HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 132-2018 (18-740)City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 (City Hall,
• 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
• City Council
Resolution: RES 132 -2018
File Number: 18 -740 Enactment Number: RES 132 -2018
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A COMMENT
LETTER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
TO THE CALIFORNIA BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL
REGARDING THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS.
WHEREAS, in July 2018, the Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC) released proposed regulations, which
seek to codify the emergency regulations implemented in December 2017; and
WHEREAS, the proposed state cannabis regulations, specifically Sections 5001(c)(11) and 5002(c)(28),
create a 10 -day "shot clock" for cities to respond to the BCC's inquiry of whether a license is valid
before that license is deemed valid; and
WHEREAS, Business and Professions Code Section 26055(g)(2)(D) currently states that cities have 60
days to provide notification of compliance or noncompliance with local ordinances or regulations before
a license application is deemed in compliance; and
WHEREAS, California's voters were assured that Proposition 64 "preserves local control ", pursuant to
the ballot pamphlet issued to the public; and
WHEREAS, reducing the local review period to 10 days would not provide the City of South San
Francisco adequate time to verify whether our City has approved a temporary or annual license to a
cannabis company; and
WHEREAS, the deadline to submit written comments to the BCC is August 27, 2018.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that it
hereby approves submission of a comment letter to the BCC on the proposed regulations, a draft of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that it hereby
authorizes the Mayor, or her designee, to submit a comment letter on behalf of the City to the BCC, a
draft of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, regarding the proposed cannabis regulations.
City of South San Francisco Page 1
File Number. 18 -740
Enactment Number. RES 132 -2018
At a meeting of the City Council on 8/8/2018, a motion was made by Richard Garbarino, seconded by Mark
Addiego, that this Resolution be approved. The motion passed.
Yes: 5 Mayor Normandy, Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto, Councilmember Garbarino,
Councilmember Gupta,.�[nd Councilmember Addiego
Attest by
Krista
City of South San Francisco Page 2
August , 2018
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
Lori Ajax, Chief
Bureau of Cannabis Control
P.O. Box 419106
Rancho Cordova, CA 95741
Submitted via Email: bce.comments!d'dca.ca ; .jov
Re: Bureau of Cannabis Control Proposed Regulations — July 208;
Dear Chief Ajax:
CITY COUNCIL 2018
LIZA NORMANDY, MAYOR
KARYL MATSUMOTO, MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
MARK ADDIEGO, COUNCILMEMBER
RICHARD A. GARBARINO, COUNCILMEMBER
PRADEEP C. GUPTA, PH.D. COUNCILMEMBER
MIKE FUTRELL, CITY MANAGER
The City of South San Francisco appreciates the opportunldomment on the proposed regulations released in July
2018, which seek to codify the emergency regulations imp leenfedin December 201,E
The City of South San Francisco strongly objects to two proposed changes that we view ion fundamental conflict with
both the language and intent of Proposition 64 and will underifi our 's Ability to effectively regulate cannabis at the
local level. Specifically, Sections 5001 c 11 ,
O ( )�alld�5002(c) (28) uvouiWudermine the ability af'Iocal agencies to ensure
community standards are met by reducing the p&Rft verify if a llcen a has obtained necessary local approvals from 60
days to 10 days.
The City of South San Francisco believes these proposed regulatlons go beyond the BCC's regulatory authority and
instead creates a new cannabls 4lcy Ot#ts�ide of tl�e �eglslatlye mss Calornia's voters were assured that "64
preserves local control "' andregul o „s chip aw, at,tle- eery = mn
dation of local control by allowing cannabis
deliveries to every jurisdictions allfornia. .
In fact, the proposed regulation
'W'A-1 bontladlcts exlsting state law. Business and Professions Code Section
26055(g)(2)(D) states:�cs have ftio 4itovide 1i cation of compliance or noncompliance with local
ordinances or re s efa ��l�cense p ycation is de_enled lrl= compliance. The City of South San Francisco strongly
believes that theQ day stand ar our states current 1llould also be applied to these regulations, because it will
allow cities the is we need to verify flat a lice a submitted to the BCC is, in fact, valid. Reducing the local review
.�
period to 10 days wMd not provide e C, o , South San Francisco adequate time to verify whether our city has
approved a temporary dual license tcannabfnpany.
For these reasons, the Ci I outh Sanl.FIncisco respectfully opposes these regulations until such time as they are
amended to address the con&&ns_ ,listed., e. We look forward to continued opportunities to comment on specific
regulatory proposals.
Sincerely,
Liza Normandy, Mayor
cc: City Council
Mike Futrell, City Manager
Meg Desmond, League of California Cities, ciiylettersgcacities.or g
I (Ballot Pamp., General Elec. (November 8, 2016) rebuttal to Argument against Prop. 64, p. 99.)
City Hall: 400 Grand Avenue • South San Francisco, CA 94080 • P.O.Box 711 • South San Francisco, CA 94083
Phone: 650.877.8500 - Fax: 650.829.6609 • E -mail: citycouncil @ssf.net