With the establishment of marijuana as a legal substance in the State of Washington, the result of passage of Initiative 502 almost a year ago, cities and municipalities have been trying to decide how to proceed with the issue in their communities.
At their Oct. 7 meeting, members of the Woodland City Council continued to voice their uncertainty about instituting the policy in their city by voting 4-2 to maintain their current moratorium on the establishment, location, operation, licensing, maintenance or continuation of marijuana related uses, including producers, processors and retailers.
“I agree that a moratorium is needed for both growing and processing marijuana,” said Council Member Scott Perry. “If we allow it in the city, it could potentially open us up to federal penalties and action if it’s not properly controlled and both the city and our law enforcement isn’t properly set up for such things right now.”
Perry conceded that after 50 years of both federal and state regulations to control the use, sale and distribution of marijuana, it has remained a constant part of American culture and society, if not grown in popularity.
“More people have come out, including both past and our current presidents, saying they’ve used marijuana at some point in their lives,” said Perry. “It’s also been shown that using it does not guarantee someone will immediately jump to harder illegal drugs, but the only way to get it is through illegal means which means there’s no quality control in place and more younger people are being put in prison, which is a drain on the economy.”
Under I-502, the Washington State Liquor Control Board (WSLCB) is tasked with adopting regulations governing both the licensing and operation of marijuana producers, processors and retailers, with the expectation of applications being accepted starting on Nov. 18. Perry pointed out that the potential tax boon that could be incurred by allowing for marijuana to be produced and sold in the city limits could be a major benefit for a cash-strapped budget.
“Considering the taxes on it would be much higher than it is on most commodities, and is in reality, no more unsafe than alcohol which is legal, this could be an opportunity to generate revenue for the city,” said Perry.
Council member Al Swindell agreed with Perry’s contention.
“The voters of this state approved 502, whether we think it’s good or bad,’’ Swindell said. “We won’t know for sure until sales actually occur, but right now, the only way it’s being sold is through the black market.”
“I don’t support the use of drugs, but how can we say to any business that they can’t do something which is legal in this state?” Swindell continued. “We’re hanging ourselves while continuing to kick the can down the road. If we establish proper zoning regulations now, then the regulations will make sense and we won’t be leaving ourselves in a pickle.”
Benjamin Fredricks, the most vocal opponent of removing the moratorium, restated his case that while marijuana is legal in the state, federal regulations outlawing it opens a potential Pandora’s Box which could lead to extreme consequences for the city.
“Unless we have got the consent and approval of the federal government, taking the moratorium down then puts the city and this council at risk moving forward of having lawsuits filed against us and being subjected to federal penalties,” said Fredricks. “Marijuana is still illegal under federal law and we don’t get to pick and choose between state and federal regulations to follow and I don’t believe it’s in our best interest to move forward with zoning laws without that approval.”
Marshall Allen sided with Fredricks and said the city can afford to wait until the WSLCB has their regulations in place before making a decision.
“I don’t agree with it, even though marijuana is legal in the state,’’ Allen said. “I think we can hold off until we have more information from the liquor control board, at which time, a decision will be more prudent.”
Fredricks said one thing he would like to see is more public input before he can make a decision.
“This is a matter where we need to hear the opinions and input of the citizens we represent and it’s an important enough matter that I would expect them to get involved and tell us which direction they would like to see us take,” said Fredricks.
The Woodland City Council will hold a required public forum during their next meeting on Mon., Oct. 21 at 7 p.m., at the Woodland City Hall. Participants will be offered five minutes to state their case for or against the continuation of the moratorium. More information will be available online at the city’s website, www.ci.woodland.wa.us/government/city-council.
Council member Susan Humbyrd was not present for the vote as she was at another city function and was excused by the council before the vote was called.
