CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA (MPG) - At the April 11 meeting, the Citrus Heights City Council continued a discussion about the possibility of allowing cannabis dispensaries to operate in the city. Medicinal marijuana use was approved by California voters with the passage of Proposition 215 in 1996 and recreational use was approved with Proposition 64 in 2016, with yes votes from 52% of Citrus Heights residents at that time.

While Citrus Heights has maintained a ban on retail cannabis dispensaries, City Council recently brought the issue up for reconsideration and requested staff conduct public outreach.

A total of 342 residents responded to an emailed FlashVote survey and 59% supported recreational marijuana use. When asked if they would support retail cannabis shops within the city, results were more split, with 49% in support and 48% opposed.

About 60 individuals attended a community workshop, with 61% of attendees supporting a retail cannabis industry in the city. An online feedback form on the city’s website gathered 20 responses, with 54% in support of allowing dispensaries.

Many attendees spoke during Public Comment on this item and others submitted written comments. Some spoke in support of allowing dispensaries, citing the potential for additional tax revenue and the benefits to residents who are already patrons or operators of these businesses.

“We can’t build a wall around Citrus Heights and hope that cannabis doesn’t come into our community. … It’s here whether we like it or not,” audience member David Warren said.

Warren said he supports allowing dispensaries to operate in the city because he views them as a “public safeguard,” because it would drive out illegal sales on the streets.

Others spoke against the idea, such as Ray Reihle, who said that dispensaries will “degrade the character of our community.”

Some residents said that it would increase crime and addiction and some predicted that it would not result in a significant increase in tax revenue for the city.

Elderly residents also pointed out that they were not represented in the data gathered from the online surveys, so future outreach should include mailers to registered voters.

Councilmember Mari-Jane Lopez-Taff has said she grew up with a parent addicted to marijuana, so she has a personal reason to oppose the marijuana industry. When looking at the city’s goals to grow the economy, attract businesses, combat homelessness, reduce crime, and raise education and community awareness, she said, “cannabis does not have a place in that vision.”

“For me, it is about the money,” Councilmember Tim Schaefer said.

It will take decades to get all the roads repaved, Schaefer said, and while there is currently a surplus in the city’s General Fund, “tougher times are coming,” so it doesn’t make fiscal sense to allocate more funding to roads than they already have.

Schaefer said that is why he wants to look for alternative revenue sources. He added that some of the anti-marijuana propaganda sent to them since this topic was introduced was “ridiculous,” including documents attempting to link marijuana usage with mass murder: “Do you think we’re idiots?”  He said he toured a dispensary and found it to be clean, highly secure, and quite impressive.

But, Schaefer said, he understands the community concerns and “it would be best to slow this down.” He suggested, “Let’s take a year. … Let’s look at this carefully. Let’s not rush to a conclusion here and let’s really develop a plan. … I need more time, and I think the community needs more time.”

Councilmember Porsche Middleton agreed that they should slow down the process.

“We want to make sure we get it right” with regards to equity, said Middleton, with a focus on ensuring Citrus Heights residents have a place in the industry if this idea moves forward. She also wanted to further explore other non-public-facing aspects of the industry, such as cultivation or manufacturing, instead of just retail storefronts.

“For me, this has always been about local control,” Middleton said. “We have always been great stewards of our own tax dollars. If we are allowing other cities to take advantage of our families who are living here, of their hard-earned money, however they choose to spend it, and it’s going somewhere else, that is an opportunity that is lost to reinvest those dollars right here in our city.”

Citrus Heights Vice-Mayor Jayna Karpinsky-Costa said, “It is about the money.” She wants the streets in her district paved, so she wants more details about how much revenue they “could really expect to receive” to weigh that against “how many roads can we do, how many police can we add to our force?”

Mayor Bret Daniels said, “I don’t see any concern on the crime aspect of it.” He said the dispensaries “are incredibly safe,” with armed security on site, which decreases loitering and the potential for crime. While Daniels fully supports medicinal use, he does not support recreational use. So, he said, “the tax means nothing to me. …. I don’t care to gain a dollar off of the recreational use of drugs.” He agreed with the City Council consensus that they should “tap the breaks for now,” and focus on more research and more outreach.

City Council then considered requests for funding from the city’s Neighborhood Improvement Partnership (NIP) Program, which provides funding for projects and programs that improve the quality of life for residents and increase community engagement. Several groups requested funding to attend the annual Neighborhood USA (NUSA) Conference, which is being held this May in Lubbock, Texas.

Sunrise Ranch Area 6, Sylvan Old Auburn Road (SOAR) Area 10 and the nonprofit Citrus Heights Arts all requested $1,800 each to cover attendance, travel and lodging costs for the conference. (Councilmember Middleton recused herself from this discussion and vote due to a conflict of interest, since her mother is the executive director of Citrus Heights Arts).

City staff  said each application met the eligibility criteria for the funding and recommended approving the full amount for each group, for a total of $5,400 from NIP funding.  If approved, there would still be $7,100 in NIP funding available for other requests through the end of this fiscal year, in June.

Karpinsky-Costa said the intention of this funding is for projects proposed by neighborhood groups. She suggested that the city institute stricter guidelines for this funding and limit how many groups are approved to use the funds for conference attendance. And she said that Citrus Heights Art should apply for funding from a different source, rather than the NIP funding.

Daniels said he supported all the applications because the funding was available, there were no neighborhood projects up for consideration at this time and the funding is for this fiscal year (which will end soon). Daniels said he had no objection to establishing more criteria to guide approval for such requests in the future, but at this time, no applicable policy is in place. Daniels said the individuals are taking time out their lives to attend this conference to find ways to improve the community: “I don’t think it’s anything but a benefit to the city at this point.”

Daniels moved approval of all three requests but the Citrus Heights Arts request did not receive a second, so that motion failed. The requests from Sunrise Ranch Area 6 and Sylvan Old Auburn Road (SOAR) Area 10 were both seconded and Council voted 4-0 for approval.

City Council considered an amendment to the city ordinance that would increase the compensation for City Council members. Senate Bill 329 was recently approved, which allows for an increase to the maximum pay for local councilmembers in California for the first time since 1984. When Citrus Heights incorporated in 1997, the pay for councilmembers was $600 per month and the compensation has not been updated since that time.

The updated compensation schedule is based on the population, so with a population of 86,000, Citrus Heights councilmembers would be eligible to receive a salary up to $1,900 per month. However, the compensation change would not apply during any councilmember’s current term of office. The new salary would go into effect for all members after an election cycle, when a new member is elected or when any current member is re-elected to a new term.

City Council voted 4-1 to approve the compensation increase, with Karpinsky-Costa dissenting.

The next meeting of the Citrus Heights City Council is scheduled for 6 p.m. April 25 at 6360 Fountain Square Drive.