MONTE VISTA— The Monte Vista Planning and Zoning Commission met last Thursday evening, June 8 to continue working on the proposed marijuana facility zoning ordinances. The commission hopes to meet every two weeks until they are comfortable with the language of the ordinance.
As the commission’s city council liaison Matt Martinez explained, once the ballot question is completed, the commission should have the ordinance available for citizens who want to ask ‘what will this look like if passed?’ Then we can show them the zoning ordinance.” The ordinance will go before city council for review and approval in November only if the city ballot question allowing retail, medical, grow and testing marijuana facilities is passed by voters . Commissioners Barbara Sears and Ruthanna Seger were present, in addition to Martinez, City Administrator Rob Vance and City Attorney Karen Lintott.
Sears asked some general questions about water usage at the beginning of the meeting, asking how much water is absorbed by the plants/soil in agricultural operations and how much returns to the sewer and water treatment systems. Vance answered that about “60-70 percent is absorbed,” the rest enters water treatment. Sears also expressed concerns about the sign code, inquiring why the commission couldn’t restrict signs for marijuana facilities. Lintott answered that due to the Supreme Court ruling in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, restricting solely one type of businesses’ signage could be considered content-based discrimination. On those lines, Sears asked then how the city would not be liable for including that all marijuana facilities will be subject to the commission’s Special Review Use process if liquor license applications are not subject to the same process. Lintott answered that state law allowed for local governments to have more leeway in marijuana licensing. Sears inquired what the commission should analyze in a potential application for a marijuana facility if the state already completes background checks. Lintott stated, “You can review the business plan and ask ‘does this make sense for the city?’” Lintott assured the commission that this process allowed them to reject a proposed business if they felt it was a front for a black or grey market operation or something else seems amiss about it.
Sears also asked if the state regulated the pricing of marijuana, stating she worried that a facility might offer deep discounts “to get people hooked.” Lintott stated that through both regulation and market forces, the cost of marijuana products stays fairly normal, “the retail operations are buying from a wholesaler who requests a base price, like an MSRP.”
The commission determined that they should handle the Special Review Use application for all retail, medical, grow and testing operations, but that city council will remain the licensing board, as they are for liquor licenses. In the business proposal, the commissioners requested to include schematics of the business and their security systems, which Lintott stated they could “absolutely” do, especially because that state requires the applicant to provide details on a facility’s security before they even approach the city. The commission reviewed parts of similar ordinances regulating marijuana licensing fees and zoning from towns/cities like Salida, Pueblo, Alma and Breckenridge, noting that they varied considerably. Vance stated that he picked towns that took very different approaches so the commission could see the range of possibilities noting that Alma “embraced it [the marijuana industry]” where towns like Salida were considerably more restrictive, allowing only two retail facilities in city limits.
The commissioners suggested the city ordinance include licensing fees of $5,000 for retail, $3,000 for medical, $1,000 for testing and $2,500 for manufacturing of infused products facilities. Seger encouraged the commission to keep the fees “non-refundable application fees” in addition to the $450 Special Review Use application fee, which they agreed to. Limiting the number of facilities similar to the model in Salida was another topic of discussion, but Lintott pointed out that the zoning limitations already decided by the commission at previous meetings was a “practical limitation” and Martinez pointed out the Special Review Use process was also similarly limiting and would allow commissioners to determine when the number of facilities was impacting the city negatively. Vance pointed out “by not having a number you might not be as liable for having a limit later on,” pointing out the special review use process could limit the number of facilities without making the city subject to a lawsuit. Sears suggested that caregivers growing marijuana be required to register as a “home occupation” license as the city limits these operations to only using 25 percent of their home space for work and they will also have to pay the home occupation fee, which is $30. The commission decided to add a $250 licensing application fee for caregivers within city limits.
The planning and zoning commission hopes to have a completed draft ordinance done in one month and will meet again for a joint meeting with city council on June 22 at 6 p.m.