May 23, 2019 Joint Special Meeting of Mountain View City Council and Shoreline Regional Park Community

Video

Transcript

[00:00:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Order. And the 1st item is to say the pledge of allegiance, if you will join me in that.

[00:00:15] Unknown Speaker: States America the Republication indisible were justice from.

[00:00:29] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Our city clerk will announce attendance.

[00:00:33] City Clerk: Council member Clark is absent. All other council members are present.

[00:00:35] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Thank you. Couple of announcements first. We do have extra seedings. So if you're expecting more people. There is seating outside in the lobby area. And also if anyone needs Mandarin translation, we also have that available and there would be folks out in the lobby where you can get the headsets from for the translation. Next item on the agenda is oral communications. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter, not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to 3 minutes during this section. State law prohibits the council from acting on nonagenda items. Is there anyone who wishes to address the council on an item that is not on the agenda? Please come up. You have 3 minutes, and be sure to fill out a blue card before or after. And just so everyone knows, we have a new system at the end of the time, not only will you see it on the monitors, but there's also a chime.

[00:01:53] Jane Horton: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. Jane Horton, a longtime Mountain View resident, and I want to thank you for the safe parking that is being worked on and started. I think it's a great start. I ask that We have safe parking for everybody that's affected by being an RV dweller. Which would, once we have the parking, we would not have to have a ban. If there's safe parking for everybody that's the 200 estimated people, have a safe parking, then we would not even need to have to consider a band because they would have a safe place to go. I also think that safe parking from 7:30 at night till 7:30 in the morning might be a good solution for tech workers, for evening waiters. janitors and others, including students and people that are service workers, they can't leave their jobs. If you're a waiter, you can't walk out at 7.30 to go move your RV. How about 24 hours, safe parking? Again, that would eliminate the needs for vehicle dwellers to find a daytime parking place. When we say there's not going to be enough parking and some people have to go. There's no place for them. Where is go? What does that mean? There's no place for you in Mountain View. throwing people away as if they have no other place to go is inhumane. How we treat our most vulnerable is a reflection of who we are. I hope that we can get the proposed 60 sites, but triple that and have it be for 24 hours a day and then no RV ban would be needed because there would be a place for these most vulnerable people. Thank you.

[00:03:37] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So anyone else who wishes to address the council on an item not on the agenda tonight? Okay, seeing none, we'll close that portion, and we will move to item 5.1. which is adopt resolutions of necessity and authorize the initiation of eminent domain proceedings. We'll start with a staff introduction and presentation.

[00:04:03] Real Property Program Administrator Dennis Drennan: Good evening, honorable mayor and members of the city council. My name's Dennis Drennan, the real property program administrator for the city of Mountain View. Mike Fuller, the public works director, is accompanied tonight. The purpose of public hearing is to consider adoption of resolutions of necessity to initiate eminent domain proceedings against portions of five separate properties for the construction of the Shoreline Boulevard reversible transit lane project. Eminent domains are the main public agencies are empowered to use to acquire property or property rights for a public purpose upon the payment of fair and just compensation. Acquiring portions of the properties, along with temporary construction easements, to be discussed in this public hearing, serve a public purpose for an approved project. Eminent domain as an authority, the city has used sparingly over the years, and as a last resort. The Shoreline reversible translating project is one element of a comprehensive program to relieve traffic congestion into the North Bay Shore Employment Center. The project was first envisioned in the Shoreline Boulevard corridor study approved by the city council in 2014. The city has also fully complied with the California Environmental Quality Act for acquiring a property in temporary construction easements, when it's certified an addendum to the North Bay Shore precise plan final environmental report in March of 2017. The project will install a dedicated center running reversible transit lane between West Meadowfield Road, and Pear Avenue to reduce travel time, and improved traffic, transit efficiency, and reliability during peak commute hours. The dedicated transit lane will serve public and private buses, northbounder, and peak morning hours in southbound during peak afternoon hours. The project will also include protected bike lanes and widen sidewalks on both sides of Shoreline Boulevard. This slide here that you see, illustrates the nature of the improvements at the cross section, at Metal Field and Shoreline. Construction schedule begin this fall and take about 18 months to complete. The project requires the acquisition of additional right of way from 9 parcels between West Middlefield Road and Highway 101 to keep the buffer and sidewalk with to safe and acceptable minimums. The property is affected, and the areas to be acquired are shown on this slide and the following two slides. The additional right away ranges in width from about 3 to 7 feet, and typically represents 1 to 2% of the total size of the individual parcels affected. In addition, the city will acquire temporary construction easements, 10 feet in width, parallel and adjacent to the acquisition areas that will be used during construction, and those areas will be completely restored when construction is completed. The additional right of way to be acquired was defined following extensive engineering studies, traffic studies, and design, and of the minimum required to meet project needs. The project cannot be constructed without this acquisition program. The city will also be acquiring the access rights to the shell and Chevron gas station driveways on Shoreline Boulevard, closest to Middlefield Road, shown on this slide. There have been closed is a safety measure for bicyclists and pedestrians. You will note that on Southbound Shoreline Boulevard, there's a dedicated right turn lane at Middlefield. And then you have that one driveway closest to Metalfield. And then, with sidewalks there, with pedestrians and bicyclists, potential conflict. And the same thing is true with the shell station across the street. So again, for safety reasons, for bicyclists and pedestrians, we are going to be closing those driveways and acquiring those access rights. Both of these gas stations will still have driveways on Shoreline Boulevard, as well as West Middlefield Road. In order for a public body in California to initiate eminent domain proceedings, its governing body must adopt a resolution of necessity in a public hearing. in order to adopt a resolution of of necessity, the city council must make the following four findings for each parcel to be acquired, and those findings are listed here. First, it must be showing that the public interest and necessity require the project, the shoreline reversible transit project is part of a phase program of transportation improvements to reduce traffic congestion and accommodate anticipated increases in employment and development in the North Bay Shore. The project is for a public purpose, and would not be possible without the acquisition of additional right of way. and the temporary construction easements. The project was certified in an addendum to the North Bay Shore precise plan final environmental report. Secondly, the interest sought to be acquired must be necessary for the project. As stated previously, the project cannot be completed without acquisition of these identified properties and the temporary construction easements. Thirdly, the project must be located in such a manner as to offset, as to offer the greatest public benefit with the least private detriment to private properties. Acquiring to describe properties and temporary construction easements will enable the street bicycle and pedestrian improvements to be constructed as part of the project. The properties to be acquired in narrow strips of land along the frontages of the properties affected and represent less than 2% of any property. The acquisitions would slightly reduce the allowable FAR of the remainder properties if they were to be redeveloped, but would not affect the current use of the property. The practical effect of the project would be to move the sidewalks a few feet into the boundaries of the remainder properties. And finally, a government code offer has to have been extended to each property owner. California law requires public agencies to appraise the fair market value of property it tends to acquire, and to offer no less than the approved appraised value as fair and just compensation. The city had the property appraised by a well qualified and licensed real estate appraiser, and on February 19th, 2019. We sent certified return receipt, letters containing formal offers to all the property owners. On May 6, 2019. We sent updated formal letters to the five property owners affected by this evening's public hearing. City staff has reached formal negotiated agreements with four of the nine property owners affected by the project, enclosed escrow on one, and very recently reached agreements, and principle and compensation with two other property owners. Initiating eminent domain proceedings with those we do not yet have a formal agreement with will ensure the project can proceed on schedule. We'll continue negotiations with the remaining property owners, following the initiation of eminent domain proceedings, and property owners will be dismissed from the proceedings, if and when an agreement is reached. Staff makes the recommendations shown in the staff report, and on this slide and the following two slides. That concludes staff's presentation, Nick Muscalino is the city's outside legal counsel for this matter, and is in attendance. Nick, is there an eye, along with the city attorney and Mr. Muscalina, are available to answer any questions.

[00:12:15] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So before we take public comment on this, Are there any questions from council members? Council member McAllister.

[00:12:29] Councilmember John McAlister: With our potential HET coming through, will there be any necessity to gather more land, or is it too early to decide, or is this sort of sort of proactive, what if that study goes forward?

[00:12:43] Public Works Director Mike Fuller: We don't envision any additional right away take with the AGT. The concept with the reversible bus lane has always been, if we do something with an AGT system down Shoreline Boulevard, that we would be able to use the right away we're dedicating to the bus lane.

[00:13:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Any other questions from council members? Okay, then we will open this up for public input. Is there anyone who wishes to address the council on this topic? If you could come up to the microphone, And we'll give you 2 minutes and be sure to fill out a blue card before or after you speak.

[00:13:30] Joel Dane: Did you say? Two minutes,

[00:13:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: yeah.

[00:13:41] Joel Dane: Joel Dane, I live at the Shadows Apartments at the corner of Shoreline and Middlefield. And... feature I'm most interested in tonight, about the Dutch intersection, is this protected refuge area for bicyclists outside the Arco station. During the evening commute. Who was this one? Evening commute. Middlefield backs up from Shoreline towards San Pierre, frequently, and sometimes it goes all the way to San Pierre. It's got pretty hectic around San Pierre. And when it gets hectic at San Pierre, people start using the bike lane. If they wanted to make a riot on shoreline. It's not supposed to do that till they're within 200 feet of the intersection, but if you don't get a ticket, I guess it's legal. Volumes of traffic that produce this kind of... condition.

[00:15:46] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Two minutes. Thank you. Could you speak into the microphone?

[00:16:02] Public Speaker: I'm from Shiveran. It is North Shoreline. I want to submit this paper.

[00:16:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, thank you.

[00:16:13] Alex Brown: Hey, Alex Brown, Santega Villa, North Bajore, Mountain View. Thank you for trying to relieve the congestion, and I'm speaking in support of this. Anything that could help deal with transit issues, especially given the concert season's about to start, and this is gonna be terrible. Yay. The Wi-Fi?

[00:16:34] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Is there anyone else who wishes to address the council on this topic? Okay, seeing none will close public input and bring it to council for any questions and then discussion and action.

[00:16:49] Unknown Speaker: Mayor, if I might, I'll just let you know that the letter that was submitted is the same letter that you have available.

[00:16:53] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yes. Thank you. Thanks. Then I'll go at once. Vice Mayor Aben Koga.

[00:17:07] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Since we're on that letter, from my recollection of doing these types of resolutions of ETA, do we continue to try to negotiate with all of the property owners until the there's is there a certain time limit?

[00:17:24] Real Property Program Administrator Dennis Drennan: We have initiated negotiations with all the property owners, including the Chevron station. But I think we're a long ways away from reaching an agreement with them. The shelf station, We had a hard time connecting with a property owner there, and it's only recently that we connected and have initiated negotiations on that. Okay. But all the other property owners, we have active and, I think, constructive negotiations.

[00:17:54] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So if, at some point, the others do come forward or... then will you continue to try to work with them?

[00:18:04] Real Property Program Administrator Dennis Drennan: We will continue to work with them. I'm starting tomorrow. And again, if we can reach an agreement with any of these property owners, they will be dismissed from these proceedings.

[00:18:16] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. All right, thank you.

[00:18:18] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member Clark?

[00:18:22] Councilmember Chris Clark: I guess someone beat it, too, beat me to it, but I was just gonna say, you know, this is pretty rare for us to do, but I think it is necessary in this case, and the improvements that we're planning to make alongshoreline are really critical, I think, to our long-term plans in terms of bike and pedestrian safety, traffic mitigation and other things. So, I'm comfortable doing this, and I'm hopeful that we'll be able to reach negotiated agreements with everyone, and we won't have to have to take this all the way to its conclusion, but we'll be supporting this, and I guess I'll let the maker of the motion read all of this fun stuff. Thanks.

[00:19:04] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I completely agree with the comments you just made. Council member McAllister. It looks like you're making a motion.

[00:19:13] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes. Adopt a resolution. Do we have to read it all?

[00:19:18] Unknown Speaker: Oh, yes, you do.

[00:19:19] Councilmember John McAlister: Oh, yeah. Everything in red. Okay. Adopt a resolution to determine. Okay, we'll go with this. We'll go with this script. Adopt a resolution to determine the necessity to acquire a portion of property located at 790 Shoreline Boulevard, APN, 15, 150, dash 31, dash 002 by imminent domain of the construction of the shoreline, reverse Shoreline Boulevard, reversible bus lane project, to authorize commencements of litigation, to acquire property by imminent domain, and to seek in order of possession, code of civic procedure section 1245 dot 220 to be read entitled only further reading wave. Two, adopt a resolution, determine the necessity, acquire a portion of property located 807 Shoreline Boulevard, APN 153 dash 16 dash 001 by eminent domain for the construction of the Shoreline Boulevard, reversible bus lane project, to authorize commitments of litigation to acquire property by eminent domain, and to seek an order for possession, code of civic procedure, section 1245 dash dot 220 to be Entitled only for the further reading waived. Three, adopt a resolution to determine the necessity to acquire a portion of property located at 808 Shoreline Boulevard, APN 153 dash 14 dash 002 by eminent domain for the construction of the Shoreline Boulevard reversible bus lane project to authorize commencements of litigation to acquire property by eminent domain, and to seek an order of possession, code of civic procedure section 1245 dash 220, to be read in title only further reading wave. Adopt a resolution, determine the necessity to acquire a portion of property located at 883 Shoreline Boulevard common area APN 153 16 021 through 153 16 044. By eminent domain for the construction of the Shoreline Boulevard reversible bus lane project, to authorize commencements of litigation to acquire property by eminent domain, and to seek an order of possession. Code of civil procedure, section 1245, 220, to be read in further reading, wave, reading wave. Five, adopt a resolution to determine the necessity to acquire a portion of property located at 917 and 943 Shoreline Boulevard APN 1531 dash 16 dash 045, by eminent domain for the construction of a Shoreline Boulevard, reversible bus lane project, to authorize commencements, of litigation to acquire property by eminent domain, and to seek an order of possession, civil code of civil procedure, section 1245 dash, dot, 2 220 to be read entitled only for the reading wave. Authorize the city attorney to take all necessary to take all steps necessary to commence legal proceedings in a court of complaint, competent jurisdiction to acquire the portions of the properties describe herein by eminent domain if necessary, and petition the court for immediate order of possession.

[00:22:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So you have a motion by council member, McAllister, and a second by council member, Kameh. Is there any further discussion on this? Okay. I'll call the question. That passes unanimously. Thank you. Yeah, thanks for reading all that, Council member McAllister.

[00:23:03] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes. Mr. Clark, next time I will. I'll give it to you.

[00:23:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, the next item on our agenda is 6.one, which is consider adoption of amendments to the cannabis regulations. We'll start with the staff presentation and introductions. You by yourself today?

[00:23:36] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: Stephanie Williams, zoning administrator is on our way.

[00:23:38] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Oh, okay, thanks.

[00:24:01] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: Good evening. I'm Clarissa Burke, senior planner in the community development department. Stephanie Williams, Stoning Administrator will be joining me shortly. Tonight's presentation. We'll discuss amendments to the city's cannabis regulations. After Proposition 64 was approved by 68% of Mountain View voters, council directed staff to study permitting retail cannabis activities. In spring, the EPC and council held study sessions to discuss the development of cannabis regulations, and provided recommendations on key issues. In October of 2018, the council approved the proposed regulations and the regulations were implemented. On March 5th, council directed staff to study 4 specific amendments, the cannabis regulations, the EPC provided recommendations on these amendments on April 24th. Council gave direction to study 4 specific amendments the existing regulations, including increasing the buffers from sensitive uses to match the San Jose model, establishing a half mile buffer distance between storefront retail businesses, prohibiting businesses in the San Antonio area, and limiting storefront retail businesses to one in the downtown. The EPC direction on these items will be discussed in the following slides. The council directed staff to study increasing the required buffers from sensitive uses. The existing buffers are 600 feet from schools, and 250 feet from childcare centers or facilities. Council specifically asked staff to study the San Jose model. The EPC recommended no changes the existing buffers in the city. The map on the left shows the current buffers. The red areas indicate the sensitive uses with the buffers shown by the gray shading surrounding those sites. The green areas without shading show the areas where cannabis could be permitted. The 4 eligible applications are also mapped in blue. The map on the right shows the San Jose model buffers in Mountain View. Note the definition of sensitive uses are greatly expanded and would include schools, childcare centers, community centers, parks, libraries, emergency housing, churches, and all residential uses. The yellow parcels are those where cannabis could locate under this model. Staff has outlined 7 alternate buffers in the staff report and attachments for the council to consider. These include maintaining the existing buffer, implementing the San Jose model, and five other alternatives. In response to the concentration of applications in the downtown, Council also directed staff to study creating a half mile buffer distance between storefront retail businesses. The EPC recommended a 600 foot buffer to maintain consistency with other established in the ordinance. Both the 600 foot and half mile buffers are illustrated here and in attachment six. Storefront retail businesses are provisionally permitted in the San Antonio area. Due to the new public school proposing San Antonio, The council directed staff to study prohibiting all cannabis businesses in the area. No applications were submitted in San Antonio. Council directed staff to study limiting storefront retail businesses in the downtown to a maximum of one. This direction was due largely to the fact that 4 of the businesses that applied in phase one of the permiting process were located in downtown. There are currently no regulations about the number of businesses in the downtown, but the maximum number of storefront retail businesses permitted in the city is two. The city has begun implementing the adopted permitting process. The permitting structure has 4 phases and is a hybrid between the merit-based and lottery-based processes that other communities have utilized. The 1st base screens applications for viability through the planning division review and background checks. The phase one application period closed on February 1st of this year. A total of 10 applications were submitted, for were deemed eligible to proceed to the lottery. The application process is on hold until amendments the regulations are adopted. Staff requests the council's direction on how to proceed with the permitting process. The options outlined in the staff report range from only allowing current applications eligible under the new regulations to proceed to opening the application process to anyone interested. The EPC recommends council adopts the amendments, the zoning text and precise plan, as outlined in the staff report. The council may also consider and adopt alternatives to the proposed amendments. This concludes SAS presentation, the Planning Division, Police Department, and city attorney's office are available for questions. Thank you.

[00:29:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Are there any questions from council members? Council member McAllister.

[00:29:31] Councilmember John McAlister: Staff and one for the police department. As this process goes forward, they are getting a conditional use permit. Isn't there another, so isn't this, to obtain that they have to have a public hearing for that?

[00:29:47] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: Yes. Public hearings for conditional use permits are held and decided on by the zoning administrator.

[00:29:53] Councilmember John McAlister: And on those public, uh, the conditional use permits, Is there a specific time limit on those, or... how long they last?

[00:30:02] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: They continue in perpetuity as long as it is not revoked for violations by the zoning administrator, um, or there's a change in the land use that would make it, um, that if the land use is change, then it could be revoked as well. One of our proposed acquirements is that we review this in a year to come back at that time.

[00:30:28] Councilmember John McAlister: So with that then, what would that require? What occur on that particular one? We just, you gave us a report, and we go from there, or would there be a recommendation to continue with the conditional use permit or discontinue it?

[00:30:43] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: My understanding of counsel's direction on March 5th was that you wanted a status update of how the permitting and businesses are functioning so that the regulations could be reconsidered if necessary.

[00:30:56] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. And this one I have before the police department? And you are?

[00:31:10] Police Sergeant McGee: Sergeant McGee, Mount V Police Foreman.

[00:31:12] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, great. There is, I was reading a staff report that there is a Bureau of Cannabis Control.

[00:31:19] Police Sergeant McGee: Correct.

[00:31:20] Councilmember John McAlister: And do they, with ABC alcohol beverage control, people can go and complain to the ABC or request or inquiry, and that could affect the business license of the retailer of that. Is that similar to what the Bureau of Cannabis control will do? or can do?

[00:31:37] Police Sergeant McGee: Yes, very similar. The lead agency in regulating commercial cannabis licenses.

[00:31:43] Councilmember John McAlister: And so even though a city approves one, they can revoke it.

[00:31:48] Police Sergeant McGee: Yes, and we've already met with one of the sworn investigators for the Bureau of Cannabis Controlling. So if there's any complaints, we would typically partner with them in investigating that, and we'd also relay any kind of violations to this state.

[00:32:01] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, thank you. Those are my.

[00:32:04] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Not the city attorney?

[00:32:06] Councilmember John McAlister: Huh?

[00:32:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: You didn't have one for the city attorney? thought you said.

[00:32:10] Councilmember John McAlister: No.

[00:32:13] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice Mayor Abbe Koga?

[00:32:15] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. So, um, my understanding is that during the application process or timeline, we received 10 applications. Um, but only for, looks like qualified. Could you or the city attorney, share with us some of the reasons why the other applicants did not qualify?

[00:32:38] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: Of course. The majority of the reason was that the applications were incomplete and didn't meet all the requirements specified in the guide and checklist provided by the zoning administrator made available to the public. Some of them were located in zoning districts that do not permit the activity as well.

[00:32:58] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, like, we've received emails about the one that had the, didn't have his address correctly, but what were some of the other incomplete items?

[00:33:10] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: Some didn't have proper business formation documents. Some didn't have appropriate site plans and floor plans as required. Some didn't have adequate lease documents.

[00:33:24] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, okay. Thank you. And then, wait, since depending on what happens tonight, there's a possibility that we may not have four, as mentioned, do we have to go out for or open up application process again?

[00:33:44] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: That is a question that we're opposing to the council. So option one would be to only allow the businesses that are eligible under the new regulations and whose applications we've already received to proceed, and that's within the council's discretion.

[00:33:59] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, great. And then finally, I know that, wait, the, so the 4 from here on, if they move forward, go into a lottery, is that, or would, is that how that would work?

[00:34:12] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: Yes, and I would just point out that a lot, what happens next will depend in part on what the council decides to do tonight, and the way that the code is written is once we complete a full process, if there are, if we don't have the number of permit Ts that are allowed in the code, then we would start a next process. So that will be something that, depending on what you discuss later on, we might want to revisit.

[00:34:39] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And then finally, we received a letter from a law firm, legal counsel for one of, I believe, the applicants. And I know I've heard some question or contestant of our process and even what we are discussing this evening. My understanding is every, I mean, this is our decision. We could choose to move forward or not, but is there any restriction on what we can and cannot do.

[00:35:14] City Attorney's Office Staff: And I presume your question to be talking about the legislative framework and how we regulate cannabis and you are legislators, and it is within your prerogative to modify existing legislation. And we're not at a position where any of the applicants actually have a permit or even have been permitted to proceed into the planning process and file an application that would allow them to do that. We were the council asked to reconsider the legislative framework before we actually held the lottery and they were allowed to proceed through the planning approval process.

[00:35:54] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So they were they made aware, then, that things could change?

[00:36:00] City Attorney's Office Staff: That's the reality that rules change and we might be having a different conversation if we'd issued a permit or we were further in the planning process, but we're not even in the planning permit approval process.

[00:36:15] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, great. Thank you.

[00:36:18] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member Hicks.

[00:36:21] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I've been getting a lot of questions from the public about how retail shops or dispensaries would face the street, you know, if you were walking down the street, what they would look like to you. So I wanted to get a clarification of that from, I think maybe we haven't been as clear as we could have been. So I wanted to get clarification from planning staff. People have asked me, you know, will there be product on display, and a display window, will there be explicit signage, or, you know, cannabis leaf murals, or how, if I were walking down the street, how, or my middle school children were, how would the shop present to passers by?

[00:37:04] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: Of course. So the 1st thing is that all the cannabis businesses are subject to the same zoning regulations as any other business, that is, if they're in the downtown, they have to maintain transparent storefronts and things like that and meet that same appearance as any other business. From the street, they're going to appear more just like a lobby, an entrance. No products are allowed to be visible from the front or from outside the premises. And we do have restrictions on advertisements, so that products, um, and marijuana related paraphernalia cannot be advertised outside the premises as well.

[00:37:43] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And the one other thing people have asked me is, what will the regulations for guards be any different than for banks and other security guards around the, you know, for other businesses in the city?

[00:37:57] Senior Planner Clarissa Burke: I'm going to refer that question to the police department.

[00:38:06] Police Sergeant McGee: You can see I grabbed some glasses so I could better see everyone. So to answer the question again, Sergeant McGee, Mountain Police Department. So the city currently, specifically law enforcement, does not regulate how businesses handle their own security armed or not. And as of now, all the plans that we currently have, none of them currently list any kind of armed security in their plan. But we, again, we don't control that, that's a realm that I don't know of a law enforcement agency that currently handles that realm and controls how they handle their own security.

[00:38:40] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you.

[00:38:42] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Any other questions? Do you have a question, account, Constr. McAllister?

[00:38:45] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, I have a follow-up question on that same one. Well, you're moving target, so... Other jurisdictions. Are you familiar with their requirements for having an armed guard or not? Or what have you observed without having to go?

[00:39:05] Police Sergeant McGee: Yeah, so in my prior assignment, I was in a cannabis dispensary purchasing for the task force. And I did see armed guards inside inside the business. But not outside.

[00:39:15] Councilmember John McAlister: Not the outside. Okay. So the public would, okay. Thank you. That's it.

[00:39:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Any other questions from council members? Okay, um, can I see a show of hands for folks who want to speak tonight? Okay, we will give you a minute and a half, and if you could be sure to fill out a blue card either before or after, and leave it with our city clerk. Also, we have a new feature. And at the end of the time, in addition to the monitors, we also have a chime, to give you a clue that the time's up. And if somebody has said what you agree with, um, you know, if you just want to say, I agree with the previous speaker or someone else, you know, I feel like it counts as much as, uh, when you say a lot. So um, if you feel like keeping it short, that's fine with us. Also, there's probably going to be very different perspectives on this topic tonight, and I want to make it really clear that it is our expectation that we will all listen to what everybody has to say. And there will be no signs of either agreement or disagreement. So no clapping, no booing. We're just going to listen very respectfully. And I'll remind you if that doesn't happen. So, um, if folks could line up over here, you don't need to line up out the door, just, you know, when the line goes down, if you want to speak, come on over. I don't want to make you stand the entire time.

[00:41:04] Hafsa Mirza: Oh, I'm the first person.

[00:41:05] Mayor Lisa Matichak: You are on.

[00:41:06] Hafsa Mirza: This is the 1st time I'm speaking at the city council. And I know a few of you who have been in the District and Parents. My name is Hafsa Mirza. I'm a parent at 1175 Castro Street, which is very close to Castro downtown. It's Rham Middle School, and I'm the PTA president over there, and also the psych council lead. So today, I have my principal here, who, because he is an employee of the district, would not be able to make any comments, but he's here and standing next to me, showing that, yes, I am right. And then I have a facilitator from our youth family facilitator. Am I right? That's your type here, and we are here from Grand Middle School representing our school. We don't have many parents here because we do, this is the month of mayhem, and we have a lot of events on our campus, and right now we have Grammys going on. Okay, so 1st I will read the letter, which was written by our ex-principal, who has now moved down to, I have 30 seconds left. Who has moved who has moved to Austin, Texas, and she has written, I have concerns about the potential cannabis stores being allowed to open within work walking distance of a middle school. Students walk downtown frequently, and having easy access to store are too much of a temptation for students who push boundaries by their very nature. They would find a way to purchase it, even if they were underage, very much like they do at 7-Eleven.

[00:42:38] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[00:42:41] Hafsa Mirza: That's it? I should not have talked so much. Thank you very much.

[00:42:46] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[00:42:48] Hafsa Mirza: Can I make one last comment?

[00:42:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Oh, no. No, I'm sorry. Just consider it. We need to be fair to everyone and give everyone the same amount of time.

[00:43:03] Pink and Fork: My name is Pink and Fork. I am a resident of Mountain View. I come here not because I have kids affected by it, but I want to take care of the city because I love this city. Some proposal that the buffer distance for marijuana shop, from daycare centre, et cetera, should be comparable to San Francisco, but I disagree. I think that we should compare it with Sano, say, because of 2 reasons. One, the population density of San Jose is similar to a mountain view. It is much better for us to follow the model of mountain view. And the mountain view above a song is a lot longer than those of proposed by the EPC. And also the distance is to take care of the kids is not to take care of the business. So if we want to take care of the kids, we should maintain the buffer song, that is safe for the kids, but not good for the business. Another one point that I don't want to follow, follow San Francisco is because that San Francisco has a homeless problem there. It is getting very seriously and most of the homeness there are drug ethics. We don't want to increase the drug ethics in mountain view to increase the homeness here. Thank you.

[00:44:26] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next place. If you could be sure to, um, folks would be sure to drop off a blue card with our city clerk, either before or after you speak.

[00:44:37] Public Speaker: Good evening, Honorable Mayor Metchek, members of the council and all who are here. I humbly addressed you in order to convey a few points. With California voters led them to legalize cannabis, for recreational use, by adults, and Mountain View voters led them to have dispensaries within city limits, I feel the council should have acted on this as soon as the ballot results were in. Now, I'm not sure how many of y'all, if any, would serve them out at that time. So I can't really say if any of y'all had, or any, or in any position to do anything about it that time. But with the past in the prop 64, in 2016, licenses were issued to allow cultivation and business establishment beginning in 2018. It's now been a year and a half . Prohibition for all intents and purposes is over. Our city needs to reflect that in our retail business because this is what both the state and the local voters asked for. I cite San Jose precise plan, which, while adopted in 2014, was still being amended 6 months ago in 2018, which, as you mentioned, eliminates cannabis from its roster businesses. However, I must ask why it was still being amended so late in the game. Well, applicants are held to criteria set forth in documents, such as the environment planning, set forth by the city, the city also should be held accountable to such criteria. Why is it that the lottery has not been held? As you know, outlined in Assembly Bill, 1356, other legislation, regarding the Act, means California could step in and do it for us, but we don't want them to do it, 'cause we want my way to do it. Okay.

[00:46:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[00:46:23] Ilarios Aldivar: Hello, my name is Ilarios Aldivar. First, I want to thank you for all the gifts and, you know, help that you've already provided to us. Partes muy importantes, para el pueblo de monde. Uh, um, themes that are very important for the city of Mountain View and for our hearts. Eh, numero dos, ah, cremos, pediles, eh, es obre la marijuana. Next, I'd really like to ask you for this favor relating to the marijuana. Y querremos, proponerles, algo, que si elas... That if some of these projects are already underway, it'd be better to just limit it to delivery instead. And if it is going to go forward, if it could be somewhere that's far flung in the periphery of the city. Porque, aquien el centros, avemos, que hay muchos niños, si ires piran, todo es, aigre de la marijuana, y puede dañara los niños por dentro de su alma. Because here, downtown, it's a very family friendly environment, and the children can just catch a whiff of it, and it would just be very damaging to, you know, their future and character. Como tambien, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, he said, yeah, una mejor, ciudad, a, and a, This is also something that the human body doesn't necessarily need, and to maintain a beautiful city, It would just be better if it was somewhere not in the middle of the city. Yes, todo, mucho gracias, por tu attensión. That's all. Thank you so much for your attention. you. And may God bless you. Thank you.

[00:48:40] Alex: My minute and a half . So my name is Alex. I'll just tell a little bit about my relationship to marijuana is that I went to UC Santa Cruz. So, yeah, that's just a clue about me. But, you know, just like Eladi was saying, I happened to be very involved in the Hispanic community. And, you know, Margaret was at our graduation yesterday, and I can definitely tell you that it's a big concern of theirs where these marijuana shops are. So, you know, I think there's something to be said for actually having a city, that feels comfortable and, you know, a place where the residents feel that they can walk out and not feel like it's going to be, you know, something that they're kind of afraid of, right? Everyone deserves to feel safe in the city, that they live in, and I can just tell you that it's a big concern of theirs, and we should be very cognizant of that. I don't, personally, you know, I've been to marijuana dispensaries and I know they're security guards. There can be long lines during peak hours. You know, even if there's not armed guards outside. It just, it sucks to think about that being on Castro Street, not very jibing with how I like Castro Street to look like. You know, again, I'd like to iterate, if it's gonna happen, just put it somewhere far away. You know, there's nothing wrong with driving a few extra miles. The San Jose buffer. I saw some green there. Maybe we can help the organizations, find a spot. Nothing wrong with that. So anyway, really appreciate your attention. Thank you so much.

[00:50:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next please.

[00:50:17] Susan Chia: My name is Susan Chia, I'm the resident of the Mountain View. I just want to see the problem brought about by cannabis shops, education, painting kids is not only the responsibility of the parents, but also the responsibility of the society. Mountain View shouldn't make it harder for parents to educate their kids to be drug free. Mountain view should be family friendly, city. Now, existing buffer zone are too few. Some Jose is 1000 feet, mountain view, government is required to enforce the state north and to meet the needs of school and kid, kidergartens in 1000 feet, uh, buffer zone, rather than reduce it to 200 feet. The rise of the drug drivers can cause more car accident. Cannabis is a schedule, one substance typically, gateway drug. It's harmful to the brain development of the young kids. Many addictions, treatment, specialists believe, marijuana is a gateway drug with potential to introduce a user to more serious, illegal substance, like cocaine or herrings.

[00:51:50] Mayor Lisa Matichak: That's wonderful. Thank you. Next, please.

[00:51:57] Public Speaker: Evening, everyone.

[00:51:58] Mayor Lisa Matichak: You can pull that down.

[00:51:59] Public Speaker: Sure. I have been living in Mountain View for seven years and I just want to share a little bit from my personal perspective. So in recent year, I often, or randomly smell some odor from my home. It's sometimes just full of our house and it came and gone, it came and gone. So I couldn't tell what that is, until one day, I saw a homeless person was consuming marijuana in my workplace in my garage at my workplace. And that person was occupied, occupied the like the bottom floor of the garage and just consuming. It's very smoky and the odor is the same as I what I smelled at home. And people are walking around, just afraid to get close to that person. So in any case, so I found out that's the marijuana. And I literally, I woke up by that older some nights and make me sleepless. I was so concerned, I reported to the Santa Clara Health Department of Health, environmental health, and I also talked to my doctor about it. So, This make me really, like, has some mental harm to myself. And we recently my husband and I were literally talking about like moving away from Mountain View because of this. And this is my 1st time to be here. So in, in the end, I strongly suggest everyone re, uh, consider this, and I, I think you all want the people to live a happy life here. So that's all. you.

[00:53:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[00:53:35] Tony Guan: Hey, everyone. I'm Tony Guan from Massanville, North from Monteville. I came. This is my 3rd or 4th time. I be here. because I care. Because, you know, in your neighborhood. If there's a criminal, you want to make sure that your case are far away as possible from the criminal. Right? So the same thing happens here. If a money view is very good, is very, is famous for Mariana, and it's, it's actually it's effectively catering for all the criminals. like security deterioration and So it's going to be a very unsafe neighborhood. If money becomes that bad, sun will cannot be out of it, because we are so close, so damn close. So I urge you guys, so you just listen to these people, right? So I know last year's election. There was one mayor got elected out. I hope he learns something or everybody else learns something from that. Apparently, but apparently, from the previous council meetings, from all the results that you guys voted. It seems that you never cared about the people's voice. So, yes, next year. We better make sure some they learn that lesson. All right? Okay, that's it. Thank you.

[00:55:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[00:55:16] Kareem: Hello again? My name is Kareem, and I live close to downtown Mountain View. Thank you, Miss Abbe Kogai, and Miss Matachek for having the courage and foresight to vote yes on the cannabis ban in Mountain View, and I stand behind you guys. I want 0 cannabis stores in Mountain View. I don't really I really don't want one downtown. I would like to know the opinions of neighboring businesses. I highly doubt you would find anyone that's okay with a store in there. If we have a dispensary downtown, We will smell cannabis smoke more often around town as people can't wait to try out the weed. At least for me, it's more obnoxious smell than cigarette smoke. And another thing about downtown, someone mentioned, when will the hours be? So will they be the same time the bars are opened, for example? If you if you drink, you also smoke. I mean, it's very easy to go that way. So they should not, they should be staggered. It shouldn't be open at the same time, if there ever is one downtown. Regarding those who think any council members owe the applicants who have spent a lot of money, it's a business, and it's a business decision, risk is inherent in business, if it pays off great, then they wouldn't vague. If not, it's all on them, not the city council, not the ABC, especially not the actual people living in Mountain View. Thank you very much.

[00:56:51] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[00:56:58] Jane Horton: Jane Horton, 45 years living here in Mountain View. People use marijuana for many different reasons. My son was badly burned in a fire. At times the CBD oil somewhat lessens his severe pain. My friend's grandmother was able to lessen her cancer related nausea, through marijuana products, which were purchased at stores in Santa Cruz. Going to Mountain View instead of Santa Cruz keeps our money here, and it's more convenient for families that are caring for their loved ones in pain and already have a lot on their plate. No one is proposing selling cannabis to anyone under age 21 in these stores. People that are under age 21 can get cannabis from their friends or other people anyway. Cannabis in stores is well regulated as far as the product and people that are relying on cannabis to help them with medical conditions really appreciate having a regulated product. Mountain View residents voted for this. That was a 68% approval. Please don't let a vocal voice against it override what this vote was. It wasn't just the mayor that voted for this. It was the residents of Mountain View that voted for this, and they said with their voice that they wanted this. It's a revenue generating business, a growing revenue generating business, and to keep that tax revenue here, and the revenue in our mountain view instead of sending that money someplace else, is going to benefit this city. So I hope that you go with the 68% who voted for this.

[00:58:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Just correct. I did not vote for it. You said the mayor. No, I'm in the previous fair. you. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that. Next, please. And again, I want everyone to please hold, um, we want to be respectful of everyone's comments, okay? Next, please. You can pull the microphone towards you so we can hear you.

[00:59:07] Public Speaker: Good evening, male, voicemail, and council members, and also...

[00:59:18] Public Speaker: Excuse me. Excuse me, I'm sorry. Amir, she's asked to speak on behalf of 5 others who are present and requested 5 minutes.

[00:59:26] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And do we have cards for the 5 people? Okay, thank you. Thank you. Okay, sorry, you can continue.

[00:59:35] Public Speaker: Okay. So, my personal idea is still no pop in Mountain View, no pop in Mountain View. But, um, March 5th, we are very disappointed about your uh, motion and uh, decision 5 to 2. You can see here. It's the propulsion. It's not 522. So, Mountain View citizen is very disappointed to you. Because we elected you as a male, voicemail, and a counselor. You didn't work well for us. So we are very disappointed for you. But in federal level, marijuana still illegal. But in California, Assembly build 64 and Mary B does not mean we can freely open pop shop in Mountain View. We still need mountain view residency citizen. U.S. citizens to have a vote. I strongly suggest to get a November vote. For the referendum, referendum. Um Secondly, someone told me today is your regulation about open marijuana stall. So my idea, my thought is delivery only. We do not want a mountain view to have a pop shop. It's not only protect kids, but protect mountain view. Mountain View has a lot of great history, but not marijuana stock, not pop shop. Consider buffer. I do not think marijuana can follow San Jose, or any other store, because mountain view, population, density is different with other cities. Anywhere from south to north. We have parks, we have library, we have schools, kindergarten, daycare everywhere. In including international school, in Wizman. So no way to have any buffer. So I'm not going to discuss any buffer with you. So I only say if the regulation, I would like to say delivery only. And by California, BBC, you already allowed can delivery. And you can also have your whatever, the warehouse to delivery. From Mountain View or come to Mountain View, whatever, but we do not want to see the storefront. the pop shop in Mountain View. If you have a buffer 650 and a 1000, it's still roomed the kids ruined the mountain view residency. The people can have leg to work and also people can have a car to drive. It's totally ruined mountain view as a good, good, um, the city. So the mountain view concert have 5 to one, this decision, it's not as smart as our surrounding city. We have Santa Clara postponed this decision. Don't discuss this question. We also have a surrounding city, like Melu Park, Palo Alto, Cupertino. Sunnyvale, they never have such thing happened. So I'm shameful and disappointed with 5 to 2 decision. And also consideration, delivery only, not only taking care of the people who need marijuana, need marijuana, but also taking care of people who does not, do not want marijuana. This method, this regulation can, taking care of both sides. So I think if we want to make a regulation today, I would like to suggest delivery only. And also, um, the cost of open a storefront, marijuana stored in Mountain View, is very expensive. Not only rent, but also the mountain wheel who, against it, is going to eliminate it. So if you have any relationship with these business people, tell them, it's very risk, big risk to open pop shop in Mountain View, better not open, because those angry people will inevitate, we will come back for another procedure, like a referendum. And also, I got so upset for on May 5th, there are lots of people...

[01:04:36] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Okay. Sorry, thank you very much. Next, please.

[01:04:42] David: Thank you. Hey, my name is David, I have been a resident of Montanville since I moved from Michigan a few years ago. And when I was at Michigan, as a student. I personally have tried marijuana a couple of times with my roommates. I know it was kind of illegal, but my roommate somehow got access to it. So the 1st time it was okay, and we had some fun and my roommate was doing push-ups of the ocean, it, and yourself, push-ups for no reason. But the sometime it was kind of terrible because we mistakenly accidentally overdosed ourselves and we were both throwing up on the floor in the middle of the night. But I really don't blame marijuana because it was mostly our fault to all those ourselves, and I wouldn't go that far to say marijuana is evil or something, but I shall a reason I'm a human. I think we must, I mean, that this thing, this particular thing has mixed of good and bad consequences, and you can find a lot of research online supporting both sides of both sides of the arguments. So, I guess my point is that on this debatable topic, which should really be conservative on it because the consequences can last for generations, and I fully support, increase the power zone for now, and maybe gradually decrease the size of it in the future, which we observe more data. Thank you.

[01:06:20] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next place.

[01:06:29] Yukan: My name is Yukan. I'm Mantu residents. I live in Mountain View and working Mountain View, and I pay tax here, and the most important thing is, and I'm raising my family with 3 kids in this city. I believe you already know what I'm about to say. Yes, I want a calling for prohibiting all cannabis business, especially retail stores in Mountain View City. I'm not going to spend more time to explain why I'm against marijuana business. Even today, it is still a federal crime. After all. I can hardly believe anyone will support this type of business in their own community unless for some special personal interest. I'm here instead to make a public statement, and I'm here instead of speaking this, I'm actually in want to make a public statement. I regret that I didn't pay enough attention on politics before. I trusted that city council members that graduated with politician degrees from Stanford, from Harvard, will be much more qualified than me as an engineer to deal with public issues. And they will, you know, quote from city members, camping website for reelection, make Mountain View an even better place to leave, work, and raise our family. Reality, reality, told me how wrong I was. And it is exactly this council member who is the leader for supporting having marijuana stores around the place, we leave, we work, and we raise our family. I started to talk with my close friends. Thank you.

[01:08:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Thank you. Next, please.

[01:08:09] Donnelly: Hi, my name is Donnelly, and I'm an old Mountain View resident. I live in Old Mountain View. I want to, I'm also a Grahams parent, and Orlando's parent, not too far, and a Mountain View High School parent. And kids will push their boundaries. They will score drugs just like they will get alcohol. And then students would then bring those purchases to school and disrupt the campus, classroom teaching and learning. It would then interfere with the teacher's time teaching and educating students. The message this sends is normalizing the use of just that are legal or not. So um, It's a catch, it's still against federal law, and I have concerns about potential criminal activities. It's a cash-based business. Also, um, Downtown Mountain View is a family neighborhood, family friendly neighborhood, and just look at the nightclubs, opal clubs. All the problems that I read on voice, publish drunkenness, public urination, driving under influence, potentially, those people who buy drugs from here, they have to come all from the Bay Area because there's no town nearby here. Can buy it, a retail store. And I do have another concern, traffic concerns. We don't even have parking for our businesses. You are attracting more people over here. Thank you.

[01:09:43] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:09:49] Ching Yu: Hi, my name is Ching Yu. I live in Mountain View for over 20 years. I join at end 3 past Calibe business meetings. As I heard last October, March, and April, as I heard, all the meetings, 80% to 90%, Mountain View citizens against this open shop in Mountain View. I wish the city councils listen to Mountain View citizens. And we want to keep mountain view as a friend, family friendly city, not drug friendly, family friend, not drug friend. Seattle is dying. San Francisco, we have become a sheet place. We don't want a sheet place. We don't want a needle everywhere. We just keep one keep everywhere. For, we thank you all the... All those your hard workers to try to keep our cities safe first. For those people, talk, like present, like drug dealers, only talk to drug dealers. Talk for drug dealers. Don't talk to for mountain view citizens, next election. We will v them out. I talk to my neighborhood. All the people around percentages, same as here. 80% don't want part shop in Mountain View. Next election. I all can got 100% votes in my block easily. Yeah, remember, we want safe city, family friend cities. His friend, city. We don't want drug friend city. We want, like, same neighborhood city. Thank you.

[01:11:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[01:11:26] Jing: Good evening, my name's Jing. I'm a parent of Mountainville High School student, and also a medical professional. So I cannot see enough about the damage marijuana can do for people, especially for our children. I don't want to repeat, go detail. Everybody understands drug is bad for us. Just purely bad. It's not going to solve any problem you seeking for the drug four. It's not going to solve the problem. And also, another point I want to make is, we are in the heart of the Silicon Valley. The tax revenue for the best high tech companies in London View is more than enough to support our city, to make our city even better for our city development. We do not need the money from marijuana business. Period. We do not need it. We have enough money. And those store, Those business not gonna make our city better richer. It's just going to destroy us. destroy this city because we want the city to be the best home for us. I want the folks in the podium right now. Please pay Careful, careful concentration before making decision, not for your own health, for your children, for your nephews, relatives, if you have anyone, in high school, or middle school, in your family, ask them, how do they get a drug? They will tell you it's so easy, even though every single store permit is to not sell to underage people, they just get it. Thank you.

[01:12:59] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[01:13:01] Vicky Len: Thank you very much. Hi, everyone. My name is Vicky Len. I'm 25 years from Taiwan to here. Immigrant here is a better fight for better environment. We work very hard. So I am behalf of the most of the Chinese people here because most of people working right now. They cannot come out to here to present, because they work hard because they want better environment, and for their kids, have better, you know, school district. So, um, my my kid, uh, I'm single mom for 18 years. So I know it's we work half for the kids. We all very care about the kids and the living environment. If you have open, you know, pop shop here, they are easy to reach and and definitely, we know there were impact there, performance, academy performance, even learning, have some problem for that. So, We all know that, but maybe we're not aware of this in the beginning, but right now more and more through the social media. We charge. everybody will know, we will involve for people who, against pop shot here for the any people here. So, yeah. So we, we, we, we, we cannot present. We are strong feeling suitable, but we will in the next year. Thank you.

[01:14:36] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next place.

[01:14:41] Amy Chu: My name is Amy Chu. Uh, I would like to say that, uh, uh, uh, no port saw, please, uh, Ewan is, we seeing the EPC committee, they are really controversial, some EPC members have strong objection on have any port saw in mountain view. Another thing is mountain view doesn't often make that most of the time doesn't make any national news, but if you remember, there's one time mountain view make national news, use Google management people die on the bowl with drug. that damages Google's reputation, damage mountain view reputation. Another incident you stayed in San Francisco a few days ago. That's a general public dependent, die on the drug, which is damaged in San Francisco reputation, and damages, like the city's reputation. So I hope you, even before it's legal, illegal. You already damage your mountain bill's reputation. So I hope that you still will no postal this time. Thank you.

[01:15:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:15:54] Lily: My name is Lily. So, I am Mountain View resident. Today, I'm very surprised. I will stand here to give my public speech because I'm definitely the last person in the world would like to speak up. But today I'm forced to speak here because this incorrect proposal. When I'm walking to the hall, I saw a beautiful post. It's on the bus stop. It's promoting our city. lovely on the spring family parade, which reminds me, which reminds us, our amount of a user to be a very family friend city. So imagine one day there's a city cannabis in the downtown mountain mill, when take kids, walk around, and the kids ask me what this is. I really don't have idea, how I answer this question to my kids. That's all I want to say. Thank you.

[01:16:47] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:16:53] Public Speaker: Excuse me. Yeah, I got another donation from other people.

[01:16:57] Mayor Lisa Matichak: No, actually, the policy, as you have to have 5 people who agree not to speak in order to have their time and consolidate the time. I'm sorry.

[01:17:07] Public Speaker: Okay, can I just say one second?

[01:17:08] Mayor Lisa Matichak: No, I'm sorry. I have to have everyone have the same amount of time. Thank you.

[01:17:19] Public Speaker: Good evening. Thanks for the time. Is it public hearing or public not hearing? I think it's... pretty clear. I've been to this public hearing for already 3 times. Every time more people. Every time more people are against it. You can see the trend. I don't know whether you guys already read attachment or not. In attachment or survey. I mean, in the question, should the Mountain View, should we limit the number of retail business, majority people saying, not allowed, should not be allowed. That's the majority of people. So, by the limiting knowledge of mathematics, I think the answer is very clear. No, right? I don't know what are we discussing here? I mean, clearly, the service shows, no, we don't want it. And people here shows, no, we don't want it. And what kind of image you want a mountain view to have. You want it to be the pioneer of the drug in the Silicon Valley, or what kind of image you want your city council to have, a council who didn't listen to his people. If that's case, think about it. Thank you.

[01:18:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next please.

[01:18:40] Eddie: Hi, council member, my name's Eddie. I came all the way from Bill Peters. I keep hearing people saying that, oh, we should learn from the model from San Jose from San Francisco. My lot learned a model from Mil Peters, which has a permanent band. Thank you.

[01:18:54] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please. I don't mind the signs. Hands, you know, waving up, but we need to keep it quiet in here.

[01:19:15] Public Speaker: Mayor, vice mayor, and kongso members, and fellow citizens. The people of the city of Mountain View and her neighbors do not want cannabis stores. The residents were not given a fair chance to vote. and their votes were twisted. The people have spoken, but some council members seem eager to protect the interests of few businesses, rather than protecting our children, the vulnerable many. Cannabis is harmful to young brains. A gateway drug according to medical authorities. Some of the council members ignore these facts. When the leaders of a country fail to protect her citizens, especially the most vulnerable children, they will not be in power for long. Nor will the leaders of a city, when they set their hearts and minds, on protecting self interests or interests of a few outsiders. As a teacher and a mother, I urge you all to protect our children from the harmful drugs. Um, and cannabis, no cannabis stores in mountain view. Thank you.

[01:20:30] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please. Excuse me, didn't you just speak?

[01:20:40] Wayne: Um, my name is Wayne. I'm a president at Mountain View for the past over 20 years. I come here to appeal to your common sense and conscious. I know people argue for a different perspective, but really that if you want to have marijuana shops, set up near your home or next to door, or if your children, you care about, want to have that kind of shop next to your home, you can, of course, ask for it. But I believe that most of your neighbors, most of your family members would not like it. I also appeal to your colleagues who are against to set up the marijuana shops, to remind your colleagues who are for it, so that next time if you indeed, there's a shop to be set up, to find the address next to your home. The ones who won't have the marijuana shops in the city. Thank you.

[01:21:43] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:21:48] Public Speaker: very much. Against against multi-wheel, they open the store. Against against... I can trust that. We'll change it factory. So it's like a monkey weird... Against strong need to open the Marona store in Mount View. Mountain you wear so many you go. Manabi is such a beautiful home for all of us. We do not want pollution from marijuana. Google, uh, Shang, Google, the, in Google, are to me, is such a famous now because of Google, and then we don't want to be being negatively famous as marijuana. I am a resident of Mountain View. We used to... When I, when I, when I saw those people, after I take marijuana, they just not conscious night down everywhere, I am so afraid to see them, my heart broke. I would like our beautiful home mountain view to not be polluted by marijuana. I, against marijuana story, man view strong. Shishi, Shishi. Thank you.

[01:23:51] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next place.

[01:23:58] Carolyn: Hi, my name is Carolyn. I'm a long time mountain New resident. Actually, I wasn't even aware of, you know, the cannabis shops opening until maybe like a year ago or so, not too long ago. Um, I'm a mother. I feel that the argument that, you know, a 68% of a Mountain View residents voted for this, and we all know that the children do not have a voice. And there are a lot of children in amount of view. It's a very family friendly city, as everyone has spoken. And I love the city. I actually moved from San Francisco to Mountain View because I absolutely am appalled by the way San Francisco has been become, really. And, um, They have websites for top 10 best marijuana dispensaries and whatnot. And we are all aware of the multitude of products that are geared towards children. I'm literally shaking because I'm so upset. Um, The other point was that, you know, I never even realized it until they spoke about the security, having armed or not armed and being in store or outside the store. It really triggered a thought that why have this type of security, if you don't anticipate violence and crime. You know, when you vote for us, I really want you to think about the safety and the security of our beautiful city. Thank you.

[01:25:34] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[01:25:37] Anthea Chan: Ms. Mayer and council members. Hi. My name's Anthea Chan, and I've been here for living in Mountain View for 18 years. 2 kids were born in Mountain View, and every weekend, My kids hang out with their friends in downtown area. We got a great city. I mean, we have library here. They hang out in the parks. They get ice cream, they get a pizza. I think if any one of you have kids, you would not want your kids to hang out around the cannabis shop. This is too small of a city to have the complication of the canopy shop near the downtown area or in the city of Mountain View. So it's a long-term residence. I'm asking. I'm requesting, please vote deliveries only. Please prefer, uh, preserve our little tongue as a family, friendly Biddletown, and we love this city and this is home. Thank you.

[01:26:27] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:26:34] Shu Fan Wang: My name is Shu Fan Wang, and I have heard a lot of residents who lived here a long time to speak. So for me, I am a new resident to Mountain View. My husband and I moved to Mountain View in 2018, and from North Carolina, where 150 K come by a 3 bedroom condo, and here, we paid 10 times more. And now I am a new mom of 2 month old. I have time to come here and I really want to speak up for all these people who, my neighbors who just moved to the area. And, um, we don't want to pod at all for our kids. And um, If you want a way to increase the, um, the revenue of the city. I think making the city better to make the property value to go up so that we pay more property tax might be a better idea than to ruin our city with drugs, making less fun, less beautiful. Um, Just I ask you to please consider the past, the president and the future resident for month of view. Thank you.

[01:27:47] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:27:54] Treaty U: Good evening. My name is Treaty U and long term resident here in Mountain View. I'm hugely concerned about opening pot shops, especially retail shops in Mountain View. Retail shop by definition, attract impulse purchases, and we have so many kids, so many young tech workers hanging around, having fun in our beautiful downtown area. And I don't think as a city, we want to encourage impulse purchases to turn non-pal users into power users because there's 0 benefit to our city. So I urge you to vote no to any pastor in Mountain View. Thank you.

[01:28:30] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:28:42] Unknown Speaker: Mary's going to speak on behalf of 2 people, so he would like 3 minutes.

[01:28:47] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So the policy is you have to have 5 people agree not to speak. Okay. So maybe if you want to see if there's somebody who hasn't spoken, who is willing to fill out a card for you.

[01:28:56] Unknown Speaker: That's okay. I'll do it in a minute. Okay.

[01:29:00] Henry Menain: Good evening, honorable council members. My name is Henry Menain. I am a semi-retired former managing director and legal counsel to a private equity company and venture fund. However, I do continue to do consulting work for a few clients here in California. I represent 3 separate entities. Castro Care Center, Nourish Mountain View, and JMY Enterprises, 3 applicants that have applied here for the license. I'm here to speak on behalf of Castro Care and nourish my client, JMY, Enterprises asked to speak for himself today. He will be following me. First of all, I want to commend the city for carrying out the will of the voters in establishing a safe and legal presence in Mountain View for cannabis. I've met numerous patients whose lives, medical cannabis, has improved as the industry has continued to go mainstream. My client Castro Care, DBA CV Coastal Corporation submitted a complete application to the city. However, the city has informed CV coastal that they're ineligible to continue. The planning department stated basically 2 reasons, number one, that there are multiple owners who are not listed in the application, and number two, there's another person's name who is associated with CV Coast, which are incorrect. First of all, many new corporations, CV coastal included, do not issue all of their shares when they are 1st incorporated. And this is true with my client as well. And if you do the research, you will see that there is still only one owner of record at the Secretary of State's office on CV Coastal. And so we hope that you will consider the opportunity to reopen this and allow the existing applicants to make the corrections and establish their cannabis business here in the city. Thank you.

[01:30:38] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[01:30:45] Justin Mather: How's it going? My name is Justin Mather. I am one of the 8 applicants that applied for the Kenneps retail store friends, a little bit about myself. I am a current resident that was born and raised in Mountain View, my late father, who actually passed away two years ago today, was a volunteer for the city of Mountain View for 15 years delivering food to the food bank, and when things were too heavy, I would assist him. In addition to that, he also helped mediate rental issues as well. The reason why I'm speaking today is because my application deemed ineligible for the lottery process, the reason why I was disqualified was a portion of my application that I had the proposed address was wrong by one digit. The other half of the application had the correct address, which is 400 Moffat. The reason for the mishap was because of the owners of the property, also own the property next door. And when their attorney drafted up the lease documents, he accidentally gave us the wrong address of 440 Moffatt on the paperwork. I actually have proof that that's what really happened if that matters. I was president spoke on the April 24th planning meeting about my application and that I would like for a reconsideration. Also, the property owner, who is a Mountain View residence, David Oku, who spoke that night to explain that it was a clerical error on their end, and they gave us the information we needed to complete the application. There was no intention to operate a cannas business at the mobile home park. Even my disqualification letter, had the correct address of the proposed site. So that means whoever disqualified me from the application process, knew that I had no intentions of operating Canada's business at a mobile home park. I believe the 400 Moffatt location is the most ideal location for a cannabis dispensary, as it is discrete location away from downtown Castro and has plenty of parking. I would hate to see this location get disqualified from the lottery system. Thank you.

[01:32:23] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[01:32:26] Public Speaker: Good evening. Mayor and counselors. So, I am a genetist. So I have a PhD degree of genetics. And I am a homeowner of Mountain Muse since 2009. So I come here, to tell you some side effects of Marijuana, and color bees. So it has been aware to the scientific field that the cannabis use linked to gene mutations, including those gene mutations which can cause cancer. And a recent publication, which published, I think, last year, also reveal that, okay, let me see it. New study finds that marijuana can reprogram sperm genes. We don't know yet if the changes are permanent. So the Mariana not only can know our sperm count, but new research suggests that the drug actually cause changes to the sperm itself. which might have implications for the health of a potential baby. So I, you know, the whole night. I didn't hear any scientific data of those kind. So, I'm not to suggest you stop abandoned poshop, but I just tell you, those kind of research data, a lot enough, enough to support, to give pork shop to every city. Thank you. Please take, you know, housings.

[01:34:01] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:34:07] Public Speaker: Hi, Mendesian, and 1st of all, I would like to thank you, mayor, and vice mayor, for standing strong. on the behalf of the residents of Mountain View, to oppose the campus shops in our city to protect our children. Your name will be remembered in the place forever. For those of you who support the campus business and claim there is no harm and on health issues. I would like to suggest you to uh, in health every day in your home, in your family, with your children, and to see if you will get adapted, addicted, or, you know, it's gonna be damaging your health, okay? And we would like to see that, so you can prove to us if there's gonna be no harm. On May 16, 2018, as many of you already know, on the northbound, I 880, there was an incident occurred. 3 people got killed because the driver was under influence of marijuana. We do not want to see that happen again to our family or to our community. So I strongly opposed any commercial campus in the city of Mountain View. Thank you.

[01:35:24] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next please.

[01:35:33] Public Speaker: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I'm here to share what I see and know what I hear, um, with all, um, city council members. We are here, um, giving up our dinner time. We were hoping that the city will become better and better, not worse and worse. I don't want, um, pot shop in my backyard and I don't want a pot shop in my city. I think all council members share the same feeling. Do you want to have pork shops in your backyard? Do you want to smell the pot every day when you are out? I think everybody wants a clean environment. I'm a teacher of an after school and I heard something today. One of my student is moving from Mountain View to Cupertino, and his father is one of the engine is the engineer of one of the high tech companies. Um, his house is within walking distance to his work environment, moving out. So, um, should we all think about it? Why do we want this? Can you repeat again? Because I forgot. Let's think about it why he's moving. Thank you. I want to leave a clean city. I think everybody does. Thank you.

[01:38:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:38:49] Rachel: Good evening, my name is Rachel. I'm Amandaville. Hi, I'm school parent. I'm here not to tell you what will happen in the future. Um, like today just already happened in middle school and also high school and why we want to make it even worse. I also want to share with you. People like to make some medical, uh, marijuana and recreational, and um, actually you can get the medical marijuana easily. Please do not use medical usage as an excuse. Recreational means getting high, period. That's it. And, um, we have so many people here to vote notes to pork shops, and if you vote, yes, and would like to open a pork shop, you are protecting cannabis business. You are not protecting our community. That's as simple as that. And if the neighboring city can ban porkshops, why we cannot? It is is that because our demographic is different? Is that our, it is our residence problem? Who makes the decision? And, um, It is your decision today to make Mountain View a safe and healthy community to make our residents proud that we are Mountain View residents, to clean up the masks that create last year. That's it. Thank you.

[01:40:16] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:40:22] Lenny Siegel: Lenny Siegel, former council member and mayor last year. We've heard a lot of people talk about basically the evils of marijuana that the people use marijuana are depraved. In fact, many people in our community today use marijuana, They use it health, healthily, they use it safely, and they contribute to our community. It's hard for me to understand why people who are not being forced to use marijuana. I don't use it myself, have a problem with other people being able to buy it legally, and in a regulated situation where they can make sure that it's not contaminated with herbicides and pesticides. So I not only urge you not to ban marijuana, but to not make any changes in what the we on the council adopted last year. If you think marijuana is not evil, if you recognize that it's legal in the state of California, there's no reason to limit the number downtown to one. There's no reason to have a 600 foot buffer zone. We want variety. We want competition, and we want a regulated system, so those people who already use marijuana, and maybe buying it from illegal sources can use it safely and legally here in Mountain View. Thank you.

[01:41:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. If folks could also remember to silence their mobile phones, we would appreciate it. Next, please.

[01:41:56] Doris: Good evening. My name's Doris, and another concerned parent from Mountain View High School. Today, I want to say no to pot shops. I'm sure you all know, but I just want to remind you with the report. From center for disease control and prevention. Unlike adults, the tin brain is actively developing, and often will not be fully developed until the mid 20s. Marijuana used during this period may harm the developing teen brain. That's including difficulty thinking and problem solving problems with memory and learning, impaired coordination. Difficulty maintaining attention.

[01:42:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Could you speak into the microphone a little bit?

[01:42:47] Doris: Yes, thanks. So, I just want to say, Marjona use in teens can lead to long term consequences. So, I hope you will consider pot shops carefully and make do not make this convenient proteins to access. Thank you.

[01:43:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:43:13] Xiao: And good evening. My name is Xiao. I'm a mountain view resident. Today, one of my friend in Leo, she cannot make the, um, meeting today, so she ran for LASD, um, board last year. She asked me to read a letter from her to the council members. So I'm reading for her. Mountain Meal City council members. My name is In Liu. I am a resident in your neighboring Los Altos school district. I'm strongly against allowing any part shops in our greater neighborhood. I frequently took my kids to Mountain View downtown, uh, shopping plaza in Mountain View, as a parent of 2 young children. too many headlines have made me concerned about safety in schools and in our community. And 1000 the feed buffer area even sound like a joke to me. It is only 3 minute walking distance. And I also have 2 research summary to show you. I have handed that to on the assistant here. One indicates the effect of marijuana on people's brain, and the other is a research result from NIH on marijuana use and educational outcomes. For the sake of the community safety and our children. Please say no to pot shops, save our community, save life, save our children. You as a city council member don't want to be blamed for putting our community in peril. Thank you.

[01:44:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please. Okay, he has 5 cards and he would like to have 6 minutes, okay? If the folks whose cards are there could raise your hands. Thank you.

[01:45:01] Vincent: Oh, yeah, good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Vincent, and I'm the owner of the Sylvan Learning Center at Mountain View. And this is the 1st time I come here to protest against banning this pot shop. And I just heard somebody saying marijuana is not evil. Marijuana might not be evil. It's just a plant. I think the true evil is some people. trying to make money in pursuit of profit without caring about our children polluting the air, polluting the mind of our children. So let's talk about some true evil, okay? So, um, We must admit we live in a time full of confusion, right? People don't know what is good, what is wrong, especially for our children. They have been misled and don't know what is happening. Don't know what to buy, what to not. Okay? I have, because I work at the learning center. I work with kids all the time. One day one of my high school student just came to me telling me this, why so many of my friends smoke marijuana? It smells awful. Like skunk. What can I tell him? I said, just don't follow what other people do? stick to your own face and develop your own principles. Okay. So dear council member, We have spent so much time discussing about this pot issue, okay? And I think it's pretty clear. You know what is going on here, okay? Look at the people behind me. Okay? None of those drug dealers are from Mountain View, and they came here just for money. We all know about it. Okay? And the dirty money that will be questioned by their own kids one day. So most of the people behind me, they're real people from Mountain View, the residents here, and they care about their children, the nature, the environment, and the spirit of America. So I would say everybody here tonight, we're writing history. Okay, no matter what are you going to say, what are you going to do? gonna be remembered for a long time. Okay. True, I came here to protect our children, to protect the nature, but actually, I came for you guys. I'm standing here tonight. I'm really not asking you guys to do a favor for me to ban those pot shops. I really want to say this is actually a great opportunity for you guys to correct it wrong. And remember, we're not gonna clap or boo. We're gonna listen respectfully to everyone. Thank you. Many of the people behind me, they have never come here. If not for this pot shop issue. Okay? So this is a very easy choice, but I have I hope you have the righteous source and the courage to choose the right path. And we know the right path can be hard sometimes. But don't worry, the good people will support you. I came from China, a country full of corrupted politicians. I've seen so many of them, they do all kinds of bad things, persecuted people to gain power, money. And I'm so happy I can see some of them end up in jail and hell. Because nobody can escape karma. What you do today will define your future. Okay. Formal Mayor Lenny refused to listen to the people here during the March meeting, and he was voted out of here right away. If you want to respect the vote of Mountain View resident, This is a good example. Okay, just share with you some. Life springs from sorrow and calamity. Death comes from ease and indulgence. Tonight will be a good lesson for my kids and my students. Never take granted for freedom and happiness. You have to fight for it. Don't let pot pollute our city. and the mind of our children, and yourselves. The only thing necessary for the trump of evil is for good men and women to do nothing. Tonight, we choose to step up and speak out. Thank you.

[01:50:55] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you very much. Next, please.

[01:51:05] Public Speaker: Good evening. I used to live pretty close to the city of Mountain View, right across the 85. When I heard about this, to be discussed in the city of Mountain View, I'm pretty shocked because I heard that the city is going to allow pot shops just 600 feet away from schools. I Googled it and 600 feet is basically 2 minutes of walking, of average person. I would like the city council to acknowledge that marijuana is something of controversial, right? Some people may support it, but like there are a large number of people who do not support it. Okay? So similar things may include casinos, stripper clubs, you know, stuff like that. So just imagine, do you want these kind of stuff that some people don't really want just so close to the kids? I think the city has to really think about it before you make the right decision. Thank you so much.

[01:52:16] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:52:23] Rezang: Good evening, everyone. Mine is Rezang and come from Peters. I'm here to actually represent my friends who live in Mountain View here. And, um, all my friends were telling me that, uh, you know, because, wow, number one is busy. Number two, yeah, there's too shy to speed. So now I'm speaking behalf of them. And all I want to say, they want urge all the city councils to ban the pots ups and also not to approve, you know, have, you know, marijuanas in Mountainville. That would be it. Thank you.

[01:53:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next please.

[01:53:09] Public Speaker: I'm struggling with weather, I should stand here to share my thoughts, because to me, it's already very clear that, it's already very clear what mountain view residence opinion is, not just the one to close the door for the marijuana retail shop. If it was possible, we didn't even want to initialize this conversation. So, my son is 2 years old, and 2 years, and 9 months old, and he is in that process of polytranning. And currently he is still in the learning process, what thing, what is good and what is bad, what he can do and what he can't do. But dear council members, you are not. Thanks again for opening to the voice from public and please hear the voice from all of us. Thanks.

[01:54:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next please.

[01:54:12] Lance One: Hi, my name is Lance one, I came to the Mountain View in 195, and we did, my family did a lot of shopping in Mountain View, and we are, well, I came here against the cannabis shop, but I will rebutt up the previous 2 supporters. One is the previous year, they said, if people need it, and you can do the delivery and instead of do the shop for the other public. And if somebody need it, then you can do the target delivery. And the 2nd one is that if you need the medical venuana, it's also could be, it's not, it's a medical. It's goes through the medical channels. That will be an... And the other thing is I think that I have a suggestion for the city council. We can have much better revenue resource instead of when I want to marijuana because at least it's controversial from the medical, from a lot of stuff. It's not a good thing for normal people. And we, the 3rd thing, we will see, we appreciate the council member to support the marijuana shop, and but we will all remember who support who is against it. We will remember next time. Thank you. Yeah. And another thing is once the... So Megalition... Double the buffer zone, at least. Thank you.

[01:55:54] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:55:59] Public Speaker: Hi, for the 2nd time this week. I just wanted to come and speak as a community activist and a clinical psychologist and say, 1st of all, actually, thank you to a lot of the people in this room for being here. It's not every day to see the chambers this full. And to see such an engaged community together is a really beautiful thing to see. So I'm glad to be here with Mountain View parents and community members. I think it's a very complicated issue, and I think what I want to come here and speak to is just honoring and appreciating that council is listening to a diversity of opinions from our Mountain View citizens. And in terms of marijuana, from like the clinical psychology perspective. It's complicated. So it can be a very good thing. It can also be, it does have, there is addiction that can happen. So I think it's not all good or all bad. This is complicated and that I'm just excited to see so many people in our community involved today. So I hope that we can come up with a compromise that can allow us to have some cannabis revenue come in because that was a big project that got worked on. I'm very excited that weed was legalized. I never thought that would happen in my life. But I also think that we are a community and we get to decide together what that looks like for us. So I would definitely support us not having them in downtown. I think it's val, I think it's valid that parents want to kind of regulate and what their kids see when they go out for dinner and things like that. So thank you so much.

[01:57:28] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:57:35] Chin Wen: Hi, my name is Chin Wen. I have been talking about to the city hall for, this is my 2nd time, but it's all related to marijuanas. I acknowledged the unique medical benefits for the marijuana to the certain individuals. In spite of the, in spite of the legalization of the marijuana, FDA still categorize it as a level one drug, which means I did Google it. No current accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. In retail shop in the city were toxic, our children and teenagers, who, based on the study, is the most age group of people to get addiction of the drugs. And also having, um, uh, having, um, cannabis shops in the downtown, uh, mountain will, uh, endanger our community safeties. Let's have the numbers talk about it. I would like to cite some statistic data on the marijuana legalization impact on the city of state of Colorado, like traffic created related marijuana desks has increased to 48%. marijuana related emergency room visit has increased 49% and marijuana related cost to the poison center had increased 100%. The laundry list could go longer and longer. It's not just to endanger the safety of communities. It's also put a lot of administration burdens on the city. And leave the... Thank you.

[01:59:12] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:59:27] Public Speaker: At this time, I camp around Mia Pizzas. I'm here to share you why me appears to band Marijuana completely. Yeah, we know that, you know, according to different medical study, marijuana, we damage people's brain, especially young people. So that's the reason we don't like to have Guareemara for recreation. only for the medical, you know, that's okay, but, you know, for those people, they feel that, you know, the, taking Verma is personal freedom, but look into those party, they tend to, you know, try to, you know, deal people to join them. So actually, you know, when you have Vadimara, actually is another good, good to the, you know, community. Also, there's a pasta when they say that they put a heist, the security. So the people won't take the Varimana out or, you know, they can only, you know, use that in the in the store, but look, those shops, you know, most of the shops will sell in what kind of the product. Look at this. There's a cookie, candy, and all those, you know, the young people use the little stuff. So, you know, actually, you know, it will cause a problem. Okay, thank you.

[02:01:01] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:01:08] Jhen Feng: Good evening, everyone. My name is Jhen Feng. I did not prepare for me to make public comments today. Sorry, I need your one and half minutes. I want to talk about one thing just happened outside. One industry representative took a picture for younger a few years old. I don't know how old she is and publish on social media. Her parents ask the lady to take down the picture. The lady refused. And the parent call policeman hasn't settled down. I don't know what's going on now. I think when Personally, I don't like to ask any partial, but if city has to open some, I think We should not do business with this kind of, I mean, this particular group, right? Maybe there are other groups. I'm more upside, as. Sorry. Thank you.

[02:02:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:02:16] Brett: Hi, everyone. My name is Brett. I live and work in Mountain View. So, I mean, same as many people said, I know, I'm concerned about my kids, I'm from the environment, about, you know, the community, these are profound issues. I'm not gonna repeat again.

[02:02:31] Public Speaker: So one thing I want to reinforce someone said before, but especially then I have time to finish is the traffic, right? It's probably the least important compared to many of these issues. But, you know, just for the convenience, right? All of you guys will, you know, go to sometime, sometime, right? So right now, like when I go to downtown, I need to worry about parking, or when I travel, it's always bad. And, you know, when I go to work, that's the same thing as well. So just for the convenience, right? Like let's affect you every single day. Right, that's, you need to think about having the pot shot in the downtown that was, it's gonna be increase the topic, make it much more, much less a charity for others to visit our downtown and our business as well. Right? So for again, for all these, all the provider issues, like kids, education helps, you know, I just want to add another minor point that I'm also against the pasta, thanks.

[02:03:24] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:03:34] Public Speaker: It's my 2nd time here. Last time, I stayed late until one a.m. just like you guys, unfortunately, still passed. But one thing I learned from last time, because I listen carefully to everyone speak. I remember someone said marijuana is easily accessible through online ordering. So if that's the case, I think the argument that the Mariana supporters saying opening more when marijuana shops make marijuana easily accessible is a false argument, especially reducing the buffer actually does not help much about improving the accessibility, but it's promoting marijuana, which is promoting a runner against the populations we don't want, those kids to access too. So my whole point is if buying my one online is so easy, why do I define a very small buffer? Thank you.

[02:04:25] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this topic?

[02:04:34] Public Speaker: Thank you. So I think one of the things that we've been talking about is the size of the buffer zones, right? And I think one of the things that I will ask the council members to keep in mind is that, you know, Marijuana has a very pungent smell and it travels a long distance, right? Anyone who'd been to downtown San Francisco would recognize that downtown San Francisco has gotten much worse, right, since the negotiation of marijuana. right? I am a resident of Mountain View, and I've been in this area for the past 20 years. I remember 20 years ago, Monteville downtown, was not as good as today, and the city has done an outstanding job over the past 20 years in making the downtown church build your place as it is today. Now, if we introduce cannabis shop in downtown, I think the smell, what kind of people, there will inevitably be folks who will smoke, right, marijuana in downtown, and that will just put this pungent smell over the entire downtown and really reduce the quality of downtown. right? So I would ask the council member to think about that and to not, you know, turn back the clock and turn the downtown area into what it was, you know, 20 years ago and keep downtown beautiful as today. Thank you.

[02:05:55] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:06:01] Julie: Good evening. My name is Julie. I'm a mountain view high parent. I was here at the October and March City Council meeting, and I also was here at the EPC meeting in April. During that meeting, there was an EPC member, ignored someone's concern about if the buffer to daycare and the youth center is too small, and the stoner who bought the marijuana would possibly consume the right away or at a nearby place. The EPC member argued that it would be illegal and be caught by law enforcement and insisted on less restricted buffer. Any human being who has the fear of punishment or breaking the law will know to obey the law. However, there are still plenty of felonies who know the law and still deliberately break the law. So don't expect every marijuana buyer, can consume it in a way, law permits. especially those drug addicts when they get high under the influence. Secondly, police department are heavily burdened to maintain the safety of the city. You just cannot expect them to promptly catch any violence any time. To open the pot shop so close to school and the youth center is to introduce the uncertainty and the risk to a vulnerable group. Now it's time to correct a mistake from previous city council's decision. Sale of recreational marijuana is illegal under federal law. Any ordinance that aids and debates marijuana cell is felony under federal law. People count on you to make the policy to make the savings. you.

[02:07:43] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:07:51] Dan: Good evening, city council members. My name is Dan. I'm a mountain view resident for more than 10 years. Um, so I'm here to um, um, strongly against opening any cannibis store in Mountain View, uh, as a parents of 2 young kids. Because I guess you guys already heard a lot about, you know, the reasons why a lot of people are here today. I just want to, I just recently read a paper on New York Times on April 27th, and the title is getting worse, not better. Illegal pot market booming in California despite negleization. So, um, some statements is quite interesting. So I just want to share that with you guys. So it says it's been a little more than a year since California, Nicolized marijuana. The largest such experiment in the United States, but no enforcement officials say the unlicensed illegal market is still thriving, and in some areas has even expanded. So if that's one of the reasons, so we may have to reconsider, if what we are doing right now is we need to fix the problem while just making the problem worse. Another argument in the paper is that there is a lot of money to be made in the black market. And whose debut, you know, since the cannibis oil was more than 5000000 in nearly April. So if you guys want to know more, you can search this paper. Thank you. Thank you.

[02:09:25] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:09:30] Cindy: So I'm strongly against, my name is Cindy, and I'm a male. No, I'm a mountain view homeowner. So I strongly against the Marvana shop in Mountainville, because, so, you know, like, there's one thing, the same thing, saying like, when you look at the Abbey, the Abbey is looking at you. So at the gate of the gate drugs of the other stronger drugs. My Rivana is wise, why is a band in the in the federal because it's the deep abbess who stare at your home at your kids. So how you feel if it's close to the mountain view to where your family is. So when I read all your camping website. When I, yeah, one word mentioned again and again, it's environment. So everybody want to have a good environment and high quality of life. And I particularly want to challenge Chris, like because when he mentioned in his website, like he wanted to make sure a sustainable, prosperous city, with high quality of life. I mean, my Rawana is not a high quality of life. It's actually drag a lot of people to a very, very bad life. So, and also, I want to challenge the council member, councilman Jiang, and you mentioned like a residential residence first. But how you make the residence 1st when you vote, yes, on the marijuana shop. You know, like all the nearby cities, like like a Cupertino, Los Santos, Paloto, like a Saratoga, they all bun the part of Aranda, because you want protection. Thank you.

[02:11:07] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[02:11:09] Diana: Hi, my name is Diana, I'm 10 years old, and I live in Mountain View. I'm here to stop pot chop. Hot chopped are really bad for us. They can make you sick or damage your brain. They are also bad for the air, which can smell and get you sick. It is also bad for the environment. And who doesn't want to have a good environment? A good environment. Means a healthier life. Thank you.

[02:11:30] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[02:11:45] Jennifer Sofas: Um, hello. I'm Jennifer Sofas, from your Peters. And I'm opposing marijuana business. I'm speaking here tonight. Not like someone, you know, who wants business, make money through selling marijuana, or representing a special interest group. But by the way, I think those people's opinions, um, should not be taken because of their conflict of interest. As you know, honorable, honorable city council members, the city of Milpitas has banned marijuana businesses, and Milpitas is not alone. 76% of cities in California has banned marijuana business. 76% is a clear message from people in California that the people don't want pot shops in their cities. Any residents of Monk Mill, if they love their city. Now they're community. Now their family, all love their kids, should all grade 0 part shop in Mountain View. I heard that month of view council members agree to permit part shops and adapt no buffers rooms. Thank you. I have 5 more cars.

[02:13:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Um, you know, you need to make arrangements, uh, in advance.

[02:13:25] Jennifer Sofas: I give to her. I give to the cook.

[02:13:29] City Clerk: She did give me the cards right as she was going up, and I didn't indicate that she was wanting extra time. So I apologize.

[02:13:34] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Oh, and are those folks all here? The 5 folks.

[02:13:40] City Clerk: She has 7 cards, so...

[02:13:42] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Thank you.

[02:13:46] Jennifer Sofas: So I heard that the month of view is going to adopt the lower buffer zone against the proposition, which is against the proposition 64. It shocks me, because since you will know that, if you pass that audience, you will bring a lot of lawsuit against the city, then that's very custody to the city, I'm just wondering why you do not care about that. Why you vote yes on this ruling? He's a city money is not important to you. Vote, no, um, marijuana business to real, represent your voters, not special, interesting groups. Thank you.

[02:14:34] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:14:51] Public Speaker: I'm a mountain mill rather than since 2012, and I'm also a mountain mill high school parent. And today, I'm here to, um, strongly against any part in our neighborhood. As, you know, we moved to Mountainville, because we wanted the kids growing up in a nice neighborhood and a safe environment. And here, strongly against an impartial in mountain. Thank you.

[02:15:25] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So anyone else who wanted to speak to us on this topic?

[02:15:36] Public Speaker: Hi, um, uh, dear uh, mayor and counselors, I'm a citizen uh, in uh, Sunnyvale City. Uh, today, uh, we are talking, uh, I think all the people here are against recreational drugs, um, uh, recreational marijuana, um... It, the major harmonies to the kids. And, uh, for my family, uh, the experience with drugs is my great great grandpa. So he had opium, like everyone remembered the opium war in China, right? So at that time, Chinese government didn't guard it, and a lot of people were on it, and my dad's remembrance of my great great grandpa is his lying there all day couldn't do anything. So, and the consequence is that China just got weakened and uh, uh, country foreign countries invading China at that time. So, for us here in US, like, for our kids, they are the future of our country. We want them to have strong mind. We want them to have good health. We don't want them to be ruined by recreation marijuana. Thank you. Thank you. They are to, uh, uh, one time you're raised, uh, uh, she is uh, over 90 years old, so, uh, you know, she asked me to, uh, represent and then to opposite the part shot. So, that's it.

[02:17:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else who wanted to address us on this topic? If there's anyone else, if you could make your way to this side of the room so we can see how many folks still want to share their thoughts with us?

[02:18:00] Public Speaker: So, good evening. I mean, everyone here? First of all, I need to reinstate. So we are talking about recreational use marijuana only. So what Lenny just said is medical use, that is out of the scope we're discussing today right now. So he's probably his statement needs to be ignored. So weeks ago, I was here for the EPC meeting and one member said, she believed that that Mountain View kids would have better self-control than sell their kids. So the Mountain View doesn't need the same buffer as San Jose does. And the other EPC member said, since Mountain View has bigger population density. So our buffer needs to be reduced. Again, I don't see the logic behind these statements. So what's wrong with our city of Mountain View? Why our kids do not deserve the same protection? The other kids. Living other cities. So I'm asking you here to ignore the EPC recommendation made from these false statements. Also, I want to remind everybody here, at this moment, cannabis business still remain illegal under federal law, which preventing banks to provide service to this store. So this store still remains cash and carry because of the unique of this business. That means people nearby, also including their property, will become a potential target for theft and the robbery. So we should take very careful step in pursuing this. Thank you.

[02:19:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:19:43] Public Speaker: Hi guys. I know you guys don't have an easy decision. It's a pretty tough thing that your spot you guys are in. I'd say if you look at all the people's, what they're thinking of what they're, you know, how they feel is pretty obvious. But I think you also need to look at what is the potential outcome, right? There's 2 decisions, either for or against. So if you look 22 years a few years down, what is the potential of not having this versus the potential of having this? So I think the potential of having this is far greater as far as, you know, things that can happen, right? As far as, you know, maybe increase in uh, in Greece and usage, increase in crime, and a variety of other things that can come along with this. Many, many cities don't allow, you know, um, alcohol, uh, you know, sellers in the neighborhood. I think there's a reason, right? So I think, you know, a lot of this is similar, that it could increase, it could sort of bring in things that we don't want in this in this city. So I think that's something that, you know, worth considering, right? Thank you.

[02:20:44] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please. If you could speak into the microphones, we can hear you better, thanks.

[02:20:58] Public Speaker: Uh, good evening, uh, dear council member, I come to, uh, against the Marana and the nose, uh, uh, part of shop in month meal. I realize there are 295. So 95 people say no from the residents, 95 people say, speakers say, yes, actually from the business, man, I think they constantly should say the difference. Thank you.

[02:21:34] Mayor Lisa Matichak: there anyone else?

[02:21:45] Public Speaker: I'm a resident at Mountain View. So, I strongly against uh, uh, pots shop in our uh, neighborhood in our city. I just wandering those promote the business one. So, Do they, in a, when no one, deep in their heart, if they have family, they will encourage them to, uh, consume it, if they have kids, do they live here? You are elected a council member. Please fight for us. We want a, we want community. They are after money, and they use our common sense. Just, I still remember, they say, one of your kids are more stronger to, against, as, um, Maroon lads, and other cities, kids. It not makes sense. Use our common sense. We want community. We want neighborhood. We don't need the money. And actually, that's not our money. It will not be any of our money to benefit our city's future. It's their money. They will take away, leave our community ruined. I strongly against the pot shop. Thank you.

[02:23:16] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[02:23:19] Richard: Thank you. Hello? Alright. So, uh, my name is Richard. I live in Los Ados, and I've come here to against to be expedite the approval of the marijuana shops in downtown as well as Paris. For 2 reasons. One, my daughter is already a junior in high school and she went, she goes to Los Alos High, very frequently. She is coming with her friends to go to the downtown for study for shopping, they start at the coffee shops. So I strongly wish the council would consider the kids, high school kids coming have easy access or at least see the store there. So you have to consider if you want to open, you have to consider the number as well as the hours of those access to the, to a stall, the 2nd on the Paris, which is right next to the Pacific Ballet Academy as well as a flight, flying fish, uh, suing school. So there's a lot of kids around there, very often. My daughter went there. My daughter goes there for dance. are really concerned about this delivery service over there and in tennis consequences when people go in that places. Thank you.

[02:24:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Anyone else who wishes to speak on this topic?

[02:24:50] Sean Kelly Rye: Good evening, Baron Counsel, Sean Kelly Rye. I just wanted to come up and thank you for always listening. I always had the opportunity to work with staff, and with the city manager's office, and with all the council members, a number of you have taken tours, taken meetings. We may not have always agreed, but you have always kept an open mind, and I appreciate that, and I thank you. I work with a lot of jurisdictions, and I can't always say that's the case. But thank you. I think that's what separates Mountain View from other cities, is the willingness to have the dialogue and have a conversation. And even though we may have opposite opinions and things, at least we can have a meaningful conversation. I just want to, in sort of in retrospect, we were originally looking at 4 storefronts way back when, and that was brought down to 2 storefronts and to deliveries. And now we're potentially looking at one storefront and one delivery. And so, if you kind of look at the progression, I think there's been a lot of understanding on behalf of the council. And they've listened a lot to the community. That's a 75% reduction in storefronts. And so I think that the community should be heartened. and should be happy that there's been a significant drop in the number of storefronts. And I think that, you know, the industry, as it progresses over time, will probably come back to you and have the conversation further as you see that there are no real negative impacts and look at furthering what we're doing. So I just want to say thank you and answer any questions if you may have any. Thank you.

[02:26:23] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member Ramirez.

[02:26:25] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Uh, thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Um... Oh, my question.

[02:26:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So if a council member asks a question, the person speaking does get to answer it. Thank you.

[02:26:39] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So what is the value add to a community to have a storefront dispensary?

[02:26:46] Sean Kelly Rye: Storefronts? The industry right now is still significantly new and people don't know enough about the product. And therefore, 70% of sales in San Jose still happen at dispensaries. Only 20 to 30% are happening through delivery. And that usually happens once a client or a patient knows what they want, have gone in, have discussed whatever works for them, and then have that delivered because there's that familiarity. So the Amazon effect is happening. It's but it happens once they have that education. I mean, I would equate a storefront to something similar to Apple. where I don't necessarily buy things at Apple, but I certainly go in and look at all the products. I wanna see the new phone. I want to see the new, I want to see the pros and cons or a Best Buy. You know, you go in and you see what you like and then you order it online and so you still need that interface at that storefront. Retail, despite Amazon, retail is doing quite well. And I think Amazon's only really 15% of total retail sales nationwide. So just to be clear, the value add is that it allows customers an opportunity to browse and determine what product they want. Browse, ask questions. The industry's so new, the product is so new. People get to talk about their ailment and what may or may not work. And so there's a lot of that I had someone approach me outside and said, hey, what should I take for this? And I said, I'm not that expert. I'm a lobbyist. I not, but that expert that's going to tell you what to take. Go to a dispensary. Go to talk to their chief science officer at that dispensary, have that conversation, and see what works for them. Go talk to your doctor. For pets. You can now talk to your veterinarian, but they have to go to a dispensary to really take a look at what that product that...

[02:28:37] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Excuse me. Excuse me, I really do not want any outbursts like that. We're gonna respect what the person has to say, and we're gonna listen carefully to it.

[02:28:50] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Those are all the questions they had. Thank you.

[02:28:52] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice mayor Abi Koga.

[02:28:54] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: you. Thank you. So just following up on that, then, from what it sounds like, it's just really more about advertising. And, um, you know, you mentioned discussing asking questions, but all of that can be done online now, couldn't it be? It's it's

[02:29:13] Sean Kelly Rye: No, because people don't know enough about the product. They have to go in. They have to see it. They have to feel feel it. I mean, I understand what you're saying. And logically that makes sense, but there's so much that people don't know about the plant.

[02:29:27] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I mean, you can usually these days have they have a help button and you just hit the button and someone live check. can chat with you. So that's what I meant. Oh, sorry. But, um, so there's, so there, I don't, so the value add is purely just for the business then to be able to to sell more product.

[02:29:48] Sean Kelly Rye: Well, no, it's for the individual who wants to purchase product, but doesn't know what to do, and wants to actually see and feel, and smell, or look at the product, and say, you know, how is this gonna work for me? either a cream for arthritis or a salve or the raw product, that is working for some folks. So I go to a dispensary and I have a conversation with a few folks because they have experience and they can tell me what may work for me or what may not. I also talk to my doctor. I have severe arthritis, and so a lot of the cannabis stuff does not work for me, but I have started talking to a doctor who works for the World Health Organization. who worked for elemental wellness. He used to put down cholera outbreaks, and he told me you should take the raw plant. It will not take make you high or do any psychoactive, but if you use that like in a salad or anything else, then that's what you should do. So you really go for that face-to-face interaction. Unfortunately, the industry is not like tech where you can do that help button and you can get someone right away.

[02:30:56] Unknown Speaker: Please continue.

[02:30:58] Sean Kelly Rye: I'm sorry, that was the end of it. Thank you.

[02:31:01] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member Hicks? Excuse me, but you all had the opportunity to speak. And it's his opportunity to speak now, and we have some questions for him. Okay, we're going to take a break. We're going to take five minute break.

[02:31:39] Mayor Lisa Matichak: You know, total attention to what the processes are here. If a member of the audience is speaking during public input portion, um, and a council member has questions, um, we ask them questions. And the person is not getting additional time to speak. They're just responding to our questions. And we ask questions. This is a very normal thing for us to do. We do ask folks who are speaking questions. And I just want to let folks know that this was not like this was something special for the individual speaking. We want our questions answered so that we can make informed decisions. And, you know, we listen to everyone and we value the input. And, And again, we're going to ask questions if we have them. So I believe council member Hicks had a question.

[02:32:40] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes, my question is, is this. I believe that you're in touch with California legislation as a whole to some degree. And my understanding is that this you may or may not know, but that there's a fairly robust black market in cannabis in Mountain View and the Bay Area. And even at our high school, my children went to Mountain View High School, and Cannabis was fairly available on the black market. Now, my understanding of the reasoning behind cities looking at delivery and dispensaries is to kind of corral that black market and get it legalized and get it into places, the dispensaries where people under the edges of 21 are no longer able to buy cannabis. So I'm wondering how overall, I'm wondering if you could comment on that sort of trajectory. I've heard, you know, that it, it has been, I've read different articles that have said it's working or it's not working, and I was wondering if you could clarify that. Thank you, Counselor.

[02:33:50] Sean Kelly Rye: It is the California market is dysfunctional. So many cities voted for it, but did not open sufficient retail outlets, either delivery or storefront. And storefront, frankly, is like any other storefront. It's like any other business. If they could do it on the internet, every other business would actually be on the internet, and there would be no retail, but that's a side point. To address this issue of a very robust. 70 to 80% of the market is black market because the taxes are high because it's cheaper. And also because it's very easy to get. And online, you can order it online, it's so easy. You don't even know who's an illegal operator or not. But to alleviate that, assembly member Phil Ting has introduced Assembly Bill 1356. And Assembly Bill 1366 is actually moving through committee. I would have thought that it would have failed. And it is actually moving forward and is for cities that have voted for cannabis over 50%. It is going to say that there should be one dispensary per 10,000 people. And that is being mandated by the state. And so, I honestly would have not believed that they're going to try to take local land use rights away. But I think we've seen this in SB 35. I think we've seen this in SB 50, although that was deferred or put on a two-year plan. But AB 1356 is has slid through. And so there could be the eventuality where you're looking at one per 10,000. That number, I understand, is going to shift to one per 15 or one per 16,000. We're expecting that it may actually end up as a writer on the governor's budget bill. And then this conversation will have been superseded by the state. And they will be implementing one per 16,000, precisely for what you mentioned, is because the illegal market is so robust. And it's the illegal market that's selling to children. It's not the legal market. Dispensaries don't allow anyone under 21. Nobody is going to get into a dispensary without a valid license, and it's not just a matter of having a valid license. There's a dispensary in San Jose near an airport. If you walk there in your 50 or 60 and look at, and you don't have a valid passport, they're not going to let you in. And they can see the gray hair in your beard or in your hair. They won't let you in because the state is that strict on letting anyone in without a valid license. And so, thank you. They are. They are going to be pushing maybe 1356. Did that answer your question?

[02:36:28] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes it does. Thank you.

[02:36:30] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[02:36:37] Matthew Mahaffy: Hello? Matthew Mahaffy. I'd just like to say thank you to all of you guys. I'm one of the four operators that was allowed to move on to the next phase. I want to thank you all for being available. Thank you for your time. Thank you for listening. again, whether we agree or not. That's fine, but I just want to thank you for your time. And this has been a complex issue. It's gone back and forth, and we've gotten to a place that hopefully we can we can resolve this tonight and move forward. Um, Yeah, I just wanted to come and say thank you. Ive set a lot up here.

[02:37:14] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Before you leave, it looks like council member Ramirez has a question for you.

[02:37:17] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes, just one question. So, just to clarify, you're proposing to open a delivery only business.

[02:37:26] Matthew Mahaffy: Yeah, so we are the one that is delivery only. And we do think that our impact to the community is much less. We basically just going to be ghost to everyone in town. I think We'll just be regular cars moving around without big signs on them, nothing in the storefront, no signage.

[02:37:44] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So the question is, we learned with the previous speaker, that part of the value add of having a storefront retail is accessibility to folks who may have knowledge about products. So if somebody, if a customer were to come to your delivery only business to ask questions, would you be able to serve as knowledge based for that customer?

[02:38:08] Matthew Mahaffy: Absolutely. And we do on a very regular basis. People call in all the time with questions. And even if it hogs a phone line for a while, we do stay on long enough to answer anything that they need, make sure that they're comfortable, and then usually we recommend something like trying a litany of things. when they find one that works for them, then that becomes the product that they consistently buy.

[02:38:32] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Great. Thank you very much.

[02:38:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Is there anyone else?

[02:38:43] Julia Tam: Hi, my name is Julia Tam, and I'm a resident of Mount here for 24 years. I was just thinking of what that 1st gentleman said about the black market, how the black market actually is dominating the marijuana commerce right now. And he said 2 things that baffled me. One is that the block market really targets underage children. So when they, you know, when the outlets do get open, Because the outlets cannot be selling, you know, marijuana to underage, how does the outlets go in eradicate selling to underage kids? So you can think about that. And secondly, he says that the black market is so much cheaper to get the marijuana. So think again, if the tax for the merchants to sell mana is so high that the city can actually, you know, get a lot of revenue back, how is that going to compete with the black market? So please think about that too. So anyway, I want to proceed with my talk. I was curious a couple weeks ago to how inform some of the residents of Mountain View is about the proposal currently by the city council. So I decided to take a couple evenings, exactly 3 evenings, and I walked the neighbors of downtown Mountain View, not the whole mountain view downtown, but some streets. And I went to the neighborhood where single families were and also apartments. And I met a lot of people and I actually took time to talk to a lot of them. So I end up serving only 35 people. Then of 35 people, 4 says, yes, they are, they are supportive of the outlets, and 3 of them were on the fence. 28 people.

[02:40:25] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Your time is up?

[02:40:26] Julia Tam: Didn't even know about the outlet proposal. And therefore, wanted more information. And of course, when they hear that,

[02:40:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Excuse me, but your time is up. Excuse me, your time's up. Thank you. Yeah, if you could leave it with the city clerk, that would be great. Next, please.

[02:40:58] Mindy: really appreciating your effort, especially give us the opportunity for the public care. This is Mindy. I am from Sunville, and my kids do go to the school in Mountain View. Um, I do have concern about the opening cannabis store. Actually, I see many parents come to voice their concern, worrying about their kids. Actually, I'm not too worried about those kids, as they have enough love from caring parents, telling them what is right, what is wrong. But I'm concerned about some minor minority kids who cannot get enough love from their parents, like kids in foster homes. They get unlimited attention from friends, from family and from society. They are not, they are one innate, or say, they don't, they don't know how to judge those bad influence. And they will become their target, if they can easily access to stores. So I hope the city can really think about, to protect, prevent them from accessing those physical camping store. By starting with one deliver store. Yeah, at the beginning. Thank you.

[02:42:23] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:42:39] City Clerk: She has 6 cards, she would like 5 minutes.

[02:42:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And are those folks all still here, if you could raise your hand?

[02:42:49] Public Speaker: So whoever's following me. Okay. Okay. So, good evening. I'll console members. First of all, I want to thank all of you. You know, we all saw the progress, even the gentlemen earlier from the industry, also praised you for the progress you made. We really appreciate as Mountain View resident. So, I have been a registered voter since 5 years ago, moved from Midwest to here, and a lot of Mountain View. And also, I think, the Montview council members, I haven't been trying your best, do the best job for the people. However, I do want to say it's not enough on this topic. I have been here since last October for every meeting, even though we're making progress, but there are lots of things really make me worried, especially after I heard what the gentleman from the industry said. I'm very, very worried. He mentioned that AB 1365. Let's make sure, it is 1365, proposed by other gentleman filting. He's ironically, he's also Chinese. What he did is not right. And even then our gentleman said, okay, to get pushed through there, 12 council members, maybe vote for yes, but I want everyone here, be aware. There are 482 counties and cities. The formula I like to against this proposal. It's not approved yet. Don't mix that concept. Then secondly, I'm really worried when the gentlemen say, we need to open a storefront in mountain view, so that people can walk in and feel what it looks like. This really worried me. Why people need to walk into a marijuana store, if they never had marijuana, they walk in and try the product, addict to it, and be a person consume a gateway drug. Let's emphasis. Marijuana is a gitory drug, it's drug, that's the fact. So, no storefront. To a lot of people to walk in and try the product for the benefit of the drug dealers. The next one I want to mention is, you know, um, San Jose, I think at the beginning of this meeting, we talk about the complete San Jose model, right? And one fact I want to point out is, after a year and a half , what did this LCC do, did they reduce the buffer? No, they didn't. What does that mean? It means they're doing the right thing for their people. And they are council members. I think you will do the right thing for mountain view people tonight as well. And also, I want to share something that I have a table I calculated. I want to share some facts because we're talking about facts tonight. So, from population wise, Sionce have one point, 025, um, 10000 people, and Mountain View have 80,000 people. Other area, for San Jose, is 177.51 square miles, and mountain views, 12.27 square miles. If we look at the population 2 square miles, ratio, Sao Se is 5000 is 776, and Mountain View is 6,556. If sunset is using the 1000 feet buffer. What does that mean to mountain view? It's 1135 feet at least. Why we are 600. I'm asking the question, you know, and I like to leave this paper to the council members, take a look. It's very easy to calculate what's the right thing for the citizen in mountain. The other thing, the last point I want to make is, look at all surrounding cities. I lost autos, Apollo Alto, and Cupertino, and Sunnyville. Did they have this kind of council meetings and vote for, you know, what's how much buffer we should give to the cannabis store? No, they don't have this kind of thing at all. They bond that all together. Why, we as a neighbor city. We want a cannabis store. What is the point to have this? There's so many high tech companies in Mountain View, and I'm working for one of them. I'm a Google employee. So I know we pay lots of tax, and Monteville is famous as a high-tech headquarters. And I'm very proud of I work for Google and I live in Mountain View. But if Mountain View become a city, has lots of cannabis store. How can I tell other people where I'm leaving? And it's shameful. And also, my kids were asking me, why didn't you help the council members to vote no for this? So, uh, honorable council members, I really want urge you. Think about the citizen of a mountain view. Think about what, you know, the marijuana dealers want to say, the gentlemen already unveiled their plan. They want to attract more customers for their own benefit. And you are the people, for the mountain view people. So please make the red decision. God bless you to make the right decision. Thank you.

[02:48:54] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[02:48:57] Public Speaker: In the evening, council member, I really had no practice here.

[02:49:01] City Clerk: Excuse me. Excuse me, I just wanted to mention that the gentleman has 5 cars and he would like 5 minutes.

[02:49:08] Public Speaker: But I would use as much as possible.

[02:49:09] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yeah. So, um, are those 5 people here? Could you raise your hands? Okay. Yeah, I know it's a long nice.

[02:49:20] Public Speaker: So I really have no plan to speak here, but I feel really motivated to share my appealing against Lobby Sean, who claim that Storefront has better, has more advantage over delivery only. Basically, he said that, uh, a customer, connered the difference between different products in person, uh, in the storefront. I'm asking how, will the customer really try the economy's product in the store? They will use the install, or how actually learn the difference between the products. My understanding is it seems illegal. You actually use the product. In the store. So if there's no way they actually can use it, they can only see their shape. And maybe, I don't know, any other advantages, they can actually see the difference of these products. All these things can be easily done online. They can literally see these different products description to the study online. So there is no advantage to actually to see, to learn the product difference in stock. So I don't really. I also working in the internet company. The intern company can do very fancy scene to have very good techniques, to sell products, to share the knowledge with customers. So I'm here, only ask city council member to really only support delivery only, not open storefronts. I think it's a very good balance points between people who may have the needs of the marijuana, but also address the concerns he might people here who have the concern of marijuana. Thank you.

[02:51:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wish to address the council?

[02:51:08] Public Speaker: Hi, good evening. Um, I hear that we reduce the buffer to the store, um, to the school. I'm really disappointed because we know that because that means we satisfied, how to say, sacrifice our kids. We don't want that. I think both all of you maybe have kids, right? Right? Right? So please don't sacrifice them. Thanks.

[02:51:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Is there anyone else?

[02:51:46] Public Speaker: Thank you, council members. Let us to speak here. I've heard... Speaking of medical marijuana. But I think medical marijuana better live at the hands of our doctors. Let them to take care of it. If anybody sleep, has a need. Please, let them to take care of, just like any prescription drugs. Okay. Now. For the, I know we are talking about recreational marijuana. I think our progress is even set a buffer zone about sodas. Well, recently, I know there's some city already, already doing that and set above a song, even for electronic smoking. Sorry, left sound like cigarettes. Shouldn't we set up better, bigger buffer song for my marijuana, especially we don't know the result for the, for the people. Thank you.

[02:53:16] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:53:27] Public Speaker: Good evening. Thank you for listening. I'm a resident in Los Altos. I just like to tell a story recent happened not too long ago. A friend is picking up her son at a basis outside basis in Saratoga. And she, while she was waiting there, she heard a huge band, and turn around, find a BMW, crash into a lamp post. And later, the police found out the guy was under influence. So she was so shaken because it only, it happened only a few minutes before the kids are released. So it only, if only the kid, he was there a few minutes later, think about what would happen. So when she told me, I was very surprised. That we heard this kind of story all the time, but you don't hear it. I don't hear it from someone so close happening to her. So after that, um, I sometimes I feel scared driving because I don't know how many people driving a car are under influence with drug or with alcohol. So that's my story. And, uh, also, um, We, when we, we have been thinking about investing in real estate in Mountain View, Silicon Valley. But now if I know there were canopy stores in Mountain View, I might need to rethink about it. So from previous meeting, you said there will be 1000000 tax revenue from canopy stores, but there will be some laws too. Yeah thank you.

[02:55:01] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next please.

[02:55:09] Leah Wong: Hello? Thanks for your time. My name is Leah Wong. I'm a resident and voter in Mountain View. I'm also a medical scientist. So 1st I want to send to Mariana actually for our cancer patients. We prescribed a lot for our cancer patient to reduce the pen. And we very glad, you know, we have the prescription, um, on them. But as a recreation of drug, I think we need more cultures. So think about the sequence. Yeah, you think about secrets is safe, but we took more than 100 years. My medical school colleague at Berkeley. They took more than 10 years, spent multi-million dollars on research, approved 3rd hand smoking, is actually could be make a child and also a fetus to be fatal, you know, with very serious medical condition. So to make the recreational marijuana so available in this neighborhood, we know we have limited data to know how to regulate that. We don't want, you know, pregnancy. Yes, we know pregnancy. shouldn't smoke. You know, shouldn't use marijuana, but we don't know if we walk in the neighborhood. The 3rd hand is 2nd hand smoking, the Mariana could affect our friends, you know, our family. So, um, and also, um, there is a productive issue at workplace if people abuse that, if it's still available, you know, on the street when you go to the bar, and they're going to be a huge expense on human resource management as well. Thank you.

[02:56:39] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[02:56:46] Chen Yang: Good evening, council members. My name's Chen Yang, and I'm a resident of Mountain View. When lobby is cannabis lobbyist said the value of storefront cannabis stores to educating people, what kind of product they can get, they could, how to use it. Actually, they try to introduce products to non-users, to transfer non-users to be users and transfer the casual users to be heavy users. That's the business because they are not nonprofit business. The only purpose is to making money. They are business. So all they want to do. Maybe looks like they want to advocating people. No. They just want to make more money. They want more people to use cannabis. So I really against go against the storefront shop. Thank you.

[02:57:47] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to address the council on this topic? Okay, seeing none? Seeing one more?

[02:58:06] City Clerk: The speaker is requesting seven minutes. She has 7 cards.

[02:58:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Are all those folks here? So I only see, where are those seven folks? If you could leave your hands up. Uh, the seven people who sign cards, not the 8 people that have their hands up. So are any of those names repeats? Is it easy to tell?

[02:58:47] City Clerk: It's not. I can read the names if you'd like, but...

[02:58:51] Mayor Lisa Matichak: You can have 5 minutes.

[02:58:55] Public Speaker: Thank you. So I just want to talk about a couple of things. First of all, let's clarify, you know, why we're here and why we're talking about this. I've heard some statements, and I think these are things that we all have to think about. First of all, I've heard people comparing Mariana business with alcohol, liquor, and people are saying, well, if we allow liquor stores in Monteville, why cannot we allow cannabis stores here? I want to make sure we all understand. This is not about comparing one bad thing with another. This is about what incremental things that were bringing to the city. Are we trying to bring incremental, better things that will increase the welfare and the benefits of the Monteview citizens or the opposite? And the other thing is, I would like to say that voting for proposition 64 does not represent monthly residents and voters say yes to opening shops here. For example, Las Autos, they also had 59% of voters voted, yes, for propositioning 64, and yet they banned cannabis shops in their city. So think about that. And also consider what other neighboring cities are doing in that same context. The other argument that I have heard is that, well, having regulated use of Mariana would actually depress the black market transactions. I want to have each one of you to read an article that was just published on New York Times on April 27th. The title of that article says, getting worse, not better. And illegal pot market booming in California despite legalization. There is a quote from a sheriff, um, that's named Thomas, and he said that there's a lot of money to be made in the black market, and actually, certainly, legalization certainly did not put cops out of work. In fact, our governor, Gavin Newsom, has declared that illegal growths in Northern California are getting worse, not better, and 2 months ago redeployed a contingent of national guard troops stationed on the border with Mexico to go after illegal cannabis farms. So that argument, at least for the one year experience that we have here in California, proved to be false. So I want you guys to consider that before you vote tonight. There's also mentioning about big revenue. I I'm sure that a lot of you guys, you know, have, you know, looked at when you value things, when you make decisions. You have to do cost benefit analysis. It's not just about one side of the equation. You also have to think about what is the burden that this cannabis business is going to be putting onto the residents of Mountain View? There's a social study that looked at it, actually. And it shows that for every tax dollar that the city can get out of those legalized cannabis shops, there's actually a 4.5 dollars cost associated with the actual police costs, extra age urgency rooms costs, and et cetera. There's also a statement that from the cannabis lobbyist earlier today that talked about a 70% reduction, that is just a misstatement. The ordinance that got passed in last October was passed by the old council without listening to all the opinions of the residents here. So we cannot use a misrepresented vote to count and to talk about the reduction. That was just a wrong number to start with. And we are here tonight, to correct the wrongdoings. I also want to highlight that the same person. Sean, uh, rankly. He actually went to Santa Clara city council meeting earlier this month. On May 2nd. There is a city council hearing in Santa Clara City for the same exact topic. And even though the city already had a band on cannabis store, the council decided, at the end of the hearing, to continue the band and extend it for another year. The same guy who stood here, just a moment ago, telling you why, having kind of a shop in such a good thing, got spent by the council member, Europeans in Santa Clara City. He also made a threat to the Santa Clara City council by saying that there is already a legislation, which is AB 1364 that got passed. The councilwoman called Debbie Davis said that he actually misrepresenting AB 1356. It won't impose dispensary series on cities who have a temporary memorial. So you all have to consider what other people are doing in the same neighborhood, and what you guys are trying to make a decision and imposing on your citizens. One last but not least, and this is just me, representing some of the opinions and questions from our neighbors and committee members. Thank you. Thank you.

[03:04:05] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, is there anyone else who wishes to address the council on this topic? You can fill out the card after.

[03:04:19] Tutu Thompson: Good evening, everyone. My name is Tutu Thompson, Montemir resident, mother of three little kids. I'll go to Wishman School District. Um, Karma goes around. So, um, you really don't know who the next DUI pot victim, nobody wants to lose a loved one to any DUI pot or any DUI period. So that includes everyone here that includes your loved one too. So please do you and everyone in mountain me a favor. Vote, can it be business style? Thank you.

[03:04:52] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. If you could be sure to fill out a card, that'd be great. Okay, anyone else wishing to address the council? Okay, we'll close the public input portion of this. Open it up to my colleagues for any additional questions or comments. Council member commit.

[03:05:12] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thanks. I'm ready to move into my comments, but I don't want to preclude any council members if they have questions that they have to ask. Do you have questions? No. Okay. So, um, first, I'd like to thank our staff, um, the planning division, the police department, the city manager's office, the city manager's office, I feel that everyone has done a lot of work, um, on this topic, that's through the website, community outreach meetings, the survey, and, um, it actually going to the downtown committee. Second, I want to thank the public for all your comments today and in March, in October, April to EPC. I know that you are all here. Um, because you care about Mountain View. And I think that's why we're all here. And regardless of how you feel about the topic. And I know that for many, you're taking time away from your family to be here. And I appreciate that. And lastly, I want to thank my colleagues for their willingness to talk about this issue. I know that for 4 of you. This is not something that's new. And I appreciate your openness and your patience to discuss changes. So, um, in February when I brought this issue back to council. For me, I saw it purely as a matter of public policy. And I know that there's been a lot of public discussion, and we heard some of it tonight in the comments, but for me tonight, it's not about merit, the merits of cannabis, or medicinal or recreational, to me, is an issue of regulation in our city. And as was mentioned by our city attorney earlier today, as legislators, you're allowed to modify legislation as part of the public policy process. And we are trying to do so at the earliest moment possible before the lottery was even conducted to try to make any changes before that. And I understand that for businesses, it can be frustrating, whether you qualified or you did not qualify. Um, and that's part of what the process is when you're bringing something new forward. There's obviously going to be, I believe, kinks that come up. So appreciate the businesses for their patients. I also want to say that we have many people who have spoken tonight that say that they're participating in their 1st kind of public city council issue. They're coming to city council for the 1st time. They're engaging with their government for the 1st time, and maybe they've been residents for many years. And I think that rather than be judgmental of that, we should celebrate that people are coming to share their views, no matter what those views are. And I would never want anyone to feel unwelcome, because of their background, to tell their elected officials how they feel. I think everyone deserves the right to share how they feel. And one of the city's goals, which we discussed on Monday, was a community for all in Mountain View. And that means everyone, you know, no matter what your opinion is. The other reason why I brought this back is, I think, between October and going into the new year, there were things that came up on the city level. that we saw, for example, the school that was discussed at San Antonio, the clustering of businesses in downtown, that we could only talk about, if it came back to city council. You can't discuss the issues or make any type of changes if it doesn't come back. So in March, we discuss some of these changes. We discussed, as I mentioned, San Antonio, the clustering of stores in downtown, and the possibility of new buffers. So now, in May, we are trying to finalize some of the changes that came up. And one of the things that I recognize, because I'm a voter, just like everyone who spoke today is that at the state level, for the state of California, cannabis is legal. And that there is, I understand that there is current legislation that a lot would allow for deliveries, even if cities vote to ban it. So tonight, what I'm trying to find and what I've been trying to find since February is an opportunity to compromise for residents who didn't feel heard, to feel heard, for the business community, to feel heard. Um, and for those who may have differing views, um, to feel heard. And it's important to respect everyone. So, when the topic of cannabis first came up. last year in October. One of the things that had been my hope was that the city would start slow. And that's one of the things that the downtown committee recommended. It's on page 5 of the staff report that came back to council. You know, to see how it goes. And, um, and to reevaluate, um, which is something that the city of Redwood City has done. So I think it's clear from the conversation that we had in March that a complete ban is not something that's possible. So I don't want to have a long discussion about a band tonight. My hope is that we can go through each one of these 3 topics that staff has if staff can pull that up. And, um, we can move forward and go into discussing each one. Um, So that we would talk about San Antonio 1st downtown and then we would go into discussing the buffers. Um, so those are my my comments and I will wait. I'll wait to make a motion if anyone else has any additional comments, but I'm, but I can go into question one if people are ready.

[03:11:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Does anyone else have any comments? They want to make.

[03:11:56] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So if we're going to do question one, um...

[03:11:59] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Unless you have comments. you can do general comments first. deferring to my colleagues. I was hoping to tackle the most contentious issue first, the buffers, but if there's a preference to tackle San Antonio first, then I will disclose that I have a leasehold interest in an apartment near the same engineered precise line area.

[03:12:20] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I think we'll do question one first, unless there's any other comments.

[03:12:28] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So I'll formally move item one, which is to adopt a resolution amending the P 40 San Antonio precise plan to prohibit cannabis businesses within the San Antonio precise plan boundaries, to be read in title only for their reading waived.

[03:12:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Do you want to hit the motion? So we have a motion by council member Kumei and a 2nd by vice mayor of a Koga. Any further discussion on this part of the topic? Council member McAllister.

[03:13:06] Councilmember John McAlister: What if? I guess we could always come back, but school district is having a tough time moving forward with this their decision to buy. So, um... What if they they back out? Would you still, is there any room in there to consider, an option, sometimes down the road to look at it again?

[03:13:42] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: My understanding is that with the amount of development happening in the San Antonio area, that a school is necessary. That's been my understanding after 6 years on planning commission and 5 months on city council, but if I'm incorrect, that that's something that the, you know, is necessary, but we have, um, numerous projects that are coming in the Gray Star project, the Prometheus project, the stacked flat condos that we looked at on Fayette, I think the amount of housing that we're looking at will likely merit the additional school. So, I feel like this might be preemptive, but I've also felt, since no one applied there, that it would be wise to move forward with removing it, so that when that time comes, when the school moves forward, that we wouldn't have to have it come back to counsel again.

[03:14:51] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Council member Hicks.

[03:14:55] Councilmember Alison Hicks: My understanding is we could review it at some future point, am I wrong? If, after some time, it becomes clear there will be no school in the San Antonio area.

[03:15:06] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: Just as you are taking a look at an ordinance that's effective now, you could look at it again in the future, it's capable of amendment.

[03:15:15] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member Clark?

[03:15:17] Councilmember Chris Clark: So, I think, um... So, first, I want to start... Council, remember, committee, I think you laid things out very, very well. I think I'm hoping to find a path forward and as we get into these, I'm prepared to compromise on a number of things because I want us to, I think it's really important that we sort of speak as a larger group as possible. And I think, one, to council member McAllister's point, this is going to come back to... I mean, we have a built-in sort of review cycle. I would be really disappointed if a school doesn't show up there at this point given all of the effort and things that we put into it. And frankly, maybe this will help in some tiny, minor way. I don't know. But, um, I think, as part of the overall, um, my part of my overall approach tonight was, um, I think, I think, um, this makes total sense, and I appreciate Council member Committee, um, bringing this particular item back in light of the new information, because I think that's one of the most important, important reasons that we, um, can review and change things is new information arises, and situations change, uh, and circumstances change. So I'll be supporting this.

[03:16:29] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Any other comments? Okay, yeah, um, we'll call the question on that one. So that's unanimous, uh, with six council members supporting the motion and one recused. So while we wait for Council member Ramirez to come back.

[03:17:01] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Mayor, while we're waiting for Counselor Ramirez, if we are moving on to item two, then I will be recusing myself due to real property I own in the downtown area. Thank you.

[03:17:13] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member Hicks.

[03:17:14] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes, I will also be recusing myself to my owning of real property in the downtown area. Thanks.

[03:17:29] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Are there any, so this one is number two about limiting the storefront retail businesses in the downtown area? Council member McAllister?

[03:17:40] Councilmember John McAlister: No, I just have a question for the city attorney. So, Council member Kame mentioned that... we're not in a position to ban the ordinance. To ban. No, I don't think that's what she said. Or was that Chris?

[03:18:02] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So when I was talking about the ban, that already came up in March, is what I was trying to say. And so, um, I wanted to move forward with the items that we're gonna vote on versus rehashing things that we had already spoken about in March. Um, is that's where my intent of my comments were.

[03:18:21] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. So is that not, okay, I just wanted to get clarify, because my intention is to...

[03:18:29] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: Are you asking me if, legally, you could take that action tonight? Is that what you're... Okay. Is that the question that you're asking?

[03:18:38] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes, could we, could we change course, or are we, as vice council member committee said, we took that vote already?

[03:18:48] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: Well, you directed staff to study certain regulations and bring those back to you. So, fundamentally, that's one of our challenges would be able to be responsive to doing something, but there is some latitude within the Brown Act and the way that the item has been agendized to allow you to make some decisions tonight that aren't exactly what we brought forward tonight. Okay. So those would be the two guiding principles, as one is whether or not the agenda description is broad enough. And then number two, whether practically based on the direction that you provided staff previously, would be able to accomplish what a majority of the council would ask us to do tonight.

[03:19:28] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. Brief comment that I would like to get this resolved tonight. I mean, I've sat through quite a few of meetings. This is, what, very, it is very impressive to see how many people come out, but I think we should, we're at a point where we can make solid decisions and balance decisions. So I'm looking forward to if there's some compromise involved. But I like to see this move forward with fairness included. So.

[03:19:58] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member Clark.

[03:20:01] Councilmember Chris Clark: So this is, um, this is an item that I think we all, where circumstances change, and I think we also had, um, new information when we saw some of the applications that came in. I think we saw the issue of, um, a number of applications, uh, a significant number of source phone applications for downtown, and then there was sort of the related, um, um, clustering and other issues associated with that. And so I think it, I think it does make sense to set a maximum of not having more than one in all of the precise plan area at any given time. That doesn't mean there will be one. And one of the things that I think will talk about later, or that I hope to talk about later when we give staff direction on how to proceed, is if we were to allow folks to find other properties and reapply, given the resistance to something downtown, we may end up not having any downtown. But I think it, at this point, given the direction that we've given to staff up until this point, and the processes that we've gone through. I think it, I think it does make sense to limit things. So all move that we introduce an ordinance amending Article 9 Division 21 to limit storefront retail businesses to a maximum one in the P 19 downtown Precise Plan Boundaries chapter 36 of the city code to be written title only for the reading wave instead of 2nd reading for June 11, 2019. And I also wanted to, um, since we're taking these one at a time, I wanted to just sort of offer a prelude that, um, I plan to sort of offer some ways later in which we, um, we may, um, that may present a possibility that we don't end up with any downtown. So it's not required, obviously, it's not requiring that there will be one downtown. It's just saying that the absolute maximum would be that, and then next we can also talk about the buffer zone between that 2 that I think will further help.

[03:22:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I kind of feel like if we're going to talk about downtown, as long as we have the other council members that have to recuse themselves recused, that maybe we should just talk about it all at the same time. So if you, I'm curious what else you were going to say.

[03:22:28] Councilmember Chris Clark: Oh, you mean address the other topics? Well, I can say it, well, they're probably listening. So, um, yeah, I think one of the things that I think in, uh, in addition to, to this limitation, the other things that I had plan to, uh, suggest were that we, um, establish certainly establish a minimum distance between the businesses. And I don't know why, frankly, I'm not quite sure why the EPC one was 600. I'm willing to go. I had originally suggested something higher than that. Yeah, and so maybe we meet, there's a, looking at the maps, there might be, I think there's a way to, to, to, basically prevent significant. I think still 600 feet provides some clustering. I think that's just too little. So we'll get there when we get through with the others. And then I think the other thing that I'll probably suggest is not that we, um, later on is not that we just open it up to the whole world again, because I think that we, um, uh, I don't want to go through that whole process again, but I think we do have an opportunity to just in fairness to those who apply to allow them to reapply with different sites based on perhaps new buffers that we'll get to in a little bit, some increased buffers, based on those new rules, they would have the opportunity to reapply if they want with sites outside of downtown. So that's where I'm headed. So I'm thinking probably an increase in the EPC recommendation on the clustering, and then distance, and then probably also an increase in the school buffer in particular when we get there.

[03:24:24] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, I have a couple more comments. Before I get to comment on that. I think it's pretty clear, based upon all the meetings we've had, that residents voted to decriminalize cannabis, but as we talked about it at the last meeting, residents really haven't had the opportunity to vote on whether or not they want retail shops or any businesses in our city. And, um, I don't think anybody here is on the council is talking about trying to, um, inhibit or prevent anybody who wants cannabis for medicinal uses from getting it. I think we're mostly talking about recreational here. And you know, I feel like you can find data to support lots of different perspectives. And so it's really hard. to sort that out. In addition, the survey that was done. I struggle with that one, the online survey, because we can't really separate out the residents from the other people who might have responded to that survey. And yet, um, when I look at all the folks here tonight and at the other meetings, as well as all the emails I've received, and folks who have just talked to me in casual conversations or at meetings or wherever you happen to be. You know, for me, it's very clear that our residents really don't want cannabis businesses in our city. And as they've said, you know, we should listen to our residents. Um, so... So I feel like that's where I'm heading. So, um, Is there a 2nd to council member Clark's motion?

[03:26:20] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Can I? Oh, I have a question.

[03:26:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, uh, Council member, come A.

[03:26:25] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So, um, I guess I just had a question because I For me, I would be interested in any qualified businesses moving out of downtown and finding somewhere else. I feel like we've heard loud and clear that people feel very strongly about our downtown. And, um, you know, I am not sure if, if I vote for this, to limit it to one. Would that, how the buffers play into that in item three? So, um, I don't know if that's more of a question slash comment. you know, that's what I'm struggling with. And, you know, I did want to go one, two, three, to go through all the lists, but I feel almost if that's one of the intents, then can we maybe amend number 2 to achieve the goal of...

[03:27:28] Councilmember Chris Clark: I think the problem is we have to tackle number 2 is this group. Um, and it could be it could be built into a comprehens, I don't know if it can be built in comprehensively later. But I think, so my, at a very high level, my fundamental thinking behind this is, I'm basing my decisions, um, compromises and other things tonight on new information, circumstances changing on the ground. I haven't heard anything new tonight about for or against downtown that I didn't hear in October or, frankly, a year ago. And we had directed staff to move forward, at least knowing that there would likely be the opportunity to at least have one, which is why all the storefront applications are there, and they've gone through the qualification process. And so if you're thinking about not having any downtown or forcing them all to move, you've basically, my bottom line is, um, I don't want to punish anyone who has gone through a process in good faith. And, I think, taking downtown off the table for, we can encourage them to find other spots through some other methods that we might have later on. But I don't think that just wiping out everyone who's already applied is the right is the right approach. I don't think that's a good public policy. I'm just a dork about these things, I guess, but.

[03:29:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member McAllister.

[03:29:04] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, I had similar concerns as council member committee, and I was looking at staff report, page 13. Bottom number one, continue with eligible applications. Allow applications deem eligible to review it under the new regulations, and that would be the four. So, I was thinking maybe, could you, if we could incorporate that into the motion, so that, you know, where we go elsewhere, but this would allow those that applied down there, and then we would already narrow our scope to the 4 that are applicable to do it.

[03:29:34] Councilmember Chris Clark: I think, well, I think that would be a broader discussion, because actually, what I was thinking, just so you know, when we get to that point, my, um, I was torn between staff numbered the options, one, and, um, and actually, um, given some of the comments that we've had from, um, other applicants, and the difficulty they had, um, finding, finding sites or switching sites, what I, one thing that we could, um, I didn't, um, I didn't think to and 4 made the most sense. I thought, one makes sense. Also, I think 3 allowing allowing the original 10 to reapply, find new sites, reapply if they want. And then from a fairness perspective, given that all the rules have changed, right? Maybe they're increased buffers, maybe there are all sorts of things. We give all those folks the opportunity if they want to reapply so that no one feels slighted. If you, but if you, you could also limit it to just the 4 that have made it through. I can see it either way.

[03:30:45] Unknown Speaker: So we'd like number four, restart the application process.

[03:30:47] Councilmember Chris Clark: No, no, no, no. So I feel like we're getting into a discussion that it would be good to have all of the council members here. Well, this participate in.

[03:30:53] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, I disagree, because this pertains to number item one, and that's why I'm trying to get a fairness of how this might play out.

[03:31:01] Unknown Speaker: You mean item two?

[03:31:02] Councilmember John McAlister: Or item two, yeah, because if we're doing a downtown, there's 3 that applied for it, and I want to be able to say, okay, what is their path forward, if we say we want it, if somewhere goes down? So that's why I think it's pertinent. And that's why I asked the maker of the motion to see if it's consideration of looking at that, to say, okay, these 3 businesses have applied, as we move down here, and some of the and the regulations change, or that I was just wanted to know how our path was going to go for those people, that we say, okay, we're going to move somewhere else. So that's why it's pertinent to number two.

[03:31:39] Councilmember Chris Clark: I mean, if you have a specific amendment, you want to run by me, that's fine. I mean, I understand your sentiment, but I just I need to know sort of what specifically you're...

[03:31:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well, or do we just switch to talking about, um... the sort of, like, the 4th question? Um, and then go back? Oh, no, what's this? Okay. Um, because maybe... that one's easier to answer. Because we could have all the council here for that. Or we could talk about number three.

[03:32:14] Unknown Speaker: It does seem like there are issues around both buffers and the application process that might impact your decision around downtown, so you might want to switch to those and then come back to that.

[03:32:27] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yep. So, um, I think we could actually combine, uh, three and sort of four. and have the discussion on that first, and then come back to two. And then we can have the other council members join us.

[03:32:44] Unknown Speaker: for the 3 and 4?

[03:32:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Uh, yeah. Are folks okay with that?

[03:32:50] Unknown Speaker: Well, we have a second. So, ask to make her the motion if he wants to remove it.

[03:32:56] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well, so are you, um... You didn't make any changes, too. Okay. Okay, so we have a motion by council member Clark, and a second by council member McAllister. Um, I actually would like to make a substitute motion. And, uh, that is, we allow only, um, for me, I felt like I heard new information tonight, um, that, to me, is a compromise. And that is delivery only businesses. So my motion would be that we allow delivery only businesses in the city. That's not. Can I do that at this point? Yeah, but I'm basically saying zero downtown, because we wouldn't be able to... You can't have delivery in the downtown. I don't think, according to the current... Can I do that motion?

[03:33:59] City Manager Dan Rich: It seems like it would be appropriate to say you want no dispensaries downtown, or no retail downtown, but on number two, you're specifically talking about the downtown area, so...

[03:34:12] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, so then I'll let the city attorney opined better than I...

[03:34:16] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: Well, we're trying to follow, and is your emotion intended to be for the entire city or just the downtown?

[03:34:26] Mayor Lisa Matichak: It would be for the entire city.

[03:34:28] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: So then the question for the council is whether or not you want to invite your colleagues back to have that conversation.

[03:34:35] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I would like my colleagues back for that, but can I make that substitute motion? Because, really, what that substitute motion is saying is there's zero retail downtown, because there would be zero retail in the city.

[03:34:47] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: Right. And the other 2 can participate in a motion that has to do with the entire city if it's just for the downtown precise plan. They would not be able to...

[03:34:56] Mayor Lisa Matichak: No, it would be the entire city.

[03:34:58] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: And it's up to the council whether or not to invite them back.

[03:35:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, but is there a second to that motion? I don't... Wait, I can invite them back before we get the second? I think I can.

[03:35:55] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: You've kind of been a, sorry, a confusing procedural posture, right? I mean, it's, if you get a second for your motion from the council member sitting on the dais, then you can discuss that motion if you don't, then it goes, it doesn't go anywhere. Now you could also get a 2nd and have the other council members come back. I mean, it's, How does the council want to move forward on this? too.

[03:36:24] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well, I'd like to have the discussion with the other council members here.

[03:36:34] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I can second the motion so that we can have our colleagues come back. Um, to have the overarching discussion. Um, I'm trying to think myself through the procedural pickle we're in. Um, But my understanding is, um, the motion has a substitute, it needs a 2nd for discussion.

[03:36:57] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: Correct.

[03:36:58] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So I'll 2nd it for the discussion and for the vice mayor and the council member Hicks to be able to come back to discuss. Is that procedurally acceptable?

[03:37:06] Unknown Speaker: Well, that's to bring them back, but who votes on it?

[03:37:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well, they can vote on citywide. All 7 of us. The motion was citywide, citywide. Thank you. So they can vote on it. Right?

[03:37:48] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I don't know if you guys have heard, but we did not finish our discussion on number two, but there is a motion on the floor and a second.

[03:37:58] Councilmember Chris Clark: And I made the motion.

[03:37:59] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Absolutely. So I made the motion that we limit the businesses in the city to delivery only. And council member committee, second in that. And I feel like that was, because it would be citywide, we can all discuss that. It's not limited to the downtown. It's a substitute motion. Council member Clark.

[03:38:26] Councilmember Chris Clark: So, um, I won't support the substitute for a few reasons, a few of which I opined on earlier, but just for the benefit of the others. I think the 1st is, as I mentioned earlier, I plan to sort of limit, you know, um, I prefer to look at this as, you know, what new information do we have? What things on the ground have changed, and we had moved forward in March, the path of the idea of there being a maximum, not something, but a maximum of one, and staff proceeded with that in terms of qualifying applicants. So I think a few things. One is if you, um, This is essentially wiping out all of all but one of the applicants. And that was sort of my, um, as you may remember, that was sort of one of my, one of my things was I don't, um, I don't feel it's appropriate to, um, to, uh, basically wipe everyone out who has acted in good faith up until this and, um, I think I just don't think that, um, that is fair. And number one, too. I think there is a place for, you know, one of the things that I think there is a place for retail is in when I visited one in a tour in the state of Washington, I believe, I was surprised by the number of folks in the, people assume dispensaries are just full of 20 and 30 somethings who are just looking to get high. And one of the things that I noticed there was, um, it had a lot of, um, a lot of older folks, senior citizens who were there to get advice and see the product and interact with a real human being as opposed to clicking a chat button. Um, and, um, and I think it was especially, um, especially at the time now where in states where recreational is passed, you essentially have combined the medical and recreational dispensaries, right? So, um, I think, I think you do a lot of the folks in the area who really want, um, who, who maybe they've gone to a doctor and they are looking for, um, something that isn't psychoactive, but they don't know exactly what to order or they want to, they want a topical, they want to be able to see, uh, what's there and interact with a real person. I think there really is a general value to that. But that's my own, that's my own opinion. But more importantly, I just, I don't think that wiping out all 4 applicants. I don't think that wiping out one, all 4 applicants, in one fell swoop, who have all acted in good faith, and done this is the right approach to this. So as I, in case my colleagues didn't hear earlier, this is this discussion, I plan to plan to talk about increased buffers and perhaps away in terms of what staff had asked in terms of how we proceed with the permitting process, to perhaps allow folks to perhaps find other places than downtown, and maybe we end up with none downtown. That was what I was planning to discuss, but I don't think that walking back on what all the decisions not only that we made in October, we made sense then, is the right approach tonight. Council member Ramirez.

[03:42:13] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. I have a question, and then some proposed friendly amendments. The question is, if we allow the phase one applicants to reapply and find new sites, would they be able to modify other aspects of their application? So, for instance, if they were proposing a storefront retail? Could they reapply as delivery only?

[03:42:37] City Staff: Yes. They would be able to find other sites and they would be required to submit a complete new application. We wouldn't rely on the old applications.

[03:42:47] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. So, some proposed friendly amendments. So if we proceed with this, then I would suggest wrapping this up with the other questions. So allowing option three, or going with option three, allowing all phase one applicants to find new sites. And then, retaining the current buffers, because one of the things that we've heard loud and clear is that the community is concerned about the impact of... storefront retail, and I think the impact of delivery is less severe. And then I'll be flexible on this, but retaining the current number of dispensaries at four.

[03:43:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Question form. So are you still allowing a storefront, but maybe somewhere in the city of Mountain Dew?

[03:43:39] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: If this motion passes, their storefront retail would not be allowed in the city.

[03:43:44] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I know. What are you? You said you wanted four businesses. And are you saying all four would be deliver only if the motion passes, yes? And your friendly amendment is to transfer, is to allow the phase one applicants to reapply as delivery only, at potentially new sites. Well, couldn't they do that either way?

[03:44:07] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: If we go with option 3, they could.

[03:44:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And is that all of the phase one applicants?

[03:44:16] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Allow all of the, so yes, options, they allow all of the phase one applicants to reapply. So option three and then retaining... What page is that on again? 14? Yeah, there it is. Sorry.

[03:44:28] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, so that's all 10.

[03:44:31] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Right. Yes. Could we apply? But maximum for, and I'll entertain other ideas.

[03:44:37] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Excuse me. So, um, no, we don't take questions now from the audience. We're having the council deliberation. So, um, I will absolutely accept the phase one, um, applicant's can apply again. I'm a little concerned about 4 businesses. How about three?

[03:45:05] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I would be comfortable with three.

[03:45:09] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So, um, 3 businesses, phase one, um, applicants can all apply again. It's delivery only. I accept all of those. Does the seconder of the motion? Council member Kamee.

[03:45:27] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay,

[03:45:27] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member McAllister. You had comments or questions or something?

[03:45:32] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, just... This whole process is very interesting how we're going through this. So, I guess I'll make some general comments, how I feel, how we're doing this, because it's, it's very different than I've had in the past, so. I've I had the opportunity to meet with 3 of you out here. And I appreciate your thoughts. Again, I appreciate, as other council members sent everybody being here. And you are a strong voice. And, um, You've done well to rally your cause. But as I, when I mentioned to my other, when there was with the people I met, I tried to explain them my perspective of why I'm doing or the proach I'm taking on this particular issue. You may you will probably disagree, but I want you to understand my thought process of how I came back. I came about it. And for those three people, I appreciate your patience. I did hear you. And I've heard everybody here before. I get what you're saying. It's very important to you. It's very passionate to you, and you're committed to it. But when I met with others, I have my job is to come up with a fair and balanced approach. to what the city goes with. Now, when we say there was 67% voted in favor of it, many can say, well, no, they didn't intend that. I've seen no information to say that wasn't their intent. It can go both ways. But I am interpreting it as 67%, which was a high percentage, the highest in Santa Clara County. People said they want to have access to it, and they were looking for it in their city. And that's how I interpret it. And so when We came up and there was a very public from a demonstration that this was not what a solid base of residents didn't like, I made sure I did my due diligence. Many of you heard that I've gone to Colorado and or I've been to Oregon and Colorado, and I've been to the shops. I've talked to council members from Colorado, Oregon, and Washington. I talked to Mayor Lily and me from Fremont. I've talked to a lot of people, and got an idea, and feel in what we're doing. I'm, a lot of times a lot of you talked about your children. And when I talked to my 3 residents, I felt very strongly that they were very diligent on being a great parents, and they educated their children from right and wrong, and that they would be, those children would know how to make decisions, and that those parents had trust in their children. What I'm asking for you folks tonight is to trust Mountview Council that they have taken your thoughts, your children, your residents, your neighbors, into protecting them. And we've done that through diligent work of looking through the regulations, making sure that there's a lot of protection for it. that we checked with other states and other cities to make sure what they have done, that we are not the ones inventing the regulations that their regulations are out there have been proven, and that we made sure that what we put out there were enforceable, and that they protected the values of Mountain View. The state also has regulations that make sure that the values and the desires of the community are safe. So that's important. Peoples want us to, in a sense, hey, you are to take care of our children, but the 1st line of defense is the parents, and you've demonstrated by being here tonight and throughout the 3 or 4 months period that you've done a great job of that. But regardless of what we do, your children are still going to be tempted to do things. And even, you know, many people will admit that, yes, you will try your hardest. And when they're walking down the street or they're with their peers, they are going to be tempted. One reason I am wanting to have legalized, because if they do get some of this illegal marijuana, that the chemicals, and we know that they're safe, because I don't think any of you really want your children to go on a black market, not knowing and demonstrating and experimenting with it. Because they will experiment with you or without you. And so that's why at one part, someone was talking about regulations. If we make it legalized, we know that it's safe going out there. My other thoughts were that I mentioned to them about a daycare that went into a neighborhood, and here's an analogy that I see, that a neighbor, this daycare went into a neighborhood, and the neighbors got a petition and presented to the city council, and they said, we're going to, we're worried about parking. We're gonna be worried about speed. We're going to bury about noise. And after 3 years, They went, the organizers of the daycare went to the city and said, how many complaints did you get? And they got 0 complaints. And their fears, were not came to fruition. And so that's part of what I'm looking at is, I appreciate your concerns. And I know you know they're real, but I've been up here for 6.5 years. I've been off city, and I've lived in this city since the '50s, and I've made it through the '60s, too. And the '70s. And I've seen the city grow and evolve. And... I know that this city will be able to handle anything that comes their way, and something like this will not deter from the greatness of the city, the value of the people of the city. Again, I represent the whole city. And I think your group, and your commitment to this particular issue, is commendable because you have already been able to influence that certain areas of the town are off the market that they will not be allowed to do that. But to say that if a child walks down the street and smell someone. I asked one of the my, the people that I talked to was, cigarette smokes, people don't see, smoke cigarettes down down too much. And I said, when was the last time you actually heard or you smelled somebody smoking cigarettes? Very rare. When I was in Colorado, which is in Boulder, Colorado, which was a college town. And there's a lot of free spirits in that town. I never saw anybody smoking. I never smelled it, and I couldn't even see the shops. They were very discreet. And so that's one of the reasons why I'm also looking that I do have faith in this community, that we can handle a simple deal, that there is a majority, there are, based on the vote, that there was a majority for this. There... I mean, somebody also mentioned that there was a food measure that was just passed by Congress, and I believe it was signed. And we're saying that cannabis is illegal. Well, in that particular deal, it said hemp and CBD is legal now to cultivate and use it for pain. So that there is a movement for the federal government moving forward to look at and is studying this. The veterans administration is looking at cannabis to see how it can help veterans through whatever situations they're at. I also noticed, I observed, that there is a lot of... Oh, you say, my bullying from members of the community to threatening our council members to say, if you don't vote this way, we will recall you. You know, you have your right to do that, but that bothers me is that this council, every single one of them is here to protect the city and to improve it. And that by threatening someone and you have every right to recall someone. But to bully someone said, you got to do this or you're out, that's your right, but I hope my fellow council members have the internal fortitude to say, I listen, I heard, I appreciate, but I have to look at a broader scheme, a broader population of people, and not only the ones that are in here. I got to take in account those who are not here, but voted beforehand and attended other meetings. So those are some general comments I wanted to say. And as we go forward, I would like to see cannabis allowed in the town. The council member Ramirez, you ask the questions, what's the value there? It's just like any other storage convenience. If I'm old enough, and that's legal in California, and I voted for people to do it, then the convenience of going to a store in Mountain View is something that they should be able to do. It doesn't have to be in downtown. If there's a compromise, that we say we have one retail store, and it's somewhere other than downtown, I can go with that. But a lot of the comments that I've heard is that Mountain View probably didn't do a good job of education, but we're never going to come to a point where we're going to be able to convince the some people that we have a sense of what's going to happen. They have a sense of perception, what's going to happen, what's very rare, and I can't argue against them, and they feel good about it. But city manager and I have was a rule that says, trust us. And here's an opportunity to say, give I brought you in your, but give us a counsel to do the right thing and trust us.

[03:55:47] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice mayor, I'll be Coca.

[03:55:49] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I wasn't going to go into comments, but I just felt that in listening to Counselor McAllister, I should share my thoughts. And when you mentioned there's no proof for data that says that the folks who voted for prop 64 don't want stores, I don't know what this is, the folks who've shown up, I personally voted for it, and I don't want a store in Mountain View. But, you know, and frankly, that vote, the vote did not ask that question. So, for everyone, I mean, I've heard the, you know, argument over and over again, and I'm proof of someone who supported it, because, yes, I understand there are benefits. You know, I am a cancer survivor. I understand that there are medical benefits. I know people want to do it, and that's fine if they want to do it in their own homes, but that didn't mean that I wanted stores in Mountain View. So it's very disconcerting to hear that, you know, I feel like I personally feel like my voice isn't being heard, if you're saying that you don't see any data. So, um, and frankly, the emails I've received have been this, mostly from people who said that, they've said, I voted for prop 64, but that didn't mean I wanted stores in Mountain View. And I haven't heard that many people say, I've heard way more from folks who don't want it than from folks who do. So, you know, if you want me to go back and count the emails, I could do that. So it was a vote on some other, a different issue. It wasn't on this specific issue. So I don't think that is, frankly, valid data to use in this decision. But I know that, you know, I lost that vote when I wanted to ban it. And frankly, and I did start off, you know, from a position of maybe allowing one or 2 shops because of the medicinal purposes. But, you know, the new information that I guess I've learned since then, and it's just been for my doing my own research is the ease of being able to get online and go to bento.com. irony, the Japanese name, and order it and, you know, get it within the day. And so, um, this issue of, and I can understand convenience, but it's interesting because I think convenience is going the other way where doing things online and going on DoorDash to get, you know, dinner delivered to you is a lot more convenient than, um, you know, going to the store and picking up dinner. So, I think things are changing. I mean, from listening to Sean Kell Rye, who I know has been to all the cities and has represents, you know, all the most of these companies, it is. It's just a way to promote your business. And I see billboards when I drive into, I have to drive to San Francisco once a week for my Arab district meetings and I see billboards up and down highway 101. So I, you know, I just would question, well, what are, you know, what are your business practices then to promote your business. So, um, that, you know, that I just had to respond, had to respond to that. At this point in time, though. And, um, you know, I do appreciate council member Kame bringing this back. I do appreciate this council's willingness to revisit this issue. I also want to thank all of you who came out and have come out many times and, you know, some former council member said I was smirking at him and it wasn't that. It was actually that I was very pleased to see so many folks come out for the 1st time. Last night we had our graduation for our Spanish language academy later. Some of them showed up this evening. And for me, you know, this is our community is diverse. And when I see more and more folks getting involved, people who've never been involved before. You know, I want to encourage that because this is a community for all of us. So thank you for coming out. But going back to our council. You know, I do appreciate this council. I, you know, I'm going to be honest and say I think this council is much more collaborative and consensus building, and I appreciate, you know, I appreciate counsel member Clark. I know you're on the hot seat today, but there seems to be a willingness to compromise. And that's where I would, you know, I would like to go as well. You know, someone said, well, you can't overturn a decision that was made before. I was just going to remind folks that in 2014 when I left, you know, the biggest decision, if you ask me, about whether to put housing in North Bay Shore was overturned within months. And I've spent the last 3 years having to deal with that. And frankly, I compromised to allow it to vote for it. So I really do hope that my colleagues will see that and see that, you know, the way to move forward for this community really is about compromise. It's not about digging your heels in and just, you know, putting your guard up and holding your decision, you know, but it's really to figure out what the best path forward is. So, you know, I ask that of my colleagues that we do find some compromise to move forward. So in that regard, on the motion and the amendment, I did have a question. I think there I think council Ramirez, you mentioned the buffers, so which buffers were you looking at?

[04:01:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: retaining the current buffers. Because in my mind, the impact of storefront businesses is much greater than the impact of deliveries. That's in meeting with many of the folks in the audience and hearing the testimony. I feel fairly comfortable with the current buffers if we do delivery only.

[04:01:50] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, is that the 600 feet? Is that what you're the current is at?

[04:01:55] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: From schools.

[04:01:56] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. And then where is the half mile buffer then? Is that part of the current?

[04:02:04] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: That was downtown.

[04:02:05] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay.

[04:02:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Actually, in my motion, I didn't even address buffers. I thought we could talk about that later, depending upon the outcome of this.

[04:02:15] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, so because it might change our perspective if it was delivery only. So you didn't accept that. Did you say that? I'm sorry, did you say that?

[04:02:26] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Retaining the current buffers was one of the friendly...

[04:02:28] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Sorry, I didn't hear that. So my preference, I have a preference for comprehensive motions just so we all know exactly what the final result. That's okay. So I could be flexible in this too. But starting from because do we all agree, I guess that is there a diminished impact from delivery only? relative to storefront? Because that's the distinction in my mind.

[04:02:54] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes, so I can support delivery only, obviously. I was going to ask you, you said you had some flexibility in number as well. And, you know, when we talked about this from the very beginning, and I think we've heard it and some of us who have compromised, you know, we have said, we'd like to start small, and then see how things go, and then if things are fine, um, yeah, you know, I wouldn't have a problem with maybe looking at allowing more down the road. But in light of just, you know, starting out, I would like to suggest two, which would be amenable to that. I know there's an argument. One was not enough because you want competition, but whether it's two, 3, or four. I just think for our size of city, we just, I don't think we need to start with so many.

[04:03:47] Unknown Speaker: I think she's asking you.

[04:03:49] Unknown Speaker: So, yeah, I'm comfortable with two. Are you making another?

[04:03:53] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: No, I'm asking because Councilman Ramirez said he was flexible. I'm asking MMP would be willing to go with two. Is that too?

[04:04:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I thought we were talking about the buffers, so is that too, with retaining the buffers? So actually, can I clarify the current balance? So the current buffer is. They are 600 for schools. And isn't it, um, 250 for childcare?

[04:04:24] Unknown Speaker: Right. Yes, and the existing buffer in the city code currently also has the provision that if a school is separated by the major Highway Expressway, as stated in the city code, then the buffer is decreased to 250 feet from the school. Is that what you were intended?

[04:04:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yes, so those buffers.

[04:04:53] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, yeah, I'm not commenting on that one because that's not... This is the mayor's motion, so I feel uncomfortable haggling over your motion. Fundament. Well, no. I guess I, you know, I appreciate you wanting to have a comprehensive motion. So, um, I was thinking when you 1st were saying this, you were meeting 600 for everything, not 250 for childcare. If you're proposing 600 for schools and daycare centers, I would be comfortable with that.

[04:05:27] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yeah, 600 for both of those. That's actually the state buffer, isn't it?

[04:05:32] Unknown Speaker: Yes, yes. I don't know that we have, do we have that attachment?

[04:05:37] Unknown Speaker: Tashman for which? It'd be nine. A 600 foot buffer?

[04:05:40] Unknown Speaker: Yeah. Yeah, we do have that if I had a quick stack called Chelsea.

[04:05:45] Unknown Speaker: I think that's attachment nine, maybe?

[04:05:49] Unknown Speaker: No, 9 is the current, I believe. It might be ten. Oh, ten. That is attachment nine. Oh. Oh, this is six. All right, so... Does everybody have attachment nine? Just keep in mind, also, with the current motion, the solid green goes away, and you only have the striped green, because you're saying delivery only. Over here. I mean, and uh, San Antonio. Right, so if we start with Attachment 9. And, um, we delete Um,

[04:06:45] Unknown Speaker: It's the light green that goes away, right? The dark green stays.

[04:06:50] Unknown Speaker: Yes. Okay. But this is 600 from everything, or 600 from schools and childcare, which is different than the San Jose model, which included a bunch of other uses that you would have a buffer from. So this is limiting it to schools in child care, right?

[04:07:14] Unknown Speaker: Yes. No, excuse me. Yes. So it'd be defined as 600 feet from schools and childcare buffers. I also have the question of, would you want to maintain the decreased buffer with the separation by a major highway or expressway as currently contained in the road.

[04:07:35] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Maintain it.

[04:07:36] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: No, you're saying retainer. I'd just leave at 600, but...

[04:07:44] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I... 250. Yeah. So that's the original one. Yeah. So, council member Clark, you've been patiently waiting to say something.

[04:07:57] Councilmember Chris Clark: So, um, so, yeah, so what I wanted to, um, I wanted to put all my cards on the table and make one final pitch for as many votes as we can get, and, um, and, um, limiting our exposure and, um, being as fair as possible. And so, um, taking into account everything that's been said, plus what I was planning, um, to offer, um, what I would like to offer if folks are amenable to, um, to an amendment to the substitute, um, it would be the following. It would be, um, It would be to not take away the ability to have storefront, but to significantly limit it, so that others can reapply perhaps outside of downtown. I would, um, I would establish, uh, I would increase the school buffer to a 1000 feet. That 1000 feet is shown on attachment 12, so it's quite significant. It rules out a pretty significant part of the city in terms of where retail could go. But folks would still have the opportunity to reapply. And the reason that I say that is like, um, I know Council member Ramirez, your thought was, you're allowing everyone to reapply, but if someone doesn't, if a storefront doesn't do delivery, then you've basically precluded them. So this would allow them to reapply for both. It would have a I would change the school buffer. I'd move that up to 1,000. I would, the reason that I am really not comfortable with the 600 foot daycare buffer is that it wipes out the only non-storefront retail business that qualified, Mr. Mahaffrey, who spoke earlier. If you look at the map, you'll see the daycare facilities sort of, I think with anything beyond a 250 foot, that site would be precluded. So, and then I would allow, as we talked about earlier, allow all the phase one applicants to basically find new sites, reapply under the new rules. And the buffer that I was talking about, I would have 2 different buffer zones. So I want to respect the 600. What I would do is for non-storefront retail. It would be the existing buffers because I don't want to preclude the folks who qualified for storefront, I would increase it to a 1000 feet from schools and you can stick with the 600 statewide, take care if you want. But that was my, that was my attempt to not preclude anyone from from reapplying, increasing the buffers. I'm okay with a half mile between, you know, I'm okay with a half mile between the retail stores. I feel less strong about non-trover detail, that could be whatever you want it to be 600,000. I don't know, but, um, That's what I was thinking because I think that that's sort of in the way accommodates everyone without knocking everyone out. At least everyone has the chance to reapply. The storefront sites are extremely limited, and the buffer of a 1000 feet really limits that. So I can make that motion if folks are interested. But I think That would be my happy medium. But that's...

[04:11:58] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice mayor, Abe Koga?

[04:12:01] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Since we're talking about starting to talk about the what how do we move forward with the applicants we've had? My personal opinion is for the 4 that, um, qualified, I'm fine to let them change locations if they need to, but I don't feel comfortable opening it to all 10. And there's a reason everybody has to follow rules at some point in time. you know, whether a lot of high school parents are here and my daughters are too. And when they if they get 89.4%, they don't get the A, they get the B. If you don't know how to, what your address is, or you didn't double check your paperwork, and turn it and didn't get the address right because you didn't check it, that's a problem for me. I mean, this is a big deal. This is a big issue. It's I know it's a business, but I still feel like, you know, it is a federally illegal business. There's a lot of vagueness to this. And so I guess, to be honest. I'm going to be stricter with this business than a daycare center, frankly. And, you know, daycare centers have to follow a lot of rules too. So if you... your address, correct? I'm sorry, but I really don't have sympathy for you. Or, you know, if you're not willing to share who your shareholders are, or if you can't get the right number or, you know, you're saying the Secretary of State has the wrong number, we'll get that corrected. Um, you know, I just don't think that there are 4 people who went through the process. They made it through. Like, it's not like nobody did. So I'm okay with those 4 moving forward, but I just don't think, you know, we should give everyone else a chance because they made some mistake.

[04:13:54] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member McAllister.

[04:13:56] Councilmember John McAlister: Council member Clark, could you... So, you were looking at attachment 12 for storefront possibilities, but incorporating, but changed, because that says, 1000 for school.

[04:14:10] Councilmember Chris Clark: That's correct. So I would apply basically attachment 12 to storefront.

[04:14:16] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay.

[04:14:16] Councilmember Chris Clark: Non-storefront would be, um, would be what it is now because if you, because if you increase that, then you knock out the only non-storefront that we have.

[04:14:24] Councilmember John McAlister: Oh, that's what I was just wondering.

[04:14:26] Councilmember Chris Clark: So that would be that would be my proposal. If you don't want to open up to all 10 and you want to just do the four, I'm perfectly fine with that. I think that's number two. And, and, um, yeah. I'm happy to make the comprehensive one, but I don't, I'm trying to be very, very nice. I don't want unfriendly things, so...

[04:14:53] Unknown Speaker: Are you making emotion? Well, we have a motion on the floor. But they can have another substitute motion, so...

[04:15:01] Councilmember Chris Clark: No. No. ugly.

[04:15:03] Unknown Speaker: Okay. I'm just asking. Can we get clarification on the original substitute motion?

[04:15:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well, I think the state, but correct me if I'm wrong, uh, is limiting it to delivery only. Uh, 600 feet buffers from schools and daycare. Um, I would, well, I'm gonna change it. At the moment, it is the 10 that previous applied can reapply. But I would be willing to entertain changing that to four, the four who qualified. If others feel comfortable with that. And, um, I'm not sure where we are on the, uh, the, yeah, on the number, it was 3 and then on the, um, if there's a, like a major barrier, if, uh, it sounds like 250 is what is on the table. on the floor. 600 for schools. 600 childcare. 250 if there's a major barrier. Did I forget anything? Council member Hicks, did you have a comment on that?

[04:16:36] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I do. So I would be comfortable with delivery only, but I'm not comfortable with how stringent it's getting. And so I think if I've understood everything you said correctly, but at this point in the evening, I might not have. Um, I would be comfortable if it were 3 to 4, if it were current, if it were current buffers, which are 600 for schools and 250 for childcare, um, if a major highway or expressway, made it, you know, if it were on the other side of that, if it were allowed, and if it were the 4 that qualified so far only, to give some kind of assurance that if you've gone good faith through the process, you would be more likely to be a lottery winner. But as it gets more and more strict to, you know, the 600 buffers and fewer and fewer locations and eliminating the major highway and expressway part of that, then I become uncomfortable with it. So, um, basically, if we retained the current buffers, because that's $6250.

[04:17:58] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yes. Retaining the current buffers. Delivery only. Three. I'd rather four. You're making it hard for me. But we would have the 4 folks who previously qualified.

[04:18:11] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yeah.

[04:18:14] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I'm comfortable with modifying my emotion to that. Are you comfortable with a 2nd on that, still?

[04:18:21] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I'm like writing all these things, trying to keep track. So I can repeat it if you want me to.

[04:18:26] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Could you repeat it? That would be lovely.

[04:18:28] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Thank you, Mayor. So, um, the, we would have 3 delivery only. The 4 applicants who qualified could apply again. The buffers would remain as they are, which is 600 feet from a school, 250 feet from a childcare, and 250 feet if there is a major barrier, and those were described as central Expressway, 237, 85, 101. You'd have to, if there was, yeah, those would have to be between you and a school or a childcare. Yes.

[04:19:14] Unknown Speaker: So, one item that you haven't come up, if you want a comprehensive motion, which I think is a great idea, is the buffer between sites, I think EPC, it said 600, previously, you had said a half a mile, whether that changes based on it being non-storefront.

[04:19:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you for bringing that up, yes. So, I'm pretty open on that. 600 feet? 200? I mean, if these are delivery only, I'm not as concerned.

[04:19:46] Unknown Speaker: Yeah. Well, no, so I feel like the, that was for, like, retail, um, if it's delivery only, I'm less concerned about the buffers between the businesses, um, I, you know, 600.

[04:20:09] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, so 600 buffer between the businesses. It's in 600.

[04:20:18] Unknown Speaker: Correct.

[04:20:20] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, um, Council member Kame, you're in the queue. I'm not sure if that's left over though. Comments?

[04:20:25] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I'll just comment since I think that this is the final, final, final motion. That's me crossing my fingers. Um, I think that we've heard a lot of compromise up here on the dais, a lot of different ideas, but I think getting to something that is a reasonable compromise. So, um, I obviously have seconded the motion, and I'm supportive of the current motion that's out here, um, and just want to, once again, as we have past 10 o'clock, um, appreciate my colleagues and staff and the public for being patient with us as we're trying to um, go through this.

[04:21:09] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member Hicks.

[04:21:12] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I just had one question of clarification, which everybody else on the dias may be clear on, but the, I wanted to make sure that the major highway or expressway that it was named in the exact same way it was previously, and I am not clear on that.

[04:21:29] City Manager Dan Rich: In essence, you wouldn't be making any amendment because procedurally, what's assuming that there's a motion that's voted on staff is going to ask for a 5 minute break. So we tried to anticipate it, but as usual, you have come up with always a slight thing that we didn't, um, we didn't in our multiple versions that we brought with us. So if you can give us 5 minutes once you take the boat, we can give you the precise ordinance language, but if you keep the existing buffers, then we're not modifying the language about the buffers. I do think we need to work on the concentration language.

[04:22:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay. Thank you. The buffers would stay the same.

[04:22:07] City Manager Dan Rich: Yeah. Or you can take a break before you vote.

[04:22:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: No, I'd rather... could do a straw motion direct us to do that. Let's vote. So I counsel member Clark, you're in the cam.

[04:22:17] Councilmember Chris Clark: I do, um, I do feel I just want to put this to bed. So I, um, I would like to move just a single amendment, and that would be to do two things. One would be to basically 2 parts to it. One would be to reduce the total number to three. So, um, to, um, non-storefront, one storefront and the and the buffer for that storefront would be a 1000 the school would be increased to a 1000 and the daycare would be increased to 600. So that there is a...

[04:23:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: It's another substitute motion?

[04:23:04] Councilmember Chris Clark: No, it's an amendment to the substitute.

[04:23:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Oh.

[04:23:06] Councilmember Chris Clark: So all I'm saying, all I'm attempting to do is add the ability for the folks who the storefront providers who applied to be able to reapply because they're, if they're not non-storefront folks, They're basically they're done. And we're...

[04:23:20] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Why is that? I don't see how you can't just go from a storefront to deliver.

[04:23:26] Councilmember Chris Clark: Different business model, I think.

[04:23:27] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Would it be easier to do than to go the other way, I'd say?

[04:23:31] Councilmember Chris Clark: That may be. But I just, I feel like we would be in a much better and more fair position as a city if we at least allow those folks to reapply with increased buffers throughout the city. And so that's what it would be, a total of three, one storefront, 2 non-storefront, and the storefront would have a 1000 foot school buffer and a 600 foot daycare, another buffer. And if there's a 2nd then great, if there's not, then I tried.

[04:24:04] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I don't want to modify my motion. Council member convey?

[04:24:10] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I was just going to say the same thing. I appreciate or council member Clark is trying to go, um, but prefer the motion that's on the table.

[04:24:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council member McAllister.

[04:24:24] Councilmember John McAlister: If we vote on the motion of the mayor, will this conclude aspects of this? And will it come back for other discussions?

[04:24:41] City Manager Dan Rich: This is what I would say. If you make the motion, then we're gonna take a 5 minute break while we write the actual ordinance language, and then you'll come back and you'll do a motion to introduce based on if that motion passes. And then assuming that you adopt the ordinance at the 2nd reading, then you would have an effective ordinance. And as I am retirement, I wouldn't be able to predict what you do after I leave. But it's legislation and you said within your purview to amend it in the future.

[04:25:14] Councilmember John McAlister: I understand contractors make a lot of money these days. So...

[04:25:17] City Manager Dan Rich: Consultants.

[04:25:20] Councilmember John McAlister: So are you suggesting that we take a 5 minute break, you write up the motion and then that would help clarify it.

[04:25:29] City Manager Dan Rich: It's my understanding that the mayor would prefer to take a motion. And based on that motion, we will draft the language, and then you would officially introduce the ordinance.

[04:25:38] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: Yeah, I'd like to, and that way I can read into the record and assist the maker of the motion with what are the changes that would be made so that we have a clear record of the action taken this evening.

[04:25:48] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yeah, I'd like to take the vote before we take a break.

[04:25:53] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Can I ask a friendly clarification, not even an amendment?

[04:25:57] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[04:25:57] Councilmember Alison Hicks: On the where we're directing staff on the direction to proceed with the permitting process? So if we're taking out the storefront, There was only one. I think there was only one non-storefront that qualified. And the only thing that I, I think, from a process perspective, that just in fairness, I would prefer that the person who qualified followed all the rules, be allowed to proceed and not have to wait for all the whole requalification process. So that person could move forward with the permitting process, and others could apply for the other slots, but I don't want that person to have to wait for the whole process to start over again. They did follow all the rules.

[04:26:39] Mayor Lisa Matichak: It looks like staff might have a comment about that.

[04:26:44] Unknown Speaker: What's essentially being discussed with that is option one. So if you want to prioritize the current applications, what would happen in option one in this scenario as currently being discussed would be that that one application for non-storefront businesses, so it's deemed eligible, would be allowed to proceed, and then we'd reopen the application period again for other people that would want to apply, but you could direct that that could only be applied for. by the other 3 businesses.

[04:27:16] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Or could we give them priority? like the other 3 businesses would have priority, and then if they don't qualify.

[04:27:23] City Manager Dan Rich: You can do it perhaps in a 3 step sort of process, the one that meets the rules, whatever they are tonight, anyone who meets those rules can proceed, you can then give priority, if you choose, to any of the other four, that made the original rules. So they would have there'd be 3 left, 3 left. and they could have sort of the next round of lottery. And if any of them make it, and it's still not full of whatever the final results are, then you would open up a new lottery.

[04:27:55] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I'm fine with that. Council member, are you fine with that?

[04:27:59] Councilmember Alison Hicks: As long as staff brings that back. Yeah, I mean, I think the one qualified non-store friend should proceed. should proceed.

[04:28:11] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: For the just so that we're trying to keep notes that with the city, I want to make sure what the city manager was saying is what the council's understanding. So the 1st trunch would be that the one who's qualified for non-storefront could proceed, that the 3 that qualified for storefront, but since the rules would change, they have priority. And then there's a 3rd tranche, is that the other 6 that applied, is the original 10, or is that just open it up?

[04:28:38] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I'd just open it up after that.

[04:28:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yeah. I didn't call on you. Sorry. So again, remember, McAllister.

[04:28:50] Councilmember John McAlister: So after the vote, then we're done. And then you're just going to clarify it. go.

[04:29:00] City Manager Dan Rich: You need to vote twice tonight.

[04:29:03] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, now I'm confused. So what are we voting the first time? What are we voting the second time?

[04:29:07] City Manager Dan Rich: So essentially, you're doing a straw motion. You're telling staff. You're basically directing us to, as quick as we can, take what you've encompassed in the motion and put it in the ordinance. And I think we're pretty much there. So if you give us five, maybe 10 minutes, we can come back, and then you will vote to introduce the ordinance.

[04:29:28] Mayor Lisa Matichak: That's the plan, but I don't know the outcome of the votes yet.

[04:29:32] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. So I have one last comment. Okay. It's for good for us. I heard a lot of comments that you thought that we were concerned about the profits or this company making money. I have not heard one consideration from anybody on this council that economics was important, that safety and the values of the city were important. So I want you to remember that when you go out, trust the city to do things, and that we don't look at economics to make the right decision. That's all I wanted to say.

[04:30:07] Unknown Speaker: You couldn't have said that. Thank you.

[04:30:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Just want a strong motion with hands? Or a strong vote? It's in here. Let's just vote. Okay. And that passes unanimously. And now we will take a break, maybe 5 to 10 minutes. And we'll come back.

[04:30:57] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, we, um, are reconvening here, and we now need to, um, take another vote on this, uh, more formally, now that we have the wording. And so, um, I think our city clerk is going to bring up the

[04:31:18] City Clerk: So, you can make an function? That's okay. I can go ahead and load the language when someone makes emotion. I have to have the motion in 2nd before I can get the language recorded and then for you to see. Okay. I think it's gonna just giving you the default language right now, probably. It doesn't say much. Okay. Got it. It has a title.

[04:31:47] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, so do we have emotion?

[04:31:50] City Clerk: We have emotion by you and a second. A 2nd by council member Kmei. Okay.

[04:31:58] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I move that we introduce an ordinance amending cannabis per regulations in article 9, division 21 of chapter 36 to prohibit storefront retail cannabis businesses within the city, maintain existing sensitive use buffers, establish a minimum distance of 600 feet between cannabis businesses, and establish a maximum number of non-star fraud cannabis businesses to 3 in the city, to be read entitled only further reading waived, and set a 2nd reading for June 11th, 2019. And then, um, Oh, there's more? Oh, sorry. Oh, there it is. I can stroll. Dreg staff to give priority to the eligible non-starfront retail businesses. followed by applications that have been deemed eligible. Direct staff to return with any other amendments deemed necessary to consistently implement these amendments. And that looks like it's it, right? Okay, and then is there anything else? Do you need to describe...

[04:33:12] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: like to actually read into the record kind of the language changes. And I'm going to refer to attachment too. So we've modified that to effectuate the changes the council's directed. And the changes on in that document will be at the bottom of page one under A. The 1st finding will be the zoning text amendments are consistent with the general plan because prohibiting store, front retail businesses in the city. Let's see furthers the policy of minimizing conflicts between different land uses, which is policy LUD 3.4. And then we modify defining B, the zoning text amendments will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the city because the adoption of these amendments are consistent with proposition 64 and state law regulating cannabis. And then as to the actual ordinance itself, the First Amendment is to Section 36.55B regarding the maximum number. So the text will now read maximum number, a maximum of 3 cannabis businesses, consisting of 3 non-storefront retail businesses, shall be allowed within the city at any given time. And I'll just point out it'll be our standard 3 with the number 3 in parentheses. There's also required to be a modification to section 36.30.60 regarding in section A the allowable activity. So we have stricken number one, which is storefront retail businesses. So number one will now be cannabis business, non-storefront retail, and renumbered 3 to number two. No change to the buffers. And an attachment to, we're gonna strike the proposed number two. and provide you with this language. Two, we'll now read a non-storefront retail cannabis business shall not be permitted within 600 feet of any other non-storefront retail cannabis business. The distance shall be measured in a straight line from the closest property line of one parcel or property containing a storefront retail cannabis business, to the closest property line of the other parcel or property containing a non-storefront retail cannabis business. And... We're going to repeal section 36.70, which related to storefront retail cannabis businesses. And the final change is in section 36.85, which relates to the conditional use permit process. And under the section 3 that describes the planning application, the 1st change is to 3A, after the lottery has taken place, the 1st 3 applications on the qualified cannabis business list shall be authorized to submit planning applications. And we're going to add a new number B, which is if 3 non-store, if the 3 non-storefront retail cannabis businesses authorized to submit planning applications, conflict with the concentration of business criteria, the business ranked higher on the qualified business list shall be authorized to submit. The 2nd business ranked on the qualified business, cannabis business list shall not be authorized to submit until the initial application is denied or withdrawn. The 1st business on the qualified cannabis business list, not in conflict with the initial authorized business shall be authorized to submit an application, and that will, that's adding a new section, so the remainder of this provision regarding planning applications will be renumbered alphabetically. And those are the changes to the ordinance, and, um, We aren't able to make all the changes to the precise plan. So I'll have Christian explain to you what the next steps are there that you won't take action on tonight, but it might be helpful before you vote to know.

[04:37:34] Christian: Yes, that's included in the number three, the direction for staff to return with any other amendments. Those will be very simple amendments to implement this direction, and it'll regard very simple deletions of previously added text to certain precise plans. And that'll be packaged with the 2nd reading of this ordinance, so that will all be considered at once.

[04:37:58] Mayor Lisa Matichak: It can all go on consent, I assume, as part of the 2nd reading.

[04:38:02] Christian: Yes, that's correct.

[04:38:07] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, so anything else we need to do? before we vote.

[04:38:17] Senior Assistant City Attorney Krishan Chopra: No, and I just... Clarissa, I just want to confirm with you, one thing that we noticed when we were doing this drafting is that functionally by eliminating the, um, storefront retail that they won't be, not non-storefront is not permitted in the downtown precise, but, just so that you know.

[04:38:44] Clarissa: That's correct.

[04:38:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Right, right. Okay, any other questions or comments before we vote?

[04:38:53] Unknown Speaker: I just want to thank my colleagues for what I think was a really good discussion in exchange of ideas and collaboration tonight in a very collegial way. So thank you all. It's a pleasure to be here on council with you. Thank you, Mary.

[04:39:12] Unknown Speaker: Thank you, Mary, for your leadership in running this meeting as smoothly as, I think it could have been.

[04:39:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. We are ready to call the question. And that passes unanimously. Thank you again. Thank you, staff. As council member McAllister would say, We hope we are done with the vote on this one. Council member Committee, did you have something you wanted to say?

[04:39:44] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh, no, I was just going to echo your sentiments, and I think hopefully at the beginning of this process, I was clear to colleagues, staff, the public on why I brought it back, what I was hoping to achieve, the different elements of it. And I think what we saw here was what I had hoped, which was a compromise. So thank you.

[04:40:05] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Okay, we have a couple more things. So, um, well, does the city attorney have a closed session report for us? Hang on, we're still doing our meeting.

[04:40:28] City Attorney Jannie Quinn: The city did not hold a close session this evening, so there is no close session report.

[04:40:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Great. And, um, we can adjourn this meeting. to the next city council meeting to be held on Tuesday, June 4, 2019, at 5 p.m. in the council chambers, 500 Castro Street.

• ← Previous
• Next →