Throughout 2024, the Woodland City Council found itself at the center of a long-debated issue — the potential for marijuana retail establishments within city limits. Despite multiple proposed ordinances, votes and public debate, city officials ultimately decided against retail cannabis sales, leaving residents to purchase elsewhere.
Woodland prohibits marijuana sales through its zoning regulations, even though cannabis is legal in Washington state. The issue resurfaced on Jan. 2, 2024, when Ordinance 1548 was introduced, proposing the rezoning of cannabis retail to Woodland’s light industrial district. The council had postponed a decision on Dec. 18, 2023, deferring the final reading until the new year. An alternative proposal to permit retail sales in the highway commercial district failed in a 5-2 vote before the council considered the ordinance.
Ultimately, Ordinance 1548 failed in a 6-1 vote, with only Councilor Monte Smith in favor. Councilor Melissa Doughty and others opposed the light industrial zoning, advocating instead for the highway commercial district.
Public opinion was divided during the council meeting. Health teacher Terry Marvin spoke out against retail cannabis, warning it could harm Woodland’s youth.
“It is killing a generation of people through its gateway entrance to harder drugs,” Marvin said.
Resident Elisha Johnson expressed support, though he said he would not personally use cannabis.
“If you don’t like it, don’t partake,” Johnson said. “Education is the best countermeasure. Allowing people a way to access it safely is better than banning it.”
After the ordinance failed, discussions emerged about involving the community directly in the decision-making process. In late January, newly appointed Mayor Todd Dinehart suggested a public vote as a way to gauge public opinion but acknowledged the $70,000 cost of an advisory ballot could pose challenges.
In a July 1, 2024, meeting, the council rejected a motion for an advisory vote. Councilors Douglas Freimarck, Carol Rounds, John Burke and Terry Hall voted against it, citing moral and public safety concerns. Some feared cannabis sales could lead to increased youth drug use.
Quoting the Bible, Hall said, “It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.”
Councilor Gabe Huston criticized the stance of the opposed council members, noting alcohol is sold in Woodland. He argued cannabis shops are heavily regulated, requiring customers to be at least 21.
“You have to be 21 to go in there … You should be saying the same thing about a bar we have on every corner in town that kids go by all day, every day … I don’t understand how it becomes a moral issue. Teach your kids what’s right and wrong. Then you shouldn’t have to worry about that issue,” Huston said.
Some residents expressed frustration with the council’s decision. One speaker, who declined to give her name, said the council’s rejection sent the wrong message to citizens.
“I haven’t spoken pro or con … What I’m concerned about is the message you’ll send to the city if you vote no … A no vote will send a message that this council is not interested in the opinions, feelings or concerns of Woodland’s citizens. I think that’s how it could be interpreted,” she said.
Resident Derek Winn supported cannabis retail, arguing it would generate tax revenue for the city. He pointed out that locals already purchase cannabis from a store near ilani Casino.
“It’s the parents that’re gonna keep [kids] away from it. They’re gonna get it here, there. They’re gonna get it [from] anywhere,” he said. “... I’m just all about the money. If it does [get approved], I’d like to see [taxes] go 100% towards the schools.”
At the following meeting on July 15, residents like Monica Rehm continued to criticize the council’s handling of the issue.
“I did not realize that seven people were gonna make this decision for the whole community. That doesn’t represent us, I don’t think,” Rehm said. “It’s not even a matter of if you are for the marijuana store or [if] you’re against it. What matters is that we all have a voice that we would like to be heard on this decision.”
Dinehart echoed her stance in favor of an advisory vote, emphasizing the importance of giving Woodland’s 3,800 registered voters a say, especially as the city has grown since cannabis was legalized statewide in 2012.
“How do we create closure? How do we create unity? How do we bring a community of 6,500 people together that says, ‘Hey, this is what we as a community want?” Dinehart said. “... Me, personally, I don’t know if it would be a yes or a no … it provides our community the opportunity to decide something that has been over our heads for [nearly] 13 years.”
The debate also sparked criticism of council members. Jennifer DeLuz called out Terry Hall for citing religious reasons to oppose an advisory vote.
“Your speech last meeting was an excellent example of religion … and the way people distort and manipulate what they want from the Bible,” DeLuz said. “I find it morally wrong and disgusting that you try to label anyone and everyone who’s any type of cannabis user as immoral. Jesus loves me. I’m just a sinner saved.”
DeLuz also accused Freimarck of hypocrisy, noting his campaign ads appeared at a Woodland cannabis store later shut down for zoning violations. Freimarck denied any involvement and said he asked for the ads removal.
“If you want to vote against me on the next election, that’s fine. If that happens, I think me and my wife would move out of town … I doubt that I’d want to stay here because I know it’s gonna happen to it in the future,” Freimarck said regarding cannabis retail.
The issue resurfaced when the planning commission proposed permitting cannabis sales in the highway commercial district. The council rejected the ordinance 6-1, with only Huston in favor. Councilors Doughty and Jason Friend said they wouldn’t support any measure without first consulting the public.
Rounds reiterated her opposition, citing minimal financial benefits and federal cannabis prohibition.
“Most of the money goes to the state. Very little comes down to the city when you sell pot, and it’s federally still illegal,” Rounds said.
Trish Schmidt, the city’s human resources clerk, noted that additional local taxes could be implemented to generate revenue. She shared insights from her family’s experience with cannabis retail in Portland, noting the council could approve additional taxation on cannabis retail. Huston argued a store near the I-5 interchange could boost the local economy.
“When the people come into town they don’t just go into the pot shop. They go into Walmart. They go to Ace [Hardware]. They go here and there. They’re spending their money all over town … If you’re looking at it from a business sense, put your personal feelings out and look at it as a straight business, and it’s a no-brainer,” Huston said.
Doughty stressed the need to involve the public before moving forward.
“I think that it’s time we start listening because, otherwise, we don’t deserve the seats that we’re sitting in right now,” Doughty said.
