Pasadena City Council (Photo – file, Garrett Rowlan).
Taking the bull by the horns was the theme of Monday night’s meeting of the Pasadena City Council.
By Garrett Rowlan
The elephant in the room (to continue the wildlife metaphor) was the commercialization of pot. In short, should the City Council need to decide about policies relating to the sale of marijuana?
The issue is, who will regulate the cannabis industry, the City of Pasadena or the owners of dispensaries, which have been known to pop up around Pasadena like weeds? (No pun intended)
Time is of the issue
The city has two options, enact an ordinance and defend it against the referendums or initiatives of the marijuana industry, or else put a ballot on the June election, knowing that proponents of the industry don’t have time to qualify, thus—pending voter approval—putting out regulations prima facie pertaining to the number of businesses (no more than 9 at any time, was the staff recommendation), locations (not near churches or schools), and guidelines, such as the dangerous packaging of edibles in cartoon-like packaging to attract kids.
It’s a complicated issue, one arising quickly and already the City has had to deal with rogue owners, a troublesome bunch who might prove resistance to even new regulations, thus bringing one councilmember to bring up the possibility of eminent domain. While that dire option was dismissed, the truth is that all the players in this new field are not on the same page, so to speak.
In the end, the council voted to accept the staff’s proposal, which meant that on or by February 26, the regulations must be in place for a plan that the City of Pasadena can set before the voters, but the possibility of enacting an ordinance and defending it instead was not abandoned.
The city ended the evening by discussing, though not voting on, a new project on 86 South Fair Oaks.
Leave a Reply