The City Commission will conduct a public hearing during their Sept. 6 meeting on proposed regulations for marijuana operations.
Commissioners voted 3-2 during their Aug. 16 to set the hearing on the regulations as proposed by staff.
City sets Sept. 6 hearing on proposed marijuana regulations
The framework, as proposed by staff, and if approved, would only go into effect if the District Court finds that the city cannot prohibit marijuana activities as it currently does, or if the voters opt to allow marijuana activities in the city limits on the November ballot.
City Commission denies second marijuana dispensary appeal
All land uses for marijuana, such as sales, cultivation, testing and other activities are currently prohibited in the city’s zoning code since the code prohibits any land uses that are prohibited by federal law.
The prohibition is in the city land use code and does not address the use or possession of marijuana by individuals. Those issues are covered under state law.
City planning board rejects proposed marijuana regulations
In November, city voters will be asked whether to maintain the current prohibition on marijuana operations or to allow them within the city limits.
The city is also in litigation with a local marijuana shop owner who wants to operate within the city and challenged the city’s prohibition. The city is awaiting a decision by the judge, which could be issued soon, according to City Attorney Jeff Hindoien.
The framework as proposed by city staff would amend city code to include state law definitions of authorized commercial marijuana activities; all commercial marijuana activities would be subject to state law licensure requirements; and those marijuana activities cannot be within 500 feet of and on the same street as a building used exclusively as a place of worship or school other than a commercially operated school, unless the locality requires a greater distance.
City votes to send marijuana question to the November ballot
Initially, city staff proposed a framework that would make state-licensed marijuana activities a permitted or conditional use in the city’s industrial zoning districts.
Under the initial proposal:
- dispensaries, testing laboratories would be allowed as a permitted use in either light or heavy industrial districts;
- cultivation would be a conditional use in light industrial districts and a permitted use in heavy industrial districts;
- manufacturing would be a permitted use only in the heavy industrial districts.
Dispensary owners file lawsuit challenging city prohibition of marijuana sales
The city’s industrial districts are primarily located on the northern and eastern edges of town, though there are some around the refinery and along the railroad corridor.
During the Aug. 2 meeting, Commissioners Joe McKenney and Eric Hinebauch said they wanted to treat dispensaries in a similar manner to off-premise alcohol sales or other retail operations.
In response, staff revised the proposal that they brought to the planning board on Aug. 9 to reflect that with a proposed framework that would make dispensaries a permitted use in the industrial and C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 zoning districts and a conditional use in the C-5 commercial district and the M-1 and M-2 mixed use districts.
That is the proposal being considered during the Sept. 6 public hearing.
County sending local marijuana tax question to November ballot
The downtown core is C-4 zoning and 10th Avenue is C-2 commercial zoning.
Some planning board members expressed concern with allowing marijuana operations in so many zoning districts, but didn’t make any suggestions on how to craft the regulations.
They unanimously voted not to recommend the proposal to the commission.
During their Aug. 16 meeting, Commissioner Susan Wolff said she couldn’t support the code amendment as presented and wanted to change it back to the initial proposal to allow marijuana operations only in industrial districts.
County considering local marijuana sales tax
Commissioner Rick Tryon also wanted to go back to the original proposal since there wasn’t a consensus of commissioners who wanted to expand the zoning districts.
Hinebauch said he supported the modified proposal since there is limited commercial property in the city’s industrial districts and didn’t want to limit it further by putting retail marijuana operations in those districts.
He said that if the voters opt to allow marijuana business operations in the city, they should zone it like any other business operations.
McKenney read the definitions of industrial zoning districts and that’s not where they should put retail marijuana sales.
“I hope the voters reject selling marijuana in the city limits,” McKenney said, but if they approved it, they should zone it as retail sales.
He said during the Aug. 16 meeting that marijuana dispensaries should be allowed in commercial districts since “10th Avenue South is not a neighborhood, downtown is not a neighborhood.”
Locals petitioning to send marijuana question to November county ballot
Wolff disagreed and said that there are residential areas and schools downtown and close off of the 10th Avenue South corridor.
Mayor Bob Kelly said during the Aug. 16 meeting that he’d support the ordinance as presented since he thinks the public should be aware of where marijuana operations could be located when the consider their November ballot.
He said he wanted to hear more from the public on where marijuana businesses should be allowed.
Commissioners can make amendments to the proposed regulations during the Sept. 6 meeting.
County holds that commercial marijuana operation in mixed use district is illegal
Staff asked that if commissioners have a strong preference for an amendment that let staff know so they can have something prepared for that meeting.
The County Commission voted earlier this year to send the question of a three percent local tax on marijuana sales to the November ballot. If approved, the county would retain 50 percent of the tax, the state would take 5 percent and the remaining 45 percent would be split between the incorporated municipalities of Great Falls, Belt, Cascade and Neihart, according to the county.
In June, the county attorney’s office told the County Commission that they estimate $1.6 million in marijuana sales monthly in Cascade County, of which the three percent tax would equate to about $50,000 countywide that would be split between the municipalities in the county.
Area residents were also gathering signatures on a petition to send a similar question of whether marijuana business operations should be allowed in the county to the November ballot. They failed to gather enough signatures, according to the county elections office.
County attorney holds that petition required to send marijuana question to ballot
Under the legal requirements, the petitioners needed to gather about 8,000 valid signatures.
As of Aug. 16, they had submitted 809, according to the elections office.
In December, County Commissioners updated their zoning regulations to allow recreational marijuana operations in heavy industrial districts, where medical marijuana operations had already been allowed.
