A proposed zoning change that would expand the number of cannabis retailers in part of the city has been tabled again, a week after a delay requested by the councilman whose district would be most affected.
The possibility of expanding the number of cannabis shops in Council District 3 has drawn high interest, as the council grapples with how to fairly allocate a precious few commercial spaces for cannabis retailers who stand to make millions from doing business in the city.
In the April 19 meeting, the council was poised to consider the zoning change until Councilman John J. Kennedy pushed the pause button.
Kennedy asked for the delay because three cannabis businesses under the city’s fledgling cannabis ordinance want to open in his district even though the city’s current laws allow only for one dispensary in each of the council’s six districts. The zoning change, if approved, would allow three to open up three at:
- 169 W Colorado Blvd. (the Harvest permitted location);
- 70 W. Union Street; and
- 827 E. Colorado Blvd.
But in a last-minute move, Kennedy formally submitted in a confidential letter to the City Attorney’s office to delay the hearing to allow for further discussion.
The delay was vital, Kennedy said, citing the need to have “more dialogue” on the issue, and to seek legal counsel to ensure that anything he said on behalf of his district did not jeopardize the city’s position in pending court cases.
Kennedy’s concerns appeared Friday to be at the core of the latest dela, which Kennedy relayed to Mayor Victor Gordo, the city manager and city attorney.
“Councilmember Kennedy raised some questions and concerns which he discussed with the mayor,” according to a statement from Lisa Derderian, the city’s spokesperson. “The mayor asked Councilmember Kennedy to speak with City Manager Steve Mermell about them, which he did. Based on that conversation, the city manager agreed there were some issues that deserve additional consideration and consequently the item was removed from the agenda after consulting with the city clerk and city attorney. The council may decide to bring it back in that forum or in another setting if they wish to do so.”
While six “top-scoring” applicants were invited to apply for the coveted spots, only three retailers have received permits — two in other districts and one in Kennedy’s.
The city’s code , coupled with one-retailer-one-district cap, stopped two others — SweetFlower Pasadena LLC and The Atrium Group LLC — from moving forward. And those two both applied to be in Kennedy’s district, which only allows one.
SweetFlower, was poised to appeal a court decision after a judge in late February ruled in favor of Pasadena and its retail cannabis application process.
In its lawsuit, Sweet Flower argued it was treated unfairly compared to other applicants, alleging the city ran afoul of its own laws. But in a tentative decision issued Feb. 25, a judge said officials acted appropriately when they denied Sweet Flower’s application to open a retail cannabis shop.
In the lawsuit, Sweet Flower pointed to a controversial aspect of the application process: a city requirement to have a licensed surveyor prepare a map of the proposed storefront location. It was meant to ensure the storefront was far enough away from places such as schools and substance abuse centers, as required by city law.
City officials denied Sweet Flower’s application because its map was not prepared properly.
In the meantime, two of an original top six applicants are up and running in the city — Varda, at 3355 E. Colorado Blvd., and Integral Associates Dena LLC, at 908 E. Colorado Blvd.
Critics of the process claimed that Integral — through communications between its attorney and city staff — had a head start on meeting a key mapping requirement to get a permit. That created an unfair playing field that could have swung the process toward Integral, and delayed — and even jeopardized — the chance for five other applicants to get the location they wanted and a permit to operate, according to allegations.
A 2019 investigation, contracted by the city, found that while the city could have better communicated with businesses on the requirement, there was no evidence of undue influence on city staffers.
The overall City Council meeting on Monday will still happen, including a hearing that would begin impaneling the city’s nascent police commission. It begins at 4:30 p.m. at https://www.pasadenamedia.org/kpas/.
Recent Comments