[1. Call to Order NOTICE OF OPTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the Commission and to the general public that, at this regular meeting, the Commission may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for legal advice and discussion with the City’s attorneys for legal advice on any item listed on the following agenda, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3).]

LET'S START WITH THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

[2. Roll Call NOTE: One or more Commission Members may be in attendance telephonically or by other technological means. MARIE JONES, CHAIR CAROLE MANDINO, VICE CHAIR DR. RICARDO GUTHRIE MARY NORTON DR. ALEX MARTINEZ BOB HARRIS III LLOYD PAUL ]

RICARDO GUTHRIE, BOB HARRIS AND ALEX MARTINEZ ARE ALL EXCUSED.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO I SEE THAT WE HAVE THE NOTICE THE OPTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THERE.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE READ OUT OR FOR THE PUBLIC? NO, THAT'S ALWAYS ON THERE.

IT'S JUST IT'S JUST A NOTICE THAT WE HAVE TO POST FOR PUBLIC PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, BUT.

NOPE. OKAY. OKAY.

I GUESS I NEVER NOTICED IT BEFORE.

ALL RIGHT. SO AT THIS TIME, ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY SUBJECT WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTION.

THAT IS NOT SCHEDULED BEFORE THE COMMISSION TODAY.

DUE TO OPEN MEETING LAWS THE COMMISSION CANNOT DISCUSS OR ACT ON ITEMS PRESENTED DURING THIS PORTION OF THE AGENDA.

TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA.

PLEASE WAIT FOR THE CHAIR TO CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME? I DON'T SEE ANY HANDS RAISED.

SO I'LL CONTINUE.

NEXT, WE WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS MAY 25TH.

[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the minutes from the meetings on Wednesday, May 25 and June 8, 2022.]

ACTUALLY, THE LAST TWO MEETINGS, MAY 25TH AND JUNE 8TH.

AS YOU RECALL, MAY 25TH WAS THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

WE HAD THE PLANNING IT WASN'T AN EXECUTIVE.

IT WAS A PLANNING MEETING.

A TRAINING MEETING.

LOOKING FOR MOTION ON THOSE.

I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES FROM MAY 25TH, 2022 AS WRITTEN.

THIS IS MARY NORTON. I'LL SECOND THAT.

OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE WE CONTINUE? SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THOSE MINUTES.

PLEASE SAY AYE, AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. SO NOW WE'RE READY FOR THE JUNE 8TH MINUTES.

I CAN MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM JUNE 8TH.

THIS IS MARY NORTON.

THANK YOU. THIS IS COMMISSIONER PAUL, I'LL SECOND.

OKAY. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AYE, AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED.

OKAY AND THAT PASSES.

NEXT, WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[A. PZ-22-00074: Noble Herb’s request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment to modify the existing Marijuana Dispensary hours. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with this report, find that the required findings of the Zoning Code have been met, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Zoning Code Text Amendment. ]

[B. PZ-22-00089: City’s request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment to modify the existing Marijuana Dispensary land use and Specific to Use provisions for Marijuana Establishments to address Proposition 207 – Smart and Safe Arizona Act (recreational use of marijuana) that was approved by the Arizona voters in November 2020 and the recent issuance of social equity licenses. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with this report, find that the required findings of the Zoning Code have been met, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Zoning Code Text Amendment.]

FIRST ITEM PZ-22-00074 REQUEST FOR ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT FOR NOBLE HERB.

GOOD EVENING CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS TIFFANY ANTLE.

CAN YOU SEE MY PRESENTATION? YES. PERFECT.

SO I WILL BE PRESENTING TWO SEPARATE CASES TONIGHT.

THEY ARE MOVING SEPARATELY.

WE'VE DISCUSSED THEM PREVIOUSLY IN THE SAME WORK SESSION.

I HAVE THEM ALL IN THE SAME PRESENTATION TONIGHT, BUT I'VE BUILT IN RECOMMENDATIONS AND INTO EACH ONE OF THESE, SO THEY WILL REQUIRE TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS.

SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND GET FORWARD.

THE FIRST THE FIRST CASE WE HAVE TONIGHT IS PZ 22-00074, WHICH IS A REQUEST FROM NOBLE HERB TO EXTEND THE MARIJUANA DISPENSARY HOURS OF OPERATION.

RIGHT NOW, THE ZONING CODE LIMITS HOURS OF OPERATION FOR MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES FROM 8 A.M.

TO 7 P.M., AND THE REQUEST IS TO EXTEND THAT FROM 8 A.M.

TO 10:00 PM.

SO YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS THE EXTENT OF THIS AMENDMENT.

IT'S NOT VERY LONG.

IT'S JUST SIMPLY CHANGING THAT.

7 P.M. TO 10 P.M..

[00:05:03]

SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS, WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS.

WE'VE HAD A WORK SESSION WITH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THERE'S ALSO BEEN A WORK SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE PLANNING AND ZONING WORK SESSION.

WE HAD SOME FAIRLY GOOD DISCUSSION, BUT THERE WAS NOTHING DEFINITIVE IN WAY OF DECISIONS IN TERMS OF WHERE WE WERE LEANING.

SO TONIGHT YOU ARE SEEING STAFF RECOMMENDING EXACTLY AS THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED ON THE 10 P.M..

SO HERE ARE THE FINDINGS FOR ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT AND I'LL GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THESE.

THE FIRST FINDING IS THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH AND CONFORMS TO THE OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND ANY APPLICABLE SPECIFIC PLAN. THE AMENDMENTS PURPOSE IS TO EXTEND THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR MARIJUANA SALES TO ALIGN WITH OTHER SIMILAR USES IN THE COMMUNITY, SUCH AS PHARMACIES. THIS AMENDMENT IS SUPPORTED BY GOALS AND POLICIES WITHIN THE REGIONAL PLAN, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING.

MOST OF THESE GOALS AND POLICIES ARE ALL COME FROM OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROVISIONS WITHIN THE ZONING CODE.

VERY RARELY DO WE SEE ANYTHING RELATED TO GOALS AND POLICIES IN RELATION TO OURS SPECIFICALLY.

BUT THESE ARE THE ONES THAT BEST MATCHED THIS PROPOSAL, WHICH INCLUDES VERY VARIETY AND FLEXIBILITY IN LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS. REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS SUPPORT THE START OF RETENTION AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING BUSINESS ENTERPRISES AND AGAIN, NOBLE HERB IS AN EXISTING BUSINESS INSIDE THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.

THEY ARE A DUAL LICENSED FACILITY, SO THEY ARE BOTH A NONPROFIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARY AS AND AS WELL AS HAVING RECREATIONAL SALES. SO, PAULA, FINDING NUMBER TWO IS, IS THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH AND SAFETY, CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE OF THE CITY. AND IN THE PAST, I BELIEVE THAT I'VE DISCUSSED THAT I DID REACH OUT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN REGARDS TO THE EXTENSION OF HOURS.

NO CONCERNS WERE SUBMITTED AS THERE ARE OTHER SIMILAR BUSINESSES WITH SIMILAR HOURS.

THE PROVISIONS OF THIS AMENDMENT ARE NOT ANTICIPATED TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH, SAFETY AND CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE TO THE CITY.

A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PROVISIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN INCORPORATED SPECIFICALLY INTO MARIJUANA OPERATIONS, ZONING CODE STANDARDS PERTAINING TO THE SECURITY OF THESE SITES. SO MOST OF THESE SITES ARE SECURED IN WAYS THAT OTHER FACILITIES ARE NOT.

SO YOU WOULD NOT SEE THE SAME LEVEL OF SECURITY STANDARDS ON A PHARMACY THAT YOU WOULD AT A MARIJUANA OPERATION OR ESTABLISHMENT.

THESE INCLUDE EVEN HOW THEY DISPOSE OF REMNANTS AND BYPRODUCTS, AS WELL AS PROHIBITION OF ONSITE CONSUMPTION, EMISSIONS OF DUST FUMES, VAPOR SMOKE AND ODORS.

AND AGAIN, THEY HAVE FAIRLY STRONG SECURITY STANDARDS THAT THEY NEED TO MAKE.

SO STAFF WAS ABLE TO MAKE THE FINDING NUMBER TWO.

AND FINDING NUMBER THREE IS THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT WITH OTHER APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CODE.

AND THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT IS, IT UTILIZES THE EXISTING FORMAT, IT DOESN'T CONFLICT WITH OTHER ZONING CODE PROVISIONS, AND IT STICKS WITH THE PURPOSE OF KEEPING A CONTEMPORARY SET OF LAND USE AND REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE STRAIGHTFORWARD, USABLE AND EASILY UNDERSTOOD.

SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIRED FINDINGS, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT PZ 22-00074 MARIJUANA DISPENSARY.

AND I'VE ADDED IN THIS RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT BECAUSE THAT'S THE NEXT TEXT AMENDMENT.

SO JUST TRYING TO BE AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE IN TERMS OF THE HOURS OF OPERATION AS PRESENTED BY STAFF AND I WAS ABLE TO INCLUDE HERE THAT PROPOSED AMENDMENT.

I'M HAPPY TO PAUSE HERE BEFORE MOVING FORWARD TO HAVE DISCUSSION ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM AND ALLOW THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A DECISION ON THIS ITEM IF YOU SO CHOOSE.

OKAY. I SEE COMMISSIONER MANDINO, YOU HAVE YOUR HAND RAISED? YES. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.

WHILE THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD BY NOBLE HERB, WILL OTHER DISPENSARIES BE NOTIFIED THAT THIS THIS CHANGE HAS HAPPENED? WE HAVE ONE OTHER DISPENSARY RIGHT NOW IN THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.

I'M PROBABLY SURE THAT THEY'RE FOLLOWING IT, BUT IF NOT, I WILL MAKE SURE TO REACH OUT TO THEM AND LET THEM KNOW OF THE CHANGES.

THANK YOU. AND COMMISSIONER NORTON.

THANK YOU. I'VE ACTUALLY GIVEN THIS A LOT OF THOUGHT.

[00:10:04]

AND I LISTENED TO THE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION WHERE THIS PRESENTATION WAS MADE TO THEM AND THEIR COMMENTS.

AND ONE OF THE COMMENTS AND IT'S IN FINDING ONE IS THE ALIGNMENT WITH PHARMACIES.

SO I KIND OF DID A LITTLE MORE LOOKING INTO THAT ASPECT OF IT AS FAR AS SORT OF THE DEFINITION OF THE PHARMACY, IS IT ACTUALLY THE PHARMACY STORE OR IS IT THE PHARMACY COUNTER WHERE MEDICATIONS AND DRUGS ARE DISPENSED? AND IN OUR CITY, YOU KNOW, THE TWO WALMARTS, THE TWO WALGREENS, THE TWO CVS AND THE SAFEWAY PHARMACIES, THEIR STORES ARE OPEN TILL 10 AND 11 AT NIGHT, BUT THEIR PHARMACY COUNTERS ARE ONLY OPEN UNTIL 7 OR8 AT NIGHT. AND EVEN EARLIER ON THE WEEKENDS.

ONLY WALGREENS HAS THEIR PHARMACY COUNTER OPEN UNTIL 10 P.M..

SO I WAS TAKING ISSUE, I GUESS, WITH THE IDEA OF EXTENDING THE HOURS OF DISPENSARIES TO ALIGN WITH PHARMACIES AND ALSO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THAT ONCE THIS IS CHANGED, IT WILL AFFECT NOT ONLY THE DUAL THE DUAL LICENSED DISPENSARIES, BUT IT WILL AFFECT DOWN THE LINE THE RECREATIONAL ONLY THE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES THAT MAY COME BEFORE US. SO THAT THAT CONCERNED ME WHILE I KNOW WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO ANYBODY, PARTICULARLY THOSE WITH A MEDICAL CARD THAT MAY NEED TO VISIT THE DISPENSARIES LATER IN THE EVENING, IT IS GOING TO.

TAKE EFFECT FOR ALL DISPENSARIES.

AND SECONDLY, I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE US ALIGN WITH OTHER NORTHERN ARIZONA CITIES, AS WELL AS THE COUNTY DISPENSARY. AND ALL OF THOSE IN SEDONA AND PRESCOTT AND IN THE COUNTY JURISDICTION ARE ONLY OPEN UNTIL 8 P.M..

SO WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW WOULD BE MY INTENTION WOULD BE TO RECOMMEND THAT THIS MOVE FORWARD, BUT WITH THE ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATION THAT THE HOURS BE REVISED TO NO LATER THAN 8 P.M..

BUT I'M LOOKING FOR OTHER THOUGHTS FROM IF THERE WAS ANY PUBLIC COMMENT OR OTHER COMMISSIONERS THINKS.

I HAVE THIS IS I HAVE ONE THOUGHT ON THAT.

I THINK THAT THE RESTRICTION ON HOURS FOR DISPENSARIES WOULD BE BY ORDINANCE, WHEREAS I DON'T KNOW IF IF THAT DRUGS THAT PHARMACY COUNTERS ARE RESTRICTED BY ORDINANCE, THAT'S PROBABLY MORE JUST THEIR CHOICE.

DO WE KNOW IF THEY'RE RESTRICTED BY ORDINANCE? THAT IS CORRECT, MARIE.

THE ONLY OTHER PLACE WHERE WE SEE ANY HOURLY REQUIREMENTS IN THE ZONING CODE ONE IS FOR OUTDOOR LIGHTING.

THERE IS A STANDARD ON MIXED USE BUILDINGS FOR SOME OUR REGULATION, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, WE DON'T REGULATE SIMILAR RETAIL OPERATIONS.

WE DON'T LIMIT THE HOURS OF OPERATION.

OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS? I JUST WANTED TO REMIND AS WELL THAT THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT AND I'M NOT SURE IF THEY HAD ANY COMMENTS OR PRESENTATION THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN MAKING.

WELL, WE COULD GO, WELL, OKAY, IF WE WANT TO SEPARATE THOSE.

WE COULD ASK THE APPLICANT TO GO AHEAD AND PRESENT ON THIS AT THIS TIME.

IF THEY'D LIKE TO DO THAT.

THIS IS [INAUDIBLE] PEACOCK FISHER ON BEHALF OF NOBLE HERB.

IS IT OKAY IF I PROCEED? YES, THAT'D BE GREAT.

THANK YOU, GO AHEAD. GREAT.

FIRST, I WANTED TO THANK MS. NORTON FOR HER COMMENTS, BUT I ALSO WANT TO REITERATE THAT THAT THERE IS PHARMACY ACCESS THAT IS AVAILABLE TILL 10 P.M., I THINK, WHEREAS ON THE MEDICAL DISPENSARY SIDE, WE CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE THAT BECAUSE OF THE ORDINANCES.

I ALSO WANTED TO MAKE THE POINT THAT WHILE THE PLANNING AND ZONING AND THE CITY COUNCIL IS TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE LICENSING STRUCTURE, REALLY OUR ASKING BEFORE THE IS COMING BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING REGARDING OUR DUAL

[00:15:07]

STATUS WHICH WHICH SERVES MEDICAL PATIENTS THERE.

AND WHILE WE HAVE USED OPERATING HOURS AS EXAMPLES OF PHARMACIES, GROCERY STORES, WALGREENS STORES, GYMS, RESTAURANTS, REALLY TO SHOW THE ACCESSIBILITY THAT CUSTOMERS HAVE TO VARIOUS SERVICES AROUND FLAGSTAFF WHEN THEY MIGHT WORK OFF HOURS OR DIFFERENT SHIFTS TO ENSURE THEY'RE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THINGS.

ALSO UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE POINT OF MAKING THE COMPARISON TO OTHER TO NORTHERN ARIZONA.

BUT AS YOU GUYS KNOW, FLAGSTAFF POPULATION IS MUCH LARGER THAN SOME OF YOUR NORTHERN CITIES, SISTER CITIES.

AND SO I THINK THAT THAT IS WORTH MENTIONING AS YOU FIGURE OUT ACCESS AND MOVING FORWARD.

YOU KNOW, I ALSO THINK THAT WHEN IT COMES TO ACCESSIBILITY, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO PUT YOUR SHOES IN PATIENTS THAT HAVE DEBILITATING CONDITIONS, TRYING TO MAKE IT THROUGH, WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO OPEN UP THE HOURS.

BUT THE OTHER THING THAT IS REALLY IMPACTFUL WITH THIS IS CURRENTLY AT THE CLOSED TIME, WE GET A HUGE BACK LOAD OF CUSTOMERS.

I'M SURE IF ANY OF YOU HAVE DRIVEN BY SOME OF THE DISPENSARY PARKING LOTS AT CLOSING HOURS, YOU WILL SEE THAT THEY ARE OVERPACKED, OVERFILLED AND IT CREATES A HARD STOP AT THAT TIME.

EXTENDING THE HOURS WILL NOT ONLY ALLOW ADDITIONAL PATIENT AND CONSUMER ACCESS, IT WILL ALSO ALLOW A SECOND SHIFT OF EMPLOYEES.

SO WE ARE ABLE TO HIRE OR HIRE TWO FULL TIME SHIFTS.

RIGHT NOW WE CAN, BASED ON THE LIMITED HOURS, HAVE ONE EXTENDED SHIFT AND NOT HAVE TWO FULL SHIFTS OF CUSTOMERS.

AND ALSO IT DOESN'T ALLOW TO SPREAD THAT TRAFFIC CUSTOMER AND TRAFFIC TO THE STORES WITH THAT HARD CLOSE AT 7.

SO IT HAS MULTIFACETED TO REALLY HELP WITH THE EFFICIENCIES AND TRAFFIC AND ACCESS AND JUST APPRECIATE THE APPRECIATE THE PLANNING AND ZONING CONSIDERATION OF THIS AND HAPPY TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT IS REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION.

OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY MORE HANDS RAISED.

SO WHY DON'T WE GO ON TO THE TO THE SECOND RELATED CASE.

SURE. AND I WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND AT THIS POINT, SORT OF ADD IN THIS NEW INFORMATION THAT I RECEIVED IN THE LAST TWO DAYS IS THAT THERE IS A NEW HOUSE BILL BEING CONSIDERED BY THE ARIZONA LEGISLATURE.

THIS WOULD COME INTO EFFECT IF IT'S PASSED, IT WOULD LIKELY COME INTO EFFECT OCTOBER OF THIS YEAR.

AND IT WOULD BASICALLY MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR THE ENTITIES THAT HAVE RECEIVED THE SOCIAL EQUITY RECREATIONAL ONLY LICENSES TO ALSO OBTAIN THE LICENSE OR THE PERMISSION FOR THE NONPROFIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARY.

SO IT IS LIKELY IN THE END, AFTER ALL IS SAID AND DONE, THAT MOST OF THE DISPENSARIES WE SEE WILL BE THE DUAL FACILITIES.

I CAN'T SAY FOR CERTAIN THAT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT I DID JUST WANT TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT THINGS WERE ALREADY HAPPENING ON THE STATE LEVEL.

AND I COULDN'T EVEN BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND WHY OR EXPLAIN WHY I HAVEN'T.

I'VE ONLY JUST BEGUN TO DELVE INTO THIS PARTICULAR BILL, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THINGS ARE ALREADY A CHANGE AT THE STATE LEVEL.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE YOU AWARE.

SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON.

LET'S SEE. WE'VE LOST YOUR VOICE OR I HAVE LOST YOUR VOICE.

TIFFANY, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING.

AM I BACK NOW? YES, YOU'RE BACK.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. SO OUR SECOND CASE IS IN REGARDS TO MARIJUANA OPERATIONS AS A WHOLE.

THE PRIMARY PURPOSE IS TO DEAL WITH SINGLE RECREATIONAL SALES ESTABLISHMENTS.

[00:20:04]

THIS IS PZ 29-00089.

AND THIS IS A REQUEST COMING FROM THE CITY ITSELF.

AND THIS IS TO AMEND THE ZONING CODE TO ADDRESS MARIJUANA OPERATIONS IN THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF BY OBTAINING TERMS AND DEFINITIONS TO INCLUDE THAT SINGLE RECREATIONAL SALES ESTABLISHMENT AND REVISE THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL MARIJUANA OPERATIONS FORMERLY MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS, IF THIS TEXT AMENDMENT IS APPROVED.

SO THIS IS THE OVERVIEW OF THIS TEXT AMENDMENT.

RIGHT NOW, MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES ARE ONLY ALLOWED IN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE.

THE USE IN THE MARIJUANA TO THE USED MARIJUANA DISPENSARY WOULD CHANGE TO MARIJUANA RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT.

WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING A SLIGHT CHANGE TO THE USES AS THEY'RE LISTED IN OUR INDUSTRIAL ZONES.

SO IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONES WE HAVE THE OFFSITE CULTIVATION LOCATIONS AND MANUFACTURING LOCATIONS.

WE'RE JUST CHANGING THAT TERMINOLOGY FROM LOCATION TO ESTABLISHMENT.

AND AGAIN, THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF DOING THIS IS TO BETTER ALIGN AND MATCH WITH ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES AND THEIR DEFINITIONS.

SO HERE IS ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT CHANGE THAT'S COMING ALONG IN THIS AMENDMENT.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING TO CHANGE THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT BETWEEN MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS AND IN THIS CASE, FROM 2000 FEET TO 2500 FEET AND WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH SOME MAPS SO THAT YOU CAN SEE.

SO BASICALLY 2500 FOOT SEPARATION SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE WHAT THIS MEANS.

THIS FIRST MAP IS OUR EXISTING.

SO THIS IS THE 2000 FOOT SEPARATION.

THIS BLUE BUBBLE YOU SEE UP IN THE NORTHERN AREA IS ACTUALLY LOCATED IN THE COUNTY JUST OUT SIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS. AND THEN, OF COURSE, YOU'LL SEE THE TWO DISPENSARIES THAT ARE CURRENTLY LOCATED INSIDE OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.

SO NOBLE HERB IS CURRENTLY LOCATED IN THE YELLOW CIRCLE, AND I'M NOT GOING TO REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE OTHER DISPENSARY NOW THAT IS LOCATED NEAR THE OTHER SAFEWAY SHOPPING CENTER.

SO THE BLUE BUBBLE NEXT TO THE YELLOW NOBLE HERB IS THEIR NEW LOCATION.

SO IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO DRIVE BY, IT'S THE OLD [INAUDIBLE] RESTAURANT.

THE BUILDING IS SO MUCH DIFFERENT THAN IT EVER USED TO BE, SO IT'S DEFINITELY A SIGHT TO SEE.

SO LOTS OF IMPROVEMENTS BEING MADE ALONG THAT CORRIDOR.

BUT YOU CAN SEE THIS IS THAT 2000 FOOT.

SO THE EXISTING NOBLE HERB SITE IS OUTSIDE.

IT IS MORE THAN 2000.

SO IT'S A GOOD REPRESENTATION OF WHAT OUR BOUNDARIES ARE.

NOW, OF COURSE, REMEMBERING THAT MOST OF THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE FALLS ON THESE MAJOR CORRIDORS.

SO AS YOU SEE THESE BUBBLES, THEY'RE KIND OF FOLLOWING THE MAJOR CORRIDOR LINES.

THE NEXT MAP IS GOING TO SHOW YOU WHAT THE 2500 FOOT SEPARATION LOOKS LIKE.

THIS WOULD ACTUALLY PUSH THE EXISTING NOBLE HERB LOCATION INTO IT'S THE BUBBLE AND NOW THEY'RE TOO CLOSE.

SO THESE TWO SITES WOULD BE TOO CLOSE.

SO YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH OF A LARGER AREA, JUST EVEN THAT 2500 FEET IS.

THE LAST ONE THAT I HAD LOOKED AT WAS THE MILE.

THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT AS I SHOW YOU THE SEPARATION, THE MAPS GET SORT OF ZOOMED IN.

AND SO YOU'RE SEEING OVERALL OF A LESS OF AN AREA.

BUT JUST SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT A MILE SEPARATION LOOKS LIKE TAKES UP MUCH MORE OF THE CITY WOULD WOULD START TO DRAMATICALLY LIMIT AREAS THAT COULD BE POTENTIAL SO YOU COULD PROBABLY MAYBE I MEAN IF YOU WERE IN THIS CORRIDOR HERE YOU COULD MAYBE FIT INTO DEPENDING UPON ZONING, DEPENDING UPON THOSE SEPARATIONS.

SO WITH THAT, THE REST OF THE CODE AMENDMENT IS BASICALLY WE'RE RENAMING MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENT MARIJUANA OPERATION AND WE'RE ADDING RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT TO THE DEFINITION TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, WE'RE RENAMING MARIJUANA OFFSITE CULTIVATION LOCATION AND MARIJUANA OFFSITE MANUFACTURING LOCATION TO OFFSITE CULTIVATION ESTABLISHMENT AND MARIJUANA OFFSITE MANUFACTURING LOCATION TO BETTER ACTUALLY THAT SHOULD SAY, ESTABLISHMENT TO BETTER ALIGN WITH ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES.

SO WE ARE GOING TO DELETE THE MARIJUANA DISPENSARY DEFINITION IN WHOLE AND WE'RE GOING TO REPLACE WITH MARIJUANA RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT.

AND THIS WILL ALSO ALLOW FOR THE RECREATIONAL ONLY MARIJUANA SALES.

[00:25:04]

SO MARIJUANA RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT WILL INCLUDE A NONPROFIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARY, A DUAL LICENSED ESTABLISHMENT OR A SINGLE RECREATIONAL RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT.

AS ACCESSORY USES, THEY CAN INCLUDE CULTIVATION, MANUFACTURING, PROCESSING, PACKAGING OR STORAGE OF MARIJUANA PRODUCTS AS WELL ON SITE.

SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, AGAIN, THERE ARE THREE FINDINGS.

THE FIRST IS, IS THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN.

THE FINDING HERE IS VERY SIMPLE, IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE PREVIOUS THAT THE AMENDMENT'S PURPOSE, PRIMARY PURPOSE IS TO IMPLEMENT THE CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION, TO UPDATE THE ZONING CODE, TO CONFORM WITH THE ISSUANCE OF SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES, AND TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY AND CONFORMANCE WITH THE REGIONAL PLANS, GOALS AND POLICIES.

THEREFORE, THE MODIFICATIONS WOULD ALLOW FOR SINGLE RECREATIONAL RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS IN ADDITION TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES AND DUAL LICENSED ESTABLISHMENTS, SINCE VERY SIMILAR GOALS AND POLICIES GENERALLY FOUND IN OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SECTIONS.

AND THEN OF COURSE THE THE SEPARATION, THE MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENT OPERATIONS CAN ALSO YOU CAN PULL SEVERAL COMPONENTS FROM OUR COMMUNITY CHARACTER SECTION AS WELL.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION FINDING NUMBER TWO, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE OF THE CITY.

THE PROVISIONS OF THE AMENDMENT ARE NOT ANTICIPATED TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH, SAFETY OR CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE OF THE CITY.

IT'S TO ASSIST IN ASSURING THAT THE PROPOSED MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENT LAND USES ARE NOT DETRIMENTAL.

MINIMUM SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS ARE ESTABLISHED FROM FACILITIES AND LOCATIONS THAT CONTAIN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING USES.

THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT AGAIN IS JUST TO EXPAND THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT BETWEEN ACTUAL MARIJUANA OPERATIONS THEMSELVES.

ALL OF THE OTHER SEPARATION STANDARDS REMAIN THE SAME.

IN ADDITION, PROVISIONS ARE ALREADY INCORPORATED PERTAINING TO THE SECURITY, DISPOSAL AND PROHIBITION OF ONSITE CONSUMPTION AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. AND LASTLY, THE AMENDMENT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT, AS IS THE OTHER AMENDMENT.

SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIRED FINDINGS MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT PZ 22-00089 MARIJUANA OPERATIONS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

AND I'D BE HAPPY TO TRY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.

THANK YOU. I SEE COMMISSIONER MANDINO.

SO TO REFRESH MY.

TO REFRESH ALL THIS IN MY MIND.

CURRENTLY IT'S AT 2000 FEET AND WE'RE SAYING 2500 FEET.

THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE LOOKING AT EXPANDING THAT SEPARATION DISTANCE SO IN EXPANDING THAT THAT'S GOING TO MAKE IT MUCH HARDER FOR THESE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES TO BE IN OUR COMMUNITY.

I WOULDN'T SAY IT'S GOING TO BE MUCH HARDER.

IT ADDS AN ADDITIONAL BUFFER.

SO IT MAY REDUCE A COUPLE OF SITES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

BUT THE INTENTION IS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MAINTAINING PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE.

RIGHT. AND SO THAT 500 FEET, YOU THINK WILL MAINTAIN A HEALTHY I MEAN, I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHY WE'RE DOING THAT, BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT'S THAT THOSE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES ARE THEN GOING TO BE MORE LIMITED AND HARDER FOR THEM TO LOCATE IN A COMMUNITY SUCH AS OURS.

AND IF THE INTENT OF LEGISLATION IS TO HAVE MORE SOCIAL EQUITY, WE'RE ACTUALLY BY PASSING AND LIMITING IT OR PASSING THIS TO GO OUT TO 2500 SQUARE FEET INSTEAD OF 2000 OR 2500 FEET INSTEAD OF 2000, IT WILL LIMIT.

IT LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF SPACE FOR THESE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES.

WOULD YOU SAY THAT WAS CORRECT? YES. AND AND THAT THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION IS TO ALLOW FOR MORE SOCIAL EQUITY.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. AND SO WE'RE I DON'T SEE WHERE THIS IS TO ME A HEALTH AND

[00:30:02]

SAFETY ISSUE, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT 500 FEET, IT JUST LIMITS WHERE PEOPLE CAN SELL OR OPEN ANOTHER BUSINESS.

AND WE'RE LIMITING THAT AND THEN NOT OPENING SPACE FOR OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE SOCIAL EQUITY.

CORRECT. THE ADDITIONAL SEPARATION WOULD REDUCE POTENTIALLY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF RECREATION OR WOULD REDUCE THE POTENTIALLY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF SALES ESTABLISHMENTS POSSIBLE.

RIGHT. AND WHY WAS CITY STAFF BRINGING THIS FORWARD? I MEAN, WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENT TO BRING THE CHANGE FROM 2000 TO 2500? WHAT ARE THE HEALTH ISSUES THAT YOU SEE BY LIMITING MORE SOCIAL EQUITY? SURE. SO STAFF BROUGHT THIS FORWARD AS A POTENTIAL AMENDMENT AT THE WORK SESSION AND AFTER DISCUSSION.

AND AGAIN, WE DID NOT BUILD A FULL CONSENSUS WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, BUT THEN FOLLOWED UP AS WELL WITH THE WORK SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL JUST TRYING TO GARNER WHERE THE.

WHERE BOTH THE COMMISSION WAS AND COUNCIL WAS, STAFF MOVED FORWARD WITH A PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF 2500 FEET.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAD DISCUSSED THE POTENTIAL OF EVEN GOING TOWARDS A MILE.

THAT'S WHY I SHOWED THE MILE MAP.

THE CITY COUNCIL ASKED ME TO COME BACK SPECIFICALLY WITH MAPS, BUT I DID GO AHEAD AND MAKE A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION THIS TIME AROUND BECAUSE WE'RE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING TIME FRAME. I DID NEED TO DO THAT.

AND SO THAT WAS BASICALLY TRYING TO BUILD OFF OF SORT OF THE CONSENSUS OR SOME OF THE INPUT I RECEIVED FROM BOTH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL.

RIGHT. AND I'M SORRY, I THINK I UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THIS NOW THAN I DID AT OUR LAST SESSION.

SO THAT'S WHAT MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS PUTTING A LIMIT.

AND I KNOW YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S BECAUSE OF SAFETY AND HEALTH, BUT I DON'T SEE WHY THAT 500 FEET IS GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

THAT JUST MY THOUGHTS.

AND I THINK IT WILL LIMIT THE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES TO BE WHERE THEY CAN BE LOCATED.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER NORTON.

THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO THANK STAFF FOR PROVIDING THE MAPS THAT WAS REALLY HELPFUL IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED AND TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT THE EFFECT WOULD BE. I WAS GLAD TO SEE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE 2500 FEET.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD COMPROMISE IN THE SENSE THAT IT EXTENDS IT A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.

MY CONCERN WAS THAT WE DON'T END UP WITH A DISPENSARY ON EVERY CORNER IN OUR LIMITED CORRIDOR OF HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS WAS EXPLAINED, WAS PRETTY MUCH MILTON AND ROUTE 66, WHICH THEREFORE MIGHT ALSO LESSEN THE OPPORTUNITY FOR OTHER BUSINESSES TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THOSE ZONED AREAS.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THE 2500 FEET.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD COMPROMISE NOT ONLY TO ALLOW THE DISPENSARIES TO COME INTO TOWN AND BE APPROPRIATELY DISTANCED TO PRESERVE SOME OF THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL SPACE FOR OTHER BUSINESSES TO ENCOURAGE THEM.

AND JUST AS A GENERAL IN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE CITY.

SO THAT'S THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

THANKS. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER PAUL.

YEAH. THANKS.

I WILL PROBABLY BE ECHOING SOME OF ALL OF THIS.

BUT YEAH, I THINK THAT THE 2500 FOOT KIND OF COMPROMISE, WHICH I THINK IS A REALLY GOOD WAY TO PUT THAT ON THIS, PROVIDES A REASONABLE LEVEL OF DENSITY FOR ONE SPECIFIC TYPE OF BUSINESS.

[00:35:02]

LOOKING AT THE MAPS WERE ACTUALLY QUITE HELPFUL WITH THIS AS WELL, ESPECIALLY JUST TO GIVE SOME SCALE TO EXISTING BUSINESSES HERE IN FLAGSTAFF.

THIS WOULD NOT BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 2000 OR 2500 FEET WOULD NOT BE CRUCIAL IN MY GENERAL SUPPORT FOR THE TEXT AS WRITTEN.

BUT 25,000 OR EXCUSE ME, 2500, ROUGHLY A HALF MILE BETWEEN SEEMS REASONABLE AND THE THE POINT FOR ALLOWING A DIVERSITY OF BUSINESS TYPES AND USES WITHIN THAT AREA, NOT HAVING ONE TYPOLOGY KIND OF CROWDING OTHERS OUT, I THINK IS A REASONABLE POINT AS WELL.

SO MY TWO CENTS THANKS.

THANK YOU. CAROLE, IS THAT YOUR HAND AGAIN OR IS THAT SO I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE THINKING OF THIS AS A COMPROMISE, BUT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE AT 2000 SQUARE FEET OR 2000 FEET. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE COMPROMISING ON.

I KNOW IT'S, YOU KNOW, 2000 TO A MILE, BUT WE'RE AT 2000 RIGHT NOW, WHICH WOULD MEAN ESSENTIALLY SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, AT 2000 FEET, SOMEBODY COULD COME IN AND BUY THE OLD OR RENT THE OLD NOBLE HERB DISPENSARY WHERE THEY'RE CURRENTLY LOCATED. THEY COULD COME IN AND DO THAT AT 2000 FEET, BUT AT 2500 FEET, THEY COULD NOT.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

AND YOU KNOW, TO ME, THEY'RE NOT ON.

WE HAVE LIMITED AVAILABILITY AND THEY CAN'T BE AVAILABLE ON EVERY CORNER.

SO TO ME, IT'S THAT SOCIAL EQUITY PART THAT WE'RE REALLY LIMITING.

AND THAT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, AS I WAS, I WAS RAISED BY PEOPLE WHO OWNED A BUSINESS, A HARDWARE STORE.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE JEEZ, IF YOU HAVE A HARDWARE STORE HERE, YOU CAN'T OPEN ONE FOR 2500 FEET.

I MEAN, NOW ANYBODY WHO OWNS A HARDWARE STORE MAY NOT WANT TO BE NEXT TO ANOTHER HARDWARE STORE, IF YOU UNDERSTAND.

BUT WE DON'T LIMIT THAT AND I REALIZE THAT THIS IS A DIFFERENT OPERATION, BUT THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MARIJUANA OPERATIONS, IT'S NOT LIKE A BAR WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAVING SMOKING MARIJUANA OR VAPING OR EATING EDIBLE MARIJUANA ON SITE.

SO I'M NOT REALLY CERTAIN WHAT THE SAFETY ISSUE IS.

SO THAT'S JUST.

MY CONCERN AT THIS POINT.

I SEE THIS AS LIMITING THE SOCIAL EQUITY.

I'M SORRY. COMMISSIONER MANDINO.

I DID WANT TO JUST STRESS THE REASON WHY I AND I DIDN'T SAY THIS WELL ENOUGH, BUT THE REASON WHY WE WERE CONSIDERING INCREASING THE SEPARATION IS BECAUSE WHEN THE CODE WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN, WE WERE LIMITED TO TWO LOCATIONS WITHIN FLAGSTAFF.

BECAUSE THESE SEPARATIONS GO BACK TO WHEN IT WAS ONLY MEDICAL DISPENSARIES THAT WERE ALLOWED.

THAT WAS THE PRIMARY REASON OF JUST HAVING THE CONVERSATION IS BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT POTENTIAL TO HAVE MORE THAN TWO NOW.

AND SO THERE WERE A LITTLE BIT MORE ASSURANCES NOT THAT THAT NOT THAT THAT GOES I MEAN, I HEAR EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT THAT WAS THE REASON FOR LOOKING AT IT TO SEE IF THAT WAS A NECESSARY. AND THEN I THINK THE STATE LOTTERY IS NOT ISSUING THAT MANY MORE LICENSES.

SO THAT'S ALSO VERY LIMITING AND IF I RECALL, THAT MAY BE THAT ONLY TWO MORE LICENSES COULD BE ALLOWED IN FLAGSTAFF.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO THERE WERE 27 SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES JUST RECENTLY ISSUED.

AND THE WAY THAT THE LICENSES USED TO WORK, THEY WERE LIMITED TO SPECIFIC AREAS.

BUT NOW ONCE YOU HAVE THE DUAL LICENSE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT YOU CAN MOVE ANYWHERE.

SO AS LONG AS YOU'RE MEETING ALL OF THE CODES AND REQUIREMENTS OF THAT MUNICIPALITY.

SO THERE ARE THOSE 27 LICENSES NEW THAT ARE OUT THERE IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA.

AGAIN, WE'RE NOT THE PRIMARY POPULATION FOR ARIZONA, BUT I WOULD SUSPECT THAT OVER TIME WE WILL SEE SOME DESIRE FOR NEW FACILITIES IN FLAGSTAFF.

[00:40:03]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

I DO SEE THERE'S ANOTHER COMMENT, BUT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT MYSELF FIRST AND THEN I'LL CALL ON YOU.

THIS IS INTERESTING DISCUSSION, I THINK, CAROLE, YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT ABOUT EQUITY ON THIS.

WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP, THOUGH, RIGHT NOW, I'M LOOKING AT THE 2000 FOOT MAP AND IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THERE IS NO SPACE ON MILTON BETWEEN THOSE TWO FACILITIES.

FOR A THIRD ONE TO GO IN, EVEN AT 2000 FEET.

AND ALSO, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IF SOMEONE, FOR INSTANCE, DID OCCUPY THE CURRENT NOBEL HERB SITE, IT WOULDN'T. THEY COULDN'T BECAUSE IT'S WITHIN THAT 2000 FOOT BOUNDARY.

THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE VISUALLY.

IF I'M SEEING THIS RIGHT I WAS READING THE MAP THE SAME WAY YOU WERE INITIALLY NUT WHAT YOU REALLY NEED TO LOOK FOR IS, IS THAT BLACK DOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CIRCLE.

SORRY. OH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S MR. THOMPSON. I THINK IF YOU COULD TURN YOUR CAMERA OFF AND YOUR AND YOUR AUDIO FOR NOW.

THANK YOU. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

NO PROBLEM. CAN I ASK YOU TO PUT THE MAP BACK UP OF THE OF THE 2500 SQUARE FEET AND THE 2000 TO LOOK AT THOSE AGAIN. YEAH.

AND WE COULD IF WE COULD GO OVER HOW YOU'RE READING THAT, TIFFANY, THAT'D BE HELPFUL.

I MEAN, I JUST WANTED TO SAY I KNOW THAT I OUR LAST HEARING I BROUGHT UP THIS SUBJECT OF DISTANCE, AND MAINLY THAT WAS MY CONCERN, THE SAME AS MARY WAS MENTIONING, THAT THE CONCERN THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU SEE IN SOME COMMUNITIES AND YOU LIKE IN COLORADO, WHERE THERE'S JUST A GAZILLION DISPENSARIES, ONE AFTER ANOTHER, AND AS YOU DRIVE THROUGH TOWN, IT JUST LOOKS LIKE DISPENSARY HEAVEN AND JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

THAT WAS KIND OF MY THINKING ORIGINALLY ABOUT THIS.

I DO THINK, THOUGH, THAT THERE'S MORE TO CONSIDER THAN THAT.

AND COULD YOU SHOW THE 2000 SQUARE FEET? SO IF WE WO HOW SHOULD WE BE READING THIS, TIFFANY? SO IF YOU SEE THE LITTLE SQUARE, THAT'S THE PARCEL WHERE NOBLE HERB IS CURRENTLY HIGHLIGHTED.

THEY FALL OUTSIDE OF THE 2000 FOOT BUFFER AROUND THEIR FACILITY.

OKAY, SO I DID THE EXACT SAME THING.

I ACTUALLY SAID THAT THIS I ACTUALLY SAID THE OPPOSITE AT CITY COUNCIL WHEN I DID THE WORK SESSION.

AND IT TOOK MY BRAIN A MINUTE TO THERE WE GO. SO WHEN I LOOK AT THIS NEXT MAP, YOU CAN SEE THAT NOW THAT EXISTING NOBLE HERB FALLS WITHIN THE 2000 FOOT BUFFER.

SO NOW THEY'RE CLOSER THAN 2000 FEET OR 2500.

SO THEY'RE THERE AT 2500 FEET THEN? YES. THANK YOU.

SO JUST CAN I ASK ON THE MAP BECAUSE IT'S REALLY HARD TO SEE WHAT'S IN BETWEEN.

SO NOW LOOK IN BETWEEN THE TWO BLUE DOTS.

WHAT AREA OF TOWN IS THAT? CAN YOU TELL ME WHERE THAT IS IN BETWEEN? PRETTY MUCH ALL THAT'S THERE IS THE NAU CAMPUS, BUT IN THIS CURVE.

SO THIS IS WHERE CITY HALL IS.

OKAY. AND THEN WHERE THE BLUE DOT IS FOR NOBLE HERB. IGNORE THE YELLOW ONE.

TELL ME WHERE THE THE FURTHEST ON ROUTE 66, THAT IS.

SO, YES.

WHAT WHAT IS THERE ON ROUTE 66 THAT YOU CAN IDENTIFY? WE CAN'T EITHER WE CAN'T HEAR YOU OR.

SO FURTHEST TO THE EAST.

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? [INAUDIBLE] OKAY.

SO FOR THIS WHAT WHAT IS AVAILABLE FOR THIS TO THE EAST ON 66 EAST OVER HERE.

THIS WAY. RIGHT.

BUT YOU'RE SAYING I'M SAYING WHERE THE BLUE DOT ENDS OR THE BLUE CIRCLE ENDS ON ROUTE 66.

WHAT IS THAT? IS THAT SWEITZER CANYON? OH, YES SWEITZER CANYON.

SORRY. AND SO IF LET'S SAY I WAS JUST OVER THERE RECENTLY AND

[00:45:02]

VERIZON HAS SHRUNK THEIR BUSINESS.

AND PART OF WHERE VERIZON WAS IS JUST EAST OF THAT WITH THAT IN THAT SHOPPING CENTER WHERE VERIZON IS.

IS VERIZON IN THAT AREA? BECAUSE I CAN SEE.

I BELIEVE THAT VERIZON IS IN THAT BLUE EXISTING.

OKAY. BECAUSE I CAN'T REALLY TELL FROM THAT BECAUSE IT CURVES.

I CAN'T EITHER.

I APOLOGIZE [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S WHERE NOBLE HERB CURRENTLY IS.

BUT THEN IT CURVES.

IT CURVES.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES. AND SO THE CURVE WOULD TO ME MEAN THAT SHOPPING CENTER.

IT MIGHT ACTUALLY BE OUT, RIGHT? YEAH. OKAY.

SO IT MIGHT JUST BE RIGHT HERE.

YEAH. OKAY.

THANK YOU. YEAH, BUT IF NOBLE HERB FOR EXAMPLE.

OKAY. THEY COULDN'T HAVE TWO STORES WHERE THEY ARE EXISTING AND WHERE THEY'RE OPENING.

IF WE GO TO THE 2500 SQUARE [INAUDIBLE], I DON'T KNOW WHY I KEEP SAYING SQUARE FEET.

[INAUDIBLE] THAT'S CORRECT.

IF WE GO TO 2500 SQUARE FEET, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO HAVE BOTH LOCATIONS.

BUT I DO BELIEVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM NOBLE HERB ARE ON THE LINE.

I THINK THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THEIR HAND UP AND WANTED TO WEIGH IN ON THIS CONVERSATION.

I'LL BE QUIET. OKAY.

SO I DO I DO SEE COMMISSIONER PAUL AND COMMISSIONER NORTON, BUT LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A COMMENT.

IS THAT DOUGLAS DAILY? IS THAT FROM NOBLE HERB.

YES. THIS IS DOUGLAS DAILY ON THE GENERAL COUNCIL HERE AT NOBLE AIR.

I MIGHT BE ABLE TO JUST GIVE YOU SOME QUICK BACKGROUND HERE ON WHAT EXACTLY IS SOCIAL EQUITY.

SO THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE QUOTE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES ARE ACTUALLY ACQUIRED BY LARGE MULTISTATE CORPORATIONS, MOSTLY LISTED IN CANADA. THESE ARE NOT YOUR MOM AND POP OPERATIONS.

AND RIGHT NOW, THE VAST MAJORITY OF CITIES, INCLUDING NEARLY EVERYONE IN MARICOPA COUNTY, TUCSON, MOST OF THE MAJOR POPULATION AREAS, THEY'VE ACTUALLY PROHIBITED SOCIAL EQUITY.

SO THERE'S NOWHERE FOR THESE TO GO.

THERE ARE SOME RURAL AREAS THAT HAVE OPENED UP, SOME COUNTY AREAS I BELIEVE [INAUDIBLE] HAS OPENED UP.

BUT CURRENTLY FLAGSTAFF IS THE ONLY CITY REALLY ANY SIZE THAT I'M AWARE OF THAT IS MOVING FORWARD WITH LIFTING THIS PROHIBITION.

SO I THINK IT REALLY BECOMES MORE OF A QUESTION OF WHAT THE CHARACTER OF FLAGSTAFF SHOULD BE.

I KNOW THAT THE COMMISSIONER HAS SUGGESTED I DON'T THINK THE VOTERS HAD INTENDED TO SEE A DISPENSARY IN EVERY CORNER.

SO I DO THINK SOME INCREASE IN SEPARATION IS A REASONABLE APPROACH BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS A CONCERN, AT LEAST BY OUR REVIEW OF THE MAPS, THAT FLAGSTAFF COULD EASILY GET 7 TO 10 MORE DISPENSARIES IF IF THE COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL JUST CHANGING THE LAW WITHOUT ACTUALLY INCREASING ANY OF THE SEPARATIONS.

AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

WOOPS. I'M SORRY. I SEE.

I'M NOT SURE WHO CAME UP FIRST MARY OR LLOYD.

WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD WITH MARY AND THEN LLOYD AFTER THAT AFTERWARDS.

OKAY. THANKS.

THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATION OF THE MAPS.

I TOO WAS READING THEM INCORRECTLY BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT THE CIRCLE, THE FULL CIRCLE ITSELF AS THE BOUNDARIES.

AND IF WE'RE GOING FROM THE DOT IN THE MIDDLE OR THE LOCATION, THAT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE, WHICH ACTUALLY MAKES ME FEEL MORE STRONGLY ABOUT THE 25 FOOT AND 2500 FOOT SEPARATION.

AND I ALSO APPRECIATE MR. DAILY'S COMMENT ABOUT THE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES IN FLAGSTAFF.

AND YES, THE CHARACTER IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT AND THAT WE PROTECT THAT.

ALSO, IT BRINGS UP ANOTHER QUESTION.

OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS AN ORDINANCE THAT WAS ADOPTED SHORTLY AFTER THE PASSAGE OF 207 THAT FORBIDS SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES HERE.

AND SO IS THIS NEW? IS WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON OR VOTING TO RECOMMEND TODAY? IS THAT LIFTING THAT ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES BECAUSE NOW WE'RE GOING TO LUMP THEM ALL TOGETHER AND CALL THEM ONE THING.

YES. OKAY. OKAY.

THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

[00:50:01]

THAT CLARIFICATION HELPS.

THANK YOU. LLOYD.

YEAH. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, GOING BACK TO THE MAPS, THE KIND OF DIFFERENCE IT SEEMS THAT WE'RE ARGUING OVER HERE IS WHETHER THE SEPARATION, SAY, FOR INSTANCE, BETWEEN THE NEW NOBLE HERB AND THE EXISTING NOBLE HERB AND WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IF I'M SORRY, IT LOOKS LIKE THE MAP HAS GONE AWAY AGAIN NOW, BUT IF THAT COULD COME UP AND WE CAN MAYBE SWITCH BETWEEN THE TWO, IT PRACTICALLY LOOKS LIKE THE DISTANCE OF THE PREVIOUS EXISTING FACILITY MOVING HALFWAY DOWN THE BLOCK WOULD THEN BE ALLOWED OR NOT ALLOWED UNDER KIND OF WHAT WE'RE KIND OF DISCUSSING AND GOING BACK AND FORTH HERE.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE 2500 FOOT SEPARATION, WHERE IT WOULD FALL WITHIN THE BOUNDARY IS RIGHT ON THE EDGE.

SO, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, A HANDFUL OF FEET IN THE OTHER DIRECTION IS KIND OF WHAT WE ARE ARGUING, OR NOT ARGUING, BUT HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT.

I THINK THAT THE TWO BUSINESSES WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW OR A COMPLETE OR EXCUSE ME, SAME BUSINESS, THE FUTURE LOCATION, THE EXISTING LOCATION, I THINK THAT IS AN ABSOLUTELY REASONABLE SEPARATION DISTANCE BETWEEN TWO SIMILAR BUSINESSES.

SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM STAYING WITH THE 2000 FOOT SEPARATION AS CURRENTLY OR AS PREVIOUSLY DRAFTED.

YOU KNOW, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 2000 AND 2500 FEET, AGAIN, IS NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT PERSONALLY FOR ME, MOVES THE NEEDLE AND ONE WAY OR ANOTHER IN TERMS OF FINAL DECISION FOR SUPPORT ON THIS.

THANKS. I THINK.

MARY, YOUR. OKAY.

SORRY. SORRY. I'M GOING TO LOWER MINE.

THAT WAS FROM BEFORE.

OH, NO PROBLEM. THOSE HANDS ARE JUST COMING UP FAST AND FURIOUS HERE, SO JUST WANTED TO BE SURE I'M NOT MISSING ANYBODY, BUT I GUESS I TEND TO AGREE THAT.

I MEAN, AS I UNDERSTAND THIS MAP BETTER NOW AND HOW TO READ IT, I SEE THAT THERE'S STILL ROOM FOR ANOTHER ANOTHER FACILITY BETWEEN THE TWO.

EVEN AT 2500 FEET, THERE'S STILL ROOM FOR ANOTHER FACILITY, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHERE IN THAT AREA, ROUTE 66 OR MILTON OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

AND THEN THERE'S STILL ROOM ON FURTHER EAST ON ROUTE 66.

THERE'S ROOM UP ALONG FOURTH STREET AREA.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE.

I DO THINK I'M REALLY GLAD THAT YOU RAISED THE ISSUE OF THE EQUITY BECAUSE I'VE WONDERED ABOUT THAT, WHETHER THIS IS REALLY YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES THESE RULES ARE MADE AND IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, THOSE COVID FUNDS ENDED UP GOING TO PEOPLE WHO REALLY DIDN'T NEED IT IN A LOT OF CASES, AND IT'S JUST GOING TO BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IS IT TRULY EQUITY? HOW IS IT REALLY WORKING? AND SO BUT ANYWAY, I GUESS I FEEL LIKE IT DOESN'T INTERFERE IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY WITH THAT. AND THAT DOES ACHIEVE THE THE IDEA OF KIND OF LIMITING THE PRESENCE OF THEM ALL ALONG OUR MAJOR ROADS.

THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I STAND ON IT.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION OR THE APPLICANT ON THIS OR THE STAFF? CAN I JUST ASK? SO I HAVEN'T BEEN TO COLORADO SINCE MARIJUANA'S BEEN RECREATIONAL USE IN COLORADO. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOU SEE TO ME? THAT WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO THAT MIGHT MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO ME.

SOME OF THOSE TOWNS.

I'LL JUST SPEAK FROM MY EXPERIENCE I'VE DRIVEN THROUGH RECENTLY AND SOME OF THOSE TOWNS I'M TRUE.

THERE TEND TO BE SMALLER TOWNS THAT I'M DRIVING THROUGH.

THERE WILL BE A WHOLE BUT I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF YOU SEE THEM.

THEY'RE JUST REALLY FREQUENT ALONG THE MAIN ROAD, WHICH IS WHAT YOU SEE WHEN YOU'RE GOING THROUGH.

SO I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I MEAN.

COMMISSIONER NORTON. I'LL JUST PIGGYBACK ONTO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I VACATION IN COLORADO A COUPLE OF TIMES A YEAR AND HAVE SINCE, WELL, LONG BEFORE MARIJUANA WAS LEGALIZED IN COLORADO AND SINCE. AND YES, THERE IS A PROLIFERATION OF DISPENSARIES IN EVERY LITTLE STRIP MALL, EVERY CORNER. IT'S NOTICEABLE.

IT DEFINITELY, I FEEL, CHANGES THE LOOK AND THE FEEL AND THE CHARACTER OF THE TOWNS BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT YOU NOTICE.

[00:55:04]

AND SURE IN SOME OF THOSE LITTLE TOWNS YOU SURE WOULD LIKE TO SEE OTHER BUSINESSES FLOURISHING, NOT JUST THE DISPENSARIES, THAT'S MY TWO CENTS.

THANK YOU BOTH. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. DAILY.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY ONE OTHER CLARIFICATION ALSO.

THERE ALSO IS THE TIME FACTOR THAT'S PRESENT HERE.

SO WHEN THE DHS AWARDED THESE LICENSES, EACH OF THE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES, THEY HAVE 18 MONTHS TO OPEN.

AND AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, MOST MAJOR CITIES HAVE HAVE PROHIBITED SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES, HAVE THE BAN IN PLACE, EVEN THE ONES THAT MIGHT BE THAT ARE TALKING ABOUT OPENING THEM UP AT THE VERY BEGINNING STAGES.

SO IT WILL BE MONTHS BEFORE THEY COME ONLINE.

SO THERE IS A CONCERN, AS FLAGSTAFF BEING THE FIRST MAJOR CITY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, IS THAT WHERE ARE THESE 27 OPERATIONS GOING TO GO AS SOON AS THEY FIND OUT FLAGSTAFF IS GOING TO BE LIFTING THE PROHIBITION.

I WOULD EXPECT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF THEM COMING IN BECAUSE PRIMARILY THAT 18 MONTH BAN, JUST WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT RIGHT NOW.

YOU KNOW HOW LONG THAT TAKES.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO FIND A HOME.

AND THERE'S ALREADY TALK AMONGST THE COMMUNITY THAT FLAGSTAFF IS THE PLACE TO LOOK.

SO I THINK THERE IS A LEGITIMATE CONCERN THAT IF NOTHING IS DONE, THAT YOU WILL SEE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FACILITIES SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN COLORADO SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO.

AND I WOULD ALSO ADD, JUST WITH THE TWO FACILITIES WE HAVE IN FLAGSTAFF TODAY, IF YOU INCLUDE THE FACILITY AT THE COUNTY, SO THERE'S THREE IN FLAGSTAFF THAT'S ALREADY ONE OF THE HIGHEST DENSITIES OF MAJOR CITIES THROUGHOUT ALL OF ARIZONA.

AND I THINK THE COMMISSION SHOULD CONSIDER THAT WHEN THEY'RE CONSIDERING THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER NORTON.

YES, THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO ADD ON TO THAT.

I WONDER IF THAT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE LEGISLATION THAT TIFFANY WAS MENTIONING THAT'S GOING THROUGH THE HOUSE AND BEYOND, THAT WOULD MAKE THOSE SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES DUAL PURPOSES BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD NOT ALLOW THOSE OTHER CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES TO FORBID SOCIAL EQUITY LICENSES BECAUSE THEY'D ALL THEREFORE BE DUAL LICENSES.

SO JUST WANTED TO KIND OF COME FULL CIRCLE ON THAT THOUGHT.

AND THEN JUST, YOU KNOW, MY THOUGHT IS, YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES WHEN.

YOU KNOW, PLANNING AND ZONING OR CITY COUNCIL IS MAKING CHANGES OR NEW RULES, LAWS, ORDINANCES IS YOU KNOW, WE DON'T ALWAYS MAYBE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE FULL RAMIFICATIONS OF IT.

AND I JUST FEEL THAT THIS IS PERHAPS ONE OF THOSE INSTANCES AND IT CONCERNS ME.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

THANK YOU. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER HANDS RAISED.

SO I WOULD GUESS THAT WE'RE READY TO HAVE A MOTION.

WELL, TWO MOTIONS FIRST.

THE FIRST IS THE LET'S SEE, WHAT IS IT BE? WE SEE THE P&Z COMMISSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REPORT AND THE AND THE FINDINGS OF THE ZONING CODE.

THAT WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF PZ 2 2-00074. ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT.

OKAY. WITH THE ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT.

TO MODIFY THE EXISTING MARIJUANA DISPENSARY HOURS FROM 7:00 P.M.

TO 10 P.M.. OKAY.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? THIS IS COMMISSIONER PAUL, I'LL SECOND.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANY MORE DISCUSSION BEFORE WE VOTE? I'LL JUST ADD IN MY COMMENT THAT I WISHED WE WERE GIVING AN ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATION TO THE CLOSING HOURS BEFORE 8 P.M..

I WOULD JUST REMIND YOU TOO THAT YOU'RE ALWAYS FREE TO AMEND.

THIS MOTION HAS BEEN MADE, SO WE NEED TO VOTE ON IT.

BUT IN, YOU KNOW, FOR THE FUTURE YOU WOULD BE WELCOME TO PROPOSE OR MAKE A MOTION THAT WOULD

[01:00:08]

INCLUDE THAT AMENDMENT TOO.

SO JUST SO YOU.

YEAH. YEAH.

THANKS. I MISSED.

I MISSED THE BOAT. OH, OKAY.

WELL, WE'LL SEE HOW THE VOTE GOES.

SO, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION.

I GUESS. CAN I CAN I JUST ASK CAN I JUST ASK YOU A PROCEDURAL QUESTION? SO IF I'M NOT IF I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE 10:00 PM.

WOULD I NEED TO VOTE NO.

YES. I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S TRUE.

YOU'D PROBABLY BE ASKED TO WHEN WE WHEN WE ALL VOTE WHEN WE VOTE AFFIRMATIVELY.

IT'S ASSUMED THAT WE'RE AGREEING WITH ALL THE FINDINGS.

SO IF WE IF WE VOTE NEGATIVELY, THEN WE NEED TO STATE WHICH FINDINGS WE CAN'T MAKE.

GREAT. WILL DO.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER MANDINO? YES, I WAS JUST GOING TO STATE THAT THE LAST MEETING I HAD SAID SOMETHING ABOUT 9:00 PM.

BUT IN REALITY, I DON'T HAVE BETWEEN 9 AND 10 P.M..

I DON'T SEE THE DIFFERENCE.

BUT. SO TO ME, 10 P.M.

IS IS OKAY AS WELL.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT THAT LAST MEETING I WAS SUGGESTING MAYBE 9:00 PM, BUT I REALLY IT REALLY DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THAT HOUR.

OKAY. NOW I'LL ADD IN 9 P.M..

I THINK WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS MOTION UNLESS THE PERSON WHO MADE THE MOTION WISHES TO AMEND IT IS THAT.

DO I HAVE THAT RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. SO I CAN SUGGEST THAT I AMEND THE MOTION TO SAY 9:00 PM INSTEAD OF 10 P.M..

AND THE SECOND, THE PERSON WHO'S SECONDED HAS TO ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT.

OKAY. I BELIEVE THAT WAS COMMISSIONER PAUL.

THAT'S CORRECT.

I'M FINE WITH DOING THAT.

THAT MIGHT CHANGE MY PREVIOUSLY, I GUESS DECIDED THOUGHTS.

BUT YES, THAT'S FINE.

IF WE'D LIKE TO DO THAT.

THAT'S I AGREE TO AMEND MY SECOND.

OKAY. SO NOW OUR NEW MOTION AMENDS THE ORIGINAL MOTION SO THAT THE HOURS PROPOSED ARE I FORGOT WHAT THE OPENING TIME IS [INAUDIBLE].

BUT AT THIS POINT IT SEEMS AS IF IT MAY FOR.

JUST THE LACK OF TO NOT CONFUSE ANYONE, INCLUDING THE MINUTES.

I THINK MAYBE IT MIGHT BE BEST IF YOU WITHDRAW THE MOTION.

OKAY. AND THEN START OVER SINCE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND MAYBE SOME HESITATION ON AMENDING SECONDS, ETC., I THINK THE BEST THING WOULD BE TO WITHDRAW THAT MOTION AND BEGIN AGAIN.

OKAY, SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO AND I WILL WITHDRAW THE MOTION IF MY SECOND WILL AGREE.

COMMISSIONER MANDINO THIS IS COMMISSIONER PAUL.

THAT IS ACCEPTABLE IN MY IN.

ALL RIGHT, THEN I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT FOR PZ 22-00074 TO MODIFY THE EXISTING MARIJUANA DISPENSARY HOURS FROM 8 A.M.

TO 9 P.M.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REPORT AND WITH ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIRED FINDINGS OF THE ZONING CODE.

OKAY A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE DO WE HAVE A SECOND.

THIS IS MARY NORTON, AND I WILL SECOND THAT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I HAVE A COMMENT ON THIS BECAUSE THIS PUTS ME IN A KIND OF A QUANDARY.

I FEEL LIKE I WAS FINE WITH THE 10 P.M.

AND I'M KIND OF.

I'M SENSITIVE TO THE IDEA OF SHIFTS, PUTTING PEOPLE ON SHIFTS AND HOW YOU DO THAT WHEN YOU HAVE LIMITED HOURS.

[01:05:03]

I GUESS I WANT TO ASK THE APPLICANT.

IF HOW MUCH I MEAN I WOULD I WOULD I'M ALSO FINE WITH 9 IF THAT THAT DOES THE TRICK.

BUT I'D LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT WHETHER OR NOT.

THEY CAN SAY WHETHER OR NOT THAT ADDITIONAL HOUR MAKES A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF THEIR STAFFING.

THE 10 P.M. ALLOWS FOR TWO FULL SHIFTS.

OKAY. WELL, I THINK I'M GOING TO LIKELY VOTE AGAINST THIS BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO STICK WITH THE ORIGINAL WORDING.

STAFF RECOMMENDED IT.

BUT IT'S NOT THAT THAT'S THAT'S MY THINKING BEHIND IT.

COMMISSIONER PAUL. I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH MAIRE TO ME, THE ONE HOUR DIFFERENCE CREATING STAFFING AND OPERATIONAL ISSUES IS NOT WORTH IT TO ME.

AND I WILL ALSO BE VOTING NO ON THE BASIS OF THE ORIGINAL TEXT BEING SATISFACTORY TO ME.

OKAY, MARY? YES. SO AS WE'RE PROPOSED RIGHT NOW, WE'RE AT A 13 HOUR OPEN.

NINE OR 8 A.M.

TO 9 P.M..

I DON'T SEE WHY THERE WOULDN'T BE TWO SHIFTS IN A 13 HOUR STORE OPENING, CONSIDERING THAT THERE'S OPENING THE STORE AND CLOSING THE STORE DOWN.

SO I DON'T SEE HOW THE ONE HOUR MAKE OR BREAKS THIS.

AND I STILL DO FEEL STRONGLY THAT THE 8 OR 9 P.M.

AND I'M FINE WITH THE 9 P.M.

IS CLOSER IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE OTHER CITIES NEARBY.

AND WE ARE SMALLER THAN PRESCOTT AS WELL AS THE HOURS THAT THE PHARMACY STORES AND PHARMACY COUNTERS ARE OPEN.

SO THAT'S MY INPUT ON THIS NEGOTIATION WITH REGARD TO ONE HOUR ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

THANKS. OKAY.

WELL. I DON'T [INAUDIBLE] YOUR HAND AGAIN OR WAS THAT FROM BEFORE? OKAY. YEAH.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT YOU KNOW THE OPEN TILL TEN GIVES THE ABILITY FOR TWO SHIFTS FULL TIME.

9 P.M. CREATES A PROBLEM FOR FULL TIME EMPLOYMENT IT MAKES EVERYONE PART TIME INSTEAD OF FULL TIME.

YOU KNOW, THE DISPENSARIES CAN'T OPEN UNTIL NINE AND SO EVENINGS ARE REALLY THE ISSUE.

AND BECAUSE WE ARE PRECLUDED BY ORDINANCE OF OUR HOURS, WE DON'T HAVE WIGGLE ROOM FOR OPENING AND CLOSING LIKE OUR HOURS ARE DICTATED.

AND SO WE CAN'T.

WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY.

EVERYONE HAS TO BE OUT AND DONE IN THE ORDINANCE HOURS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

WELL, I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER HANDS RAISED AND WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND SO WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THAT AND ANYTHING ELSE NEEDS TO HAPPEN AFTER THAT WE'LL KNOW.

SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION ON THE TABLE PLEASE SAY AYE, AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED.

AYE. EXCUSE ME.

YEAH. YEAH.

OKAY. SO WE HAVE KIND OF AN EVEN NUMBER THERE.

SO I WOULD SAY THAT DIDN'T PASS IN THAT WAY.

AND I THINK THAT WE'VE IN OUR COMMENTS, WE'VE ALREADY EXPLAINED OUR OUR VOTES.

SO I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A NEW MOTION.

AND THIS WILL BE TO FROM PZ 22-00074 FOR A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE EXISTING MARIJUANA DISPENSARY HOURS FROM 8 A.M.

TO 10 P.M.

BE FORWARDED FOR APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL.

[01:10:01]

WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO SECOND THAT? THIS IS COMMISSIONER PAUL.

I'M SORRY. ACCORDING TO THE FINDINGS AND.

AND ACCORDING TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS.

THIS IS COMMISSIONER PAUL SECOND.

OKAY. CAROLE.

YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HALEY WAS SAYING.

IS SHE STILL ON THIS CALL? YEAH, I SEE HER.

OKAY, I JUST.

SHE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO OPEN UP AT 8:00 IN THE MORNING, AND I'M NOT SURE WHY THAT WAS.

BECAUSE OUR OUR HOW HOW IT STANDS NOW.

IT'S 8 A.M. TO 7:00 PM.

SORRY, I PROBABLY DIDN'T MAKE THAT CLEAR.

WE COULD OPEN AT 8 A.M..

BUT YOU KNOW, THE MARKET HAS DICTATED US TO OPEN AT 9 AND REALLY THE ISSUE HAS BEEN NEEDING PEOPLE AT NIGHT.

SO THAT'S KIND OF MARKET PRINCIPLES TO GET TO THOSE TWO FULL TIME SHIFTS HAVE REQUIRED ADDITIONAL EVENINGS IN THE HOURS.

REALLY BECAUSE YOU DON'T OPEN AT THE HOURS THAT WE ALLOW YOU TO OPEN.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW.

YEAH. ANYHOW THAT I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS [INAUDIBLE] MORE HANDS.

BUT I'M JUST WONDERING, YOU KNOW, WE'VE WE'VE ALREADY HAD A MOTION FOR THE HOURS ENDING AT 9 P.M.. NOW WE HAVE A MOTION IN AT 10 P.M..

SO IF WE DO NOT, I MEAN, SO ANYWAY, I JUST WANT TO CALL ATTENTION TO THAT IN CASE, IN CASE THERE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THIS IS SORT OF OUR CHANCE TO VOTE ON THIS A SECOND TIME.

COMMISSIONER MANDINO, IS THAT STILL YOUR NEW HAND? I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.

OKAY. FOR CITY STAFF, I KNOW RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NOBLE HERB ON THE LINE WITH US TODAY, BUT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE OTHER DISPENSARY.

DO THEY OPEN AT 8 A.M.

OR DO THEY WAIT AND OPEN AT 9 A.M.? DOES ANYBODY KNOW? I BELIEVE THEY I BELIEVE THEY OPEN AT 9 A.M..

BECAUSE. YOU KNOW, I WOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SAYING OPENING AT 9 A.M.

TILL 10 P.M..

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A CONSIDERATION.

SINCE THEY DON'T OPEN AT 8 A.M..

WELL, IT SEEMS LIKE WE COULD SEE HOW THE VOTE GOES ON THIS.

THAT'S ANOTHER OPTION, RIGHT? I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN.

IS IT THE NUMBER OF HOURS OPEN? I THINK IT'S WHEN THEY MAKE THE SALES.

RIGHT. BUT I MEAN, WHEN WE SAY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 9 AND 9 OR 9 AND 10 OR 8 AND 9 AND 8 AND 10, WHAT ARE THE.

I MEAN, I'M JUST WONDERING OUT LOUD WHAT THE CONCERNS ARE IS IT A CONCERN THAT THEY'RE OPEN TOO LONG, THAT THERE'S JUST TOO MUCH. I MEAN, I GUESS I'M INTERESTED TO KNOW MORE WHAT THE CONCERN IS THERE.

I GUESS I DON'T REALLY HAVE A CONCERN.

I'LL JUST SAY THAT IF IT'S 8 TILL 10, I DON'T HAVE A CONCERN.

THEY BOTH OPEN IT AT 9, BUT.

YOU KNOW, THE CONCERN FROM NOBLE HERB WAS THAT THEY CAN'T INSURE TWO SHIFTS WHEN AT 8:00 TO 9 P.M.

THEY COULD INSURE TWO SHIFTS, BUT THEY DON'T OPEN IT.

EIGHT. SO THAT WAS THAT WAS JUST A.

ANYHOW. I CALL FOR THE VOTE.

OKAY, BUT TAYLOR HAS ANOTHER COMMENT, SO WHY DON'T YOU JUMP IN THERE? I JUST LOOKED IT UP, AND THE OTHER DISPENSARY OPENS AT 10.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S RELEVANT, BECAUSE REALLY WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS AN ISSUE IN THE EVENING HOURS.

BUT JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW, I DID A QUICK SEARCH AND THEY OPEN AT 10.

YEAH. AND I'LL.

I'LL JUST CALL FOR THE VOTE.

OKAY. AND I GUESS I JUST HAD ANOTHER COMMENT HERE THAT MY FEELING IS THAT IT'S NOT SO MUCH HOW MANY HOURS IN A DAY YOU'RE OPEN. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE OBJECTION MORE WAS TO HOW LATE THEY'RE OPEN.

AND LATE IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS APPLICANT IS LOOKING FOR ARE LATER HOURS.

[01:15:02]

SO. YEAH, SO I'M GOING TO CALL FOR THE VOTE, WHICH.

OKAY. OKAY.

WELL, LET'S DO THAT. SO WE HAVE MOTION ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

PLEASE SAY AYE, AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED NAY.

OKAY. WELL, WE HAVE A MAJORITY VOTE ON THAT.

WOULD YOU LIKE COMMISSIONER NORTON TO JUST TO SPEAK TO THE FINDING THAT YOU CANNOT MAKE? YEAH. NO, I'D BE HAPPY TO.

AND IT KIND OF PIGGYBACKS BETWEEN FINDING ONE, THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ALIGNMENT WITH PHARMACIES, BECAUSE I HAVE A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF PHARMACY STORE VERSUS PHARMACY COUNTER WHERE THERE'S THE DISPENSING OF MEDICATIONS.

SO I FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO SEEK AN ALIGNMENT WITH THOSE HOURS THAT 8 OR 9:00 PM WOULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER FIT. AND SO THEREFORE IT SORT OF PIGGYBACKS INTO FINDING TO WITH THE WELFARE SAFETY OF THE CITY, I'D RATHER SEE THAT ALIGNMENT WITH THESE OTHER PHARMACIES, AS WELL AS WITH THE OTHER NORTHERN ARIZONA CITIES, WITH THE COUNTY DISPENSARY THAT'S LOCATED NEARBY, THAT WE'D BE CONSISTENT AND NOT HAVE THINGS OPEN TOO LATE.

SO THOSE WERE THOSE WERE ALL MY FACTORS FOR MY VOTE.

THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH THAT I THANK YOU FOR FOR PROVIDING THAT FOR THE RECORD AND FOR COUNCIL.

AND I THINK WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON TO THE SECOND A SECOND MOTION FOR 00089 CASE.

THIS IS SO WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION.

I CAN MAKE A MOTION FOR THIS ONE.

I MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIRED FINDINGS.

THE APPROVAL OF ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT PZ 22-0089 FOR MARIJUANA OPERATIONS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF, WHICH DOES INCLUDE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE 2500 FOOT DISTANCE CHANGE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SECOND THAT MOTION.

AND DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTING? OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

I'M SORRY. REALLY QUICKLY.

WAS THAT.

I GUESS I DON'T SEE THE.

I'VE BEEN ARGUING ABOUT THE 500 FEET, BUT I GUESS FROM THE MAP, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE.

SO THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE, AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED, PLEASE SAY NAY.

OKAY. THAT PASSES.

THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR THE REALLY GOOD DISCUSSION AND THANKS A LOT STAFF FOR ALL THE MAPS AND ALL THE RESEARCH FOR THIS.

I'M SURE IT'S BEEN A REALLY GOOD LEARNING EXPERIENCE FOR YOU TOO, BUT I SURE LEARNED A LOT.

THANK YOU FOR MAKING THIS A CHALLENGE.

I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

OH, GREAT. OKAY, SO LET'S DO IT AGAIN.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S DO I LOVE TO HEAR FROM EVERYBODY.

SO LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT CASE.

THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT.

[A. Preliminary Plat PZ-19-00019-07 for Rio Homes Unit 4 Multifamily A request by RP4V, LLC and RP40, LLC for Preliminary Plat approval for Rio Homes Unit 4 Multifamily, a 6-unit multi-family residential townhome subdivision. The 5.1-acre site is located at 1221 East Emma Drive in the MR, Medium Density Residential Zone, and has a Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: In accordance with the findings, staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward the Preliminary Plat to the City Council with a recommendation for approval.]

[B. Preliminary Plat: PZ-19-00019-06 Rio Homes Unit 4 Multifamily Condominiums RP40, LLC and RP4V, LLC request approval of the Preliminary Condominium Plat for Rio Homes Unit 4 Multifamily, a 40-unit multi-family residential condominium subdivision. The 4.11-acre site is located at 1221 E. Emma Drive in the Medium Density Residential (MR) Zone and has a Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the findings presented in this report, forward the Preliminary Plat to the City Council with a recommendation for approval.]

GOOD AFTERNOON.

THIS IS GENEVIEVE PEARTHREE SENIOR PLANNER AND THE CURRENT PLANNING SECTION.

AND I WILL GO AHEAD AND SHARE MY SCREEN AND WE CAN GET THIS STARTED.

OKAY. SO I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO DO A PRESENTATION FOR BOTH PLATS AT THE SAME TIME [INAUDIBLE] DO WORK HAND IN HAND.

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT, I'LL TRY TO DO MY BEST TO KIND OF EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE OF EACH ONE AND WHY WHY IT'S UP FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, BUT FEEL FREE TO. YEAH, JUST IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, YOU'RE WELCOME TO ASK THEM.

IT IS A LITTLE BIT TRICKY.

SO. OKAY, SO THIS AGAIN, THIS IS FOR TWO PLATS.

IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THEN IT'S ALSO A CONDOMINIUM PLAT.

I WILL DISCUSS THOSE BOTH IN DETAIL.

AND I ONLY HAVE ONE SCREEN RIGHT NOW, SO WHOOPS, I'LL TRY TO KEEP THIS LITTLE BOX DOWN THERE.

[01:20:06]

OKAY. SO THE REQUEST IS FROM RP4V LLC AND RP40 LLC.