Ron Strider
Well-Known Member
Another city council meeting, another spirited discussion about cannabis, another incremental step towards finalizing the Cloverdale cannabis ordinance.
The Oct. 24 meeting started out with local member of the cannabis industry Lou Bevaros inquiring as to why the new city timeline showed the Request For Proposal process for dispensaries being pushed into the beginning of 2018. He and others hoped to have their local permits by the end of the year, in order to apply for state permits.
Bevaros outlined previous timelines that had shown the RFPs being ready in July and October respectively, and asked "What happened? What changed?"
"What happened was a fire disaster," responded Cloverdale City Manager Paul Cayler, who went onto to say the RFP would be brought for approval at the next meeting, on Nov. 14, but that final approvals of RFPs submitted for dispensaries should not be expected until March of 2018.
When the first cannabis item on the agenda came up, councilmember Mary Ann Brigham recused herself, as usual, and the remaining members discussed the new proposed fee schedule.
A previously presented version had been met with great concern among cannabis stakeholders and councilmembers alike, so an ad hoc committee met twice and took input from city staff and industry members as to potential changes.
The revised fee schedule creates a deposit-based system (similar to the one used with contractors and developers) which brings down the initial payment required and also rewards applicants for putting together what Cayler calls, "good paperwork." Any additional time spent by the city processing the application will be charged to the applicant, but if the deposit is not used, any remainders will be returned to the applicant.
Dispensaries and microbusinesses that include a dispensary component, will not have a deposit-based system, due to the manner in which the dispensary application must be processed, via RFPs and council approval. The application deposit is slightly lower than the previously suggested fee ($2,300 versus $2,391.50) while the fees for a dispensary application are unchanged from the first draft: $4,285.
Where cannabis businesses will see a significant change is in the annual fees they are charged, which have dropped by approximately 40 percent, following some alterations to the inspection and monitoring schedule.
"(This) is based in part on good feedback from the industry about the tracking and permit system they have to use at the state level and the use of metric software," said Assistant City Manager David Kelley. "Initially we were going to hire an outside company to perform four audits per year. We reduced that from four to three times per year, as that will be adequate to cover our needs. These audits are an important tool for year one to assist staff with the development of forms and parameters, we will reevaluate at year two. The scaled back cost is reflected in the annual permitting fee."
Before voting on the fee schedule, Mayor Gus Wolter asked city attorney Jose Sanchez to discuss the timelines for permits at the local and state level that has so many local cannabis business owners anxious and frustrated. Sanchez turned the floor over to Kate Cook, an attorney who explained that the Jan. 2 deadline being discussed was the day that the state was going to start issuing temporary permits, with the first batch going to those businesses already permitted and operating locally before Dec. 31, 2017.
Cook stated that not having a local permit in hand didn't prohibit anyone from starting the state application process, and that the temporary permits were primarily for businesses that were already going concerns who could prove they had been operating under local regulations and rules.
Bevaros stood again to voice his frustration. "Ongoing, existing business will be processed first," he said. "We had the opportunity to be included in that if we could show operation prior to December 31. I'm venting my frustration because we've been expecting this for a long time, and the idea was to get operational to qualify for priority processing."
Cayler then pointed out the applications for all but the dispensaries would be ready by the Nov. 14 city council meeting, and could be processed before the end of the year, allowing all the non-dispensary businesses to be able to apply for priority processing. But, he admitted the RFP process would certainly go into the early part of 2018 before permits would be issued.
All the present councilmembers voted in favor of the fee schedule. Just as they would minutes later for a resolution setting the local excise tax on cannabis at 4.5 percent. Shawn Bovee stood to ask them to consider tweaking the tax rate for medical cannabis, and also for testing businesses since, he said, "they keep us safe."
Monica Gray, a cannabis proprietor from Marin, also stood to say that many Marin producers had warned against opening a business in Cloverdale, saying the tax rate was too high. While the council passed it easily, they did make sure to point out that this rate would be up for annual review.
News Moderator: Ron Strider 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: City Council and Municipal Recap: Cannabis legislation creeping toward finality | News | sonomawest.com
Author: Heather Bailey
Contact: Contact Us | Site | sonomawest.com
Photo Credit: iStock
Website: Cloverdale Reveille | sonomawest.com
The Oct. 24 meeting started out with local member of the cannabis industry Lou Bevaros inquiring as to why the new city timeline showed the Request For Proposal process for dispensaries being pushed into the beginning of 2018. He and others hoped to have their local permits by the end of the year, in order to apply for state permits.
Bevaros outlined previous timelines that had shown the RFPs being ready in July and October respectively, and asked "What happened? What changed?"
"What happened was a fire disaster," responded Cloverdale City Manager Paul Cayler, who went onto to say the RFP would be brought for approval at the next meeting, on Nov. 14, but that final approvals of RFPs submitted for dispensaries should not be expected until March of 2018.
When the first cannabis item on the agenda came up, councilmember Mary Ann Brigham recused herself, as usual, and the remaining members discussed the new proposed fee schedule.
A previously presented version had been met with great concern among cannabis stakeholders and councilmembers alike, so an ad hoc committee met twice and took input from city staff and industry members as to potential changes.
The revised fee schedule creates a deposit-based system (similar to the one used with contractors and developers) which brings down the initial payment required and also rewards applicants for putting together what Cayler calls, "good paperwork." Any additional time spent by the city processing the application will be charged to the applicant, but if the deposit is not used, any remainders will be returned to the applicant.
Dispensaries and microbusinesses that include a dispensary component, will not have a deposit-based system, due to the manner in which the dispensary application must be processed, via RFPs and council approval. The application deposit is slightly lower than the previously suggested fee ($2,300 versus $2,391.50) while the fees for a dispensary application are unchanged from the first draft: $4,285.
Where cannabis businesses will see a significant change is in the annual fees they are charged, which have dropped by approximately 40 percent, following some alterations to the inspection and monitoring schedule.
"(This) is based in part on good feedback from the industry about the tracking and permit system they have to use at the state level and the use of metric software," said Assistant City Manager David Kelley. "Initially we were going to hire an outside company to perform four audits per year. We reduced that from four to three times per year, as that will be adequate to cover our needs. These audits are an important tool for year one to assist staff with the development of forms and parameters, we will reevaluate at year two. The scaled back cost is reflected in the annual permitting fee."
Before voting on the fee schedule, Mayor Gus Wolter asked city attorney Jose Sanchez to discuss the timelines for permits at the local and state level that has so many local cannabis business owners anxious and frustrated. Sanchez turned the floor over to Kate Cook, an attorney who explained that the Jan. 2 deadline being discussed was the day that the state was going to start issuing temporary permits, with the first batch going to those businesses already permitted and operating locally before Dec. 31, 2017.
Cook stated that not having a local permit in hand didn't prohibit anyone from starting the state application process, and that the temporary permits were primarily for businesses that were already going concerns who could prove they had been operating under local regulations and rules.
Bevaros stood again to voice his frustration. "Ongoing, existing business will be processed first," he said. "We had the opportunity to be included in that if we could show operation prior to December 31. I'm venting my frustration because we've been expecting this for a long time, and the idea was to get operational to qualify for priority processing."
Cayler then pointed out the applications for all but the dispensaries would be ready by the Nov. 14 city council meeting, and could be processed before the end of the year, allowing all the non-dispensary businesses to be able to apply for priority processing. But, he admitted the RFP process would certainly go into the early part of 2018 before permits would be issued.
All the present councilmembers voted in favor of the fee schedule. Just as they would minutes later for a resolution setting the local excise tax on cannabis at 4.5 percent. Shawn Bovee stood to ask them to consider tweaking the tax rate for medical cannabis, and also for testing businesses since, he said, "they keep us safe."
Monica Gray, a cannabis proprietor from Marin, also stood to say that many Marin producers had warned against opening a business in Cloverdale, saying the tax rate was too high. While the council passed it easily, they did make sure to point out that this rate would be up for annual review.
News Moderator: Ron Strider 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: City Council and Municipal Recap: Cannabis legislation creeping toward finality | News | sonomawest.com
Author: Heather Bailey
Contact: Contact Us | Site | sonomawest.com
Photo Credit: iStock
Website: Cloverdale Reveille | sonomawest.com
