Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutOrdinance 10-933U1 1 1 ORDINANCE NO. 10 -933U AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCILOF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NOS. 09 -925U AND 09 -926U TO CONTINUE FOR A PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR THE MORATORIUM BOTH ON NEW MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES AND ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA AT EXISTING BUSINESSES IN THE CITY WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public meeting on April 21, 2009, and after hearing and considering public testimony, the City Council of the City of Temple City adopted Ordinance No. 09-925U, an interim urgency ordinance establishing a moratorium on Medical Marijuana Dispensaries in the City for a period of forty -five (45) days pending a resolution of the conflict in Federal and State law on this issue and pending completion of an update to the City's Zoning Ordinances. WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public meeting on June 2, 2009, and after hearing and considering public testimony, the City Council of the City of Temple City adopted Ordinance No. 09 -926U, the first extension of Ordinance No. 09 -925U allowed pursuant to Government Code Section 65858, continuing the moratorium for an additional period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days because the conflict in Federal and State law on this issue had not been resolved and the update to the City's Zoning Ordinances not completed. WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65858(a) authorizes the City Council to continue the effect of Ordinance Nos. 09 -925U and 09 -926U for an additional period of one (1) year. WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on April 6, 2010, the City Council considered and heard public testimony to continue the effect of the moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries and on the sale of medical marijuana at existing businesses for an additional period of one (1) year, or up to and including April 21, 2011. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Temple City does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Findings A. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. B. The recitals, text, moratorium and findings made in Ordinance Nos. 09 -925U and 09 -926U are hereby reaffirmed, readopted and incorporated by reference as though they were fully restated herein. C. Pursuant to Government Code § 65858(d), 10 days prior to the expiration of Ordinance No. 09 -926U, the City Council issued a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions which led to the adoption of Ordinance Nos. 09 -925U and 09 -926U. D. The immediate threat to and specific adverse impacts upon the public health safety and welfare that would result from unregulated development of medical marijuana dispensaries justifies continuation of the interim urgency moratorium on that type of use. E. The establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries without appropriate rules and regulations could result in the creation of negative secondary effects such as an increase in crime in the areas immediately surrounding such dispensaries and an irreversible incompatibility of land uses. Other jurisdictions such as the City of West Hollywood, City of Anaheim, City of Hayward, and Alameda County have received and investigated a number of complaints of violent criminal activity, including armed robberies, burglaries, and other drug - related arrests at or near medical marijuana dispensaries. Such criminal activity is the type of negative secondary effect associated with the presence of medical marijuana facilities that a zoning study will seek to limit. F. To allow additional time for the City to consider, study, and enact regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries, it is necessary to continue the temporary suspension of the approval of medical marijuana dispensaries and to prohibit existing businesses from selling medical marijuana as such uses may be in conflict with the development standards and implementation regulations that the City will ultimately impose after the City has considered and studied this issue, which will be accomplished within a reasonable time. G. Since the adoption of Ordinance No. 09 -926U, the legal status of medical marijuana dispensaries has remained unsettled. Specifically, the United States Attorney General's office stated that it would not be engaging in the enforcement of marijuana laws as against medical marijuana users. No statement was made about dispensaries. The City of Los Angeles enacted a sweeping ban on medical marijuana dispensaries, disallowing any new dispensaries and requiring all but a specified number to close their doors by a date certain. The courts have issued conflicting decisions about medical marijuana dispensaries, with the most recent being a California Supreme Court holding in People v. Kelly (January 21, 2010) that portions of the regulatory law set up pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act ( "Act ") and Senate Bill 420 ( "SB 420 ") actually go beyond what those laws allow and are themselves not lawful. H. The judicial matter that prompted the City to adopt the moratorium Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, has been delayed due to the appellate court seeking additional briefing on the matter. This case turns on whether medical marijuana dispensaries are required by or protected by the Act or SB 420 and the decision is expected to resolve whether municipalities have the authority to prohibit dispensaries. A decision in the matter had been anticipated before the end of calendar year 2009 but will now not be issued until after the effectiveness of Ordinance No. 09 -926U has expired. Thus, there remains substantial uncertainty about the extent to which the City may regulate medical marijuana dispensaries and that uncertainty will remain until the decision is issued. A second extension to the moratorium will provide the City with time to consider, study, draft, and adopt regulations based on the forthcoming Qualified Patients decision and consistent with that decision's interpretation of the Act and SB 420. These regulations would either prohibit or else regulate the location and operation of new medical marijuana dispensaries and existing businesses which may seek to supplement their current services offered to include the sale of medical marijuana in a manner that is consistent with the general plan and Code, compatible with surrounding neighborhoods, and in the best interests of the residents of the City. J. At this time, no feasible alternative is available to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impacts referenced herein, as well or better with a less burdensome effect, than the adoption of the proposed Interim Ordinance. K. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is not subject to the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) in that the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the environment, and 15060(c)(3), the project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment, directly or indirectly, and it prevents such changes in the environment pending completion of the contemplated Municipal Code review. SECTION 2. Interim Prohibition From the date of this Ordinance, the moratorium established by Ordinance No. 09 -925U and extended by Ordinance No. 09 -926U is hereby extended and shall remain in effect for a period of one (1) year after the last date on which Ordinance No. 09 -926U is effective. During this period, no use permit, variance, building permit, or any other entitlement for use shall be accepted, processed, approved or issued for the establishment or operation of, and no person shall otherwise establish, a "medical marijuana dispensary" and no existing business shall begin dispensing medical marijuana. For purposes of this ordinance, "medical marijuana dispensary" means any facility or location where marijuana is made available, sold, transmitted, given, or otherwise provided to qualified individuals in accordance with the Act. All sections of the Municipal Code inconsistent with the terms of this ordinance remain suspended during the life of this ordinance. 1 1 1 The Community Development Department has undertaken the studies required by Section 65858 and reports Ithat 1) the provisions of Ordinance Nos. 09 -925U and 09 -926U should be extended for an additional one (1) year; 2) that no marijuana dispensary should be allowed as a permitted use without appropriate conditions providing for anticipated crimes in connection therewith; and 3) the Municipal Code should be amended to prohibit all uses not specifically allowed or prohibit any use that is contrary to any federal or State law. 1 SECTION 3. Urgent Need Based on the foregoing recitals and findings which are all deemed true and correct, this interim ordinance is urgently needed for the immediate preservation of the public safety, health, and welfare. This interim ordinance shall remain in effect for a period of one (1) year after the last date on which Ordinance No. 09 -926U is effective, or up to and including April 21, 2011. SECTION 4. Authority Government Code Section 65858 provides that this second extension to an interim ordinance may be adopted by a four -fifths vote of the City Council and that this measure will be effective for a period of one (1) year following the date on which Ordinance No. 09 -926U will expire, which is April 21, 2011. SECTION 5. Penalties The definitions and penalties for land use violations that are prescribed in the Code apply to violations of the provisions of this Interim Ordinance. SECTION 6. Severability If any provision of this Interim Ordinance or the application thereof to any persons or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of this Interim Ordinance, which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Interim Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 7. Notice The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Interim Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published and /or posted at the designated locations in the City of Temple City. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED, this 6th day of April, 2010. ATTEST: r),A, City Clerk, I1lary R. Flandrick 1 Mayor, Fernand izcarra I, City Clerk of the City of Temple City, do hereby certify that the foregoing urgency ordinance, Ordinance No. 10 -933, was introduced as an urgency Ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temple City held on the 6th day of April, 2010, and was duly passed, approved and adopted by said council, approved and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of April, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmember -Blum, Sternquist, Yu, Chavez, Vizcarra NOES: Councilmember -None ABSENT: Councilmember -None ABSTAIN: Councilmember -None City Clerk i