools and retailers to 1,000 ft. (52 other jurisdictions also increased the state required 600 ft buffer)
Weed: Protected the public and workers against secondhand smoke by not allowing on-site consumption (along with 132 other places such as Merced, Los Angeles City, Pasadena, & Sacramento)
Sacramento: Promoted social equity through equity in licensing provisions (as well as Oakland, Los Angeles City, Long Beach, San Francisco, Watsonville, El Monte & 13 other places)
Contra Costa County: Protected youth by prohibiting flavored products for combustion or inhalation (along with Chico, Watsonville & Mammoth Lakes) , and banning vaping products
Grass Valley: Protected youth and mental health by taxing high potency products (Cathedral City, too), and sugar sweetened cannabis beverages Stanislaus County: Increased the number of sites with a required buffer from retailers (as well as 114 other jurisdictions) Mono County: Protected consumers by not allowing health or therapeutic claims on cannabis products or their marke ting (as did Palm Springs)
Watsonville: Protected youth by prohibiting
advertising, packaging and products attractive to
youth (along with Mono County, Mammoth Lakes,
Turlock, and 8 others)
Salinas: Protected youth by capping the
number of licensed retailers at 1 for
every ~32,000 people (9 9 other
jurisdictions also capped the
number of dispensaries)
Pasadena: Protected youth by
prohibiting promotions
and coupons offering
discounted cannabis
(along with 3 others)
West Hollywood:

Protected consumers by
requiring cannabis-
related health and safety
training of dispensary
staff (Long Beach,
Pasadena, Mt. Shasta,
Mammoth Lakes & Mono
County did, too)
El Monte: Protected youth by dedicating
tax revenue to youth programs, addiction
prevention and recreation (Riverside County,
Sonoma County, Placerville, Pomona, Merced, Santa
Ana, Turlock & Davis funded similar programs for youth
Santa Ana: Informed consumers by requiring cannabis-
related health risks information on signs or in handouts in dispensaries (along with 23 others, including San
Francisco, San Jose, Culver City, Richmond & Chico)

You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important From: Beth Painter Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2021 2:16 PM To: Clerk Subject: Fwd: request to oppose further cannabis sales

Begin forwarded message:

From: tuffytuffy <
Subject: request to oppose further cannabis sales
Date: November 14, 2021 at 12:17:58 PM PST
To: [email protected]

[EXTERNAL]
We are residents of the City of Napa. I write to ask that you please oppose any expansion of cannabis sales and new establishments in the City of Napa.

A leer writer to the Napa Register dated November 13th has put forth true and valid reasons for stopping furtherance of cannabis. For all the reasons she states in her leer and even more, I urge you to say and vote No if this comes up for discussion or vote.

Thank you.

S. M. Carranza

From: Beth Painter Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2022 10:25 AM To: Clerk Subject: Fwd: Industry gratude Aachments: Leer to Napa CIty Council - Adult Use 1.11.22.pdf

Begin forwarded message:

From: Lauren Niehaus <
lniehaus@harvesnc.com>
Subject: Industry gratude
Date: January 11, 2022 at 1:59:51 PM PST
To: "
[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>

Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important [EXTERNAL]
Mayor Sedgley, Vice Mayor Alessio, Councilors,

Aached please find a leer from our cannabis industry group. We are looking forward to next week’s meeng. I was hopeful to finally be in town to meet you in person, but I understand that we may be moving to a virtual meeng next week. If that is the case, I will most certainly parcipate online/via phone.

Thank you for all of the hard work you are doing in the city of Napa, parcularly as this pandemic pushes on.

Stay healthy,

Lauren Niehaus I Director of Government RelationsI 303.827.9039 I
[email protected]
Confidenal communicaon noce: This e-mail and any files transmied with it are the property of Harvest Health & Recreaon, Inc. and/or its affiliates, are confidenal, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or enty to whom this e-mail is addressed. This message may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private informaon. If you are not one of the named recipients or otherwise have reason to believe that you have received this e-mail in error, please nofy the sender and delete this message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retenon, disseminaon, forwarding, prinng or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.

January 11, 2022

Honorable Scott Sedgley
Members of the Napa City Council
City of Napa
955 School Street
Napa, CA 94559

Mayor Sedgley, Vice Mayor Alessio, Councilmembers:

First and foremost, we hope you all enjoyed a wonderful holiday season and are continuing to remain safe during this latest COVID surge.

By now, you are familiar with our cohesive group of experienced cannabis retailers based in Napa. We want to thank you for all the work you and the Planning Commission have undertaken to move the updated adult use cannabis ordinance through the process. We very much look forward to an affirmative vote at the January 18 th City Council meeting.

As we have previously mentioned, we strongly believe in the positive economic impact that adult use sales will bring to our city. Industry studies show that cannabis retailers offering delivery and the sale of both medical and adult use cannabis generate the most tax revenue and create the highest number of jobs within the industry.

We believe the proposed ordinance amendment maintains and incorporates the highest level of regulation and transparency existing in Napa’s current ordinance, while allowing for adult use sales. We are looking forward to taking the next step of working with the Planning Department, upon passage of this ordinance, to receive formal approval to begin serving all 21+ customers with recreational cannabis in the city.

Thank you for your support throughout this process.

Kimberly Cargile
Owner, Napa Cannabis Collective

Lauren Niehaus
Director of Government Relations, Harvest of Napa

David Spradlin
Founder & CEO, Perfect Union

Micah Malan
Owner, Abide

Billy Summers
Owner, The Herbivore, Inc.

Chris Hester
License holder

From: Liz Alessio
To: Steve Potter; Tiffany Carranza
Subject: Fw: City Council Agenda 10/20: Adult Use of Cannibus Date: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 9:21:22 AM
Attachments: Cannabis Public Health Impacts 2.26.18.pdf Good morning,
Please share the attached cannabis report from Dr. Karen Relucio.

Thank you,
Liz
From: Relucio, Karen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 3:12 PM
To: Henn, Jennifer <[email protected]>; Liz Alessio <[email protected]> Subject: RE: City Council Agenda 10/20: Adult Use of Cannibus [EXTERNAL]
Hi Liz,
In terms of general concerns – our major concern is youth access, especially in people <25 years of age, as the brain is still developing up until age 25.

Attached was a presentation I gave in 2018 and the last few slides (14-15) discuss some mitigation measures.

Thanks!
Karen
From: Henn, Jennifer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 2:10 PM
To: Liz Alessio <[email protected]>; Relucio, Karen <[email protected]> Subject: RE: City Council Agenda 10/20: Adult Use of Cannibus Hi Liz,
Well, in terms of data, there are a couple of findings from the 2020 CHKS survey data for Napa County students. Although the percent of students who had used marijuana in the last 30 days actually declined in 2020-2021 (possibly related to the pandemic), 11% of 11 th graders and 23% of
non-traditional students had used within marijuana within the last 30 days. Although the ordinance is about adult use, 11% of 9
th graders and 21% of 11th graders reported that adult acquaintances were a source of marijuana among students who use it.

Another trend in the survey findings was that marijuana use was higher among students who felt sad or hopeless or who seriously considered suicide. For example, 24% of 11th graders who reported considering suicide also reported marijuana use; among 11th graders who did not report considering suicide, 9% used marijuana. As the article Barb Nemko shared states, the linkage between marijuana use and mental health issues doesn’t prove causality; it could also be that marijuana (as well as alcohol and other drugs) are being used to self-medicate.

Best,
Jennifer

From: Liz Alessio <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 12:44 PM
To: Relucio, Karen <[email protected]>; Henn, Jennifer <[email protected]>
Subject: City Council Agenda 10/20: Adult Use of Cannibus [External Email - Use Caution]
Hi Dr. Relucio and Dr. Henn,
I'm not sure if you know, but Napa City Council is reviewing an ordinance change to include adult use of recreational cannabis. I'm concerned with the public health implications, especially on our younger adults. Do you have current data or concerns if this is passed?
Dr. Barbara Nemko sent me a link to the following article. She also shared the most recent scoring of where the US stands in education compared to other countries.

Marijuana:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/how-do-
life/202011/the-latest-recreational-marijuana
NAEP
https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2021-10- 14/americas-kids-earn-disappointing-grades-on-nations-report- card
International comparison (2018, latest available, but it’s difficult to imagine that we’re better in 2021) Do note that they make the US look better than it is by the first chart excluding non-OECD nations including China.

I appreciate your time and response.

Best regards,
Liz
Liz Alessio
Councilmember
City of Napa
955 School Street, Napa, CA 94559
Phone (707) 258-7800 x5282
Email [email protected]
Website www.cityofnapa.org
Social [www.facebook.com/CityOfNapa ]www.facebook.com/CityOfNapa · @CityOfNapa

1 1
Public Health Issues

2 Pregnancy and Breastfeeding
• Substantial evidence of s tatistical
association between maternal
cannabis smoking and lower birth
weight
• Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) can
potenti
ally affect fetal brain
development and future cognition
• THC can also be present in breast
mi
lk for a long time

3 Youth Use
• Cannabis use during adolescence may impair
subs
equent academic achievement, employment
and income, social relationships and social roles
• Greater frequency of cannabis use or use at a
younger
age increases likelihood of problem
cannabis use.
• Moderate evidence between cannabis use and
devel
opment of substance use disorder for alcohol,
tobacco and other illicit drugs (gateway drug)

4 Drugged Driving and Motor Vehicle
Crash Fatalities – Washington State

5 Drugged Driving and Motor Vehicle
Crash Fatalities

6 Overdose Injuries
• There is moderate evidence of a
assoc
iation between cannabis use
and increased risk of overdose
injuries, including respiratory
distress, among pediatric
populations in US States where
cannabis is legal

7 Hospitalizations and ED visits
(All Ages)

8 Child Marijuana Exposures

9 Cannabis-related poison control
calls

10 10
Medical evidence that
demonstrates
support of use

11 Therapeutic Use: Most
established
• Adults with chemotherapy-i nduced
nausea and vomiting
• Adults with chronic pain experienced a
cl
inically significant reduction in pain
symptoms
• Adults multiple sclerosis (MS) related
spa
sticity, short-term use improves
patient-reported spasticity symptoms
• Children with seizure disorders

12 Other considerations supporting
cannabis use
• Limited evidence that suggests that regular
exposur
e to cannabis smoke may have
anti-inflammatory activity
• Legalization may increase state revenues
for
needed medical and epidemiological
research

13 13
Mitigating Public
Health Issues

14 Prevention Policies
• Consider placing cannabis businesses 1000 ft. or more of school
, daycare, youth center (state law 600 ft.)
• Restrict advertising for cannabis products and prohibit adverti
sing within 1000 feet of schools, childcare, parks
• Prohibit vending machine sales, self-service di splays, free sampling, sponsorship of sporting and cultural
events and coupon redemption
• Label THC levels in cannabis products; childproof
packagi
ng
• Add cannabis to all clean air and s ocial host ordinances • Limit cannabis smoking in multiuse dwe llings

15 Educational Campaign Topics
• Implications of youth use
• Targeted to youth
• Targeted to parents and mentors of youth
• Avoiding use in pregnancy and
breast
feeding
• Promoting safe use
• Avoid driving
• Lock up products
• Education on higher potency of edibles and
dabs

From: Liz Alessio
To: Clerk
Subject: Fw: Cannabis
Date: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 9:53:17 AM
Hello,
I'm forwarding public comment regarding tonight's Council meeting.

Thank you,
Liz
From: Janet Mendelsohn
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 7:55 AM
To: Liz Alessio <[email protected]>
Subject: Cannabis

You don't often get email from
[EXTERNAL]
Your "No!" vote re: non-prescription adult cannabis sales in Napa when the City Council first voted on the issue was the wisest vote! The City of Napa has no need for non-prescription cannabis sales as most cities in California have apparently realized by their consensus in non- approval.

I urge you to again vote "No"!
Limit commercial cannabis sales to adults with prescriptions.

Sincerely, J. Mendelsohn, concerned Napa resident

From: Catherine Hoffman
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 1:53 P M
To: Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Council Agenda Item: Adult Use Cannibas Regulation and Safety

[EXTERNAL]

Council Members,

Unfortunately I am coming late to your review/discussion of this issue, so I apologize.

As a public health researcher and former nurse I reviewed the Adult Use Cannibas documents attached to tonite’s agenda, looking for input from the sheriff’s office and public health staff who might be available to advise you.  The only mention of public safety (under Section 1.2.  Public Health, Safety, and Welfare….) does not address what is known about the impact of alcohol and drug use in combination, nor how rates of alcohol and drug use have increased during the pandemic. In our small county, that builds it’s reputation and economy on wine and spirits, I trust we can continue to balance that with safety on our few roads.

I am attaching a link to a news article from last month (December 23, 2021) that reported on a meeting held by District Attorneys from 7 CA counties that was convened to discuss a significant uptick in DUI fatalities in 2021 compared to 2020.  In all of the counties DUI deaths increased and in some—they more than doubled.

Additionally, more than half of those arrested for DUI showed a combination of both alcohol and drugs in their system.  Their opinion on the factor driving this sudden increase may be the pandemic’s impact on stress, mental health problems, and job loss — triggering greater use of substances in general.

With this in mind, perhaps the Council will consider:
1) consulting the sheriff’s office for Napa data and public health advisors) and/or 2) recommending your decision be made after the pandemic subsides, albeit that may be awhile.

I hope this information is helpful in your deliberations tonite.

https://www.dailydemocrat.com/2021/12/23/california‐das‐address‐dramatic‐uptick‐in‐dui‐fatalities/

Respectfully,
Catherine Hoffman, ScD, RN

Napa, CA.  94559

You don't often get email from

From: Rebecca Schenck
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 4:48 P M
To: Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: General Public Comment: Intersection at Coombs and Oak

[EXTERNAL]
I would like to submit a general public comment for the Napa City Council Meeting for 1‐18‐ 2022 regarding the intersection of Franklin Street and Oak Street and request that it be changed to a four way stop.  Both Franklin Street and Oak Streets are identified a Bicycle Boulevards  Class III) in the City of Napa Bicycle Plan https://www.cityofnapa.org/DocumentCenter/View/8937/2021‐City‐of‐Napa‐Bicycle‐Plan‐ PDF Franklin Street is a good way to travel to downtown on a bike except for this intersection where Oak Street traffic does not have to stop and bikes have to stop on Franklin. Bikes have a hard time accelerating without conflicting with the Oak Streep traffic.  A true Bicycle Boulevard gives priority for bicycles by assigning right‐of‐way to the bicycle at intersections.

Thank you,
Rebecca Schenck

Napa, CA

You don't often get email from

I want to speak about why I support adult-use cannabis in Napa. I have lived in the Napa Valley most of my life and have worked in the wine business for a good portion of my adult life. When Wine Business Monthly Magazine put on a seminar a few years ago titled “Wine and Weed” I had to attend and learned so much.
“The social use of cannabis includes its use for recreation, socializing and generally improving the quality of life. Most people who use cannabis today do so for these reasons. Historical records also point to the social use of cannabis.

In ancient India, Hindus were against the use of alcohol, but accepted social cannabis use. In ancient Rome, wealthy people finished banquets with a cannabis-seed desert that was known for the good feeling it caused. In ancient Indian weddings, cannabis (bhang) was served for good luck and as a sign of hospitality. Today, people often use cannabis for specific activities and occasions. When used properly, it helps some to relax and concentrate, making many more activities enjoyable. Eating/dining, listening to music, socializing, watching movies, playing sports, having sex and being creative are some things people say cannabis helps them to enjoy more. Sometimes people also use cannabis to make mundane tasks, like chores, more fun. “
Source: https://www.heretohelp.bc.ca/why-people-use-cannabis In my personal experience, with both college sports and work injuries within the wine business the medicinal use is obvious, due to a fused ankle from college volleyball and then years later a severed quadricep repair twice. Yet, my concern is for those who may not have the urgent medical reason or the financial means to access the medicinal route to cannabis for well-being. Let me explain. After my first rounds of surgeries for the ankle injury I took Ibuprofen, an FDA approved over the counter medicine that is now killing my kidneys after 20 plus years of use. My Kaiser doctors are adamant I do not take Ibuprofen medication ever again. While I certainly qualify for the medicinal access, I know of other people with lesser physical issues that could use the access to cannabis for the well-being aspect to their lives. Not everyone has discretionary income these days in a covid world to pay for the additional doctor prescription required but they should have the access they need as human beings without judgement or marginalizing policies in place regarding access.

Thank you for your consideration in your vote on adult-use of cannabis in Napa today. As a side note, while attending graduate school in my early 40’s I used cannabis daily and was able to maintain a 3.9 GPA in my two-year academic program. The scare tactics of “refer madness” is just that, sheer madness.

Respectfully,
Debbie Klimeck

Item 14.A.

From: Debbie Klimeck
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2022 8:19 AM
To: Clerk <clerk@cityofnap
a.org>
Subject: Addendum to why I support adult‐use of cannabis in Napa

[EXTERNAL]
In addition to why I support adult use of cannabis in Napa is the economic factor that Napa may be missing.out on. From 2017 to 2021 I lived in Novato while commuting to Napa. Novato had no retail/medicinal location so I would drive to Sebastopol. With further research I found a dispensary in San Rafael that would deliver to my home. Again, the city of Novato missed out on the legal tax revenues from not having their own location within their city limits.

Thank you for your consideration.

‐‐
Debbie A. Klimeck

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important