Draft Cannabis Regulatory
Ordinance:
Application Scoring Criteria
Redondo Beach City Council
October 8, 2024
Recent Direction
• December 19, 2023: engage Tierra West Advisors (TWA) to assist with regulatory ordinance update
• May 14, 2024: Discussed key elements of ordinance
• September 17, 2024: Discussed scoring criteria and permittee selection • October 8, 2024:
• Review updated scoring criteria
• Criteria presented one section at a time
• Discussion and direction for each criteria
• Return with updated criteria for final approval
Section 1:
Qualifications of the Applicant’s Owners and Managers
Current Scoring Criteria
200 TOTAL
Criteria # Item Points
1 Demonstrates cannabis retailer operations and ownership in California, that has taxable gross sales of $10,000,000/year per store. Up to 100
2 Demonstrates business operations and ownership in California providing services with annual gross revenue of $5,000,000/year. Up to 50
3 A description of the Applicant’s owner(s) and manager(s) qualifications detailing any experience operating cannabis retailers in any jurisdiction where cannabis retailers are permitted or special business or professional qualifications or licenses of the applicant’s owner(s) and manager(s) that would add to the quality of services that the cannabis retailer would provide, including in areas related to cannabis, such as legal, finance, business ownership/administration, waste management, real estate development, scientific, or healthcare or wellness fields.
Up to 50
Updated Scoring Criteria
1 Applicant must demonstrate cannabis
retailer operations and ownership in
California, with taxable gross sales of
$3,000,000/year generated by at least
one retail, storefront location.
20 0: No evidence provided of
cannabis retailer operations
with taxable gross sales of at
least $3,000,000/year.
20: Evidence of cannabis
retailer operations with
taxable gross sales of at least
$3,000,000/year.
Updated Scoring Criteria
2 Applicant must provide a
record of compliance with
local, state, and federal
regulations, including any
disciplinary actions or
violations. For any
violations or disciplinary
actions describe the
corrective actions and
evidence of their
effectiveness.
Demonstrate how
applicant will avoid these
issues in this application.
20 0: No compliance record provided or insufficient information to assess compliance.
4: Compliance record provided, but contains significant issues such as repeated or severe violations. The response lacks clarity on corrective actions taken.
8: Compliance record provided, but includes several minor violations or past disciplinary actions, with some explanation of corrective measures. The response suggests improvement but does not fully reassure regulatory adherence. Lack of clarity on how applicant would prevent reoccurrence in a Redondo location.
12: Compliance record with isolated minor violations, all of which have been resolved appropriately. The response demonstrates a willingness to correct issues and improve practices. Application clearly demonstrates safeguards from reoccurrence in Redondo location.
16: Strong compliance record with very few minor infractions, all of which have been swiftly and appropriately addressed. The response demonstrates a strong commitment to adhering to regulations.
Application clearly demonstrates safeguards from infractions occurring in Redondo location.
20: Exemplary compliance record with no violations or disciplinary actions. The response provides a thorough and transparent history, demonstrating a consistent and proactive approach to regulatory adherence. Application clearly demonstrates controls to ensure exemplary performance in Redondo location.
Updated Scoring Criteria
3 Applicant must provide a detailed
description of owners’ and managers’
qualifications, including experience in
cannabis operations or relevant
professional fields. Applicant must include
Letter of Commitment from proposed shop
manager to remain in the management role
at the proposed location for at least one
year.
20 0: No qualifications provided. No letter of
commitment for manager included.
4: Minimal experience or qualifications in related
fields, lacking detail and depth. The response does
not demonstrate an understanding of the cannabis
industry or relevant operations.
8: Some relevant experience noted, but the response
lacks specific examples or clarity regarding roles and
achievements. The qualifications do not provide a
clear picture of capability in managing cannabis
operations.
12: Adequate qualifications provided, covering most
relevant areas. The response includes some specifics
about experience but may lack depth in certain
critical areas, making it difficult to fully assess
readiness for managing operations.
16: Strong qualifications presented, showcasing
significant experience in cannabis or related fields.
Only minor details may be missing, but overall, the
response effectively conveys capability and
preparedness for leadership roles.
20: Exceptional qualifications demonstrating
extensive relevant experience in cannabis operations
or related professional fields. The response is
comprehensive, providing in-depth insights into past
roles, achievements, and how these experiences will
contribute to operational success.
Updated Scoring Criteria
4 Applicant must provide the total taxable
gross sales for their highest-grossing retail
location in California. Scale of taxable
gross sales for this single location will be
scored progressively ($3,000,000 and
above), with additional points awarded for
every $1 million demonstrated, up to a
maximum of 20 points.
20 0: No gross sales provided.
1: $3,000,000 gross sales.
2: $4,000,000 gross sales.
3: $5,000,000 gross sales.
4: $6,000,000 gross sales.
...
20: $22,000,000 gross sales or
above.
Updated Scoring Criteria
5 Applicant must provide a
description of their local
experience and community
involvement, highlighting
their connections to the local
community and any prior
civic engagement. This shall
include evidence of how the
applicant has have fulfilled
the commitments outlined in
Community Benefit Plans
submitted to other cities.
20 0: No information provided regarding local experience or community involvement. Insufficient evidence of compliance with Community Benefit Plans in other operating locations.
Evidence supplied demonstrates lack of compliance with
Community Benefits Plans in other operation locations.
Independently obtained information by City of Redondo on Community Benefit Plan compliance in other operating locations demonstrates lack of compliance.
4: Minimal ties to the community; lacks evidence of fulfilling commitments made in other cities. The response does not convey a genuine connection or contribution to the local area. Evidence of compliance with Community Benefits Plans in other operating locations is unverifiable.
8: Some community engagement noted, but the response lacks specific examples or evidence of fulfilling prior commitments.
The qualifications presented do not adequately demonstrate the applicant’s dedication to community involvement.
12: Moderate community involvement demonstrated, with some evidence of fulfillment of commitments made in other cities. The response covers relevant experiences but lacks detail in terms of specific contributions or impacts on the community.
16: Strong community ties established, with clear evidence of fulfilling all commitments from previous Community Benefit Plans. The response provides substantial insights into community engagement and demonstrates a proactive approach to local involvement.
20: Comprehensive description of local experience and
community involvement, showcasing extensive connections and significant contributions to the local community. The response provides detailed examples of civic engagement and a proven track record of fulfilling commitments from previous Community Benefit Plans.
Updated Scoring Criteria
6 Applicant shall provide
the total taxable gross
sales and net profit for
their first three years of
operation at their highest
revenue location.
20 0: Gross revenue and gross profit not supplied in
sufficient detail to analyze. Operating losses for first three years and/or in Year 3.
5: Submission is detailed enough to analyze. Show net
positive profit in Year 2.
7: Submission demonstrates net operating profit in
Year 1.
10: Submission is a balance sheet from an independent
auditor demonstrating net profits in years 2 and 3.
15: Submission is a balance sheet from an independent
auditor demonstrating net profits in years 1, 2 and 3.
17: Submission is a balance sheet from an independent
auditor demonstrating net profits in years 1, 2 and 3
with average profit between 3% and 5%..
20: Submission is a balance sheet from an independent
auditor demonstrating net profits in years 1, 2 and 3
with average profit greater than 5%.
Updated Scoring Criteria
7 Dun and Bradstreet rating.
Applicant shall supply DUNS
number in application
10 0: No current D&B rating or DUNS Number.
D&B Financial Strength Rating of less than 2A.
Risk rating of less than 2.
5: D&B Financial Strength of 2A or more. Risk
rating of 2
10: D&B Financial Strength of 3A or more. Risk
rating of 1.
Section 2:
Plans, Renderings, and Overall Location
Current Scoring Criteria
150 TOTAL
Criteria # Item Points
1 75 of the 150 points available under this Subsection 2 will be awarded, as a ministerial duty, if the Applicant’s proposed cannabis retailer is located more than 1,500 feet from any youth centers, as identified and measured in accordance with the Location Zoning Requirements in Section 6-xxx and Section xx of the Ordinance, and confirmed by a report from a licensed surveyor included in the application.
75 2 A premise diagram in accordance with Section 5006 of Division 42 of Title 16 of the State Code of Regulations. Up to 10 3 A site development plan that provides information on existing conditions and proposed improvements to the site and how it meets or will meet the development standards outlined in Chapter xx of the City Municipal Code, including adequate parking. Information on existing conditions shall include:
1. Exterior photographs showing all sides of any existing structure(s);
2. Photographs of existing parking areas, landscaping, trash enclosure, and signage;
3. Information on existing use on the site, including the addresses, uses, and square footages.
4. Photographs of the existing site if the site is vacant; and
5. Photographs of adjacent properties for context.
Up to 10
4 A floor plan showing information on the existing layout and proposed layout of the building interior. Up to 15 5 Building elevations that provide information on existing conditions and proposed improvements. Up to 20 6 A conceptual landscape plan with the percentage of landscaping in the parking lot, setback areas, and tree size and species. Up to 10
7 Colored interior renderings and exterior elevation renderings (for both existing and/or proposed improvements). Up to 10 Updated Scoring Criteria
1 Applicant must provide a premises
diagram in accordance with Section
5006 of Division 42 of Title 16 of the
State Code of Regulations.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Diagram not provided. No premises
diagram submitted.
Pass: Diagram provided in compliance with
regulations.
Updated Scoring Criteria
2 Applicant must provide a site development
plan that details existing conditions and
proposed improvements, demonstrating
compliance with Chapter XX of the City
Municipal Code, including adequate
parking.
10 0: Site development plan not provided.
10: Plan provided with all required
information.
3 Applicant must provide a floor plan
illustrating the existing and proposed
layout of the building interior.
10 0: Floor plan not provided.
10: Floor plan provided with necessary details.
4 Applicant must provide building elevations
that illustrate existing conditions and
proposed improvements.
10 0: Building elevations not provided.
10: Elevations provided with adequate detail.
5 Applicant must provide a conceptual
landscape plan, including the percentage of
landscaping in the parking lot, setback
areas, and details on tree size and species.
10 0: Conceptual landscape plan not provided.
10: Plan provided with necessary details.
6 Applicant must provide colored interior
and exterior renderings, including existing
and/or proposed improvements.
10 0: Renderings not provided.
10: Renderings provided with required
information.
7 Applicant must provide a
traffic/transportation analysis that
addresses ingress, egress, and delivery of
products to the store.
10 0: Traffic/transportation analysis not provided.
10: Analysis provided with adequate detail.
Updated Scoring Criteria
8 Applicant must provide a
detailed site development plan
that includes exterior
photographs of existing
structures, existing parking
areas, landscaping, trash
enclosures, signage, and
adjacent properties for
context. Submission complies
with Chapter XX of Redondo
Beach Municipal Code.
10 0: No site development plan provided. Submission does not comply with Chapter XX of Redondo Beach Municipal Code. 2: Basic site information provided, but the plan lacks detail and clarity. Photos may be minimal or poorly presented, and key features such as landscaping or adjacent properties may not be fully considered.
4: General overview provided, but missing several key
photographs and contextual details, leading to gaps in
understanding how the site fits within its surroundings. 6: Adequate information provided, covering most elements.
However, some details such as comprehensive landscaping or parking solutions are missing or unclear, and the quality of the photos or visual presentation may be subpar.
8: Detailed site development plan provided, with clear photos and well-documented elements. Minor clarifications may be needed in areas such as trash enclosures or adjacent property context. Overall quality is strong, but a few areas could be improved for thoroughness.
10: Comprehensive and high-quality site development plan that is visually well-presented. All elements, including clear and context-rich photographs, parking areas, landscaping, and adjacent properties, are articulated thoroughly. The plan shows a deep understanding of site integration, spatial planning, and overall project vision.
Updated Scoring Criteria
9 Applicant must provide a
well-designed floor plan
that maximizes the
usability of the space and
incorporates creative,
efficient layouts.
Submission complies
with Chapter XX of
Redondo Beach
Municipal Code.
10 0: No floor plan provided. Submission does not comply with Chapter XX of Redondo Beach Municipal Code.
2: Basic layout provided, but it lacks functionality, is unclear, or does not make effective use of the space. There may be significant inefficiencies in flow or design.
4: General layout provided, but it is inefficient, with poor use of available space. Key areas are not optimized, and the plan lacks creative solutions for maximizing usability.
6: Adequate layout with most key features included, but minor details are missing or certain areas feel underutilized. The design is functional but lacks innovative or creative elements. 8: Well-designed floor plan that effectively meets usability requirements, showing strong consideration of space and flow.
Minor improvements in efficiency or creative design elements may be possible, but the overall layout is effective.
10: Exceptional floor plan that maximizes the usability of every area, incorporating creativity and efficiency. The design reflects innovative use of space, promotes smooth operational flow, and enhances both functionality and aesthetics. No significant improvements are needed.
Updated Scoring Criteria
10 Applicant must provide
quality building elevations
that demonstrate aesthetic
improvements, including
high-quality materials and
finishes both inside and
outside the building.
Submission complies with
Chapter XX of Redondo
Beach Municipal Code.
10 0: No elevations provided. Submission does not comply with Chapter XX of Redondo Beach Municipal Code.
2: Basic elevations provided with little detail. The proposed improvements lack clarity, depth, and attention to the quality of materials or finishes.
4: General overview of proposed improvements provided, but missing several key elements such as detailed materials, finishes, or architectural enhancements. The design lacks aesthetic depth and visual appeal.
6: Adequate elevations with most features covered. The design demonstrates some attention to materials and finishes, though there are gaps in detail or quality. The aesthetic appeal is present but lacks sophistication.
8: Detailed elevations provided with clear attention to materials, finishes, and overall design. Some minor
clarifications may be needed, but the plan presents a strong visual and functional improvement. The aesthetic choices enhance the building significantly.
10: Comprehensive elevations showcasing all proposed
improvements, with a focus on high-quality materials and finishes. The design reflects a well-considered aesthetic vision and demonstrates a clear commitment to architectural
excellence both inside and outside the building. The
improvements are visually striking and well-integrated.
Updated Scoring Criteria
11 Applicant must provide a
conceptual landscape
plan, including the
percentage of landscaping
in the parking lot, setback
areas, and details on tree
size and species.
Submission complies with
Chapter XX of Redondo
Municipal Code.
10 0: Conceptual landscape plan not provided or not in
compliance.
3: Plan provided with necessary details. Does not comply with City landscaping requirements
5: Plan provided with necessary details. Fully complies with City landscaping requirements.
7: Plan provided with necessary details. Fully complies with City landscaping requirements. Landscaping avoids creating security issues.
10: Plan provided with necessary details. Fully complies with City landscaping requirements. Landscaping avoids
creating security issues. Landscaping significantly
contributes to overall attractiveness of premises.
Updated Scoring Criteria
12 Applicant must provide
colored interior and
exterior renderings,
including existing
and/or proposed
improvements.
Submission complies
with Chapter XX of
Redondo Municipal
Code.
10 0: Renderings not provided.
2: Basic renderings provided with little detail. The proposed improvements lack clarity, depth, and attention to the quality of materials or finishes.
4: General renderings provided, but missing several key elements such as detailed materials, finishes, or architectural enhancements.
The design lacks aesthetic depth and visual appeal.
6: Adequate renderings with most features covered. The design demonstrates some attention to materials and finishes, though there are gaps in detail or quality. The aesthetic appeal is present but lacks sophistication.
8: Detailed renderings provided with clear attention to materials, finishes, and overall design. Some minor clarifications may be needed, but the plan presents a strong visual and functional improvement. The aesthetic choices enhance the building significantly.
10: Comprehensive renderings showcasing all proposed
improvements, with a focus on high-quality materials and finishes.
The design reflects a well-considered aesthetic vision and demonstrates a clear commitment to architectural excellence. The improvements are visually striking and well-integrated.
Updated Scoring Criteria
13 Applicant must provide a
traffic/transportation analysis that
addresses ingress, egress, and
delivery of products to the store.
Submission complies with Chapter
XX of Redondo Municipal Code.
10 0: Traffic/transportation analysis not provided.
2: Traffic analysis lacks sufficient information to assess traffic impacts, capacity, safety, and delivery.
4: Traffic analysis fails to accommodate/address
capacity, mitigate safety and traffic impacts, and/or
delivery impacts on traffic and surrounding properties. 6: Traffic analysis is complete and demonstrates
attempts to address capacity, traffic flow, safety, traffic impacts due to volume and vehicular ingress/egress,
and details delivery to minimize traffic and noise
impacts on surrounding properties.
8: Traffic analysis is complete, accommodates volume,
includes safe vehicular ingress and egress, includes a
solid delivery solution that minimizes traffic and noise impacts on surrounding properties, and mitigates
traffic impacts to the extent practical for the site as determined by assigned Public Works evaluators.
10: Traffic analysis is complete, accommodates peak
volume, includes safe vehicular ingress and egress,
includes a solid delivery solution that minimizes traffic and noise impacts on surrounding properties, and
mitigates all traffic impacts.
Section 3:
Business and Operations Plan
Current Scoring Criteria
100 TOTAL
Criteria # Item Points
1 A written description of the total square footage of the facility with estimated square footage of proposed uses. Up to 5
2 A schedule for beginning operations, including a narrative outlining any proposed construction improvements and a timeline for completion. Up to 10 3 A budget for construction, operation, maintenance, compensation of employees, equipment costs, utility costs, and other operating costs. Up to 15 4 A description of the sources(s) of capital and use(s) of capital. Up to 10 5 Pro forma financial statements for at least three (3) years of operation. Up to 10 6 A description of the type of products to be sold and the estimated quantity and value of product(s) to be sold. Up to 10
7 A description of marketing procedures and tactics. Up to 15 8 A description of day-to-day operations that should acknowledge both state and local laws and should be consistent with industry best practices. Up to 5 9 A description of hours of operation and opening procedures. Up to 5 10 A description of cash handling procedures. Up to 5
11 A description of inventory control procedures to include identification of point-of-sale systems, and track and trace software. Up to 5 12 A description of transportation, loading and unloading, distribution, or delivery procedures. Up to 5
Updated Scoring Criteria
1 Applicant must provide a schedule for
beginning operations, including a
timeline for construction completion.
5 0: No schedule provided.
5: Schedule provided.
4 Applicant must provide a description
of hours of operation and opening
procedures.
5 0: No description of hours and
procedures provided.
5: Description provided.
5 Applicant must provide a description
of cash handling procedures. 5
0: No cash handling procedures
provided.
5: Procedures provided.
6 Applicant must provide a description
of day-to-day operations that
acknowledges both state and local
laws and is consistent with industry
best practices.
5 0: No description of operations
provided.
5: Description provided.
Updated Scoring Criteria
2 Applicant must provide
audited financial statements
for at least three (3) years of
operation.
Pass/Fail
Fail: No financial statements
provided.
Pass: Financial statements provided.
Updated Scoring Criteria
3 Applicant must provide a
description of the type of
products to be sold and the
estimated quantity and value of
product(s) to be sold.
Pass/Fail
Fail: No product description provided.
Pass: Product description provided.
Updated Scoring Criteria
7 Applicant must provide financial projections,
including costs of products and operations,
other business expenses, expected profits and
projected city revenues based on the
description of type and quantity of products
to be sold.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Information not
provided.
Pass: Information
provided.
Updated Scoring Criteria
7 Applicant must provide a written
description of the total square
footage of the facility with
estimated square footage of
proposed uses.
5 0: No description provided.
1: Basic information provided but lacks detail about
total square footage and specific proposed uses, making it difficult to gauge feasibility.
2: General description with limited estimates and some
proposed uses mentioned but insufficient for
understanding overall functionality.
3: Adequate description with most estimates provided;
some detail on proposed uses but lacks clarity on space utilization for operations.
4: Detailed description with all estimates provided;
clearly articulates proposed uses and demonstrates
understanding of spatial needs, though may require
minor clarifications.
5: Comprehensive description with all details and
estimates clearly articulated; demonstrates a thorough
understanding of how each area contributes to overall
operations and efficiency, including potential future
needs.
Updated Scoring Criteria
8 Applicant must provide a budget
for construction, operation,
maintenance, compensation of
employees, equipment costs,
utility costs, and other operating
costs.
5 0: No budget provided.
1: Budget provided but lacks detail; essential categories missing and unclear assumptions limit viability assessment. 2: Basic budget outline present but several key categories are absent; vague assumptions affect overall reliability. 3: Adequate budget that covers most categories; minor
details missing; demonstrates awareness of costs but lacks thorough justification for estimates.
4: Detailed budget covering all major categories; shows solid understanding of financial requirements but may need
minor clarifications.
5: Comprehensive budget with detailed costs for all
operational aspects; provides clear justifications for each cost and showcases robust financial planning and
understanding of sustainable business operations.
Updated Scoring Criteria
9 Applicant must
provide a description
of the sources(s) of
capital and use(s) of
capital.
5 0: No description provided.
1: Basic information on sources provided but lacks detail on uses, making it hard to evaluate feasibility.
2: General description provided but missing key details on sources or uses; lack of clarity undermines confidence in financial planning.
3: Adequate description with most sources and uses covered; some details missing; demonstrates understanding of capital flow but may require additional justification.
4: Detailed description with clear sources and uses articulated; shows good understanding but minor clarification needed. 5: Comprehensive description detailing both sources and uses of capital; demonstrates sound financial planning and clarity on fund allocation and strategic alignment with business objectives.
Updated Scoring Criteria
10 Applicant must
provide a
description of
inventory control
procedures,
including
identification of
point-of-sale
systems and track
and trace software.
5 0: No inventory control procedures provided.
1: Basic procedures provided but lacking critical details on systems, processes, and how they will be implemented, making it difficult to assess the effectiveness of inventory control.
2: General overview provided, but significant elements are missing (e.g. point-of-sale systems). Limited description of inventory management practices or compliance procedures is provided, affecting overall understanding.
3: Adequate procedures with most key elements covered, including some identification of systems. However, there are missing details, such as how inventory is received, stored, or audited, and lack of clarity on loss prevention measures or compliance with regulations.
4: Detailed procedures provided, including most required elements such as the type of POS and track and trace systems. However, minor clarifications are needed regarding integration, user training, or specific practices for inventory management and compliance.
5: Comprehensive inventory control procedures with all systems and software clearly identified. The description includes specific types of point-of-sale and track and trace software, how they integrate, training provided for users, and thorough inventory management practices. Details on receiving procedures, storage methods, inventory audits, loss prevention measures, compliance with regulations, documentation processes, and feedback mechanisms are all articulated.
Updated Scoring Criteria
11 Applicant must provide a
detailed description of
transportation, loading and
unloading, distribution, and
delivery procedures. This
should include plans to
ensure that delivery
operations do not disrupt
traffic flow, align with the
neighborhood compatibility
plan, and do not obstruct
fire lanes.
5 0: No transportation procedures provided.
1: Basic transportation information provided, lacking detail on logistics and compliance with local regulations.
2: General overview provided but missing key procedures related to delivery scheduling and route planning to minimize disruption. 3: Adequate procedures with most key elements covered; however, minor details missing on potential disruptions and mitigation strategies.
4: Detailed procedures provided but minor clarification needed on compliance with neighborhood compatibility and fire lane regulations. 5: Comprehensive transportation procedures with all elements clearly articulated; ensures minimal disruption to traffic flow and alignment with community standards, showing foresight in operational planning.
Updated Scoring Criteria
12 Applicant must provide a
description of marketing
procedures and tactics.
5 0: No marketing procedures provided.
1: Basic marketing information provided, lacking detail on target audience, channels, and tactics.
2: General overview provided but missing key tactics for engagement and outreach effectiveness.
3: Adequate procedures with most key elements covered; however, minor details missing regarding implementation, measurement, and adaptability of strategies.
4: Detailed marketing procedures provided, with minor
clarification needed on goals and effectiveness in reaching the target market.
5: Comprehensive marketing procedures with all elements clearly articulated; demonstrates a strategic approach to outreach, customer engagement, and market positioning, with plans for assessment and adjustment.
Updated Scoring Criteria
13 Applicant must provide a
description of the City tax
payment management
plan/procedures, ensuring no
cash is managed by the City.
5 0: No tax payment management plan provided.
1: Basic information provided, lacking detail on processes, accountability, and tracking mechanisms.
2: General overview provided but missing key procedures for compliance and clarity on financial management.
3: Adequate plan with most elements covered; minor
details missing on reporting, payment and transparency
measures.
4: Detailed plan provided but minor clarification needed on implementation and compliance monitoring.
5: Comprehensive tax payment management plan with all
details clearly articulated; ensures compliance with City regulations and demonstrates transparency and
accountability in financial management.
Updated Scoring Criteria
14 Applicant must demonstrate a
plan for maintaining ongoing
compliance with all applicable
cannabis laws, including
licensing requirements and
reporting obligations.
5 0: No compliance plan provided.
1: Basic compliance information provided, lacking detail on processes, monitoring, and accountability.
2: General overview provided but missing specific compliance elements, timelines, and reporting obligations.
3: Adequate plan with most elements covered; however, minor details missing on updates, audits, and compliance checks. 4: Detailed plan provided but minor clarification needed on implementation strategies and compliance monitoring.
5: Comprehensive compliance plan with all details clearly articulated; ensures adherence to all applicable laws and regulations, demonstrating a proactive approach to compliance and risk management.
Updated Scoring Criteria
15 Applicant must provide a
schedule for beginning
operations, including a
timeline for construction
completion.
5 0: No schedule provided.
1: Schedule lacks sufficient detail to evaluate or is clearly unrealistic based on other submittals; or is unreasonably long time to occupancy and operations based on other submittals. 3: Schedule has some detail but not in all areas. Creates question as to whether the schedule is realistic and reasonable based on other submittals.
5: Schedule is detailed, realistic, and demonstrates occupancy and operations in a reasonable period of time based on
amount of work to be done.
Updated Scoring Criteria
16 Applicant must provide a
description of hours of operation
and opening procedures.
5 0: No description of hours and procedures provided.
1. Hours of operation provided, opening procedures too vague to evaluate.
2. Hours of operation not respectful of adjacent properties, and/or opening procedures pose security or operational risks.
3. Hours of operation respectful of adjacent uses; opening procedures lack detail or include fixable exposure to security and operational risks.
5: Hours of operation respectful of adjacent uses; and opening procedures address and demonstrate clear understanding of security and operational risks.
Updated Scoring Criteria
17 Applicant must provide
a description of cash
handling procedures.
5 0: No cash handling procedures provided.
1: Basic information provided but in insufficient detail to fully evaluate.
2. Sufficient information provided for evaluation however procedures do not instill confidence that cash is properly recorded, any discrepancies are always detected and traceable or that cash is handled securely.
3. Procedures are in adequate detail and generally instill confidence that cash will be properly reported, that discrepancies are detected, and that cash is handled securely. Any procedural gaps are minor and easily fixable.
5: Detailed procedures provided and procedures instill confidence that cash will be properly reported, discrepancies are always detected and traceable, and that cash will be handled securely.
Updated Scoring Criteria
18 Applicant must provide a
description of day-to-day
operations that acknowledges
both state and local laws and
is consistent with industry
best practices.
5 0: No description of operations provided.
1: Basic information provided but lacks detail to assess compliance with state and local laws and/or that the operations are consistent with industry back practices.
3. Operations description generally demonstrates compliance with state and local laws and with industry best practices. Any gaps are fixable.
5: Operations description is in sufficient detail that clearly demonstrates compliance with state and local laws and that the operations are consistent with industry best practices.
Section 4:
Security Plan
Current Scoring Criteria
150 TOTAL
Criteria # Item Points
1 The security plan shall be prepared by a professional security consultant. Up to 30
2 A premises security diagram. Up to 20
3 A description of access control, inventory control, cash handling, and other security procedures and security
equipment demonstrating compliance with the security
requirements under this Chapter 6xxx.
Up to 50
4 A description of the intrusion alarm and monitoring system including the name and contact information for the
monitoring company.
Up to 25
5 A description of the services of on-site security guards to include the (1) number of security guards; (2) the hours security guards will be on-site; (3) locations where security will be positioned; and (4) security guard responsibilities.
Up to 25
Updated Scoring Criteria
1 Applicant must provide a Security
Plan prepared by a professional
security consultant.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Applicant did not provide a Security
Plan or Security Plan was not prepared by
a professional security consultant.
Pass: Applicant provided a Security Plan
prepared by a professional security
consultant.
Updated Scoring Criteria
2 Applicant must provide a
description of the Panic
Button installation, showing
where the panic buttons are
located in the facility.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security plan did not provide a
description of the panic button installation,
locations are inadequate for security.
Pass: Security plan provided a description of
the panic button installation, locations are
adequate for security purposes.
Updated Scoring Criteria
4 Applicant must describe how the business
remains secure during a Power Outage,
ensuring access doors are not solely
controlled by electronic access panels.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not describe how the
business remains secure during a power outage.
Pass: Security Plan described how the business
remains secure during a power outage.
Updated Scoring Criteria
5 Applicant must provide proof that all
Security Personnel hold valid Security
Guard registration issued by the State
of California Bureau of Security and
Investigative Service (BSIS).
5 0: Security Plan did not provide proof of valid security guard registration.
5: Security Plan provided proof of valid security guard registration.
Updated Scoring Criteria
6 Applicant must provide proof of General
Liability Coverage with a minimum
coverage of $2,000,000 and Workers'
Compensation Insurance with a minimum
coverage of $1,000,000.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not provide proof of
insurance coverage.
Pass: Security Plan provided proof of
compliant insurance coverage.
Updated Scoring Criteria
7 Applicant must provide a description
of the Security Camera System,
including camera placement and 24/7
monitoring capabilities.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not provide a description of the security camera system or system does not meet
requirements.
Pass: Security Plan provided a description of a security camera system that meets requirements.
Updated Scoring Criteria
8 Applicant must describe the
Battery Backup system for
surveillance equipment,
ensuring a minimum of four
hours of backup recording
in the event of a power
outage.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not describe the battery backup system, or back up system insufficient.
Pass: Security Plan described a battery backup system that meets requirements.
Updated Scoring Criteria
9 Applicant must
provide proof that the
Surveillance System
has a failure
notification system
that alerts the
permittee and Police
Department of any
system interruptions.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not provide proof of a surveillance system failure notification system.
Pass: Security Plan provided proof of a surveillance system failure notification system.
Updated Scoring Criteria
10 Applicant must describe the
procedure for storing and
retaining Surveillance Recordings
for a minimum of 90 days, in a
format that ensures no alteration
of the recorded image.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not describe an adequate
procedure for storing and retaining surveillance
recordings.
Pass: Security Plan described an adequate
procedure for storing and retaining surveillance
recordings.
Updated Scoring Criteria
11 Applicant must provide a
description of the Alarm
System, including
monitoring company and
schematic of security zones.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not provide a description of an adequate alarm system.
Pass: Security Plan provided a description of an adequate alarm system.
Updated Scoring Criteria
12 Applicant must demonstrate
that at least one licensed
Security Guard is present at
all times the premises is
open to the public or
employees.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not provide proof of coverage by a licensed security guard.
Pass: Security Plan provided proof of coverage by a licensed security guard.
Updated Scoring Criteria
13 Applicant must describe the
record-keeping process for
maintaining records related to
surveillance, alarm systems,
and track-and-trace systems
for inspection by law
enforcement.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Security Plan did not describe an adequate recordkeeping process for maintaining security-related records.
Pass: Security Plan described an adequate record-keeping process for maintaining security-related records.
Updated Scoring Criteria
14 Applicant must provide a
detailed description of the
consultant’s or architect’s
qualifications and the
methodologies used in
preparing the Security
Plan.
5 0: No information provided.
1: Information provided, but lacks detail or clear connection to cannabis industry standards. Consultant appears inexperienced, with no mention of prior relevant projects.
2: Basic qualifications and methodology provided, but lacks depth or evidence of having worked in high-risk industries. The plan uses generic approaches to security that could apply to any business. 3: Qualifications and methodology are clear, with some experience relevant to high-risk industries. However, the plan lacks tailored features that specifically address the unique needs of cannabis retailers.
4: Solid experience with high-risk industries, and methodologies that show thoughtful planning for cannabis retail operations, though lacking in some innovative features or specific best practices. 5: Extensive experience in cannabis or other high-risk industries.
Methodology is detailed, innovative, and incorporates best practices from similar operations. Demonstrates a proactive approach to challenges unique to cannabis retail (e.g., theft, compliance).
Updated Scoring Criteria
15 Security Plan must provide
a description of the Security
System Design,
demonstrating how the
system prevents
unauthorized individuals
from entering and
remaining on the premises
and establishes limited
access areas for authorized
personnel only.
5 0: No information provided.
1: The description lacks reasoning, or no specific measures are provided for preventing unauthorized access. Controls appear generic or minimal. 2: Basic system described with limited access areas, but the design lacks layers of protection or advanced features.
3: A functional system is described, with appropriate access controls and limited access areas, though there are gaps in covering all potential vulnerabilities.
4: Strong system with multi-layer controls, clear access zones for personnel, and a reasonable approach to securing high-risk areas (e.g., vaults or product areas). Some consideration given to employee movement and customer flow.
5: Comprehensive system with automated controls, multi-layered protection, and proactive measures to address potential vulnerabilities.
The system integrates employee monitoring, customer access, and emergency protocols seamlessly. Prevents minors from entering sales area.
Updated Scoring Criteria
16 Security Plan must provide a
description of the Surveillance
System, including camera
coverage, operational hours, and
how the system meets 24/7
monitoring requirements. Highdefinition (HD) is defined as a minimum resolution of 720p or
higher, with clear image quality
in varying lighting conditions.
5 0: No information provided.
1: Limited detail on the surveillance system, unclear coverage, or insufficient monitoring hours (less than 24/7). No mention of fps or low frame rate below 24 fps.
2: Basic camera coverage with gaps, standard HD quality (720p), but frame rate is below 24 fps. Limited effectiveness in capturing clear footage in all conditions.
3: Functional system with HD coverage (720p) at 24 fps in most areas, but there are blind spots or frame rate limitations in highrisk zones. 4: Extensive HD coverage (1080p) with 24 fps or higher, minimal gaps, providing clear image quality in all monitored areas. 5: Advanced system with full HD coverage (1080p or higher), at least 24 fps or higher with no blind spots. Ultra-HD (4K) available in key areas, with smart features like motion tracking, remote monitoring, and optimized performance in low-light conditions.
Updated Scoring Criteria
17 Applicant must provide details
on Surveillance Footage
Compatibility, including how
the footage is accessible to law
enforcement and compatible
with City systems.
5 0: No information provided.
1: The system is incompatible or requires extensive manual effort to extract footage for law enforcement use.
2: Limited compatibility, requiring manual extraction and some workarounds to provide footage to law enforcement.
3: Mostly compatible, but requires effort in sharing or integrating with City systems, including manual file transfers or significant delay in sharing.
4: Fully compatible with City systems, with streamlined sharing processes for law enforcement that allow easy access to footage as needed.
5: Real-time remote access for law enforcement, offering seamless integration with City systems and advanced features like automated alerts for incidents. The system is designed to be both easy to use and highly responsive to law enforcement needs.
Updated Scoring Criteria
18 Applicant must describe the
Surveillance Equipment
Maintenance Plan, including
records of maintenance
activity, service logs, and
procedures for ensuring the
system’s operational
reliability.
5 0: No information provided.
1: Little to no information provided about the maintenance plan, with vague references to system upkeep.
2: Basic description of a maintenance plan, but no evidence of a structured process or regular logs for servicing the equipment. 3: A functional maintenance plan with regular upkeep and basic records provided, though the depth of record-keeping may be minimal.
4: Well-documented maintenance plan with regular servicing schedules and detailed logs. The plan includes preventive measures to avoid downtime or security risks.
5: Comprehensive preventive maintenance plan with detailed logs of all service activities, including advanced monitoring systems that notify administrators when maintenance is
required. The plan ensures maximum operational reliability with minimal downtime.
Updated Scoring Criteria
19 Applicant must provide a
description of the Alarm
System, including alarm
system type and alarm
monitoring methods.
5 0: No information provided.
1: Minimal information on the alarm system, with no clear monitoring strategy or backup plans in place.
2: Basic system described, covering primary entry points but leaving some vulnerabilities, with no advanced features like motion detection or zoning.
3: Good alarm system covering all critical access points, reliable but without advanced integration with other
security systems.
4: High-quality alarm system with zoning for different areas of the business. Comprehensive monitoring and reliable
response protocols in place.
5: Top-tier alarm system with advanced sensors, full
integration with surveillance and security systems, and automatic notifications to law enforcement or monitoring services.
Updated Scoring Criteria
20 Applicant must provide
description of Security
Guard Training and
Experience, including
guard licensing, industryspecific training, and
qualifications relevant to
cannabis business
security.
5 0: No information provided or guards don't meet minimum qualifications.
1: Guards have minimal training and licensing, with no
evidence of cannabis-specific experience or experience in high-risk industries.
2: Basic guard training and licensing provided, but no
specialized training relevant to cannabis businesses or highrisk industries. 3: Guards are well-trained with some relevant experience, though their qualifications may be more general rather than cannabis-focused.
4: Guards have extensive experience in high-risk industries and relevant training specific to the cannabis industry, demonstrating an ability to handle cannabis-specific risks. 5: Guards are highly trained specialists in cannabis security, with continuous education and advanced qualifications that include scenario-based training and proactive response
protocols tailored to the unique risks of cannabis businesses.
Section 5:
Safety Plan
Current Scoring Criteria
100 TOTAL
Criteria # Item Points
1 The safety plan shall be prepared by a professional fire prevention and suppression consultant. Up to 20
2 A premises safety diagram to include (1) a
description/illustration of evacuation routes and (2)
location of fire extinguishers and other fire
suppression equipment.
Up to 10
3 A description of safety procedures, training for
emergency situations, and safety equipment
demonstrating compliance with the safety
requirements under this Chapter 6xxx.
Up to 50
4 Identify all gases, pesticides, and chemicals to be used and their storage locations. Up to 10
5 A description of the firm alarm and monitoring system including the name and contact information for the
monitoring company.
Up to 10
Updated Scoring Criteria
1 Applicant must provide a Safety Plan
prepared by a professional fire prevention
and suppression consultant or architect.
5 0: Applicant did not provide a Safety Plan prepared
by a professional consultant or architect.
5: Applicant provided a Safety Plan prepared by a
professional consultant or architect.
4 Applicant must provide a description of
safety procedures, including training for
emergency situations and safety equipment
demonstrating compliance with safety
requirements.
5 0: Applicant did not provide a description of safety
procedures and training.
5: Applicant provided a comprehensive description
of safety procedures and training.
Updated Scoring Criteria
2 Applicant must provide
a description of
Access/Egress into the
facility that meets
building and fire code
requirements.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Applicant did not provide a
description of access/egress that meets
code requirements.
Pass: Applicant provided a complete
description of access/egress that meets
building and fire code requirements.
Updated Scoring Criteria
3 Applicant must provide a
premises safety diagram that
includes evacuation routes
and locations of fire
extinguishers and other fire
suppression equipment.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Applicant did not
provide a premises safety
diagram.
Pass: Applicant provided a
complete premises safety
diagram with required
elements.
Updated Scoring Criteria
5 Applicant must identify all gases,
pesticides, and chemicals to be used,
along with their storage locations.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Applicant did not identify
gases, pesticides, or chemicals
and their storage locations.
Pass: Applicant provided a
complete identification of all
gases, pesticides, and chemicals,
including their storage locations.
Updated Scoring Criteria
6 Applicant must provide a
description of the fire alarm and
monitoring system, including the
name and contact information for
the monitoring company.
Pass/Fail
Fail: Applicant did not
provide a description of the
fire alarm and monitoring
system that meets code.
Pass: Applicant provided a
complete description of the
fire alarm and monitoring
system with contact
information that meets code.
Updated Scoring Criteria
7 Applicant must provide a description of
safety procedures, employee training for
emergency situations, and safety equipment
demonstrating compliance with safety
requirements, including, but not limited to,
Chapter 4 of the California Fire Code (CFC),
Section 406, regarding Employee Training
and Response Procedures.
5 0: No information provided.
1: Information provided but lacks detail on either safety procedures or training. The applicant includes some mention of safety procedures or training, but the submission is vague and lacks substance. No direct reference is made to specific safety standards or codes like the CFC, Section 406. The response may only provide high-level concepts with no actionable plans or procedures. 2: Basic information provided, including safety procedures or training, but not both.
The applicant addresses either safety procedures or employee training but fails to address both areas sufficiently. There may be limited reference to safety requirements but with no concrete detail about implementation or compliance with the CFC. Missing key elements such as detailed descriptions of emergency responses or protocols for hazardous situations.
3: General overview provided of safety procedures and training, but lacks specific compliance details, including reference to Chapter 4 of the CFC. The applicant outlines both safety procedures and employee training but offers only a high-level view. Some elements of safety compliance are mentioned but lack specific references to Chapter 4 of the CFC or detailed safety requirements. Emergency response procedures may be described in broad terms without specific steps or training schedules.
4: Detailed information provided on procedures and training, referencing Chapter 4 of the CFC, but missing minor elements of compliance. The applicant provides detailed safety procedures and employee training protocols, making specific reference to Chapter 4 of the California Fire Code (CFC), Section 406. The information is mostly complete, covering essential elements of emergency procedures and safety compliance. Minor areas may be incomplete or lack depth, such as missing updates on safety equipment or partial training timelines, but overall compliance is largely demonstrated.
5: Comprehensive information provided, including thorough details on safety procedures, training, compliance with Chapter 4 of the CFC, and response procedures in emergency situations. The applicant submits a fully developed and thorough plan addressing all aspects of safety, including, but not limited to 1) Clear, step-by-step safety procedures for various scenarios, 2)Complete employee training programs, 3) Explicit reference to compliance with Chapter 4 of the CFC, Section 406, and other relevant safety codes, 4) Demonstrated use of required safety equipment and technologies that comply with state requirements, 5) Detailed emergency response procedures tailored to potential risks at the dispensary, and 6) Continuous improvement processes to ensure ongoing compliance and readiness.
Updated Scoring Criteria
8 Applicant must provide a detailed
description of the consultant's or
architect's qualifications and the
methodologies used in preparing the
Safety Plan. A comprehensive
methodology will include, but is not
limited to, the following:
1) A systematic assessment of risks
associated with the specific cannabis
retail environment.
2) Integration of relevant regulations
and standards, including local, state,
and federal guidelines.
3) Development of clear procedures for
emergency response and safety
training.
4) Continuous improvement processes
to update the Safety Plan based on new
information or incidents.
5 0: No information provided.
1: Minimal qualifications mentioned; lacks detail on methodologies used. 2: Basic qualifications provided; methodologies are mentioned but lack depth. 3: Adequate qualifications and methodologies described, but lacking specific examples or context, including educational background or certifications. 4: Strong qualifications and detailed methodologies provided; relevant experience or successful past projects noted; some minor elements could be improved or clarified. 5: Comprehensive qualifications and methodologies provided, including educational background, certifications, and relevant experience with safety planning for cannabis retailers or other high-risk environments, with clear examples illustrating successful implementations.
9 Applicant must provide a detailed
description of the processes,
procedures, and practices included in
the Safety Plan. The comprehensive
Safety Plan will include, but is not
limited to, the following:
1) A systematic assessment of risks
associated with the specific cannabis
retail environment and processes and
procedures to mitigate those risks. .
2) Integration of relevant regulations
and standards, including local, state,
and federal guidelines as well as
industry best practices.
3) Development of clear procedures for
emergency response and safety
training.
4) Continuous improvement processes
that would update the Safety Plan
based on new information or incidents.
5 0: No information provided.
1: Minimal details that make it difficult to assess confidence is the safe day-to-day operations of the business.
2: Processes ands procedures are mentioned but lack depth making it difficult to assess confidence in safe day-to-day operations of the business. 3: Adequate qualifications and methodologies described, but lacking specific examples or context, including educational background or certifications. 4: Detailed and effective processes and procedures provided; clear application of industry best practices evidenced; some minor elements could be improved or clarified. Overall, leads to confidence in the safe day-to-day operation of the business. 5: Comprehensive and detailed processes and procedures clearly described with clearly defined roles and responsibilities of onsite staff. Clearly integrates specific industry experience and best practices. Leads to high confidence in the safe day-to-day operation of the business.
Updated Scoring Criteria
10 Credentials of Safety Plan
author: professional fire
prevention and suppression
consultant or architect
required.
5 0: No information provided.
1: Author's qualifications submitted, but it is unclear if author meets requirements
3: Author is clearly qualified, but no apparent
experience with cannabis dispensaries.
5: Author is clearly qualified and has demonstrated
experience with cannabis dispensaries, operations,
and unique safety risks and concerns.
Section 6:
Safety Plan
Current Scoring Criteria
150 TOTAL
Criteria # Item Points
1 A “Good Neighbor Policy” that (1) includes policies and measures in place to protect adjacent uses from any potential impacts (e.g., noise, light, odor, traffic, etc.) related to the proposed cannabis retailer, including addressing parking and traffic impacts and (2) describes how the cannabis retailer and its operating characteristics will be proactively managed so the business is not detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare of persons residing, working, visiting, or recreating in the surrounding area and will not result in the creation of a nuisance.
Up to 75
2 A description of odor mitigation practices to include: (1) identifying potential sources of odor; (2) a description of odor control devices and techniques employed to ensure that odors from cannabis are not detectable beyond the permitted premises; and (3) all proposed staff odor training and system maintenance.
Up to 25
3 A description of a waste management plan that includes waste disposal locations within the proposed premises and the applicant’s security measures and methods of rendering waste unusable and unrecognizable.
Up to 25
4 A description of efforts at sustainability/environmental impact mitigation. Up to 25 Updated Scoring Criteria
1 Applicant must provide a "Good Neighbor
Policy" that includes measures to protect
adjacent uses from potential impacts related
to the cannabis retailer, including addressing
parking and traffic impacts.
10 0: The applicant did not
provide a Good Neighbor
Policy.
10: The applicant provided a
Good Neighbor Policy.
Updated Scoring Criteria
2 Applicant must provide a description of
odor mitigation practices, including
identifying potential sources of odor,
odor control devices, and staff training
for odor management.
Pass/Fail
Fail: The applicant did not provide
a compliant odor mitigation
description.
Pass: The applicant provided a
compliant description of odor
mitigation practices.
Updated Scoring Criteria
3 Applicant must provide a waste
management plan, detailing waste
disposal locations and methods to
render waste unusable and
unrecognizable.
Pass/Fail
Fail: The applicant did not
provide a compliant waste
management plan.
Pass: The applicant provided a
compliant waste management
plan.
Updated Scoring Criteria
4 Applicant must describe efforts at
sustainability/environmental
impact mitigation.
Pass/Fail
Fail: The applicant did not
provide a description of
sustainability efforts.
Pass: The applicant
provided a description of
sustainability efforts.
Updated Scoring Criteria
5 Applicant must provide a
comprehensive description of
their Community Engagement
strategies, including how they
plan to engage with the
community and respond to
concerns.
10 0: No information provided on Community
Engagement.
2: Basic information provided, with minimal
engagement strategies mentioned, lacking clarity
and depth.
4: General description of Community Engagement,
mentioning some strategies but lacking specific
details on execution and impact.
6: Adequate information on Community
Engagement strategies, demonstrating some
understanding of community needs, but missing
details on responsiveness and follow-up actions.
8: Detailed information on Community
Engagement strategies, including multiple methods
of engagement, response plans to community
concerns, and a commitment to regular updates,
but missing some minor elements or specifics.
10: Comprehensive information provided,
demonstrating a proactive approach to community
engagement with clear, actionable plans, detailed
methods of engagement, and a well-defined
feedback loop to ensure responsiveness to
community concerns.
Updated Scoring Criteria
6 Applicant must provide a
detailed description of
their Traffic Management
plan, addressing customer
flow, parking solutions,
and congestion reduction.
10 0: No information provided on Traffic Management.
2: Basic information provided, with vague references to traffic management, lacking any specific strategies.
4: General description of Traffic Management, including some strategies for customer flow and parking, but missing
comprehensive measures for congestion reduction and
specifics on implementation.
6: Adequate information on Traffic Management, presenting a coherent plan for customer flow and parking solutions, but lacking details on effectiveness, congestion mitigation strategies, and potential impacts on the surrounding area. 8: Detailed information on Traffic Management, outlining clear strategies for customer flow, parking solutions, and congestion reduction, with some evidence of potential
effectiveness but missing minor elements or full evaluation criteria.
10: Comprehensive information provided, including a
thorough Traffic Management plan developed by a qualified traffic engineer, with specific, evidence-based strategies for optimizing customer flow, innovative parking solutions, and effective congestion reduction measures, along with metrics for evaluating success and community impact.
Updated Scoring Criteria
7 Applicant must provide a "Good
Neighbor Policy" that includes measures
to protect adjacent uses from potential
impacts related to the cannabis retailer,
including but not limitied to: facility,
parking lot and landscaping cleanliness
and upkeep; controlling noise exterior
to the facility; ensuring no loitering or
on site product use; practices to ensure
minors are not attracted or served
including by a surrogate; and ensuring
the exterior building is not gaudy;
blends in with the surrounding
community; is architecturally attractive,
high quality and interesting; and is free
from product advertisements.
10 0: The applicant did not provide a Good
Neighbor Policy that clearly addresses all
requirements.
1: Good Neighbor Policy includes all
required items, but includes significant gaps
that lead to questions on whether business
will generate substantive complaints from
surrounding businesses and residential
neighborhood.
5: Good Neighbor Policy is complete and
thorough and leads to high confidence that
the business will be maintained to minimize
substantive concerns of abutting businesses
and nearby residential neighborhood.
10: Good Neighbor Policy exceeds minimum
requirements and leads to high confidence
that the business will be maintained to
minimize substantive concerns of abutting
businesses and nearby residential
neighborhood. And the facility is
architecturally attractive, of high quality,
and is interesting in design.
Section 7:
Labor and Employment Plan
Current Scoring Criteria
100 TOTAL
Criteria # Item Points
1 An organizational chart of showing owners, managers, and employees. Up to 10
2 A description of the owner’s and manager’s roles in day-to-day operations and decisions.
Up to 10
3 A description of the number of employees, title/position, and their respective responsibilities Up to 10
4 A description of compensation to employees, opportunities for continuing education, and employee training. Up to 20
5 A description of whether the cannabis retailer is committed to offering employees a living wage. Up to 20
6 A description of benefits provided to employees such as health care, vacation, and medical leave, to the degree they are offered as part of employment.
Up to 20
7 A description of a plan to recruit employees from socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Up to 10
Updated Scoring Criteria
1 Applicant must provide an organizational
chart showing owners, managers, and
employees, including operational daily/shift
organization.
5 0: No organizational
chart provided.
1: Overall
organizational chart
clearly meets
requirement.
Operational Daily/shift
organization missing
or unclear.
3: All organizational
charts complete.
Shows clear chain of
command during daily
and shift operations.
5: All organizational
charts complete.
Shows robust control
of staff and operations
throughout operating
hours.
Updated Scoring Criteria
2 Applicant must
provide a description
of the owner's and
manager's roles in
day-to-day
operations and
decisions.
5 0: No description of roles provided.
2: Description addresses required
items. Allocation of roles and
responsibilities between owner and
manager unclear, overlap heavily,
and/or includes obvious gaps.
5: Clear and thorough description
differentiates operational roles and
authorities without significant gaps
or overlaps.
Updated Scoring Criteria
3 Applicant must provide a
description of the
number of employees,
title/position, and their
respective
responsibilities.
5 0: No description provided or
description does not clearly address
all requirements.
1: Description addresses all required
items but lacks detail or is unclear in
one or more of the required areas.
3: Description clearly covers all
requirements but responses indicate
correctable issues such as
understaffing on a shift, too junior a
staffing mix, unclear or inadequate
description of roles, responsibilities
and authorities.
5:Description clearly addresses all
requirements and leads to high
confidence in daily operations and
compliance with all permit
requirements and local and state
laws.
Updated Scoring Criteria
4 Applicant must provide a
description of hiring and
employment practices
included any local hire policy
and practices, background
checks (if any), other
processes of vetting potential
employees.
5 0: No description provided.
1: Description addresses all required
items.
3: Description clearly describes how the
applicant will prioritize local hires
and/or that the applicant utilizes and
independent service for background
checks.
5: Description clearly outlines robust
processes that ensure attraction and
prioritization of local hires,
independent background checks and
criteria for avoiding candidates with a
history of drug or legal problems; and
ensuring that employees remain free of
illicit drug and criminal activities.
Draft Cannabis Regulatory
Ordinance:
Application Scoring Criteria
Redondo Beach City Council
October 8, 2024