City Council Agenda and Packet 2014 01 07

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes December 17, 2013 Page 11 of 24 COUNCIL COMMENTS Council member Jasiak did not believe it was fair to compare the marijuana industry with the alcohol industry. She stated no one questions the dangers with alcohol, but the comparison is not valid in this case. Marijuana is a new market and as regulation moves forward, it is in response to having a void in the marketplace. Marijuana is still federally illegal, illegal in neighboring communities and illegal in neighboring states. Council member Lipton stated it is not a matter of whether marijuana is legal or not legal in Louisville; it is to what extent the Council limits retail operations in the City. He suggested starting out very slowly and learning how it is working in and outside of the City. He felt it would be easier to be conservative and expand, if necessary, at a later date. He favored allowing the two existing medical marijuana establishments to convert, but not allowing retail marijuana in any other area in the City. He noted retail will not be allowed in the downtown area, residential areas or other commercial districts. Mayor Muckle agreed with Council members Jasiak and Lipton and stressed marijuana is still illegal at the federal level and is a very big problem for law enforcement with respect to transporting marijuana across state borders. He supported proceeding very cautiously and supported the health department proposals. He would not contest any comments made about whether marijuana is safer than alcohol and noted alcohol can be purchased in all the fifty states. He supported the ordinance to allow the two medical marijuana establishments to convert and the health department's recommendations. Council member Stolzmann felt it was very important to carry out the will of the voters. She felt the public wants marijuana to be regulated similarly to alcohol and felt it was Council's responsibility to do so. She requested more discussion on the dual premise licensing process. She did not understand why a wall would be required to separate the businesses and felt it was adding extra work for the applicant. Planner I Robinson pointed out the separation of businesses (wall) is a state requirement. City Attorney Light explained the permanent regulations adopted by the state require dual operations to have physical separation. He addressed the size limitation of establishments. Medical establishments are capped at 1,800 square feet and retail is at 2,000 square feet. He asked for Council direction on the size limitation for a dual premises license. He asked if two separate businesses are operating out of the same premise, what should be the size limitation. Council member Jasiak commented marijuana has been a discussion for almost a year. She acknowledged and thanked the constituents who have come forward. She stressed this has been a very emotional conversation. She voiced her pride in how the discussion has been conducted and the Council's response to the constituents and to the business owners. She felt it has been a good conversation and she was proud the Council can move forward with intelligent regulations. 40