Draft Cannabis Regulatory
Ordinance:
Application Scoring Criteria
Redondo Beach City Council
October 15, 2024
Possible Discussion Items
• Continue with the review of Sections 4 through 6 of the Evaluation Criteria
or
• Provide staff direction related to community and industry feedback
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:
Good Neighbor Policy 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.
Considerations
Community and Operator Feedback
Shifting Focus from
Current Operations
to
Experience in
Operations
Example criteria language change:
Considerations:
• Will make application process
more inclusive
• Applicant won’t be required to
demonstrate success in
current market
1.1 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.
1.1 Applicant must demonstrate principals’
cannabis retailer operations
and ownership within the past five years
in California, and/or other states, 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
within past five years with
taxable gross sales of at least
$3,000,000/year.
20: Evidence of cannabis
retailer operations within
past five years with taxable
gross sales of at least
$3,000,000/year.
Clarifying Language
to
Ensure Ownership
is Scored
Considerations:
• Specificity ensures consistent
scoring across all applications
Example criteria language change:
1.2 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.
1.2 Applicant must provide a record of Owner’s 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.
Removing the Criteria Requiring Three (3)
Years of Audited Financial Statements
Considerations:
• Feedback includes recommendation to instead focus on first three years of operation in RB • e.g. detailed 3-year business model outlining dispensary construction, launch, operations from pre-build out (including license pursuit costs) to store launch plus 3 years post-launch. • Will make application process more inclusive
• Potentially diminishes City’s ability to evaluate prior profitability Draft Cannabis Regulatory
Ordinance:
Application Scoring Criteria
Redondo Beach City Council
October 8, 2024