Petaluma approves cannabis delivery services

City to allow pot manufacturing and delivery, but bans dispensaries.|

On Jan. 1, Petaluma residents that overwhelmingly voted to legalize recreational cannabis last November, will still not have access to dispensaries to purchase the product inside the city limits under a set of regulations approved Monday.

The city will allow businesses to manufacture cannabis-infused products. It will also permit two Petaluma-based marijuana delivery services that can operate in the city from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.

The regulations, passed on a 6-1 city council vote, with City Councilwoman Kathy Miller dissenting, increase the number of plants residents can cultivate on their properties from three to six. The policy also extends to medical marijuana users and caregivers.

At a Dec. 18 meeting, decision makers will discuss the details of the regulations, including a fee structure and permitting process. Until those particulars are in place, the ordinance acts as a moratorium for new businesses, City Attorney Eric Danly said.

For the past decade, the city has banned brick-and-mortar dispensaries for medical marijuana. Last year, it updated its policy to allow medical card holders to cultivate three plants and for delivery from outside of the city to medical users and caregivers.

Prop. 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, last year legalized the sale and possession of recreational cannabis for those ages 21 and over within certain parameters, but left some control in the hands of local jurisdictions, forcing the city to reevaluate its policies. It is not yet possible to purchase marijuana without a doctor’s recommendation, but the state is expected to issue licenses for recreational businesses as soon as Jan. 1. Cannabis is still illegal at the federal level.

Mayor David Glass described the new rules as a middle ground for a divided council and city. Three of the seven members sought more liberal policies and a limited number of retail outlets in the city, but safety concerns won out. Officials have said the unmarked delivery facilities may attract less crime than a retail outlet.

“It’s a compromise – it means that Petaluma will be more restrictive than state law and more permissive, obviously, than federal law,” Glass said. “And, in a lot of ways, it seems to me that this strikes a balance for the community.”

The ordinance allows the city to revisit the issue and further shape its policies after the impacts of cannabis become clearer. Research presented by city staff showed inconclusive evidence about the impacts of industry-related crime in other nearby areas.

“In the years to come, the presence of cannabis in the city will grow and not decline because that’s where this legislation is a step to, but it’s going … slowly down that path rather than rapidly,” Glass said.

Vice Mayor Teresa Barrett, a vocal supporter of allowing dispensaries and further incorporating cannabis into the fabric of the city, expressed frustration with the process.

“We have to move on,” she said. “This is kicking a dead horse if we keep going. It’s baby steps and we have left it open so we can come back and look at this in some future time. Hopefully we’ll do that sooner rather than later.”

She pointed out that a medical marijuana dispensary is attempting to set up shop on an acre of land at 50 Ely Blvd. North, a pocket of unincorporated county land just outside the city. The development could signal that other dispensaries will attempt to open on county land adjacent to the city proper.

“You’re in a situation where you don’t have any control over that,” she said. “That’s not where I want to be. I want to be in a situation where I have a little more control over it and we’re getting the revenue from it. We don’t want the problems without the control.”

Councilwoman Miller, who said she struggles with odoriferous cannabis cultivated in a neighbor’s backyard, said her dissenting vote was meant to represent those in the city opposed to cannabis.

“I don’t think it’s any secret that I’m really not interested in having cannabis in town,” she said. “I heard from a lot of constituents who don’t want these sorts of businesses in town … and on a related matter, they don’t want people growing in their backyards.”

John Richards, a resident of Petaluma for 42 years, encouraged the city to take an even more cautious approach. President Donald Trump’s administration has taken a hard-line stance against cannabis, though staff research revealed no instances of cities facing legal challenges for allowing recreational marijuana.

“The people of California may have voted for this, but you’ve got some issues because the federal government has not,” he said. “Some of you may not like the president, but if he’s in for another term or someone else is, you may have to deal with this.”

Petaluma Police Chief Ken Savano said he appreciated the council’s wait-and-see approach. For now, the ordinance gives his staff the ability to crack down on smelly, visible marijuana grows that cause neighborhood nuisances.

“If was the ultra-conservative police chief under basic crime prevention, I would try to eliminate any opportunity for crime, so I would be completely against anything,” he said.”Where there’s opportunity, crime will come … but realizing that the voters have an interest in seeing some kind of regulation and knowing that it’s coming, we’ve got to try to enact legislation that deals with the complaints we’ve been addressing. What will come in terms of crime, it’s hard to say. You have to argue that there will be some increase in crime, what exactly that will be, I don’t know.”

(Contact Hannah Beausang at hannah.beausang@arguscourier.com.)

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.