RULES COMMITTEE: 09/013/2023
Item: B.1
File ID: ROGC 23-319
TO: Honorable Mayor & FROM: Toni J. Taber, CMC
City Council City Clerk
SUBJECT: The Public Record DATE: September 13, 2023
August 31 – September 7, 2023
ITEMS FILED FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD
Letters from Boards, Commissions, and Committees
Letters from the Public
1-27. Letters from 27 members of the public, dated August 31 – September 7, 2023, regarding:
No Cuts to Park Funding.
28. Letter from Getting it Right from the Start, dated August 31, 2023, regarding: Review Requested: San Jose 2023 Cannabis Policy Scorecard.
29. Letter from Emmanuel Abello (LAFCO), dated August 31, 2023, regarding:
AVAILABLE NOW! Countywide Fire Service Review – Revised Draft Report (redlined).
30. Letter from Dilpreet Bhandal, dated September 1, 2023, regarding: Subway Grand Opening – Eastridge Mall.
____________________________
Toni J. Taber, CMC
City Clerk
TJT/tt
!
"#
$%
&'()*+*,-!.#!$#/%%.0(
0
&1!(.
#2)
!)
%)$#/
()". $%
3 4% 00$#".5()0()./.
.'"
%$
%.&!
.%/3$#)$ "(.%)$#. #5
0()./.
.'"2 .& #6 %(2)
!)/($
%).!$0(.()%0$% #%$&/%!.#%37. !$&
$#&0.#$
. (. #.#8 $&/$!!%%% !
5 !
$&' $'(.
&!.# .#$(#!.00&// #$!(
!%
&(.". #
.!$
$
"9
%
(
&' . #0./
.!$
.#/
&$&!%5.##($
&'20$#8(
&'$&/($:$(
.&
$'3 ;
$%
( %8&.
5". )$9$&"6 %(
.&%2.#
5!$&
.5$%%
%($&!(.". #< #
%/
!(
.&3 =>?@?AABCDBAEBD>AFGHIA>?JAKGAA?KIL 4
%$43;$/.&2;)M N%$#!)M
#!(.# 4 #$%)O3-.#..%)2NM2P-;Q ;.
!"4%%.!
$( R"&&-
9#2PM2P;Q2S44; M
#!(.# T
$#$U.&V$
VU$#!
$ Q$
()W6
(";#.'#$0X..#/
&$(.# U((
&'
(N
')(5#.0()-($#( ;
!Q$
()Y&%(
( ( *+++X&(#-(#(2Z,+[ \#8
"2X4]^_+` )(( %abb'((
&'
(#
')(5#.0()%($#(3.#'b
THE STATE OF CANNABIS
POLICY IN CALIFORNIA’S
CITIES & COUNTIES
2023 SCORECARD METHODOLOGY
The scores are based on six primary categories of policies where local government can act to protect youth, public health, and equity if they opted to allow cannabis retail. Policies with the greatest potential for achieving these goals, based on the best available evidence, received higher points. Cannabis laws passed by January 1st, 2023 were scored, using legal databases, municipal codes, and direct outreach to counties or cities. The maximum score possible was 100.
1) RETAILER & DELIVERER REQUIREMENTS: Strategic limits on cannabis retailers can decrease youth use and exposure to cannabis. • Caps on Retailers (10 points max). Limit the number of licensed retailers, we used the ratio to number of inhabitants • Distance from Schools (5 points). Mandate a distance greater than 600 feet between K-12 schools and retailers • Retailer Buffers (2 points). Mandate a required distance between retailers • Other Location Restrictions (3 points). Mandate required distance between retailers and other youth serving locations not covered by state law such as parks, playgrounds, or universities, or other locations such as residential areas. • Health Warnings Posted in Stores OR Handed Out to Customers (4 points each). Mandate retailers post and/or hand out health warnings informing consumers of relevant risks at point of sale Delivery-only requirements: • Local Permit (12 points max). Mandate local permitting by deliverers originating within and outside the jurisdiction • Medical Cannabis Sales (3 points). Allow delivery sales of medicinal cannabis • Independent ID Verification Process (10 points max). Mandate use of an independent age and identity verification process before cannabis delivery • Delivery Destinations (10 points max). Limit where deliveries can terminate, i.e., no delivery to college dormitories 2) TAXES & PRICES: Taxes & higher prices can decrease youth access while raising valuable revenue for local communities. • Local Cannabis Tax (6 points). Impose a local tax on cannabis retail • Dedicated Tax Revenue (6 points max). Dedicate tax revenue to youth, prevention, or reinvestment in communities most affected by the war on drugs • Tax by THC Content (5 points). Impose higher tax rates for high potency (high THC) products • Discounting (2 points). Prohibit discounting on cannabis such as coupons or discount days • Minimum Price (1 point). Establish a minimum price floor for cannabis 3) PRODUCT LIMITS: End the Cannabis Kids Menu of products that appeal to youth and limit products which increase adverse effects. • Limit Potency (6 points max). Prohibit sale of high potency cannabis flower and products through bans or ceilings • Flavored Products (Non-Edibles) (5 points). Prohibit sale of flavored combustible or inhalable (non-edible) products • Cannabis-Infused Beverages (4 points). Prohibit sale of cannabis-infused beverages • Products Attractive to Youth (2 points). Prohibit sale of products attractive to youth more clearly than state law 4) MARKETING: Limited exposure to marketing to decrease youth use and provide accurate warnings to inform consumers. • Billboards (6 points max). Restrict or prohibit the use of billboards to advertise cannabis • Health Warnings on Ads (4 points). Require health warnings on all cannabis advertisements • Therapeutic or Health Claims (3 points). Prohibit the use of therapeutic or health claims on cannabis products, packages, or ads • Business Signage Restrictions (3 points). Restrict on-site business advertising • Marketing Attractive to Youth (2 points). Detailed restrictions on packaging or advertising attractive to youth 5) SMOKE-FREE AIR: Smoke-free air policies can improve air quality, protect kids, and reduce secondhand smoke exposure. • Temporary Events (5 points). Prohibit temporary cannabis events such as at county fairs or concerts in parks • On-Site Consumption (3 points). Prohibit on-site cannabis consumption, whether by smoking, vaping or use of edibles 6) EQUITY & CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Cannabis policy can promote social equity and reduce conflicts of interest. • Priority in Licensing (3 points). Prioritize equity applicants when issuing cannabis business licenses • Equity in Hiring (3 points). Require hiring to prioritize low-income, transitional, or other workers from communities disadvantaged by the war on drugs • Cost Reduction/Deferral (1 point). Reduce/defer the costs of cannabis business licenses for equity applicants • Conflict of Interest (2 points max). Prohibit on-premises patient evaluations, prescriber ownership or other financial relationship with retailer, industry representation in oversight, or industry communication with application evaluation committee members.
Getting it Right from the Start is a project of the Public Health Institute. The Project has worked with experts to identify potential best regulatory practices and develop model regulatory and taxation frameworks to protect youth, public health and social equity. Visit us at www.gettingitrightfromthestart.org.
THE STATE OF CANNABIS
POLICY IN CALIFORNIA’S
CITIES & COUNTIES in 2022
Examples of what your neighbors are doing to protect youth, public health, and social equity
Alturas: Protected youth by increasing the buffer between schools and retailers to 1,000 ft. (54 other jurisdictions also increased the state required 600 ft buffer)
Grass Valley: Protected youth and mental health by taxing high potency products (Cathedral City, too), and sugar sweetened cannabis beverages Sacramento: Promotedsocial equity throughequityinlicensingprovisions (as well as Oakland, Los Angeles City, Long Beach, San Francisco, Watsonville, Fresno & 13 other places)
Contra Costa County: Protected youth by prohibiting flavored products for combustion or inhalation (along with Chico, & Watsonville), and banning vaping products
Burlingame: Prohibited delivery to youth- and children-serving locations, public parks and buildings, and eating and drinking establishments (along with 22 others limiting delivery destinations).
Stockton: Protected the public and workers against secondhand smoke by not allowing on-site consumption (along with 135 other places such as Merced, Los Angeles City, Pasadena, & Sacramento)
Stanislaus County: Increased the number of sites with a required buffer between retailers (as well as 127
other jurisdictions)
Mono County: Protected consumers by not
allowing health or therapeutic claims on
cannabis products or their marketing (as
did Stockton)
Watsonville: Protected youth by
prohibiting advertising,
packaging and products
attractive to youth (along with
Mono County, Mammoth
Lakes, Turlock, and 7 others)
Salinas: Protected youth by
capping the number of
licensed retailers (108 other
jurisdictions also capped
the number of dispensaries)
West Hollywood: Protected
consumers by requiring
cannabis-related health and
safety training of dispensary
staff (Long Beach, Pasadena,
Mt. Shasta, Mammoth Lakes
& Mono County did, too)
Pasadena: Protected youth by
prohibiting promotions and
coupons offering discounted
cannabis (along with 3 others)
Chula Vista: Protected youth by banning
cannabis-infused beverages (along with
Pasadena & Mono County)
Santa Ana: Informed consumers by requiring
cannabis-related health risks information be
distributed on signs or in handouts (along
with 28 others, including San Francisco, San
Jose, Culver City, Richmond & Chico) El Monte: Protected youth by dedicating tax revenue
to youth programs and
substance use prevention
(along with 16 others)
San Luis Obispo:
Prioritized licensing
retail applicants
who offer low THC
products.
DATE: August 31, 2023
TO: Special District Board Members and Managers
City Managers and County Executive
City Council Members and County Board of Supervisors
District and City Fire Chiefs
Interested Parties
FROM: Neelima Palacherla, Executive Officer
SUBJECT: COUNTYWIDE FIRE SERVICE REVIEW – REVISED DRAFT REPORT (redlined)
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY & NOTICE OF LAFCO PUBLIC HEARING LAFCO has received public comments on its Countywide Fire Service Review Report published on June 30, 2023. LAFCO staff has compiled all the comments received, including those received verbally at the community meetings. LAFCO’s consultant has prepared a table with responses to the comments received and has revised the Draft Report, as appropriate. The table of comments/responses and the redlined Revised Draft Report for the Countywide Fire Service Review is now available for additional public review and comment on the LAFCO website.
LAFCO PUBLIC HEARING
OCTOBER 4TH AT 1:15 PM OR SOON THEREAFTER
LAFCO will hold a second public hearing in order to consider adoption of the Countywide Fire Service Review Report. The hearing will be held in-person at the location listed below. Members of the public may also attend and participate by virtual teleconference via Zoom or telephone as noted below.
Board of Supervisors’ Chambers, 70 West Hedding Street, San Jose Zoom Link: https://sccgov-org.zoom.us/j/97249155795
Telephone: (669) 219-2599 Meeting ID: 972 4915 5795
WRITTEN COMMENTS
Your feedback is important to LAFCO. You may email written comments to [email protected] on the Revised Draft Report. LAFCO’s consultant will prepare a written response to comments received before 5:00 pm on Wednesday, September 20, 2023, which will be included in the LAFCO Staff Report for the October 4th LAFCO Hearing.
Thank you for your participation and interest in this important project.