DEFINITIONS 

• Existing: SCC §20-02-140

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• B&P §26001
• BCC Reg §5000
• CDPH §40100
• CDFA §8000

ANALYSIS

The SCC definitions should be aligned with state law and this can be accomplished with language such as: “The County of Sonoma adopts herein all adult use, medical, and commercial cannabis definitions contained within the regulations promulgated by the Bureau of Cannabis Control (commencing with §5000), California Department of Public Health Manufactured Cannabis Safety Branch (commencing with §40100), California Department of Food and Agriculture (CalCannabis §8000), and those contained within MAUCRSA (commencing at Business and Professions Code §26001 et. seq.).”

LICENSE TYPES

• Strike:SCC §26-88-250(c)(5) (events)
• Strike: SCC §26-88-250(c)(6)
• Amend: SCC 26-88-256(g)(13)
• Add Type 7, N, P, Delivery, Events

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• B&P §26050
• B&P§26061
• CDPH §40118
• BCC §5600-§5604
• CDFA §8303

ANALYSIS

The County should align with the State and authorize the same license types as are authorized by the state.

By striking and amending the listed SCC provisions, the County will be aligning with the state on issues such as manufacturing, infusion, processing, non-storefront delivery, and special events.

SETBACKS

• Amend: SCC 26-88-254(f)(6)-(8)
• Amend: SCC 25-88-256(f)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• B&P 26054(b)
• BCC §5026(a)

ANALYSIS

The County should apply California sensitive use setbacks to all commercial license types:
“A premises licensed under this division shall not be located within a 600-foot radius of a school providing instruction in kindergarten or any grades 1 through 12, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued”.

This amendment would only apply to sensitive use setbacks and not amend setbacks to neighbors.

TERM OF PERMIT

• Strike: SCC §26-88-250(e)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• No State Statute or Regulation Controls

ANALYSIS

The County’s permit renewal mandate is duplicative and requires state licensees to undergo a rigorous and expensive process which is unnecessary. State licenses renew annually which provides the requisite regulatory controls currently duplicated by the County. The County should just require the local permittee to furnish proof of state licensure annually or when material changes occur to the licensee.

ON-SITE CONSUMPTION

• Strike: SCC 25-88-256(g)(9)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• B&P§26200(g)

  “Notwithstanding paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 11362.3 of the Health and Safety Code, a local jurisdiction may allow for the smoking, vaporizing, and ingesting of cannabis or cannabis products on the premises of a retailer or microbusiness licensed under this division if all of the following are met:

  (1) Access to the area where cannabis consumption is allowed is restricted to persons 21 years of age and older.
  (2) Cannabis consumption is not visible from any public place or nonage-restricted area.
  (3) Sale or consumption of alcohol or tobacco is not allowed on the premises.”

ANALYSIS

The County should align with the State and allow for onsite consumption. This is one of the most important elements of the evolving cannabis industry and is essential for cannabis related tourism (discussed further below).

State regulations already ensure that any onsite consumption of cannabis is done in a safe manner equivalent to the safeguards mandated for the onsite consumption of alcohol.

The County should amend the ordinance adopting language mirroring B&P 26200(g).

NO CAPS 

• Strike: SCC §26-88-256(d)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• B&P §26051
• BCC§5019: Excessive Concentration Controls at State Level should set caps rather than through local ordinance

ANALYSIS

The County should remove the cap of 9 and instead use land use to regulate retailers. 600 ft. setbacks to sensitive uses and 600ft buffers between retail premises should sufficiently regulate and control the siting of retail facilities.

TOURISM 

• Strike: SCC §26-88-250(c)(5)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• No State Statute or Regulation Controls

ANALYSIS

This is contrary to State policy which allows for these types of events and on-site consumption at both events and at licensed retailers.

EVENTS

• Strike: SCC §26-88-250(c)(5)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• BCC §5600-§5604

ANALYSIS

The County should align with State law and allow for special events.

DISASTER RELIEF 

• Add Provision

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• BCC §5038: Disaster Relief
• CDFA §8207
• CDPH §40182

ANALYSIS

The County should align with State law and provide for Disaster Relief.

MULTIPLE PERMITS 

• Amend: SCC §26-88-254(e)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

• No State Statute or Regulation Controls. California does not limit licensing in this way.

ANALYSIS

The County should remove the 1 Acre cap on permit ownership. The state does not impose this limit and a locally imposed limit significantly impairs the County’s cultivators ability to compete in the market.

Strikethrough the following: “provided that the total combined cultivation area within the county does not exceed one (1) acre”