HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.23.16 Council Agenda Memo1
CITY OF BOULDER
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 23, 2016
This study session will provide a report on the Marijuana Advisory Panel’s analysis of
potential changes to City of Boulder’s Marijuana Code Provisions.
PRESENTERS
City Staff:
Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager
Thomas Carr, City Attorney
Sandra M. Llanes, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Kathleen E. Haddock, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Mishawn Cook, Licensing and Collections Manager
Beverley Bookout, Boulder Police Officer, Marijuana Enforcement Division
Facilitator
Heather Bergman, Peak Facilitation Group
Panel Members
Andrea Meneghel, Boulder Chamber of Commerce
Heath Harmon, Boulder County Public Health
Kate Thomson, Skinny Pineapple, Inc.
I. PURPOSE
This study session will provide council with an opportunity to consider recommendations
made by the Marijuana Advisory Panel (MAP).
II. BACKGROUND
The State of Colorado legalized medical marijuana with the adoption of Amendment 20
in November 2000. Prior to 2008, growing and providing medical marijuana was not a
business, instead it involved caretakers providing medical marijuana for their patients that
were approved by the state. In 2008, the U.S. Attorney issued a memo (commonly
referred to as the “Cole memo”) which led to explosive expansion of medical marijuana
by the opening of marijuana businesses providing marijuana on a much larger scale.
2
Even before the state acted, the City of Boulder adopted interim regulations regarding
medical marijuana in November 2009 and its first medical marijuana code on May 18,
2010. The city’s medical marijuana regulations have been amended six times: February
1, 2011; September 20, 2011; November 1, 2012; November 12, 2013; June 3, 2014; and
December 16, 2014. After the state adopted Amendment 64 in 2012 legalizing
recreational marijuana, the city adopted regulations related to recreational marijuana on
November 12, 2013. It has been amended twice on June 3, 2014 and December 16, 2014.
When the city council began its initial regulation of marijuana businesses in 2009, it
faced a virtually unregulated marketplace. In the past, updates to the city’s marijuana
codes have been presented regularly to council by city staff as state laws and regulations
changed and gained experience in trying to enforce the codes. Later amendments have
been on a more piecemeal basis from requests by the marijuana businesses. The
formation of the Marijuana Advisory Panel was intended to avoid this piecemeal
approach and take a more efficient comprehensive look at potential changes.
III. QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL
1. Do you agree with the MAP’s recommendations? If so, which MAP
recommendations should staff draft an ordinance to implement?
2. Does council support the MAP’s recommendation regarding future Panel
work? If not, how does council wish to handle any future issues that may
arise?
3. Are there any questions you would like answered by the MAP or staff
regarding the materials presented today in connection with any future draft
ordinance?
IV. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (prepared by MAP)
Colorado voters approved recreational marijuana in 2012, and the first licensed
businesses opened in early 2014. Since then, recreational and medical marijuana
businesses in Boulder have generated nearly $8.1 million in tax revenue—these monies
have gone to the City’s general fund, as well as help pay for parks and recreation, open
space, education, youth prevention, and transportation. However, this work has carried
an opportunity cost as well: Boulder’s City Council and City staff have worked on a
number of labor-intensive revisions to Boulder’s medical and recreational marijuana
business codes in collaboration with industry.
At the direction of Boulder’s City Council, a 12-member Marijuana Advisory Panel
(MAP) was formed in January 2016 to take a comprehensive review of the existing city
code related to marijuana regulation, and to make recommendations related to any
potential changes to topics related to advertising, public health impacts, licensing, zoning,
and more. Council approved a Charter (see Attachment A) that provided the MAP with
direction to analyze both State regulations and Boulder’s code in order to understand
regulatory intent and impact, to solicit public input, and to discuss possible changes to the
3
code—all while preserving and promoting Boulder’s unique community values (see
Attachment B for the composition of MAP.)
The MAP undertook the task to better assess the impact of Boulder’s code on public
health, safety, and the competitiveness of the Boulder-based marijuana industry. In the
course of its work, the Panel also reviewed differences between City and State
regulations, and the interconnectedness between business operations, enforcement, and
youth education.
The MAP actively included the perspectives of a cross-section of community
representatives and leaders, such as the Boulder Chamber, Boulder County Public Health,
Boulder Valley School District, the State of Colorado’s Marijuana Enforcement Division,
the University of Colorado, as well as patient advocates, legal experts, independent small
business owners, and community members.
MAP Meeting Process
At each of MAP’s 11 public meetings, public participation helped inform and improve
the panelists’ understanding of the complexities surrounding the City of Boulder’s local
ordinance and congruence with state regulations, impacts upon the community and local
businesses within the marijuana industry. All meetings were publicly noticed and all
meeting agendas, materials, and minutes were posted to the city’s website. Additionally,
MAP developed several subcommittees representing the diverse interests on the Panel;
these subcommittees worked between meetings to increase their shared understanding of
issues and bring proposals to the rest of the Panel for consideration.
Consensus Through Rigorous Discussion
MAP held substantive discussions on dozens of topics, which were addressed through a
balance of perspectives that considered the community’s goals to protect community
health and the safety of Boulder’s youth, to support economic vitality, and to seek clarity
and regulatory consistency between local ordinances and State regulations. Each
discussion on current regulations began with a presentation from Staff—and generally
included participation from the Police and Fire Departments, the State Marijuana
Enforcement Division, and others—on the intent and scope of existing language in the
ordinance. These discussions led to consensus-based decisions and recommendations,
and incorporated the professional expertise and personal views from stakeholders and
public commenters.
Key Recommendations
By consensus, MAP has prepared more than three dozen recommendations for Council’s
consideration according to the following areas: Advertising, Business Operations, ID
Scanner Requirements, Licenses, Merchandise, Sales, and Zoning. A full list of the
Panel’s recommendations is included. See Attachment C.
1. Advertising: MAP recommends specific updates and clarifications to the code
in the areas of discounts and coupons, informational/educational materials,
sponsorships and events, and terminology.
4
2. Business Operations: MAP recommends expansion to the hours of operation
and changes to background checks and waiting periods, as well as
terminology.
3. Licensing: MAP recommends updates and amendments to the City Code on
license transfers, penalty schedules, and transfer of products and plants
between licensed facilities.
4. Merchandise: MAP recommends aligning with the State on regulations related
to branded and unbranded merchandise.
5. Zoning: MAP recommends upholding density restrictions for dispensaries.
The Panel also recommends making adjustments to caps on licenses for
marijuana businesses, permanent modifications, square footage limits, and
virtual separation.
Potential Future Items for Action
Marijuana Social Use Clubs - The idea of social use clubs has been widely discussed but
rarely implemented. The concept of a marijuana social use club is to provide a location
where people can consume marijuana in a social environment. The MAP formed a
subcommittee to address the idea of social clubs in Boulder. The subcommittee members
all agreed that more information was needed before they could develop a proposal. The
attached document outlines the pros and cons. It does not provide a position but rather
indicates interest in exploring the issue further possibly in a future annual meeting. The
MAP approved the document and agreed to provide it to council in this study session.
See Attachment D.
Creative Ideas to Support Public Safety and Community Health – The Panel assembled a
subcommittee to explore creative ideas to support public safety and community health.
The MAP has acknowledged that although regulations can have an impact on public
safety and community health, it is only one component of a larger approach. The Creative
Ideas Subcommittee convened twice, to develop recommendations that could both
support the recommended code revisions and the values of protecting public safety and
community health. Ensuring that public safety and community health are maintained are
part of an ongoing conversation. A full list of the recommendations are attached. See
Attachment E.
Gratitude and Additional Considerations
MAP gratefully acknowledges the leadership of City Council and the City Manager for
their thoughtful design of the Panel’s purpose and composition. We are indebted to the
professional staff and law enforcement from the City of Boulder for their public service.
It is MAP’s view that one of its most important outcomes of these proceedings, has been
an improved understanding and collaboration among stakeholders—including city
licensing, the health community, industry, and law enforcement—which in turn enabled
compromise among diverse perspectives. During the course of its work, the Panel also
discussed and reached agreement on a number of process improvements in real-time that
5
together suggest an improved working relationship moving forward. Finally, MAP
expresses the need for future check-ins to promote continual dialogue to review
regulatory updates and address any community issues. (See Attachment F for MAP’s
recommendations for future work).
V. COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENTS AND IMPACTS
Economic – The council’s original intent in imposing zone district and density
restrictions, was to assure that a diversity of businesses were maintained in the
city. It is unknown if removal of those limitations will lead to lack of diversity
that could negatively impact sustainability as market changes occur.
Environmental – There is a potential for an increase in electricity use if density
changes are imposed.
Social – Some of the recommendations of the committee allow for the existing
culture of marijuana in Boulder to change by: (a) expanding hours of operation of
businesses from closure at 7 p.m. to closure at 10 p.m.; (b) allowing sale of
branded merchandise and allowing the sale of non-consumable merchandise,
rather than limiting sales to marijuana and marijuana accessories and; (c) reducing
the limitations on size, ownership, and density of marijuana businesses. It is
unknown what if any, effects each of these changes will have to the existing
culture in Boulder.
VI. OTHER IMPACTS
Fiscal – An increase in the number of marijuana businesses will result in a need
for increased staff to maintain current levels of inspection and enforcement.
License fees are set to cover the cost of each license, so the increased funds
should be collected to cover the costs of the increased staff. Staff annually
evaluates fees to make sure that fees do cover the costs to prevent the need for
additional funding. Having more marijuana businesses in the city, should result in
collection of more of the additional excise and sales and use tax imposed on
marijuana businesses and not other types of businesses.
Staff time – Additional staff resources will be required if some of the
recommendations are implemented that increase the difficulty of auditing
marijuana businesses or increase the number or size of marijuana businesses that
may open in the city. Suggested amendments changing business operations and
timelines are covered in the normal work plan. It is unknown if implementing the
recommendations allowing marijuana to sell any other non-consumable
merchandise or increased advertising will change requirements for staff time.
VII. PUBLIC FEEDBACK
Many of the public comments were from employees from marijuana businesses and those
paid by the marijuana industry in support of removing restrictions on marijuana
businesses. The exception was a group of neighbors that expressed concern if the hours
of operation went beyond 7 p.m. because of the noise impact on their neighborhood
located adjacent to a marijuana business.
6
VIII. ANALYSIS
The purpose of this study session, is for council to obtain information from the Marijuana
Advisory Panel so council can determine what recommendations to pursue. Staff does
not have any analysis at this time. However, staff was actively involved in the
discussions with MAP as recommendations were formed and issues identified, which are
reflected in the Chart of Panel Recommendations under the heading Staff Considerations.
Staff will be at the study session to answer questions and will provide an analysis of any
code changes requested by council when presenting those code changes in the form on an
ordinance.
While a lot of the recommendations would not change the status quo, some could
substantially result in substantial change. Direction from council regarding what changes
are desired will facilitate staff being able to provide an analysis. If council directs that
the land use changes should be brought to the Planning Board, staff can also provide an
analysis of changes to Title 9 for Planning Board and Council.
IX. MATRIX OF OPTIONS
Upon direction by council of which recommendations to pursue to the Planning Board or
as code changes, staff can provide a matrix of options for each recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS:
ATTACHMENT A: Charter
ATTACHMENT B: MAP Member List
ATTACHMENT C: MAP Recommendations and Exhibits
ATTACHMENT D: Social Use Club Grid
ATTACHMENT E. Creative Ideas Subcommittee Recommendations
ATTACHMENT F Future Engagement Recommendations