City Council Memorandum
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: OCTOBER 28, 2025
FROM: CITY COUNCILMEMBER SEAN H. MILL WARD: ALL
SUBJECT: MOTION TO EXCUSE ITEM FROM SUNSHINE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS AND
MOTION TO RECONSIDER PROPOSED TESTING LABORATORY
COMMERCIAL CANNABIS BUSINESS PERMIT PROCEDURE GUIDELINES AND AMENDMENTS TO CITY’S FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE PROVIDING
FOR A CANNABIS TESTING LABORATORY APPLICATION
ISSUE:
Consideration of a motion to excuse this item from the Sunshine notice requirements and motion to reconsider proposed Testing Laboratory Commercial Cannabis Business Permit Procedure Guidelines and amendments to City’s Fees and Charges Schedule providing for a Cannabis Testing Laboratory Application Fee.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the City Council:
1. Approve a motion waiving the Sunshine Ordinance pursuant to Riverside Municipal Code Section 4.05.050(D)(2) adding a request to reconsider the matter establishing the proposed Testing Laboratory Commercial Cannabis Business Permit Procedure Guidelines to the Agenda.
2. Approve a motion to reconsider proposed Testing Laboratory Commercial Cannabis Business Permit Procedure Guidelines and amendments to City’s Fees and Charges Schedule providing for a Cannabis Testing Laboratory Application Fee.
BACKGROUND:
On October 21, 2025, Councilmember Mill directed staff to prepare a report waiving the Sunshine Ordinance to reconsider the matter regarding Testing Laboratory Commercial Cannabis Business Permit Procedure Guidelines and amendments to the City’s Fees and Charges Schedule.
On August 19, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing and considered an item to amend Chapter 5.77 (Cannabis Business Activities) of Title 5 of the Riverside Municipal Code (RMC) related to the Commercial Cannabis Program.
CC Date: 10-28-25
Item No.: 37a
Motion to Reconsider ● Page 2
During the discussion, two of the seven City Council members did not participate. As a result, the final roll call vote showed three council members in favor of the motion, two opposed, one recused, and one absent. Consequently, the motion failed to achieve the minimum of four affirmative votes required by the City Council's Rules of Procedure and Order of Business. This led to the matter not receiving approval.
DISCUSSION:
Pursuant to RMC Section 4.05.050(d)(2) states that if a Councilmember, with the concurrence of two other Council members, believes an item is urgent, which urgency is detailed, in writing, in the City Council report and affirmed prior to its consideration by four affirmative votes of the City Council, and the failure to meet any additional notice requirements was due to the need to take immediate action, which came to the attention of the local body after the agenda was posted.
Staff informed Council member Mill that his motion for reconsideration must be agendized by the third successive regular meeting after August 18, 2025. Therefore, the only opportunity to bring the request for reconsideration forward, according to the estab lished rules, was during the October 28 agenda. The need for immediate action arose after the agenda was published, prompting him to request the addition of the reconsideration on that date, which was approved without objection from his colleagues.
Moreover, Councilmember Mill, who voted with the majority during August 19, 2025, Public Hearing, has requested that a motion to reconsider be placed on the agenda for this item. Four affirmative votes are required to approve the motion to reconsider. If the motion is approved, staff will proceed with presenting the details f or establishing the Testing Commercial Cannabis Business Permit Procedure Guidelines.
Prepared by: Councilmember Sean H. Mill
Approved as to form: Rebecca McKee-Reimbold, Interim City Attorney
Authored by:
__________________________________
Councilmember Sean H. Mill