My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2013 07 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2013 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2013 07 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:44:34 PM
Creation date
8/7/2013 7:59:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
7/16/2013
Original Hardcopy Storage
7D4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2013 07 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />July 2, 2013 <br />Page 21 of 25 <br />Mayor Pro Tem Dalton suggested remaining silent on the issue. City Attorney Light <br />stated the regulations state it may be allowed if the governing body finds it permissible. <br />City Attorney Light preferred to have it clearly stated for the applicants. <br />Chief Goodman stated it should be stated and noted both medical marijuana stores will <br />ask for dual licensing. <br />Council member Loo asked for the difference between the licenses. City Attorney Light <br />explained there is a difference in the age of consumption; medical is for users 18 years <br />of age and above, while retail will be for users 21 years of age and above. He <br />explained there is market for the three year period of the medical marijuana license. <br />City Council Loo voiced her support for dual licensing. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Dalton read a dual license can only serve users 21 years of age. City <br />Attorney Light stated if there are two entrances and two different points of sale, both <br />medical and retail can be sold from the same facility. <br />Sign Control: Is Council interested in controlling the content of signs for retail <br />marijuana? <br />COUNCIL COMMENTS <br />Council member Jasiak quoted from the State of Washington's proposed regulations. <br />"Advertising for retail stores will be restricted to one sign visible to the public; limited in <br />size; ads cannot be false or misleading or promote over consumption or depict toys or <br />characters especially appealing to minors ". <br />Planning Director Russ explained with respect to medical marijuana, the City followed <br />the state regulation on signage. They are also subject to the Commercial Guidelines. <br />City Attorney Light explained the state has adopted emergency rules for 120 days, but it <br />may be October before regulation on signage is adopted. Amendment 64 stipulates the <br />local jurisdictions will establish sign regulations. <br />Council member Keany favored using the existing sign code but being more diligent on <br />banners and sandwich boards. <br />Cultivation and Other Types of Retail Marijuana Establishments: Does Council <br />want to allow marijuana cultivation facilities, marijuana product manufacturing facilities <br />or marijuana testing facilities in addition to retail marijuana stores? <br />COUNCIL COMMENTS <br />Council member Jasiak was not interested in cultivation or manufacturing operations. <br />She inquired about the actual testing. Planner I Robinson explained state regulations <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.