HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 12/01/2009 - SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 128, 2009, IMPOSIN DATE: December 1, 2009 AGENDA ITEM..SUMMARY
STAFF: Darin Atteberry
Steve Roy FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2009, Imposing a Moratorium on the Acceptance and Processing of
Applications for the Issuance of Licenses or Permits Related to Businesses that Seek to Dispense Medical Marijuana
and on the Establishment or Operation of a Any Such New Businesses in the City.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance,which was presented for Council's consideration on November 17,2009,as an emergency measure,
was instead approved by Council on First Reading. Council also amended the Ordinance so that, if approved on
Second Reading, it will impose a moratorium on new medical marijuana dispensaries for approximately three months
rather than ten months. At the end of the Council discussion, staff was invited to inform the Council as to whether,
in staffs opinion, a moratorium is still advisable and, if so, what the length of the moratorium should be.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Staff does believe that a moratorium is still advisable. On Second Reading, staff is recommending the following
changes to the Ordinance:
1. Instead of imposing a ten-month moratorium,the moratorium will be in place from the effective date
of the ordinance, December 11, 2009, through March 31, 2010. While this is more than three
months, staff believes that extending the moratorium beyond the second Council meeting in March
will allow for better processing of the proposed regulations that staff will be bringing forward. That
process will include development of the regulations, review of any Land Use Code changes with the
Planning and Zoning Board, review of the draft regulations with the Council in a work session, and
public outreach.
2. The Ordinance no longer provides for a case-by-case review of applications for sales tax license
application for MMDs that are pending on December 11. When the Ordinance was presented as
an emergency measure, that review was intended to allow applicants additional time to have their
applications processed after adoption of the Ordinance if they had made substantial, nonrevocable,
good faith investments in real or personal property based upon the expectation that they would be
able to obtain a sales tax license for an MMD. Since Council decided not to adopt a moratorium on
MMDs on an emergency basis, staff believes that those members of the public who are interested
in establishing a new MMD will have had ample opportunity to apply for and obtain a sales tax
license by the time this Ordinance takes effect. Therefore, under the Ordinance as presented on
Second Reading,only those MMDs that have actually had a sales tax licenses issued by December
11, 2009, that date and that conform to all existing zoning requirements will be allowed to operate
during the moratorium.
3. The declaration of emergency has been removed. The risks that the businesses present to the City,
which are listed in Section 2 of the ordinance, are now recited in support the imposition of a
moratorium rather than in support of a declaration of emergency. Those risks, which were
previously listed in one of the"whereas"clauses of the Ordinance as well as in Section 2, have been
consolidated and now appear just in Section 2.
4. A new section has been added directing the City Manager and City Attorney to present proposed
regulations to Council for its formal consideration no later than the March 2, 2010 Council meeting.
5. Minor wording changes have been made and some sections have been renumbered or relocated.
December 1, 2009 -2- ITEM 24
Preliminary Schedule/Workplan:
The following is a preliminary outline of action items and schedule for completing the review of potential regulations
and enacting regulations by the time the moratorium expires on March 31, 2010.
December 2009 research; draft regulation concepts
January 2010 outreach (focus groups or a community meeting;
modify regulation concepts based on feedback and draft ordinance
February 9, 2010 Council Work Session
February 18, 2010 Planning and Zoning Review
March 2, 2010 First Reading of Regulating Ordinance
March 16, 2010 Second Reading of Regulating Ordinance
March 26, 2010 Ordinance and Regulations take effect
All other provisions of the Ordinance remain the same as on First Reading.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 17, 2009.
(w/o original attachments)
DATE: November 17, 2009
STAFF: Darin Atteberry AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Steve Roy
Emergency Ordinance No. 128, 2009(Im� posing(a��rMoratio`rjiulrn'
'on he AT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
cceptance of Applications for the Issuance of
Licenses or Permits Related to Businesses That,Seek to Dispense Medical Marijuana and on the Establishment of
Such Businesses in the City. �L� �/ J t J
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City has recently seen a proliferation of medical marijuana dispensaries ("MMDs") within its boundaries, some
of which are operated as "home occupations" in zone districts that are primarily residential in character. As of
November 9, 2009, twenty-six such businesses had been issued sales tax licenses by the City, twelve of which have
been issued in the last month, and City staff continues to receive inquiries from persons interested in establishing
additional such businesses at the rate of approximately ten per week.
Fort Collins Police Services has serious concerns about the secondary effects of MMDs. Staff has held a number of
meetings to discuss this issue and, on November 5, 2009, the City Manager, City Attorney, Chief of Police, Planning
Director and members of their respective staffs met with their counterparts from Larimer County and the City of
Loveland to discuss a coordinated approach to dealing with MMDs. Because court rulings and regulations at the state
level are rapidly changing with regard to MMDs and because there is a strong possibility that the state legislature will
address this subject during its upcoming.leg islative.sessio,City staff recommends that the City Council impose a ten-
month moratorium on MMDs, by means�ofthis emergency.ordinance, unti`t�he laws and regulations that govern MMDs
are clarified and until the City has had an opportu kity to determine how best to deal with them at the local level in the
event that statewide regulations proveotoobbeinaai q`�atel./
This moratorium would maintain the status quo in that those MMDs that have been established would be allowed to
continue to operate unless, under current law, they are illegal.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The origin of MMDs in Colorado.
The reason that MMDs have come into existence is that, in November of 2000, the voters of the state of Colorado
approved a constitutional amendment(the Amendment)that created an exception and an affirmative defense to the
state's criminal laws so that patients and their "primary care-givers" who are in lawful possession of a registry
identification card can possess and use a certain amount of marijuana for medical purposes. The presumptive amount
which is, by definition, "lawful" under the Amendment, is two ounces or six plants per patient. However, as an
affirmative defense to any prosecution, a person charged under state law may assert and prove that greater amounts
were"medically necessary." {� 7
The Amendment states that nopersonsha�� Ilbeentitle�epr" otectionoftheAmendmentforacquisition,possession,
manufacture, production, use, sale distriibbutio,.dispensing o trr ansp0'ion of marijuana for any use other than
medical use.
The Department of Public Health and Environment (the "Department") is required and authorized under the
Amendment to maintain a confidential registry of patients who have applied for and are entitled to receive a registry
identification card. Local law enforcement officers can access the registry only if they have "stopped or arrested a
person who claims to be engaged in the medical use of marijuana and is in possession of a registry identification card
or its functional equivalent"and only for the purpose of verifying that the individual is lawfully in possession of the card.
The Amendment sets forth in detail the criteria and procedures for obtaining such a card. Patients may, but are not
required to, designate a primary care-giver.
November 17, 2009 -2- ITEM 21
The Amendment defines a primary care-giver as a person other than the patient and the patient's physician who is
eighteen years of age or older and who has a"significant responsibility for managing the well-being of a patient who
has a debilitating medical condition." However, the Amendment does not define the term "significant responsibility
for managing the well-being of a patient."
A combination of factors have led to an n su�rgence�of MMDs i olora Colorado
municipalities.
In the absence of a constitutional de41i`ion of this term,/;he Rule' s mad by the Department have largely determined
the extent to which the Amendment has provided a..safe harbor for MMDs. Initially, there was limited growth on the
medical marijuana registry and in 2004, the Department created an administrative guideline that a primary care-giver
could provide for only five registered patients. In 2007, however, a Denver District Judge overturned this limitation
because of process concerns with the way the guideline had been adopted, including the fact that no public hearings
were conducted by the Department.After this ruling, more MMDs began to open in communities throughout the state.
In July of this year, the Department, through formal action of its Board following a public hearing, adopted a rule
defining the term "significant responsibility for managing the well-being of a patient who has a debilitating medical
condition" that further opened the door to MMDs. It defined the term to mean "assisting a patient with daily
activities,including but not limited to transportation or housekeeping or meal preparation orshopping or making any
necessary arrangement for access to medical care or services or provision of medical marijuana." (Emphasis
added.)
This rule adopted by the Board suggested that MMDs that have little, if any, actual responsibility for managing the well-
being of patients could claim entitlement to the protection of the Amendment as primary care-givers. At its July
hearing, the Board not only revised the definition to include the provision of marijuana as a way of assisting a patient
with daily activities, but it also declined to limit primary care-givers to a certain number of patients.
/�, r 'C -7
In addition, shortly after the Board hearing, the Obama administration announced that,even though the manufacture,
I I 1<f! k: d6 A l
distribution, possession and use of marijuana is(prohibited by,Jfederal la Mederal law enforcement agencies should
not seek to prosecute marijuana cases in which the defendant is in compliance with states' medical marijuana
programs. This reduced the risk that a MMD would braided by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
Finally, the state legislature has not tried to clarify or limit the extent to which MMDs fall within the protection of the
Amendment, which has led to an even larger influx of MMDs in Colorado.
In combination,these factors have created a huge growth in number of patients on the medical marijuana registry and
a blossoming industry for producing and distributing the drug.
In Fort Collins, the first sales tax license for a MMD was issued by the City on February 5, 2008,with a second issued
on July 28, 2008. There have been 24 more issued to date in 2009 (12 in the last month). It also appears that more
physicians have begun recommending marijuana to their patients and the number of written recommendations of
medical marijuana issued by those physicians has increased dramatically. As of August 17, 2009, 732 of the 17,142
physicians licensed in Colorado(4.3%)had made recommendations for medical marijuana. Two of those physicians
have written 38% of the recommendations, and the top 15 have made 76% of the recommendations.
Recent rulings are more limiting.
The Colorado Court of Appeals ruled inflate October thhaat' the act of supplying marijuana for medical use, by itself, is
insufficient to constitute significant manageme`t responsibi.lity�for a�gatient's well-being, and consequently is
insufficient to constitutionally qualify a person doing so as'a primary care-giver." People v. Stacy Clendenin,Colorado
Court of Appeals, announced October 29-2d09�However,,,,the court-did-not address the question of whether the
Board's regulatory definition of the term "significant responsibility for manage the well-being of a patient"would have
changed its ruling because that definition was not in effect at the time of the defendant's trial and conviction in the case
before the court. On the heels of the Court of Appeals decision, the Board repealed its definition of "significant
responsibility for managing the well being of a patient" so as to be consistent with the court ruling. That decision of
the Board, like the 2004 administrative guideline, was subsequently overturned by the Denver District Court.
Therefore, at the present time, because of the conflict between the Court of Appeals decision and the Department
regulations, it is unclear whether MMDs must provide daily assistance to patients beyond just providing marijuana to
them. Hopefully,the courts,the Board or the state legislature will soon clarify what MMDs need to do in order to qualify
November 17, 2009 -3- ITEM 21
as "primary care-givers". In the meantime, City staff continues to have serious concerns about the unregulated
proliferation of MMDs in the City.
The health and safety problems presented by MMDs.
Police Services has identified a number o" " f specific health and�ty problems associated with MMDs. They include
the following: %=�/ 1, �,
1. Thousands of people who do not meet the intended definition of"debilitating medical condition"are receiving
certificates for medical marijuana. The number is growing too fast to obtain current statistics, but the number
may be approaching 20,000 registered patients. About 10% of the certificate holders reside in Larimer
County.
2. There are no regulations regarding MMDs. The term"dispensary"is not defined at the state level. There are
no rules limiting the location, hours of operation, use on site, or criminal background of people who operate
MMDs. At least six of the MMDs in Fort Collins are in residential areas. In Loveland, there is a MMD
immediately next to a high school. Several of the Fort Collins MMD operators have arrest records for drugs
and other serious crimes, criminal histories, including felony convictions for marijuana cultivation and
distribution.
3. Due to the unregulated nature of MMDs and marijuana growing operations, and the quantity of money and
drugs involved, there is serious crime associated with them. There have been several violent robberies and
burglaries of MMDs and growers in Fort Collins. Many associated crimes go unreported because of the
potentially illegal actions of the victims.
4. A large amount of marijuana is'being grown in residential houMandy being imported from other areas to meet
this demand. There is no provision in thelAmendment'for third party producers; however, this is the manner
in which many MMDs obtain their supp'ly�to meet the recent demand. There has been damage to rental
properties and disruption to neighb ro hoods causedtyy these marijuana growing operations. There are also
hazards associated with electrical wiring coupled with high electrical demand of indoor growing operations,
air quality issues and mold and fungus that develops in these indoor grows. There are also no controls to .
ensure thatthe marijuana grown and distributed underthe protective umbrella of the Amendment is consumed
by registered users. There have been local cases where medical marijuana has been distributed on the illegal
market and even to high school students.
5. There is no requirement that a business disclose that it is providing medical marijuana on its sales tax
application. While there are 23 businesses that have specifically listed it, Police Services believes that there
are other businesses that are dispensing marijuana under licenses listing products like horticulture supply,
paraphernalia and herbal medicine. Some MMDs may not have sales tax licenses at all. There is no way to
determine how many MMDs are actually operating in the City.
6. Investigating unregulated MMD's for possible criminal violations is extremely difficult. For example, there is
no requirement, as exists at liquor licensed establishments, that MMD operators allow police into their facility
to ensure that applicable laws are being followed. Some MMDs advertise popular music, game rooms and
smoking rooms where young users can"medicate"together. These.look more like bars than medical facilities
with none of the regulatory fra(1mework,.
7. The laws and regulations concerning MN1DDat the state and fede�vels are unsettled at best, with several
changes in the past few months,-T-his/makes.it very-difficult for Police Services to differentiate between legal
and illegal marijuana activity. There are also liability risks if perceived errors are made in this uncertain
environment. It is very difficult to create an enforcement strategy until these issues are resolved. In addition,
Police Services does not have adequate staffing to devote to these investigations. This contributes to the
completely unregulated nature of the marijuana business in the Fort Collins area. Depending on actions taken
at the state level,further regulation may be necessary at the local level to regulate this industry in accordance
with local values.
Possible Regulatory Approaches.
November 17, 2009 -4- ITEM 21
Colorado municipalities have taken a variety of approaches to addressing MMDs. Many have enacted ordinances
establishing a moratorium on MMDs pending further study. Long-term approaches range from adopting no local
regulations to imposing a total ban. Regulations include locational requirements (e.g., minimum distances from
schools or particular zone districts)as well as regulations limiting on-site quantities,signage,hours of operation,on-site
consumption etc. Some municipalities issue permits to MMDs and make t a permits subject to suspension or
revocation much like a liquor license.1E6ch of these approac�he reflTects�a particular policy position with regard to
MMDs and each is designed to address certain�perceiVed Jp oblemsN`such as their proximity to facilities that are
occupied or frequented by school age childrenk!or the possibility that MMDs will serve as "fronts" for illegal drug
trafficking, etc. ` _LL -LIL
Before City staff can make an informed recommendation to the City Council as to how to deal with MMDs, much needs
to be determined. First and foremost, the law needs to be clarified as to just what the Amendment allows and does
not allow. This clarification can come from either the Board or the state legislature or both. In addition,City staff needs
to investigate the most reasonable approach to dealing with MMDs at the local level. Finally, the City needs to
coordinate its efforts with Larimer County,Loveland and other neighboring municipalities so that the approach it adopts
takes into consideration the impact of the City's regulations on neighboring communities.
The recommended ten-month period of time should be sufficient to allow for the formulation of recommended
amendments to the City Code to deal with MMDs in the City. In the interim, staff believes that an adequate number
of MMDs already exist in the City to meet the intent of the Amendment at the local level.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS
• Potential sales tax and licensing revenues associated with MMD's during the Moratorium.
ese ..nd" r t-
• Staff time and resources associated`wit((h�research a��nd'poten'tial code changes to address the use.
SUSTAINABILITY: ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS
Part of the purpose of this proposed moratorium is to understand the economic, environmental and social impacts
associated with MMDs. It is unclear as to the impacts MMD's as allowed by State Law would have on our community.
The economic impacts associated with regulating and enforcement is unknown as well as the impacts of not regulating
or enforcing them as a complete and unfettered allowance of the use may have economic impacts associated with
safety issues as the use and potential negative impacts enter into residential neighborhoods. The environmental
impacts are also unclear as there are potential issues associated with the varying scales of the MMDs. Finally, the
social impacts are also unclear as the absence of any regulatory criteria may cause the residential character of
neighborhoods to decline and sensitive uses such as schools, places of worship, daycare facilities, etc could also be
impacted. The proposed moratorium will allow the City to review potential impacts and provide the City Council with
information to make an informed decision regarding the appropriate regulatory methods to address MMD's
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
For the foregoing reasons, City staff recommends t� City �y Co9unci-immediately adopt a ten-month moratorium
on the issuance of sales tax licenses lfor MMDs land on the establishment of such businesses in any zone district in
111
the City. On or before the term inationtdate.of themoratorium, staff w,ill11provide recommendations and proposed
legislation to the Council for dealing with MMDs.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Amendment 20
__ ___ _ _ __ _. _ ORDINANCE NO . 1289 2009
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE AND PROCESSING OF
APPLICATIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF LICENSES OR PERMITS RELATED TO
BUSINESSES THAT SEEK TO DISPENSE MEDICAL MARIJUANA AND
ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OR OPERATION OF ANY SUCH NEW
BUSINESSES IN THE CITY
WHEREAS , at the general election held in November, 2000, the voters of the State of
Colorado adopted Amendment 20 to the Colorado Constitution (the "Amendment") adding Article
XVIII to the Constitution; and
WHEREAS , the Amendment creates an affirmative defense to, and exception from, state
criminal laws pertaining to the possession and use of marijuana when such possession or use is for
the treatment of debilitating medical conditions and when certain conditions specified in the
Amendment are met; and
WHEREAS , over recent months, 2655 businesses offering medical marijuana for sale or
other distribution have obtained or applied for sales tax licenses in the City, and the City is receiving
inquiries on a daily basis from persons interested in establishing additional such businesses in the
City; and
WHEREAS , under the general zoning laws of the City, these businesses, referred to herein
as medical marijuana dispensaries or "MMDs," likely constitute retail sales operations or clinics that
are permitted uses in a wide variety of zone districts, including those that are primarily intended for
residential use ; and
WHEREAS , the City currently has no land use or business regulation concerning the
operation of MMDs ; and
WHEREAS , the unregulated operation of MMDs in the City presents serious health and
safety concerns to the citizens of Fort Collins, ' . ; and
robberies than the operators of most other businesses because of the presence
of mar ttana and substantial amounts of cash on the prenin�
it is very hat d to deternfirte which Nf Nf i3s are lawful and which at c not since
there are no ficensill�; 01 FC11111t requirements for Stich businesses , no
ICTIMICITIetit that records be kept of the number of patients Served, no
operators of NfMi3s are subject to a greater risk of violent brrgfarics and
the on-site production of mar nana can create unsafe conditions on the
busines uch as excessive electrical connections that creat
hazards and mold and fangus in the areas used to grow th
in the absence of licensing requirements such as those associated with liquor
establishments, ther * . to litnit the ownership and operation of
M?vffls to persons of good moral character, so as to ininimize the illegai
activity that can be associatcd with such busincsscs , an
WHEREAS , ambiguities in the wording of the Amendment have created uncertainty as to
which MMDs may properly be considered "primary care-givers " under the Amendment for the
purpose of providing medical marijuana to patients suffering debilitating medical conditions; and
WHEREAS , the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (the
"Department"), which is responsible for the administration of the medical marijuana program
established by the Amendment, is continuing to consider changes in its administrative regulations
that govern MMDs as primary care-givers; and
WHEREAS , the same question about MMDs as primary care-givers is currently under
review by the Colorado appellate courts and may also be the subject of proposed legislation in the
upcoming session of the state legislature; and
WHEREAS , municipalities throughout Colorado are struggling to gain control over the
recent proliferation of MMDs and have enacted various kinds of local regulations in an attempt to
curtail abuses of the medical marijuana exception created by the Amendment; and
WHEREAS , a significant period of time will be required in order for the City Manager and
City Attorney and their respective staffs to clarify the evolving state of the law with regard to
MMDs, and to formulate recommended amendments to the City Code to deal with the subject; and
WHEREAS , with the influx of MMDs, the City Council is concerned about its ability to
protect the public welfare and preserve the character of the City's neighborhoods and commercial
areas where MMDs might be located; and
WHEREAS , the imposition of a ten-mond moratorium for a reasonable period of time on
the strbmission, acceptance, consideration, and approval of all applications for City licenses,-and
permits, and development proposals related to the operation of MMDs, and on the establishment of
MMDs in the City, will allow City staff and the City Council to investigate the City's ability to
regulate such businesses and develop and implement appropriate regulations ; and
WHEREAS, tenthree to four months is a reasonable period of time and no longer than
necessary for the City to determine the extent to which MMDs will be regulated on a statewide basis
and to properly investigate, develop, and, if appropriate, adopt and implement any local regulations
related to MMDs ; and
-2-
WHEREAS, neither the proprietors of existing and proposed MMDs nor the patients they
serve or intend to serve will be unduly prejudiced by the imposition of such a moratorium, since the
number of existing MMDs in the City should be adequate to meet the medical marijuana needs of
such patients for said period of time;morel.
Wf fEREAS , Article ff, Section 6 of the eharter of the eity of Fort eollins authorizes
eity eotnicit to adopt emergency ordinances, which shall be finally passed on first reciding by the
affirmative vote of at least fivc mcnThers of ttic eonticif and which shall contain the spccific
statemcnt of the nature of the emcrgcncy .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows :
Section 1 . That the recitals contained in this Ordinance are hereby adopted and
incorporated as findings of fact of the City Council .
Section 2 . That the proliferation of unregulated MMDs in the City
art warrants the imposition of a moratorium because of the serious health and safety concerns
presented by such unregulated MMDs, including the following of the risk that snch bttsinesses will
MUM
(a) serious deterioration of the residential and commercial areas in which1hey
are lecated;operators of MMDs are subject to a greater risk of violent
burglaries and robberies than the operators of most other businesses because
of the presence of marijuana and substantial amounts of cash on the
premises ;
(b) bodily it nry to the occnpants and patrons of NfNfl3s , cither by reaso
violent crimcs eommittcd against such persons or becausc of the health and
saf�ty hazards created by the condition and use of the buildings in whichihey
are laeatee , it is very hard to determine which MMDs are lawful and which
are not since there are no licensing or permit requirements for such
businesses, no requirement that records be kept of the number of patients
served, no limitations on quantities or on-site consumption, and no other
regulations that could help investigating officers make such determination;
(c) widesprcad violation of federal and state criminal laws thaf prohibit
mmmfacture and distribution of illegal ,the on-site production of
marijuana can create unsafe conditions on the business premises such as
excessive electrical connections that create fire hazards and mold and fungus
in the areas used to grow the marijuana; and
(d)
incteased exposure of the youth of the community to a culture of iffegal drtt-
tisc ; the absence of licensing requirements such as those associated
with liquor establishments, there is no way to limit the ownership and
-3 -
operation of MMDs to persons of good moral character, so as to minimize
the illegal activity that can be associated with such businesses .;�
(c) an influx of pcisons fiom other conn=itics who are invotVed in the
maimfacture and distribution of illegal drugs .
Section 3 . That, for the purposes of this Ordinance, the following definitions shall
apply:
a. Medical mary*uana dispensary or MAM shall mean a property or structure
used to sell, distribute, transmit, give, dispense or otherwise provide
marijuana in any manner to patients or primary care-givers pursuant to the
authority contained in Amendment 20 to the Colorado Constitution and the
implementing state statutes and administrative regulations, except those
properties or structures that are used by an individual primary care-giver to
provide marijuana to a single patient.
b. Patient shall mean a person who has a debilitating medical condition.
Section 4 . That it is necessary forth reservation of the public safety, health,
and welfare to delay the acceptance and processing of applications for City licenses, permits,
and development proposals related to the establishment and operation of medical marijuana
dispensaries in the City until the City has had a reasonable opportunity to determine the extent of
the City's regulatory authority over such businesses and to further determine what regulations, if any,
should be imposed by the City upon these businesses.
Section 5 .
a. That a moratorium is hereby imposed, as of the effective date of this
Ordinance (the "Effective Date") , on the acceptance and processing of any
applications to the City for the approval of licenses, o"ermits, or
development proposals related to the establishment or operation of medical
marijuana dispensaries, and on the processing of any pending applications for
such licenses or permits .
b . That this moratorium shall continue in effect until the 31 st day of March,
2010, or such earlier date as may be determined by the City Council by
ordinance .
b. c . No That no medical marijuana dispensaries shall be established or shall
operate within the City after the Effective Date and until the expiration of
this moratorium, , except those medical
marijuana dispensaries that: (i) to the extent required under Sections 25 -73
or 25 -74 of the City Code, have been issued a sales tax license pursuant to an
application filed with the City prior to the Effective Date, and (ii) are in
-4-
compliance with all zoning requirements for the property on which they are
located.
Notwith3tanding the provisions of paragraph (a) and (b) above, miy person
who has, prior to the Eff-ective Date, submitted an application for the
1 of such a license or pennit and has not yet been issued such license
> on or before November 30, 2009 ,
nonrecoverable, submit to the Office of the
eity Nimiager evidence that such person has, prior to the Eff-ective Datc,
made substantial, good-faith
property f6r the sole purpose of establishing and operating a medical
a dispensary at the location shown on said application. The eity
Manage, or his designee shall review such evidence mid, no later
- - - - - d'ing to administrative cri
December 14,
, >
established f6r the purpose of such review, williether said application shoul
be granted. The eity Manager's decision in that regard shall bc final. .
Section 6 . That no license, permit, or development proposal related to the
establishment or operation of a medical marijuana dispensary that was issue approved by the City
prior to the Effective Date, above-,--of this
ordinance may be amended during the term of this moratorium.
Section 7 . That all persons applying to the City for the issuance or amendment of a sales
and use tax license during the term of this moratorium shall indicate, on a form approved by the
City, whether any part of the business that is the subject of the application involves the provision
of medical marijuana to patients with debilitating medical conditions or their primary care-givers .
Section 8 . That the failure of any person to provide the information required under
Section -5 7 of this ordinance, or the provision of any false information to the City related to a sales
tax application, or the establishment or operation of a medical marijuana dispensary contrary to the
provisions of Section 4 5of this Ordinance during the term of this moratorium shall constitute a
misdemeanor criminal offense punishable as provided in Section 1 - 15 of the Code of the City of Fort
Collins .
Section 9 . That, during the term of this moratorium, the City Manager and City Attorney
are hereby directed to analyze the following issues and develop for City Council consideration
regulations as they may deem necessary and appropriate to address said issues :
a. the extent to which MMDs are legally protected under the Amendment;
b, the impact of MMDs on the character of residential neighborhoods and
commercial areas where they may be located; and
c , any increase that will likely occur in vehicular traffic or in nuisance or
criminal activities in areas where MMDs are located.
-5 -
seetion to . That this moratoritim shall confitme in cff-ect until the f 6th day of
,
-20 f 0 , or such earlier date as may be determined by the eity eouncil by ordinance .
Section 10 . That on or before March 2 , 20109 the City Manager and City Attorney are
further hereby directed to present for the City Council ' s formal consideration such laws and
regulations relating to medical marijuana dispensaries in the City as the City Manager considers
necessary and appropriate for the preservation of the health, safety and welfare of the residents of
the City.
Section 11 . That nothing herein shall be construed as decriminalizing or making lawful
in the City any MMD or other business involved in the acquisition, possession, manufacture,
production, use, sale, distribution, dispensing, or transportation of marijuana or related paraphernalia
that is not lawful under state criminal laws .
,
eoffins and finally passed as an emergency ordinance and ordered published this 17th day of
NovenTher, A.B .hitroduced, considered favorably by five (5 ) members of the eouncit of the eity of F
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 17th day of
November, A.D . 2009 , and to be presented for final passage on the 1 st day of December, A. D . 2009 .
Mayor
ATTEST :
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the Ist day of December, A . D . 2009 .
Mayor
ATTEST :
City Clerk
-6-
-7 -