Public Comment

On May 15 the City Council voted in favor of a “Del Norte Marijuana Dispensary Zone,” without a public hearing or local presence. Oakland’s “Oaksterdam” district and Richmond’s Pot Shops have shown how hard it is to help chronic pain sufferers while evading potential damage to “society.” Top quality cannabis can cost more than gold. If legalized, it could be grown as easily as, say, basil. The sick clamor for “at cost” medical use attracts idealists, profiteers and attorneys. Drug companies devise new methods for medical “inhaling.” Tobacco and liquor interests ponder ways on how not to be cut out of potential profits. The State and federal legal standoff is unlikely to be resolved soon. The broader pros and cons of legalization are well beyond being a local matter. 

California’s 1996 “Compassionate Use Act” has spawned a new breed of lawyers “doing well by doing good.” Our cities scramble in a variety of ways. Some opt for restrictive zoning and operational rules. Albany, with an elected city attorney, i.e. “responsible to voters rather than council,” plans an “Advisory Referendum.” Dublin wants a ban, claiming that “allowing dispensaries to operate and then placing such stringent rules on them so that they could barely operate would be hypocritical.” 

Janet Coleson, El Cerrito’s city attorney, produced a “confidential” memo on this topic. In a “public” report she argues, convincingly, that the city impose a “restrictive ordinance.” She had two years in which to prepare while she tripled our legal costs over the cost of her predecessor. Did she dilly-dally? Is she now railroading the council into a “least risky option,” to find at least one suitable potential “pot zone” location? The planning department has ignored all public input and discussion, and hit upon “Del Norte.” The Planning Commission is next in line to be stampeded, so a proposed ordinance can pass its final (second) reading, before the current marijuana moratorium runs out on July 19. 

Checking the dates of confidential and other memos and related invoices should reveal whether the blame is mainly our attorney’s, or if it should be shared with other staff and/or councilmembers. If it is the former, a good case can be made that the city take its time to proceed properly and prudently. In case of a lawsuit, we could demand legal protection from the attorney’s firm, at no cost. Otherwise, do some fast footwork, make up for lost time, try to evade the pot-holes, and, mainly, bring affected residents, i.e. everybody, into the decision loop. A bad ordinance puts us, in all respects, at greater risk than no ordinance. Here are the things to consider:  

1. Is our historically most problematic area the best site for this latest problem? Del Norte has consumed the bulk of our redevelopment money, some $50 million to date before current obligations are paid off. What was achieved? “We got rid of the Bay Bridge motel prostitutes” is the claim. But there’s another motel close by, and dozens of casual day laborers flag down job prospects en route to Home Depot. The “Baxter Creek/Gateway Park” which we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on, is right across the street. 

2. Del Norte remains a major redevelopment site. The “Olson” (Mayfair) condo plans need to be addressed; BART hopes to develop its parking lots; other sites in El Cerrito and Richmond, toward the San Pablo and MacDonald intersection, are to be developed soon, presumably with housing. Neighboring cities, that pioneered pot clubs, found out they require a lot of police attention. If El Cerrito is to have such a place, shouldn’t it be as close as possible to our police and medical emergency services? 

3. “Keep the dispensary away from schools, residences, parks” sounds right. Yet the planners have managed to pick a site that, although zoned “commercial” on paper, has in its middle eleven “very low income housing units” at 5124 Wall Ave., Richmond, and a pleasant detached family home with a “children at play sign” at 5222 Wall Ave.. Will staff ever decide to first ask us locals? Consider the reality on ground rather than just from maps? 

The Del Norte BART location is substantially more problem prone than 19th Street BART “Oaksterdam.” If we’re going to do this at all, it should not be done by underhanded, wimpy, manipulative railroading. Forget the “first reading” ordinance approval, it was disgraceful. Let us hear from all interested and potentially affected residents first. 

My suggestion: One of the empty “Mill & Lumber” storefronts is the perfect site for a controllable, above board medical cannabis clinic, under close daily supervision of police, city hall, and “village town center” officials, to serve legitimate local users. It may even be a money-generator rather than a troublemaker, for “El Cerrito the City that Gives a Damn.”