The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutdocuments distributed;�� % LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions : My Favorites AGO-[ Code: Select Code Section: Search •f UD^ << Previous Next >> cross-reference chaotered bills PDF I Add To My Favorites ' i _ Highlight GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV TITLE 7. PLANNING AND LAND USE [66000 - 66499.68] ( Heading of Title 7 amended by Stats. 9974, Ch. 1536.) DIVISION 1. PLANNING AND ZONING [66000 - 662101 ( Heading of Division 9 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) CHAPTER 4. Zoning Regulations [65800 - 66912] ( Chapter 4 repealed and added by Stats. 1965, Ch. 1880. ) ARTICLE 2. Adoption of Regulations 165850 - 65863.13] (Article 2 added by Stats. 1965, Ch. 1880. ) 66868. (a) Without following the procedures otherwise required prior to the adoption of a zoning ordinance, the legislative body of a county, city, including a charter city, or city and county, to protect the public safety, health, and welfare, may adopt as an urgency measure an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the legislative body, planning commission or the planning department is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time. That urgency measure shall require a four-fifths vote of the legislative body for adoption. The interim ordinance shall be of no further force and effect 45 days from its date of adoption. After notice pursuant to Section 65090 and public hearing, the legislative body may extend the interim ordinance for 10 months and 15 days and subsequently extend the interim ordinance for one year. Any extension shall also require a four-fifths vote for adoption. Not more than two extensions may be adopted. (b) Alternatively, an interim ordinance may be adopted by a four-fifths vote following notice pursuant to Section 65090 and public hearing, in which case it shall be of no further force and effect 45 days from its date of adoption. After notice pursuant to Section 65090 and public hearing, the legislative body may by a four-fifths vote extend the interim ordinance for 22 months and 15 days. (c) The legislative body shall not adopt or extend any interim ordinance pursuant to this section unless the ordinance contains legislative findings that there is a current and immediate dire;,r rn 5-11- r•.: 'l1 ° ;�;; safety, or welfare, and that the approval of additional subdivisions, use permits, vas ,alt--i-, c! u, doy other applicable entitlement for use which is required in order to comply with a zoning orci; Banca Nuuic result in that threat to public health, safety, or welfare. In addition, any interim ordinance adopted pursuant to this section that has the effect of denying approvals needed for the development of projects with a significant component of multifamily housing may not be extended except upon written findings adopted by the legislative body, supported by substantial evidence on the record, that all of the following conditions exist: (1) The continued approval of the development of multifamily housing projects would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. As used in this paragraph, a "specific, adverse impact" means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date that the ordinance is adopted by the legislative body. (2) The interim ordinance is necessary to mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1). (3) There is nr, feasibia alternative to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid rhe specific, adverse impact Identified pursuant to paragraph (1) as well or better, with a less burdensome or restrictive effecr, than the adoption of the proposed interim ordinance. (d) Ten days prior to the expiration of that interim ordinance or any extension, the legislative body shall issue a .�..Ei:C•".;�_..''=.�4�'S!d?iire.,, ��tJ+: `�,... ...�v. _ �:c"�.1.'=SC:iC:^a.i...�....iii.'zY:.'��f?:.::vi.S�-c`�5£'i.: is ��...�....—�:3 k;� �'��'s" , written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of the ordinance. (e) When an interim ordinance has been adopted, every subsequent ordinance adopted pursuant to this section, covering the whole or a part of the same property, shall automatically terminate and be of no further force or effect upon the termination of the first interim ordinance or any extension of the ordinance as provided in this section. (f) Notwithstanding subdivision (e), upon termination of a prior interim ordinance, the legislative body may adopt another interim ordinance pursuant to this section provided that the new interim ordinance is adopted to protect the public safety, health, and welfare from an event, occurrence, or set of circumstances different from the event, occurrence, or set of circumstances that led to the adoption of the prior interim ordinance. (g) For purposes of this section, "development of multifamily housing projects" does not include the demolition, conversion, redevelopment, or rehabilitation of multifamily housing that is affordable to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or that will result in an increase in the price or reduction of the number of affordable units in a multifamily housing project. (h) For purposes of this section, "projects with a significant component of multifamily housing" means projects in which multifamily housing consists of at least one-third of the total square footage of the project. (Amended by Stats. 2001, Ch. 939, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2002.) ..^_•S:.i`C3'^,�.a^,'.,'.s^i�3'_:"fi.��.'. �a�'^�; s';^�5 fi=?'G..?"7'?:' "c-..-;'\+ 5 4. s�., 'Rr -[ . Le l7;. ..: t]' .?.�[ �i:.. �:? k..FY�': �. i•':.y [j�`�-; SS:P: i.�"i. }�pYE Page 2 Of 2 *eeoo Verizon --7 ChanqeLab 10;08 AM changelabsolutions.org Tobacco Fle-althy Control L --- -2?! Housing ABOUT TOBACCO CONTROL SERVICES TOOLS CONTACT US Home) Tools i FAQs,Vvh3! is a 'moratorium ordinaricc. and how cM d affect tobacco saves in your commune? I fl" F",ILJ - .z znari-cl-. I E a PaKal i aW MaLlaW5 I ninit-Z Oto 0 1 61C1 10 tG Mb Cif ai i -Y ;it omn I L J Liarl I c:14jj; aj,j U0: • %-an m & the !jimv it naadiE I a si -Hly NO Rate nth 11 effects :)t M .1r I eg N ij I al �nr m CII 11.3 ar U&0. 5 &V q�al C.'nfoerj r�'l '.r' mi o Pa I [I I 0!" h bmo 0•r:: tobacco retailers pending development Requirements Under California WITH its municipal code, which iecil.iire two approvals (called `readings'! by Iho City Council or Board of legislative oody. Tobacco retailers, hookah lounges. and electronic cigarette lounges health risks of secondhand srn^xe exposure to employees. passers-by. and patrons of neighboring 17 s , r - discussed above Relationship with tobacco retailer licensing ordinances 1 32% 111[- � What is a "... eeeoo Verizon 10:06 AM 9 32% A 4 & interim ordinance definition (10 :,"'-° .. b sa - interim or... interim ordinance definition "Interim Zoning Law and Legal Definition. Interim zoning means a temporary emergency zoning that is conducted while the local government makes revisions to existing zoning ordinances, or creates and adopts a final zoning plan or zoning ordinance, or addresses some other local policy issue in the state." Interim Zoning Law and Legal Definition I USLegal, Inc. - US . nrms derpmtions.usls wxom , intenrrrr.. Interim Zoning Law and Legal Definition I USLegal, Inc. - US Legal definition -*trS' v1p1mt+0n5-uslega1.com imbnm-z. Interim Zoning Law and Legal Definition. Interim zoning means a temporary emergency zoning that is conducted while the local government makes revisions to existing zoning ordinances; or creates and adopts a final zoning plan or zoning ordinance, or, addresses some other local policy issue in the state. What is a "moratorium ordinance," and how can it affect tobacco sales in your community? ChangeLab Solutions ',nangeLab Solidions 13{[-!T6raT1r,t43r Under California Government Code section 65858, a city or a county rs' a adopt an interim ordinance r,) temporarily prohibit certain land uses. including particular types of businesses, in the community. This type of ordinance is commonly referred to as a "moratorium ordinance." Sec. 20.242.030 - Definitions. I Code of Ordinances I Mendocino County, CA I Municode Library hd„r.u: ry library , 4ndNS , crk r. rr! w'u i i (A). Referrals of applications to the Department for review related to existing cultivation sites shall include the Agriculture Commissioner's determination that the cultivation site existed prior to January 1.... ORDINANCE NO. 184381 An interim ordinance, adopted as an urgency measure pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858, p - City of Los Angeles . ;•y ;ri !_u i^10e-d7d:7 -07 Residential Floor Area, as defined in Section 12.0:3 of the LAMC. Sec. 2. INTERIM CONTROL AREA. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to all RA. RE. RS. and R1 zoned lots located wholly or partly within the ORDINANCE NO. 17-3,892 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS FOR NEW ACCE Surn ar•kl. Ln•.. '1 •,7'r"lE -t,'ii �'l: dc�un:+e i1! The Interim Development Standards for Accessory Dwelling Units shall be as follows: A, DEFINITION: For purposes of this interim ordinance. the terms "accessory dwelling unit" and "ADU” shall . Accessory Dwelling Units Burbank, CA -;..�1 7 ::... ..! 'r5n6,•"ar��e-ueanil'FL •eeoo Verizon ^ 10:07 AM 9 32%9—, SLE A . A definitions.uslegal.com C Interim Zo... A Personal - Q Business - ? Attorneys - ? Help - 0 E -Providers V Login Convenient, Affordable Legal Help - Because We Ca re! USLegal > Legal Definitions > I > Interim Zoning Interim Zoning Law and Legal Definition Tn x Interim zoning means a Search Public temporary emergency zoning that is conducted while the local Records Now government makes revisions to existing zoning ordinances, or 1) Enter a Name and Select creates and adopts a final a State 2) View Public zoning plan or zoning Records Instantly! ordinance, or addresses some - O other local policy issue in the state. it helps to preserve the status quo or at least to limit the extent of change that can occur from the zoning activities. It is also termed as stopgap zoning. In Liberty Cove, Inc. v. Missoula County, 2009 MT 377 (Mont. 2009), the court held that "Due process requires that the notice and hearing procedures of standard zoning apply to interim zoning." In addition the court in Matson v. Clark County Bd. of Comm'rs, 79 Wn. App. 641 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995), held that "If interim zoning is to serve its purpose in a state with a permissive vested rights doctrine, it must not be subject to time-consuming notice and hearing requirements applicable to ordinary zoning." 0 Legal Definition list Interim trustee Interim Retention of Authorities Interim Remedial Measure (IRM) Interim Order [Patents] Interim Occupancy Agreement >> Interim Zoning Interinsurance Interior Design Contract Interior Designer Interior Furnishing Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act a Related Legal Terms Ad Interim Ad Interim Copyright Aesthetic Zoning Assignee Ad interim Chapter 13 Trustee Interim Statement Cluster Zoning Conditional Zoning Contract Zoning Cumulative Zoning Euclidean Zoning Attorney Help Legal Definitions Legal Q&A Online US Legal Forms Legal Topics Get the USLegal Last Will Combo Legacy Package and protect your family today! JINoWni y rndorud by ® RAMSEY includes your Will, Power of Attorney, Living Will and more. Start Now! Endorsed by Dave for 10+ years. Share: GUE301M Virtual Low Firm. Fixed Fees, Affordable. low.. Get Starlet! i ..: S. C:RIADO L LC H, PLLc 8:11 AM = - City of San Bernardino, Measure .. 177/177 100.00% YES 24,048 23,015 45 90',o .0o 0Q"6 City of San Bernardino, Measure O 177/177 100.0010 YES 26,037 55.12% NO 21,19fi - - 4--L88% Total _ 100.009,10 City of San Bernardino, Measure P 177/177 100.00% * .. YES 23,106 48.45% No 24,583 51.558/* Total 47,689 100.00% City of Upland, Measure U 41/41 100.00% YES 10.745 35.62'0N4 EEO 19,41-9 64.34% Total 30, i 64 X;0.00°1.: City of Victorville, Measure X. ��i'S2 1tiU.00'ln . ..nr Percent YES 12.1Q5 44.87% . 14.471 55.138x* Total 26,976 100.Oi? u Town of Yucca Valley, Measure Y . a• m: --Percent YES 5,594 7.460%Ef NO _ _ 2.126 27.54% Total 7,.721 100.00% Town of Yucca Valley, Measure 2 11/11 100.00`0 8:11 Ash City San Bernardino, Measure 177/177 100.00% d YES 27,476 60.57% 17,890_ - ota'i ' City of San Bernardino, Measure N 177/177 100.08+% YES 24,048 Pio 23,015 Total or)t"." City of San Bernardino, Measure 0 177/177 100.00% - a ■Percent YES 26,037 SS -121D/0 114 Total City of San Bernardino, Measure p 177/177 100.000/0 YES 23,106 48A 5"�F.) NO 24,583 51.550/0 Total 47,689 100,00% City of Upland, Measure U 41/41 100.00% •. -nl; Percent YES 10.745 35:62%, No 19,419 64.38% Total City of Victorville, Measure X 32/52 100.00% YES 12,10544.87% NO 14,871 55.139W Total 26=.`76 100.00% Town of Yucca Valley, Measure Y 11/t eeaoo Verizon ^ 9:11 PM 1 27% ■ AWS Last Updated: February 11, 2014 3:39 PM Registration & Turnout 77,588 Voters sbcounty.gov rohrabach... Title Precinct Turnout 3,315 4.27% Vote tq Mail Tumout 8,929 11.51% Total 12,245 15.78% San Bernardino City - Mayor 166/166 100.00% WENDY MCCAMMACK 5,242 43.15% CAREY DAVIS _ 6.905 56.85% Total l,:, 1=" 100.00% San Bernardino City Ward 4 - City Council 36/36 100.00% FRED SHORETT ANTHONY JONES Total San Bernardino City Ward 5 - City Council 15/15 100.00% 2,032! 65.87% 1,053, 34.13% 3,0851 100.00% KARMEL ROE 316 11.82% RANWIL DY SON 806 30.14% LARRY A. LEE 542_; 20.279/b H: W. NICIii -- 3.010'', +37.77_% Total 2,674. 100.00% What is ? . L San Ber... ••000 Verizon ^ 9:10 PM y 27% 11111:::o sbcounty.gov SB City Ward 1- City Council 36/36 100.00% JOHN J. ABAD 237 21,350i CASEY DAILEY_ _ 248 22.3_4% VIRGINIA MARQUEZ -�� 625, -1,110 56.31% Total4 329. _100.00% SB City Ward 2- City Council BEN1TO 7. BARRIOS 6351-55.90% ROBERT JENKINS 501 44..1 Total 1,136 100.00% SB City Ward 4- City Council 36/36 100.00% FRED S_14ORETT_ i _1,529 48,220& KATHY PINEGAR 657 20.72% ANTHONY JONES 985 31.069/0 Total 3,171 10000% SB City- Recall James F. Penman Question 166/166 100.00% YES - 7,730 ! 13.45% 60.66% NO 51013 MICHAEL "MIKE" THOMAS 39,34% Total 12,743 329. 100.000/0 SB City- To Succeed James F. Penman _ 875 k._ 41.29%' Total 166/166 300.00% 100.009+0 GARY D. SA_ENZ Vote Count 5,771 Percent 56.00% TIM PRINCE 4,535 44.00TO Total 10,306 100.001/0 50 City Ward 3- Recall John Valdivia Question 26/26 100.00% YES 426 / 37.67% NO 705 62.33% Total 1,131 100.00% SB City Ward 3- To Succeed John Valdivia 26/26 100.009/b Vote Count Percent ROXANNE WILLIAMS 577' 100.00% - ...._. Total _ 577 100.00% SB City Ward 7- Recall Wendy J. McCammack Question 17/17 100.00% YES 1,460 58.56eYa NO 1,033 41.44% Total. - - -.... , - _ _ 2,493 100.001/b ; SB City Ward 7- To Succeed Wendy J. McCammack 17/17 100.009/6 NICK GON2ALEZ 285 13.45% JOSHUA D. WILLIAMSON 162 7.65% MICHAEL "MIKE" THOMAS 468: PAUL W. SANBORN 329. 15.53%, JIM MULVIHILL _ 875 k._ 41.29%' Total 2,119 r 100.009+0 West Valley WD 70/70100.00% LINDA "LYNDA" GONZ_ALEZ JACKIE C_OX -� DON OLINGER _ ___.-....._...�. _._ CLIFFORD YOUNG Total - Measure C - City of Grand Terrace 818 100-00% -981L 572 728. 908 3,189 ' 17.94% 22.83%1 28.47% r 100=./Q ••oo-o Verizon IF 9:09 PM '6 27%9 - sbcounty.gov SS City- Mayor 166/166 100.00% RICHARD T. CASTRO_ 880 6.84_% DRAY_MOND "DRAY" CRAWFORD -� 741 5.76% MATT KORNER 291 2.26% CHAS A. KELLEY _5_87 10.96% RICK AVILA 12,863 _4.56% 11.61% CAREY DAVIS 3,023 23.50% H. W. NICKEL 1,059 8.23% WENDY 7. MCCAMMACK 3,091 2.4.03% , KARMEL ROE 288 2.24% RIKKE VAN JOHNSON W J _ 1,410 10.96% Total 12,863 100.00% SB City Ward i- City Council 36/36 JOHN J. ABAD 237 21.35% CASEY DAII EY _ 248_ 22.34% VIRGINIA MARQUEZ 625! 56.31% Total _- _ 1,110 100.000/0 SB City Ward 2- City Council 14/14 100.00% BENITO J. BARRIOS 635 55.90% ROBERT JENKINS _ 501 44.10% Total _ 1,136: 100.00% SB City Ward 4- City Council 36/36 100.00% FRED SNORETT 5,771 -3 1,529 48,22% KATHY PIN EGA R 44.000h 657 20.7_2_% ANTHONY JONES 985 31.06% Total 3,171 100.00% SS City- Recall James F. Penman Question YES 426 I db' 1 r.6 l i ilj.00 ae NO 705 _17-67% 62.33% YES Vote Count 71730 p90.00%; Percent 60.66% NO 5,013 39.34% Total 12,743 100.00% SS City- To Succeed James F. Penman 166/166 100.00% GARY D. SAENZ - 5,771 -3 56.00%' TIM PRINCE 4,535. 44.000h Total 10,306 t 100.00% $B City Ward 3- Recall John Valdivia Question 26/26 100.00% YES 426 i i NO 705 _17-67% 62.33% Total 1,131 ` p90.00%; SB City Ward 3- To Succeed John Valdivia 26!26 100.00% Vote Count Percent. ROXANNE WILLIAMS 577 100.004/D Total 5-17 100.00% SB City Ward 7- Recall Wendy J. McCammaek Question 17/17 100.00% YES 1,460 NO _.033 41.44% 100.00°l0 SB City Ward 7- To Succeed Wendy J. McCammack 17/17 100.009/6 NICK GONZALEZ_ y - 285 13.45% JOSHUA D. WILLIAMSON i _ 162 ; - 7.65% CAL CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) CALIFORNIA bERARTMkNI Of cdfa F... t AGRICULTURE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Food and Agriculture CalCannabis Cultivation Licensing Division Cannabis Cultivation Temporary License Application cdf+] CALIFORNIA UEPARTMEN3 �( .00. & AGRICULTURE CalCannabis Cultivation Licensing (CalCannabis), a Division of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), is responsible for issuing licenses for any commercial cultivation of cannabis in the State of California. Any person or entity who wishes to engage in commercial cannabis cultivation must submit an application package, which includes a completed temporary application form and all required documentation. A temporary cultivation license is a license issued by the California Department of Food and Agriculture and shall be valid for a period of 120 days, which may be extended for additional 90 -day periods. Temporary licenses shall only be eligible for an extension of the expiration date if the applicant has submitted a complete cultivation application for licensure. The temporary applications and licenses are exempt from fees. This document is intended to provide information for commercial cannabis cultivation in the State of California and does not provide information on industrial hemp production or non-commercial cultivation. Completion of this application does not grant rights or impose obligations. Please reference California statutes and regulations for all licensing requirements. Cannabis is a Schedule I drug according to the federal Controlled Substances Act. Cannabis related activity is subject to federal prosecution, regardless of the protections provided by state law. Information provided on this application will be entered into the CalCannabis Licensing System and may be subject to disclosure as required by any federal, state or local laws, rules, or regulations, including, but not limited to, the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6250 et seq.). For more information on CDFA's CalCannabis Cultivation Licensing program, please visit: calcannabis.cdta.ca. u For California Legislative Information, please visit: leg info.legislature.ca.gov. CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 1 cdfaCA41fORN1A DEPARTM.EN1 FOQD d AGR RE SECTION A — APPLICATION TYPE ❑ Temporary Medicinal Cannabis Cultivation APPLICATION ID NUMBER IIF APPLICABLE;: El Temporary Adult -Use Cannabis Cultivation APPLICATION ID NUMBER (IF APPLICABLE'r SECTION B — LICENSE TYPES ❑ Specialty Cottage Outdoor ❑ Specialty Outdoor Small Outdoor ❑ Medium Outdoor ❑ Specialty Cottage Indoor ❑ Specialty Indoor ❑ Small Indoor ❑ Medium Indoor ❑ Specialty Cottage Mixed -Light Tier 1 ❑ Specialty Mixed -Light Tier 1 ❑ Small Mixed -Light Tier 1 ❑ Medium Mixed -Light Tier 1 Specialty Cottage Mixed -Light Tier 2 ❑ Specialty Mixed -Light Tier 2 ❑ Small Mixed -Light Tier 2 ❑ Medium Mixed -Light Tier 2 ❑ Nursea cessor SECTION C C.1 — BUSINESS ENTITY STRUCTURE (Optional) ❑ Corporation ❑ Limited Liability Company (LLC) ❑ Sovereign Entity ❑ General Partnership ❑ Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) ❑ Sole Proprietorship (Individual) ❑ Joint venture ❑ Limited Partnership ❑ Trust Other (Specify Entity Structure): 01 C.2 — BUSINESS INFORMATION LEGAL BUSINESS NAME: EIN: DESIGNATED RESPONSIBLE PARTY'S LEGAL LAST NAME: i DESIGNATED RESPONSIBLE PARTY'S LEGAL FIRST NAME: BUSINESS TITLE: J TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: ❑ SSN/ITIN ❑ EIN ❑ NIN =0101I;@ 1q 191 --.3A 0 ZIP CODE: ESSOR PARCEL NUMBEW& fAPN COUNTY: COUNTY - ATE: STATE: CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 2 cd � CAEIFGPNIA DEPARTMENT ur �.j Fpo. & AGRICULTURE SECTION D - LOCAL AUTHORIZATION Local Authority Type: ❑ SECTION E - APPLICATION ATTACHMENT ❑ County ❑ City and Count- SECTION ount ❑✓ A copy of a valid license, permit, or other authorization, issued by a local jurisdiction, that enables the applicant business entity to conduct commercial cannabis activity at the location requested for the temporary license. SECTION F - DECLARATIONS 1. 1 understand that the temporary license is a conditional license and authorizes my business to engage in commercial cannabis activity as would be permitted under the privileges of an annual license of the same type. 2. 1 understand that refusal by the licensing authority to issue or extend a temporary license shall not entitle the business to a hearing or appeal of the decision. 3. 1 understand I am responsible for knowing and complying with all California state laws and regulations applicable to commercial cannabis cultivation, including but not limited to, the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act and Title 3, Division 8, Chapter 1 of the California Code of Regulations. I understand I am responsible for compliance with subsequent updates to cannabis cultivation laws and regulations. 4. 1 hereby declare the information contained within and attached to this application is complete, true, and accurate. I understand a misrepresentation of fact is cause for rejection of this application, denial of the license, or revocation of an issued license. Print Name: Designated Responsible Party Signature: Date: CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 3 CALIF ORMIA DEPA I—MEN'cdfa ..r F,,.."d AGRICULTURE Cannabis Cultivation Temporary License Application Instructions SECTION A: APPLICATION TYPE In the application form, check the appropriate box next to the application type that applies to your premises. Note that you may only select a single application type for a single premises per application. The following list describes the two different temporary application types: Temporary Medicinal Cannabis Cultivation (M -license) o Select this option if your business is applying for a state license for commercial cannabis activity involving medicinal cannabis. Medicinal cannabis refers to cannabis intended to be sold for use pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (Proposition 215) found at Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code by a medicinal cannabis patient in California who possesses a physician's recommendation. o If the business has been issued an application identification number by the Department, enter your application identification number in the space provided. • Temporary Adult -Use Cannabis Cultivation (A -license) o Select this option if your business is applying for a state license for cannabis intended for use by adults 21 years of age and over and who do not possess a physician's recommendation. o If the business has been issued an application identification number by the Department, enter your application identification number in the space provided. SECTION B: LICENSE TYPES In the application form, check the box next to the license type that describes the cultivation site. A cultivation site is a location where commercial cannabis is planted, grown, harvested, dried, cured, graded, or trimmed, or that does all or any combination of those activities. Note that you may only select a single license type per application. Indoor cultivation is the cultivation of cannabis within a permanent structure using exclusively artificial light or within any type of structure using artificial light at a rate above twenty-five watts per square foot. Mixed -light cultivation is the cultivation of mature cannabis in a greenhouse, hoop -house, glasshouse, conservatory, hothouse, or other similar structure using light deprivation and/or one of the artificial lighting. models described below: 1. Mixed -light Tier 1 — the use of artificial light at a rate of six watts per square foot or less. 2. Mixed -light Tier 2 — the use of artificial light at a rate above six and below or equal to twenty-five watts per square foot. Outdoor cultivation is the cultivation of mature cannabis without the use of artificial lighting in a canopy area at any point in time. Artificial lighting is permissible only to maintain immature plants. A mature plant is a cannabis plant that is flowering. Canopy means the designated area(s) at a licensed premises, except nurseries, that will contain mature plants at any point in time, as follows: (1) Canopy shall be calculated in square feet and measured using clearly identifiable boundaries of all area(s) that will contain mature plants at any point in time, including all of the space(s) within the boundaries; CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 4 cdfac AtIf ORNIA DEPARTMENT cat F.OD & AGRICULTURE (2) Canopy may be noncontiguous but each unique area included in the total canopy calculation shall be separated by an identifiable boundary that includes, but is not limited to, interior walls, shelves, greenhouse walls, hoop house walls, garden benches, hedgerows, fencing, garden beds, or garden plots, and (3) If mature plants are being cultivated using a shelving system, the surface area of each level shall be included in the total canopy calculation. License Type ty Cottage Outdoor tv Cottage Indoor Specialty Cottage Mixed -Light Tier 1 i Specialty Cottage Mixed -Light Tier 2 Specialty Outdoor Specialty Indoor Description Outdoor cultivation site with up to 25 mature Indoor cultivation site with 500 square feet or less of total canopy. Mixed -light cultivation site with 2,500 square feet or less of total canopy and the use of artificial light at a rate of six watts per square foot or less. Mixed -light cultivation site with 2,500 square feet or less of total canopy and the use of artificial light at a rate above six and below or equal to twenty-five watts per square foot. Outdoor cultivation site with less than or equal to 5,000 square feet of total canopy or up to 50 mature plants on noncontiguous plots. Indoor cultivation site between 501 and 5,000 square feet of total canopy. Mixed -light cultivation site between 2,501 and 5,000 square feet of total Specialty Mixed -Light Tier 1 canopy and the use of artificial light at a rate of six watts per square foot or less. Specialty Mixed -Light Tier 2 Mixed -light cultivation site between 2,501 and 5,000 square feet of total canopy and the use of artificial light at a rate above six and below or equal to twenty-five watts per square foot. Small Outdoor Outdoor cultivation site between 5,001 and 10,000 square feet of total Small Indoor Small Mixed -Light Tier 1 Small Mixed -Light Tier 2 Medium Outdoor Medium Indoor Indoor cultivation site between 5,001 and 10,000 square feet of total Mixed -light cultivation site between 5,001 and 10,000 square feet of total canopy and the use of artificial light at a rate of six watts per square foot or less. Mixed -light cultivation site between 5,001 and 10,000 square feet of total canopy and the use of artificial light at a rate above six and below or equal to twenty-five watts per square foot. Outdoor cultivation site between 10,001 square feet and one acre (43,560 square feet) of total canopy. Indoor cultivation site between 10,001 and 22,000 square feet of total canorn ' Mixed -light cultivation site between 10,001 and 22,000 square feet of total Medium Mixed -Light Tier 1 canopy and the use of artificial light at a rate of six watts per square foot or less. Mixed -light cultivation site between 10,001 and 22,000 square feet of total Medium Mixed -Light Tier 2 canopy and the use of artificial light at a rate above six and below or equal to twenty-five wafts per square foot. Nursery I Conducts the cultivation of cannabis solely as a nursery. Processor Cultivation site that conducts only trimming, drying, curing, grading, packaging, or labeling of cannabis and non -manufactured cannabis products. CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 5 a. i[ftpNIA DEPARTME£.ITcdfa 4:74 F... d AGRICULTURE SECTION CA: BUSINESS ENTITY STRUCTURE (Optional In the application form, check one box that corresponds to the applicant business entity structure associated with this business. Before you establish a business in the State of California, you should consult with an attorney or tax advisor for advice about what type of applicant business entity will meet your business needs, and what your legal obligations will be. The following is a brief overview of various business structures. The information is intended to provide a basic understanding of the different business structures and is not intended to provide legal advice. Corporation A California corporation generally is a legal entity which exists separately from its owners. While normally limiting the owners from personal liability, taxes are levied on the corporation as well as on the shareholders. The sale of stocks or bonds can generate additional capital and the longevity of the corporation can continue past the death of the owners. Legal Counsel should be consulted regarding the variety of options available. To form a corporation in California, Articles of Incorporation must be filed with the California Secretary of State's office. Forms for the most common types of Articles of Incorporation are available on the California Secretary of State's website. You may use the form or prepare your own statutorily compliant document. Corporations must be registered with the California Secretary of State and in good standing prior to being issued a cultivation license. Limited Liability Company r LLC A California LLC generally offers liability protection similar to that of a corporation but is taxed differently. Domestic LI -Cs may be managed by one or more managers or one or more members. In addition to filing the applicable documents with the Secretary of State, an operating agreement among the members as to the affairs of the LLC and the conduct of its business is required. The LLC does not file the operating agreement with the Secretary of State but maintains it at the office where the LLC's records are kept. To form an LLC in California, Articles of Organization (Form LLC -1) must be filed with the California Secretary of State's office. LLCs must be registered with the California Secretary of State and in good standing prior to being issued a cultivation license. 3. Limited Partnership (LPI A California LP may provide limited liability for some partners. There must be at least one general partner that acts as the controlling partner and one limited partner whose liability is normally limited to the amount of control or participation of the limited partner. General partners of an LP have unlimited personal liability for the LP's debts and obligation. To form an LP in California, a Certificate of Limited Partnership (Form LP -1) must be filed with the California Secretary of State's office. CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 6 cdfat AIIFORNIA DEPARTMbNT f - ',-,.D d AGRICULTURE Partnerships must be registered with the California Secretary of State and in good standing prior to being issued a cultivation license. 4. General Partnership (GP) A California GP must have two or more persons engaged in a business for profit. Except as otherwise provided by law, all partners are liable jointly and severally for all obligations of the partnership, unless agreed by the claimant. Profits are taxed as personal income for the partners. To register a GP at the state level, a Statement of Partnership Authority (Form GP -1) must be filed with the California Secretary of State's office. Note: Registering a GP at the state level is optional. 5. Limited Liability Partnership (LLP An LLP is a partnership that engages in the practice of public accountancy, the practice of law, the practice of architecture, the practice of engineering or the practice of land surveying, or provides services or facilities to a California registered LLP that practices public accountancy or law, or to a foreign LLP. An LLP is required to maintain certain levels of insurance as required by law. To register an LLP in California, an Application to Register a Limited Liability Partnership (Form LLP -1) must be filed with the California Secretary of State's office. Partnerships must be registered with the California Secretary of State and in good standing prior to being issued a cultivation license. 6. Sole Proprietorship A sole proprietorship is set up to allow an individual to own and operate a business. A sole proprietor has total control, receives all profits from and is responsible for taxes and liabilities of the business. If a sole proprietorship is formed with a name other than the individual's name (example: John Smith's Fishing Shop), a Fictitious Business Name Statement must be filed with the county where the principal place of business is located. No formation documents are filed with the California Secretary of State's office. Other state filings may be required depending on the type of business. Sovereil.-,n Enti,, Native Sovereign Nations are federally recognized tribes that are registered with the Federal Government under "Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs." 8. Trust An unincorporated business organization created by a legal document, a declaration of trust, and used in place of a corporation or partnership for the transaction of various kinds of business with limited liability. 9. Other For any other business entity structure not listed above. CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 7 cdfaCAEIFOANIA OEPARTMEN7 Of F.0D & ArRICUITURE SECTION C.2: BUSINESS INFORMATION In the application form, fill out the appropriate information regarding the applicant. Please see the following to understand the information the Department will be collecting. NOTE: The Applicant refers to an owner of the applicant business entity seeking licensure. In the application form, provide your "Legal Business Name" which refers to the legal name of the applicant business entity as registered with the California Secretary of State. Provide the Employer Identification Number (EIN) if applicable. An EIN is also known as a federal tax identification number, and is used to identify an applicant business entity. It is also used by estates and trusts which have income which is required to be reported on Form 1041, U.S. Income Tax Return for Estates and Trusts. The Designated Responsible Party is an owner who has the legal authority to bind the applicant business entity, and serves as the primary contact for the application. This individual will receive legal correspondence or application deficiency notices on behalf of the Applicant and will also receive other applicant or license information. Owner means any of the following: (1) A person with an aggregate ownership interest of 20 percent or more in the person applying for a license or a licensee, unless the interest is solely a security, lien, or encumbrance. (2) The chief executive officer of a nonprofit or other entity. (3) A member of the board of directors of a nonprofit. (4) An individual who will be participating in the direction, control, or management of the person applying for a license. In the application, please indicate the Designated Responsible Party's full legal name, mailing address, "Business Title", "Phone Number", and "Email Address". All communication for application processing and licensing will be sent to the email address provided. In the application form, please select and provide the appropriate Taxpayer Identification Number, which refers to the associated Social Security Number (SSN), Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), or National Identification Number (NIN), used to identify the Business by the IRS. The following defines the difference between the 3 types of Taxpayer Identification Numbers: • SSN —Social Security Number — is a nine -digit number issued to U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and temporary (working) residents authorized to work in the United States. It is a 9 -digit number formatted NNN-NN-NNNN. • ITIN — Individual Taxpayer Identification Number — is a tax processing number only available for certain nonresident and resident aliens, their spouses, and dependents who cannot get a Social Security Number. It is a 9 -digit number formatted NNN-NN-NNNN. • NIN — National Identification Number — Taxpayer Identification Number used by governments in many other countries to track their citizens, permanent and temporary residents for taxation purposes. The premises is the designated structure(s) and land specified in the application that is owned, leased, or otherwise held under the control of the applicant or licensee where the commercial cannabis activity will be or is conducted. The premises shall be a contiguous area and may only be occupied by one licensee. In the application, provide the following information about the premises: The "Premises Address" refers to the location of the premises and the physical address that is assigned by the local municipality or county. All addresses entered in this field must conform to the USPS Publication 28, CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 8 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT cdfa PO.D Q AGRICUIT RE Postal Addressing Standards. If addresses have not been assigned, USPS will assign Route and Box numbers for mail processing. Enter the "Assessor Parcel Number(s) (APN)", which is assigned and can be provided by the tax assessor of a particular jurisdiction. There may be multiple APNs associated with the premises. In this case, please include all associated APNs and separate them by a comma. SECTION D: LOCAL AUTHORIZATION In the application form, the applicant is required to check one of the following local authority types: City, County, or City and County. SECTION E: APPLICATION ATTACHMENT The applicant must submit a copy of a valid license, permit, or other authorization, issued by a local jurisdiction that enables the applicant business entity to conduct commercial cannabis activity at the location requested for the temporary license. This shall include, at a minimum, a written statement or reference that clearly indicates the local jurisdiction intended to grant permission to the person to conduct commercial cannabis activity at the premises. SECTION F: DECLARATIONS Declarations are formal written statements in which the Designated Responsible Party declares under oath that the contents are true. In this section of the temporary application, the Designated Responsible Party will read the declarations and if they agree that the applicant business entity will comply and abide with the terms and conditions as defined in the statements, the Designated Responsible Party will acknowledge the applicant business entity's acceptance of the Declarations by signing in the space provided. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS Submitting Applications: Applicants have two methods of submitting cultivation license applications: (1) Online You can create an account and complete the application using the following website: hftps:Haca6-acceIa.com/caIcannabis/. (2) Paper Applications You may submit hard -copy applications and all applicable attachments. Complete the application and all accompanying forms legibly in black or dark blue ink, with a typewriter, or using the PDF form. Forms completed in pencil will be returned to you. Please make sure that you and other authorized individuals sign and date the forms, where applicable. Send your Application Package to: California Department of Food and Agriculture CalCannabis Cultivation Licensing Division P.O. Box 942871 Sacramento, CA 94271 For licensing assistance you may contact us at: calcannabislicensin cdfa.ca.iov or 1 -833 -CAL -GROW (225-4769) CDFA-LIC-001-T (12/18/2017) Page 9 •• Verizon 10:48 AM 1 72% W- ` San Bernardino Sun oo� Friday at 5:30 PM The city currently is operating under a 45 -day moratorium on marijuana activities. Extend temporary marijuana ban 10 months, 15 days, San Bernardino staffers say 05 Like Q comment G> Share 0''-�- :W' James Albert and 53 others 17 shares 0 William Elmo cioci Should the moratorium expire on Feb. 2 without local regulations in place, the state would regulate cannabis on the city's _b_�ha #f _ _stafif _revort_ says.- Write a comment... IN NO San Bernardino Sun's Post • • • William Elmo Cioci Should the moratorium expire on Feb. 2 without local regulations in place, the state would regulate cannabis on the city's behalf, a staff report says. More lies from the willfully ignorant William Elmo Cioci My hope is we get a good, robust debate on (marijuana regulations) and educate ourselves and educate each other on all the various aspects of what we need to be considering;' Councilman Henry Nickel said in a phone interview Friday. He is a bold faced liar who rejected debate and willingly remained ignorant of the plight of the patient's who rely on cannabis medicine and his commissioner appointment is also his police commissioner. This commissioner has made a lucrative career out of lying and demonizing others for financial profit and it showed in his comments and recommendations during the cannabis commission meetings. San Bernardino Sun's Post • Karmel Roe Everyone needs to be at the hearing K Robert Price Karmel Roe • r Giang Ngo Interesting, why not just let them open and tax it? The city would be making lots of money to put back into the community. Our downtown and streets need some updating. Chris Puuohau Replied Kevin Coghlan They had a whole year to discuss and come up with options before Jan. 1. But the city like always wants to pretend like they were not clued in on what was going on. So they are trying to put a moratorium for a year for their lack of initiative. San Bernardino always behind the curve. 0 Serina Lopez Replied Lesleyanne Heathcote San Bernardino Sun's Post #00 W Serina Lopez We need someone new in office. Ik Lesleyanne Heathcote What a farce. All they` have to do is issue one or two permits in zoned areas and let it be. If it works well fair enough. If they become more trouble than the money they generate is worth then implement a ban. Other California Cities and Counties have decided to fight Sessions. The truth about San Bernardino is the County Supervisors, DA, Sheriff and San Bernardino Mayor are all Republicans. There is also a council member who works for big pharma. Republicans have zero respect for the will of the people when it comes to voting on issues like this. They will use any excuse in the book to play it the party way. Reply 0 Chris Puuohau Well said Rick Simmons !'m.-a..a. Republican and._I-don-'t agt-ee Loj Write a comment... GIF -: San Bernardino Sun's Post 040 10 Rick Simmons I'm a a Republican and I don't agree with these decisions. There are many things the current government of the State of California , and counties of California have shoved down the throat of the people of California against their will... Ruby Hoke wonder how many upset people vote in local elections and go to council meetings? Go tell the city council that if they want their comfy jobs they better listen to the people 0 is Lesleyanne Heathcote Totally agree. The Mayor is Republican S�• and one other City Council member works for big pharma and has done for years as his day job. 0 KO qW I r AN San Bernardino Sun's Post • • 0 Alexander Javier Fermin More worried about investors than the needs of people. SB board is a joke. People with no experience trying to regulate something they have no expertise in 0 Alonzo Rivens Its time to clean house in San Bernardino we need politicians making decisions on our behalf to be on top of things. This is ridiculous M Serina Lopez Who is in charge? Why doesn't the City take control over what is going on? This is ridiculous! We need someone to take control over the city! Clean it and make San Bernardino proud again! Chris Anderson Oh stfu you cant even act like you can stop weed good nice try..lol Kory Jarrett o really? every shop is still up and running Write a comment.. +* Verizon A 10:49 AM 1 72% W1, San Bernardino Sun uci i iai uli iv Nl vuu avail is • ► Chris Anderson s Oh stfu you cant even act like you can stop weed good nice try..lol 0 Kory Jarrett o really? every shop is still up and running Serina Lopez Make San Bernardino great again! 0 IV Serina Lopez Replied Christopher Moreland What happened to the"war" on opioids?? SMFH Carlos Lopez Lol it won't last.. lol W Karmel's Post 006 Measure O has officially been invalidated Robert Porter Barbara Babcock Mark Estermyer share the word this is hot off the press. Case CNOS1712424 - ROE -V -CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Actlen- (Choose) a RULING ON SUBmiTTED MATTER 01/1812018 - 11:00 AM DEPT. S26 RAVID COHN, JUDGE R CLERK: NADYA AVAKIAN GOUFfT RULES AS FOLLOWS ON SUBMITTED MATTER: PLEASE BEE THE ATTACHED "RULING Ow SUBMITTED MATTER. MEAStuRE 0 is >? nivi8 GWEN By JWCtALASSISTANT' VMJEBT OF ALL PARTiES, RULING ON SUBMITTFM JW&AM BY EAWL. SWE r-OVERSHEET GkNERATED TO W& I% jib Like Q Comment 4)0 You, Magie Noir and 9 others Carrie Walker and 2 others shared this Share •- ii,E �I. Sandra tbarra So—are their supporters going after the county or state next? LOL Karmel's Post +•. to Karmel Roe They have already filed a new initiative. 20 Like Reply Karmel Roe in San Bernardino please share this post and ask others to share Sandra Ibarra They're still trying to go at it? Karmel Roe This fight is barley beginning unless the City dose the right thing and works with the community meaning residents and cannabis business owners local business First. Oci 14 Sandra Ibarra I agree—but they too need to reach out to the community and listen to their concerns. Write a comment— C s �&�I �=�I� ff� Karmel's Post Sandra Ibarra Only reason I say this is because we do have those who also don't want them here without listening to their side and their vision for our community.: -J Karmel Roe The thing is over 55% of voters wanted them regulated. They are here regulated or not this is an undisputed fact. However everyone should have there concerns herd and taken into consideration. we the people must unite if we do not show up in numbers they will continue to do as they will. Zd Like Reply 0 Sandra lbarra During working hours... Karmel Roe I will speak up for the resident community if no one else shows up. 0 Sandra lbarra Safety_ is #1 concern. Paying taxes tike write a comment... Karmel's Post • o * Sandra Ibarra Safety is #1 concern. Paying taxes like any other business here. Heck, I'd even suggest a special tax where that money will be specific for well -lit neighborhoods, trimmed trees, filling up potholes, fix dangerous sidewalks, etc. Sandra Ibarra We know we can't fully trust city to manage all that money yet. Best to do special tax on ballot for voters who agreed for the regulation to make it specific. Sandra Ibarra No more general taxes if they can't even trim trees, takes 1+ year to fix lights along E Street, and potholes... 9P Karmel Roe I will represent that at the meeting if anyone else has anything to say please let Me Know so I can represent it. Karmel's Post .•. 20 Karmel Roe I will represent that at the meeting if anyone else has anything to say please let Me Know so I can represent it. 0% Sandra Ibarra I've reported the lifted sidewalk where 7 -eleven is (Highland and H Street), one on 27th and H Street, and another on G Street, right north of 20th. Scott Trimble what is it? Robert Price Andrea Price Andrea Price Hmmm Eases pain I lost my son three years ago to serious complications of Hier. The marijuana he srrioked would lielp him problem was ease L1 the pain. The l) � � himself �V -he was too sick to go buy x yes, me, his mother, would have to 90 and get it for him - Believe me, it snared me doing it. I always seared I 'would get, caught wa s and arrested carrying it to him. But as a mother I Would do it knowing it hepe 1 d his pain. Yesv I could see it did ease his pain. So vote yes on this -bill to pass to legalize it for those who kiiow it Deins with their illness and pain. because marijuana docs help pain. ES'THER QUIROI San $ernardinc; Sung II Kim i promise to support everyone and not judge or criticize or even get emotional. Sung II Kim and I support you Karmel Roe to speak for us all when the time comes. Like Reply Karmel Roe The time is NOW Karmel Roe We all must speak and back each other up we are fighting politics 0 Monique Makaveli Cline They weren't able to protect the citrus community, not one bit. The citrus growers got f***** and that is exactly what's happening to the cannabis growers. Smh. Legalisation is a f****** joke. 00900 Verizon LTE 2:12 PM 1 58% IV;, r' Angelo Acab Sr also commented on CarlyAnn Leimomi Luahiwa-Blackwell's photo. Governments sole function is to control, tax, and regulate all human activities from intercourse to death, for the purpose of financial gain. I have come to the conclusion that no enlightened being or true child of G -D would participate in this political system of debt slavery, and by default it's left to the demons and sheep. The politics that runs our government is dependent on ignorance, gossip, lies, deception, bribery, cruelty, theft, sexual immortality, treachery and murder for financial profit. As a result of this conclusion, I denounce any political affiliation. #ActLikeYouKnow jib Like Karmel Roe (�] Comment William Elmo Cioci and 2 others shared this Ce iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirs Share * _ Verizon ^ 10:58 PM 1 100% imi, f Robert Porter is in San Bernardino, California. I- , - dist.3gr _ m • Karmel Roe Mike Sullivan I will express your views qh Like Reply James Hughes Might want to bring up the topics: Mexican slang, racial bias, marijuana, cannabis, botany, professionalism. I actually will not tolerate my government calling cannabis a Mexican slang term that has bad racial stigma attached to it. If they keep calling in marijuana im going to complain at every level. �l Maurice Fowler Cannabis should be legal and san Bernardino counsel should take every step to make use of cannabis ..from the stems to the leaves Reply ,4APPI Branden BZ Aguilera Fob Mardis Dominic Santos Dewey Aguilera ** Verizon ^ 10:59 PM -1 100% AW William Elmo Cioci via Green Rush Daily I knew someone would do it eventually. Our city is intentionally preventing us from being able to compete in this newly emerging global market. The carousel mall has the opportunity to bring $30 million dollars in taxes annually ! San Bernardino is bankrupt and our city officials are willfully ignoring the highest value, immediately available solutions to not only our economic woes, but also blight, crime and public safety. It's time to talk about a better San Bernardino, it's time to #EndTheBan and #Win4TheCity. Colorado Welcomes the World's First Marijuana Mall I Green Rush Daily Like �D Comment �Am Anna Va1en71JP1a and 3 nthPrs shared this G� Share is arI 1 ` • ! FS Karmel Roe Thank you Ester kiddo Quiroz I will represent your voice if you are not in attendance It Esther Klddo Quiroz Karmel Roe Yes I will surely try to attend because I sure do want to be there ok Love j Tonie Flaherty Sorry for your loss Esther Klddo Quiroz. ki� Esther Klddo Quiroz thank u Tonie 0 It, Maurice Fowler Cannabis should be legal and san Bernardino counsel should take every step to make use of cannabis ..from the stems to the leaves TEXT OF EMERGENCY REGULATIONS implication is for an M -license or A -license• (2) If the applicant has already submitted an application for annual licensure, the application number: (3) The legal business name of the applicant entity7 (4) The full legal name, mailing address,phone number, email address, and affiliation of the designated responsible Party who shall: (A) Be an owner with legal authority to bind the applicant entity [B)_ Serve as agent for service of process: and (C) Serve as primary contact for the application. (5) The physical address of the premises; 16) A copy of a valid license, permit, or other authorization, issued by a local iurisdiction, that enables the applicant entity to conduct commercial cannabis activity at the location requested for the temporary license. For the purposes of this section. "other authorization" shall include, at a minimum, a written statement or reference that clearl_Vjndicates the local jurisdiction intended to grant permission to the applicant entity to conduct commercial cannabis activity at the r,remises. (cl When the applicant provides a license, permit, or other authorization from the local iurisdiction where the licensed premises will be or is located, the department shall notify the contact person for the local jurisdiction pursuant to section 26055 of the Business and Professions Code. If the local jurisdiction does not respond to the department's notification within ten (10) calendar days, the department may issue a temporary license to the applicant. jd1 A temporary license issued pursuant to this chapter shall be valid for one -hundred twenty (120) days from the effective date. No temporary license shall be effective prior to January 1, 2018. (e) A temporary -license may be extended for additional ninety (90) day periods if a complete application for licensure has been submitted to the deRartment pursuant to section 8102 of this chanter. j1 A temporary license does not obligate the department to issue an annual license nor does the temporary license create a vested right in the holder to either- an extension of the temporary license or to the granting of a subsenuent annual license. Temporary applications and licenses are exempt from fees. (h) This section shall remain in effect until January 1, 2019, Authority: Sections 26012 and 26013. Business and Professions Code. Reference: Sections 26050.1 and 26055 Business and Professions Code. 8101. Annual License Application Fees. Page 4 of 63 Joint Special Meeting Agenda January 22, 2018 6. ADJOURNMENT The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency is scheduled for 4:00 p.m., Wednesday, February 7, 2018, in the Council Chamber at 201 North "E" Street, San Bernardino, California 92401. Closed Session will begin at 4:00 p.m. and Open Session will begin at 5:00 p.m. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING AGENDA I, Georgeann "Gigi" Hanna, CMC, City Clerk for the City of San Bernardino, California, hereby certify that the agenda for the Monday, January 22, 2018 special meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor was posted on the City's bulletin board located in the breezeway of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California, at the San Bernardino Public Library, and on the City's website www.ci.san-bernardino.ca.us on Friday, January 19, 2018. 1 declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. r 11 L Georgeann "Girgi" Hanna, CMC, City Clerk NOTICE: Any member of the public may address this meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency on any item appearing on the agenda by approaching the microphone in the Council Chamber when the item about which the member desires to speak is called and by asking to be recognized. Any member of the public desiring to speak to the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency concerning any matter not on the agenda but which is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency may address the body at the end of the meeting, during the period reserved for public comments. Said total period for public comments shall not exceed 60 minutes, unless such time limit is extended by the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. A three minute limitation shall apply to each member of the public, unless such time limit is extended by the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. No member of the public shall be permitted to "share" his/her three minutes with any other member of the public. Speakers who wish to present documents to the governing body may hand the documents to the City Clerk at the time the request to speak is made. The Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency may refer any item raised by the public to staff, or to any commission, board, bureau, or committee for appropriate action or have the item placed on the next agenda of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. However, no other action shall be taken nor discussion held by the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency on any item which does not appear on the agenda unless the action is otherwise authorized in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (b) of Section 54954.2 of the Government Code. Public comments will not be received on any item on the agenda when a public hearing has been conducted and closed. Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 Printed 111912018 VorLEGISLATIVE INFORMATION Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Code: select Code Section: �� search L_. €- UDn << Previous Next >> cross-reference chaotered bills PDF I Add To My Favorites Highlight GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV TITLE 5. LOCAL AGENCIES 150001 - 575501 ( Title 5 added by Stats. 1949, Ch. 81. ) DIVISION 2. CITIES, COUNTIES, AND OTHER AGENCIES [53000 - 558211 (Division 2 added by Stats. 1949; Ch. 81.) PART 1. POWERS AND DUTIES COMMON TO CITIES, COUNTIES, AND OTHER AGENCIES [63000 - 64999.73 Part 1 added by Stats. 1949, Ch. 81. ) CHAPTER 9. Meetings [64960 - 54963] ( Chapter 9 added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 1588. ) 54964.2. (a) (1) At least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, including items to be discussed in closed session. A brief general description of an item generally need not exceed 20 words. The agenda shall specify the time and location of the regular meeting and shall be posted in a location that is freely accessible to members of the public and on the local agency's Internet Web site, if the local agency has one. If requested, the agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. The agenda shall include information regarding how, to whom, and when a request for disability -related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, may be made by a person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in the public meeting. (2) For a meeting occurring on and after January 1, 2019, of a legislative body of a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state that has an Internet Web site, the following provisions shall apply: (A) An online posting of an agenda shall be posted on the primary Internet Web site homepage of a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state that is accessible through a prominent, direct link to the current agenda. The direct link to the agenda shall not be in a contextual menu; however, a link in addition to the direct link to the agenda may be accessible through a contextual menu. (B) An online posting of an agenda including, but not limited to, an agenda posted in an integrated agenda management platform, shall be posted in an open format that meets all of the following requirements: (i) Retrievable, downloadable, indexable, and electronically searchable by commonly used Internet search applications. (ii) Platform independent and machine readable. (iii) Available to the public free of charge and without any restriction that would impede the reuse or redistribution of the agenda. (C) A legislative body of a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state that has an Internet Web site and an integrated agenda management platform shall not be required to comply with subparagraph (A) if all of the following are met: (i) A direct link to the integrated agenda management platform shall be posted on the primary Internet Web site homepage of a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state. The direct link to the integrated agenda management platform shall not be in a contextual menu. When a person clicks on the direct link to the integrated agenda management platform, the direct link shall take the person directly to an Internet Web site with the agendas of the legislative body of a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state. 141191,118; 11:3pt ,.%C gs,. f -I (ii) The integrated agenda management platform may contain the prior agendas of a legislative body of a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state for all meetings occurring on or after January 1, 2019. (iii) The current agenda of the legislative body of a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state shall be the first agenda available at the top of the integrated agenda management platform. (iv) All agendas posted in the integrated agenda management platform shall comply with the requirements in clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) of subparagraph (B). (D) For the purposes of this paragraph, both of the following definitions shall apply: (i) "Integrated agenda management platform" means an Internet Web site of a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state dedicated to providing the entirety of the agenda information for the legislative body of the city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state to the public. (ii) "Legislative body" has the same meaning as that term is used in subdivision (a) of Section 54952. (E) The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to a political subdivision of a local agency that was established by the legislative body of the city, county, city and county, special district, school district, or political subdivision established by the state. (3) No action or discussion shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda, except that members of a legislative body or its staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights under Section 54954.3. In addition, on their own initiative or in response to questions posed by the public, a member of a legislative body or its staff may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on his or her own activities. Furthermore, a member of a legislative body, or the body itself, subject to rules or procedures of the legislative body, may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the body at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the legislative body may take action on items of business not appearing on the posted agenda under any of the conditions stated below. Prior to discussing any item pursuant to this subdivision, the legislative body shall publicly identify the item. (1) Upon a determination by a majority vole of the legislative body that an emergency situation exists, as defined in Section 54956.5. (2) Upon a determination by a two-thirds vote of the members of the legislative body present at the meeting, or, if less than two-thirds of the members are present, a unanimous vote of those members present, that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need for action came to the attention of the local agency subsequent ';, tie agenda being posted as specified in subdivision (a). Ir�_� (3) The item was posted pursuant to subdivision (a) for a prior meeting of the legislative body occurring not more than five calendar days prior to the date action is taken on the item, and at the prior meeting the item was continued to the meeting at which action is being taken. (c) This section is necessary to implement and reasonably within the scope of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. (d) For purposes of subdivision (a), the requirement that the agenda be posted on the local agency's Internet Web site, if the local agency has one, shall only apply to a legislative body that meets either of the following standards: (1) A legislative body as that term is defined by subdivision (a) of Section 54952. (2) A legislative body as that term is defined by subdivision (b) of Section 54952, if the members of the legislative body are compensated for their appearance, and if one or more of the members of the legislative body are also members of a legislative body as that term is defined by subdivision (a) of Section 54952. (Amended by Stats. 2016, Ch. 265, Sec. 1. (AB 2257) Effective January 1, 2017.) .::;`i fc.iei at +"v• ca _ _ fi 7s yS w=s<-,T,.x =;„_` ' '• . ..iii;; i1:35 D'vt CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AGENDA FOR THE JOINT SPECIAL MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MONDAY, JANUARY 22, 2018 9:00 A.M. — CLOSED SESSION 9:30 A.M. — OPEN SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBER • 201 NORTH "E" STREET • SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401 • WWW.SBCITY.ORG Virginia Marquez COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 1 Benito Barrios COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 2 John Valdivia COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 3 Fred Shorett COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 4 Henry Nickel COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 5 Bessine L. Richard COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 6 R. Carey Davis MAYOR James L. Mulvihill COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 7 Andrea M. Miller CITY MANAGER Gary D. Saenz CITY ATTORNEY Georgeann "Gigi" Hanna CITY CLERK David Kennedy CITY TREASURER Welcome to a meeting of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino. o Anyone who wishes to speak during public comment or on a particular item will be required to fill out a speaker slip. Speaker slips must be turned in to the City Clerk by 9:00 a.m, the day of the meeting. o You may email your request to speak to publiccomments @sbcitv. org if you cannot turn it in in person prior to 9 a.m. Each request will cover one speaker. Those who wish to speak must submit their own request to be called on by the Mayor. o Public comments for agenda items that are not public hearings will be limited to three minutes. o There is a 6 -minute -per -person time limit for all comments, excluding public hearings. o All who wish to speak, including Council members and staff, need to be recognized by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore before speaking. o Please contact the City Clerk's Office (384-5002) prior to the meeting for any requests for reasonable accommodation to include interpreters. o All documents for public review are on file with the City Clerk's Office or may be accessed online by going to http://www. sbcity. ora. o Please turn off or mute your cell phone while the meeting is in session. Joint Special Meeting Agenda January 22, 2018 CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Present Absent Late , Arrived Council Member, Ward 1 Virginia Marquez ❑ ❑ ❑ Council Member, Ward 2 Benito J. Barrios ❑ ❑ ❑ Council Member, Ward 3 John Valdivia ❑ ❑ ❑ Council Member, Ward 4 Fred Shorett ❑ ❑ ❑ Council Member, Ward 5 Henry Nickel ❑ �� ❑ ❑ Council Member, Ward 6 Bessine L. Richard Council Member, Ward 7 James Mulvihill ❑ ❑ ❑`�❑ ❑ ❑ Mayor R. Carey Davis ❑ 0 3 ❑ City Clerk Georgeann "Gigi" Hanna ❑ ❑ ❑ City Attorney Gary D. Saenz ❑ ❑ ❑ City Manager Andrea M. Miller ❑ ❑ ❑ CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS A three-minute limitation shall apply to each member of the public who wishes to address the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. No member of the public shall be permitted to "share" his/her three minutes with any other member of the public. A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) and (d)(1): Kush Concepts, et al. v. City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No. CIVDS 1702131 Quiang Ye, Applicant, et al. v. City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No. CIVDS 1704276 Karmel Roe v. City of San Bernardino, et al., San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No. CIVDS 1712424 CLOSED SESSION REPORT INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 Printed 1/19/2018 Joint Special Meeting Agenda January 22, 2018 PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED ON THIS AGENDA A three-minute limitation shall apply to each member of the public who wishes to address the Mayor and City Council on any item on the agenda, excluding public hearings. There is no limit to the number of items that may be discussed within the three-minute time limit. To be called on by the Mayor. please turn in individual speaker slips to the City Clerk by 9:00. a.m. the day of the meeting. If you wish, you may email your speaking request to ,aubliccomments@sbcity.org prior to the beginning of the meeting. Emailed requests to speak will not be accepted from anyone but the person requesting to speak. STAFF REPORTS 1. Cannabis Regulations Recommendation: Receive and file verbal reports related to cannabis laws and regulatory framework; Measure 0 litigation status; status of other local agencies in the region; potential public concerns and regulatory alternatives related to business types, public consumption and use, indoor and outdoor personal cultivation, special events, unregulated operators, and operator selection, and tax and fee revenue; review and discuss and provide direction to staff. 2. Public Outreach, Town Hall Meetings, and Surveys Recommendation: Receive and file a verbal report, review and discuss options, and provide direction to staff. 3. Ballot Measure Timing Recommendation: Receive and file a verbal report, review and discuss options, and provide direction to staff. PUBLIC HEARING 4. Extension of the Moratorium on Commercial Marijuana Land Uses and Activities, Outdoor Personal Cultivation of Marijuana and Cannabis Events Recommendation: Adopt an Ordinance of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, extending the 45 -day moratorium related to certain commercial marijuana land uses and activities, outdoor personal cultivation and cannabis events for up to 10 months and 15 days. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 Printed 1/19/2018 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 a Superior Court of Califomia County of San Bernardino 247 W. Third Street, Dept. S-26 San Bemardino, CA 92415-0210 Cp8 L. oUR T 'eSf?KY RDINO AN zor BY N M ADY, RA ►v, pZpU7Y SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT "MEASURE O CASES" Case Nos.: CIVDS 1702131 CIVDS 1704276 CIVDS 1712424 RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER: MEASURE O IS INVALID I Introduction Three lawsuits address the validity of Measure O,' a ballot initiative approved by toters in the City of San Bernardino in the November 8, 2016, election: (1) Kush Concepts Collective, et al. v. City of San Bemardino, et al. CIVDS 1702131; (2) Quiang Ye, et al. v. City of San Bemardino, et al., CIVDS 1744276; and (3) Karmel Roe v. City of San Bemardino, et al., CIVDS 1712424. Measure O is known officially as the San Bernardino Regulate Marijuana Act of 2016. -1- I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 25 26 27 28 Quiang Ye is a petition for writ of mandate with a cross-complaint for decla relief. Kush Concepts and Kannel Roe are both complaints for declaratory relief and injunctive relief. The three actions are not consolidated, and the specific interests and viewpoints of the parties differ. Some parties, such as Quiang Ye, seek straightforward implementation of the Measure O. Others, such as Karmel Roe, challenge the validity I of Measure O as written, but contend the court can sever invalid portions and allow 11 implementation of the remainder. Still others, such as the City of San Bernardino, contend Measure O is altogether invalid. Despite the divergent interests, the central I issue in all three cases is whether Measure O is valid. Accordingly, the court conducted J a single hearing, and now issues this tentative Statement of Decision; applicable to all three actions.2 For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that Measure O is invalid. Background On November 8, 2016, California voters approved Proposition 64 --known officially as the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act thereby joining burgeoning national trend to legalize recreational use of man. ana.3 The stated purpos of Proposition 64 was "to establish a comprehensive system to legalize, control and regulate the cultivation, processing, manufacture, distribution, testing, and sale of nonmedical marijuana, including marijuana products, for use by adults 21 years and older, and to tax the commercial growth and retail sale of marijuana." (2016 Cal. Legis. Serv. Prop. 64, § 3 (West).) The new law contemplated a comprehensive regulatory structure to oversee the marijuana industry through a statewide system of "licensing, regulation, and enforcement." (Id. at § 3, subd. (b).) The law also allowed local 2 Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1590, subdivision (c)(1), this tentative decision serves as the court's proposed Statement of Decision, subject to party's objection under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1590, subdivision (g). ' The other states to pass laws legalizing recreational marijuana, subject to various limitations, are Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Massachusetts, Alaska, Maine, and Vermont, as well as the District of Columbia. -2- 1 11 governments to ban the businesses entirely if they chose not to participate in the 2 nascent industry. (/d. at § 3,subd. (d).) 3 On the same date that Proposition 64 appeared on the state-wide ballot, voters it 4 the City of San Bernardino were presented with three competing local ballot initiatives 5 pertaining to marijuana businesses—Measure N, Measure O, and Measure P. Measurf 6 O succeeded, defeating the other two initiatives.4 Measure O removed a city-wide ban 7 on medical marijuana facilities and specifically authorized marijuana businesses In 8 portions of the commercial and industrial zones" of the City.5 9 Measure O created two "marijuana business overlay zones" within the City. 10 Under Measure O, businesses which obtain state -issued licenses for cultivation, 11 manufacturing, testing, transportation, or distribution—but not for "dispensing" (i.e., 12 sales)—are permissible in " M -B Overlay Zone 1." Businesses which obtain state -issued 13 licenses for dispensing are permissible only in "M -B Overlay Zone 2."6 14 The term "zone" i(Tlplies a geographic region of the City, but Measure O does not 15 delineate the zones in that manner. Rather, Measure O assigns specific parcels, 16 identified by Assessor's Parcel Number, to each "zone." In other words, the "zones" are 17 not defined by areas of the City, but rather by the specific parcels the zones comprise. 18 The parcels are not necessarily contiguous. Each zone contains a patchwork of 19 parcels, interspersed with parcels that are not assigned to the zones. Overlay Zone 1 20 comprises 153 parcels. Overlay Zone 2 comprises twenty-one. 21 After Measure O passed, the City's Community Development Office determined 22 that a number of designated parcels should be disqualified due to their proximity to so - 23 24 4 Measure P received less than fifty percent of the vote, and was therefore defeated outfight. While Measure N received more than fifty percent of the vote, it received fewer votes than Measure O. Measu 25 O therefore prevailed over Measure N pursuant to the terms of the competing measures. 26 $ Had Prop. 64 failed, Measure O would still have taken effect, but would have applied only to medical marijuana facilities rather than recreational marijuana facilities. Medical marijuana facilities were 27 already authorized under state law pursuant to the Medical Marijuana Program Act, Health & Safety Code section 11362.7 et seq., but were previously banned in the City of San Bernardino by local ordinance. i 28 Measure O did not distinguish between medical marijuana and recreational marijuana, but simply allowed marijuana businesses insofar as they are "consistent with State law." (See Measure O, § 3-A.) e See Table 1 in Measure O for the specific state -issued license types permissible in each zone. -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 called "sensitive" areas—schools, religious facilities, and residential areas. The City disqualified seven parcels from Overlay Zone 1 on this basis, and then disqualified four I more because they were not listed on the County Tax Assessor rolls. This left 142 I qualified parcels in Overlay Zone 1. With respect to Overlay Zone 2, the Community Development Office disqualified twelve of the twenty-one designated parcels based on their proximity to "sensitive" areas, plus one additional parcel because it was not listed on the County Tax Assessor rolls. Furthermore, of the eight remaining parcels in Overly Zone 2, the City determined that five constituted a single site, located at 350 West Fifth Street. Thus it appears that Measure O allows dispensing of marijuana only at two addresses: 100 Hospitality Lane I I and 350 West Fifth Street. The disqualification of parcels, particularly in Overlay Zone 2, increases the I patchwork duality of the so-called zones. Unjoined Applicants for Licenses Are Not Necessary or Indispensable Parties. Code of Civil Procedure section 389, subdivision (a), requires joinder of a person I who "claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that the disposition of the action in his absence may ... as a practical matter impair or impede his ability to protect that interest ...." If such a person cannot be joined, section 389, subsection (b), allows the court to "determine whether in equity and good conscience the action should proceed among the parties before it, or should be dismissed without prejudice, the absent person being thus regarded as indispensable." Bubba Likes Tortillas, LLC ("BLT ,)7 contends that the suits challenging Measure O cannot proceed absent joinder of all applicants for business licenses under Measure 0. Specifically, BLT argues that the City's failure to join certain lessees of qualified 1 aroperties under Measure O, who have applications for business licenses pending with :he City, is a ground for dismissal of these cases. BLT argues that these lessee - BLT is a cross-defendant in the Quiang Ye matter. -4- 1 11 applicants have an obvious interest in the validity of Measure O, and that a judgment - 2 holding Measure O to be invalid will "as a practical matter impair or impede [their] ability 3 to protect that interest ...." (Ibid.) 4 While a judicial determination that Measure O is invalid would certainly adversely 5 affect the interests of these lessee -applicants, "[a] party's ability to protect its interest is 6 not impaired or impeded as a practical matter where a joined party has the same 7 interest in the litigation." (Deltakeeper. Oakdale Irrigation Dist (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 8 1092, 1102; Citizens Assn. for Sensible Development of Bishop Area v. County of Inyo 9 (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 151, 161.) Here, the lessors of the qualified parcels -who must 10 give their permission for lessees to operate marijuana businesses on the premises - 11 have been joined. Their interest in upholding the validity of Measure O is sufficient to 12 protect the interests of their lessees.$ Therefore, the absent lessee -applicants are 13 11 neither necessary nor indispensable parties within the meaning of the Code of Civil 14 11 Procedure section 389. 15 IV 16 Ballot Initiatives are to be Liberally Construed. 17 It is well-settled that "the people reserve to themselves the power of initiative 18 and referendum." (Cal. Const., art. IV § 1, cited in Legislature v. Eu (1991) 54 Cal.3d 19 492, 501.) As a result, "the initiative power must be liberally construed to promote the 20 democratic process." (Ibid.; Raven v. Deukmejian (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 336, 341). Courts 21 have a duty to guard the initiative power, "and to resolve any reasonable doubts in favor 22 of its exercise." (Ibid.) `i[A]II presumptions favor the validity of initiative measures and 23 mere doubt as to validity are insufficient; such measures must be upheld unless their 24 unconstitutionality clearly, positively, and unmistakably appears." (Legislatue v. Eu, 25 supra, 54 Cal.3d at p. 501; Calfarm Ins. Co. v Deukmejian (1989) 48 Cal.3d 805, 814.) 26 27 28 "An initiative measure amending a ... zoning ordinance is valid `so long as reasonable minds might differ as to the necessity or propriety of the enactment....'" (Pala Band of 8 Furthermore, dismissal would not be appropriate because there is no showing that the tenants could not be joined were the court to deem it necessary. Nor is there any showing that the action "in equity and good conscience" should not proceed in their absence. (Code Civ. Proc., § 389, subd. (b).) -5- 1 Mission Indians v. Board of Supervisors (1997) 54 Cal.App. 4th 565, 574, quoting Garat 2 v. City of Riverside (1991) 2 Cal.App 4th 259, 292, disapproved on other grounds in 3 Morehart v. County of Santa Barbara (1994) 7 CalAth 725, 743 fn. 11.) In ruling on the 4 validity of Measure O, the court is mindful of the broad deference required for the review 5 of ballot initiatives in general and zoning ordinances in particular. 6 V 7 Measure 0 is not Invalid Due to Federal Preemption. 8 Evolution Health, Inc. ("EHI")9 contends that Measure O is invalid because it is 9 preempted by federal law, which criminalizes the use, cultivation, and distribution of 10 marijuana. (See general, 21 U.S.C. § 801, et seq.)10 Drawn to its logical conclusion, 11 this argument would also require preemption and invalidity of Prop. 64 and similar laws 12 in other states that have authorized the possession and sale of recreational or medicina 13 marijuana. 14 EHI's argument is predicated on Qualified Patients Association v. City of 15 Anaheim (2010) 187 Cal.AppAth 734. The court in Qualified Patients, however, held 16 that California's medical marijuana laws were not preempted by federal law. (Id. at pp. 17 756-763.)" According to EHI, the holding of non -preemption in Qualified Patients is 18 distinguishable because California's medical marijuana laws only decriminalized, for 19 purposes of state law, certain conduct related to medical marijuana, whereas Measure 20 O specifically authorizes the possession and sale of marijuana in contravention of 21 federal law. This is a distinction without difference. In both cases—under California's 22 medical marijuana laws and under the new recreational marijuana laws—businesses 23 are allowed to sell .marijuana and customers are allowed to buy it. Yet neither is legal 24 under federal law. But as noted in Qualified Patients regarding medical marijuana, 25 26 9 EHi is a plaintiff in the Kush Concepts case. 27 10 Recent statements by United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions suggest the Department of Justice may cease the prior federal policy of foregoing prosecution of marijuana businesses operating in 28 compliance with state law. (See, Los Angeles Times, January 4, 2018.) " See also, City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center, Inc. (2013) 56 Cal.4th 729. -6- 1 2 3 4 5, 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 there is no federal preemption because the state laws "do not mandate conduct that federal law prohibits, nor pose an obstacle to federal enforcement of federal law." (Id. p. 757). The same is true of recreational marijuana. Neither Prop. 64 nor Measure 0 require Californians to cultivate, buy, sell, or use marijuana—Californians are free to abstain—and nothing prevents or impedes the United States Department of Justice from prosecuting violators. There is no federal preemption. VI The Challenges to Measure O are not Barred by the Statute of Limitations. BLT contends that the challenges to Measure 0 are time-barred under Government Code section 65009, which requires that actions attacking the validity of certain decisions of a legislative body be commenced with in ninety days of the decision. The statute has no application here. Measure 0 was not a decision of a legislative body, but was a voter -sponsored initiative. The challenges to Measure 0 are not time-barred. W Measure O Does Not Conflict with the City's General Plan. A city's General Plan is a "constitution for future development." (Foothill Communities Coalition v. County of Orange (2014) 222 Cal.AppAth 1302, 1310, quotin DeVita v. County of Napa (1995) 9 Cal.4th 763, 772-773.) Government Code section 66473.5 requires a project to be "compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs" specified in the General Pian. The parties challenging Measure 0 contend it is invalid due to conflict with the City's General Plan. 12 The City's General Plan seeks to "promote development that integrates with and minimizes impacts on surrounding land uses." The plan enumerates a number of specific policies to further that general goal, including: (a) controlling the number and ocation of "community -sensitive" uses (such as alcohol sales, sex -oriented business, and game arcades) based on their proximity to residences, schools, religious facilities, 2 The City is the primary proponent of the argument that Measure O conflicts with the City's 3enerai Plan, though EHI joins in the argument generally. -7- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 and parks; (b) requiring Police Department review of uses that may be characterized by high levels of noise, crime rates, etc., and providing for the conditioning or control of use to prevent adverse impacts on adjacent schools, residences, religious facilities, and other "sensitive" uses; and (c) agreeing that the protection of quality of life takes precedence during the review of new projects, thus allowing the City to utilize its discretion to deny or require mitigation of projects that result in impacts that outweigh benefits to the public. Measure O voices similar and consistent values. Measure O states that it is the intent of the voters to provide a means for cultivation and use of marijuana for purposes consistent with California law, to protect public health and safety through reasonable limitations on marijuana businesses, to limit the concentrations of marijuana businesses, to adopt a mechanism to monitor compliance with local and state iaw, to impose fees to help mitigate against possible adverse secondary effects, to cover the cost of regulation, to facilitate the implementation of state law, to allow marijuana businesses only by people who have the intent and ability to comply with applicable law, and to protect public safety by limiting the locations, where marijuana businesses can operate. The measure sets forth "location, type, and numerical requirements," and states, "It is the intent and purpose of the marijuana business overlay zones ... to allow marijuana businesses in portions of the commercial and industrial zones where such uses would be consistent with the General Pian, compatible with surrounding commercial and industrial uses and not materially detrimental to adjacent properties." Despite these similarities in the stated purposes of Measure O and the General Pian, the City argues that Measure O obstructs the objectives of the General Plan. But a project --or in this case a zoning ordinance adopted by ballot initiative—need not be in "rigid conformity with every detail" of the General Plan. (Foothill Communities Coalition, supra, at pp. 1310-1311, quoting San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City 9nd County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.AppAth 656,678.) It need only be `compatible" with it. (Ibid., quoting Gov. Code § 66473.5) Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 i It is true that Measure O is not in "rigid conformity with every detail" of the City's General Plan. For example, the General Plan requires "community -sensitive" businesses (i.e., businesses that may attract unsavory clientele or may be associated with increased levels of crime) to be located away from residences, whereas Measure only prohibits marijuana businesses from close proximity to parcels zoned for residen use, without addressing the possible presence of non -conforming residences located ' within commercial or industrial areas. Similarly, Measure O does not specifically bar I marijuana businesses from close proximity to religious institutions. While these examples may demonstrate that Measure O does not align perfectly with the General Pian, the City has not shown that Measure O obstructs the plan or is incompatible with the plan. The measure expressly provides for the protection of public I health and safety through reasonable limitations on marijuana businesses. Furthermore, it allows the City to promulgate regulations to address the needs of the community as they arise. Through these express grants, the City can require Police Department review of marijuana business applications and monitoring of marijuana business operations. Nothing in Measure O prohibits the City from undertaking such protective measures. In short, there are no irreconcilable conflicts between Measure O and the General Plan, such that would require invalidation of Measure O. VIII Measure O Creates Unlawful Spot Zoning and a Zoning Monopoly. Among the categories of zoning ordinances that may be invalid as applied to particular properties are so-called "spot zoning" and zoning that creates a monopoly (Wilkins v. City of San Bernardino (1946) 29 Cal.2d 332, 340; Ross v. City of Yorba Linda (199 1) 1 Cal.AppAth .354, 950, fn. 1. See also Lindgren, Mattas, et al., California Land Use Practice (Cal CEB 2017 Update) §19.50.3.) In this case, the challengers of Measure O contend it is invalid on this basis because it benefits only a few select 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 owners of qualified parcels. They are correct, at least with respect to Overlay Zone 2. After the elimination of disqualified parcels, Overlay Zone 1 (allowing non - dispensing marijuana businesses) comprises 142 specifically identified parcels, and Overlay Zone 2 (allowing marijuana dispensing businesses) comprises only two.13 Why these particular locations and not others which are similarly situated? No one has adequately answered this important question. Spot zoning, however, is not necessarily impermissible.. It is impermissible if there is no rational basis for it—if it is arbitrary or capricious. (Foothill Communities Coalition v. County of Orange (2014) 222 Cal.AppAth 1302, 1309, quoting Avenida San Juan Partnership v. City of San Clemente (2011) 201 Cal.AppAth 1256, 1268.) "",It is obvious that by a zoning ordinance a city cannot unfairly discriminate against a particular parcel of land." (Reynolds v. Barrett (1938) 12 Cal.2d 244, 251.) In Arcadia ,Development Co. v. City of Morgan Hill (2011) 197 Cal.AppAth 1526, 1536, the court explained: "Spot zoning is one type of discriminatory zoning ordinance. [Citation.] `Spot zoning occurs where a small parcel is restricted and given lesser rights than the surrounding property, as where a lot in the center of a business or commercial district is limited to uses for residential purposes, thereby creating an `island' in the middle of a larger area devoted to other uses. [Citation.] Usually spot zoning involves a small parcel of land, the larger the property the more difficult it is to sustain an allegation of spot zoning. [Citation.] Likewise, where the `spot' is not an island, but is connected on some sides to the like zone, the allegation of spot zoning is more difficult to establish since lines must be drawn at some point. [Citation.] Even where a small island is created in the midst of less restrictive zoning, the zoning may be upheld where rational reason in the public benefit exists for such a classification. [Citation.]" S one of these locations is composed of several different parcels, but each of the two locations )ears only one address. -10- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 24 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Spot zoning is not limited, however, to situations where a property with more restrictive zoning is surrounded by properties with less restrictive zoning. Spot zoning can also result when a parcel of land is subject to less restrictive zoning than surrounding properties. (Hagman et al., Cal.Zoning Practice (Cont.Ed.Bar. 1969) §553 p. 152.) In Foothill Communities Coalition, supra, 222 Cal.AppAth at p. 1314, the court explained that " the creation of an island of property with less restrictive zoning in the middle of properties with more restrictive zoning is spot zoning." Even so, spot zoning—whether by islands of greater restriction or by islands of lesser restriction—"may be justified ... if a substantial public need exists, and this is so even if the private owner of the tract will also benefit."' (/d. at p. 1314, quoting Pharr v. Tippitt (Tex. 1981) 616 S.W.2d 173,177.) "'[T]he term 'spot zoning' is merely shorthand for a certain arrangement of physical facts. When those facts exist, the zoning may or may not be warranted.... Spot zoning may well be in the public interest; it may even be in accordance with the requirements of a master plan' [Citation]" (Foothill Communities Coalition, supra, 222 Cal.App.4th at p. 1314, citing to Arcadia Development Co. v. City of Morgan Hill, supra, 197 Cal.AppAth at p. 1536).14 Here, the qualified parcels have been given less restrictive zoning relative to surrounding parcels they may host marijuana businesses, whereas surrounding, similarly -situated, and even adjacent properties may not. This is spot zoning, at least with respect to Overlay Zone 2, where there are only two qualified addresses, separatf from each other by several miles and surrounded on all sides by non-qualified parcels. is The court in Foothill Communities ultimately found that the up -zoning of a lot to permit a ,enior living facility was permissible spot zoning, as opposed to impermissible spot zoning. -11- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 The question, of course, is whether the spot zoning is permissible—does it have a rational basis? It is unclear why or how these particular parcels were selected. Why those addresses and not others which are similarly situated? Furthermore, there is no showing of a "substantial public need" for the selection of these particular sites. (Foothill Communities Coalition, supra, 222 Cal.AppAth at p. 1314.) Measure O simply states that the purpose of the overlay zones is "to allow marijuana businesses in portions of the commercial and industrial zones where such uses would be consistent with the General Plan..." But there is no explanation for the selection of the particular parcels chosen. While there may be a public interest in restricting marijuana businesses to certain areas of the City, no rational basis supports the unexplained and apparent randomness of the selection of these particular parcels which constitute the zones. While Overlay Zone 1 (which allows non -dispensing marijuana businesses) may be sufficiently large that there is no monopoly, Overlay Zone 2 (which allows dispensing 18 ' businesses) comprises only two addresses. This creates a zoning monopoly (or, to be 19 precise, a duopoly), with the owners of these two locations the sole beneficiaries. They 20 and they alone may operate a marijuana dispensary—surely a uniquely profitable 21 enterprise. 22 23 Absent an adequate explanation in Measure O as to how or why the parcels for 24 ' Overlay Zone 2 were selected, the court cannot find a rational basis for the resulting 25 26 27 28 zoning. -12- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Measure O is Not Severable. When an initiative provision is invalid, the void provision must be stricken but the remaining provisions should be given effect if the invalid provision is severable. (Gerken v. Fair Political Practices Com. (1993) 6 CalAth 707, 721.) Measure O contain: a severability clause: "If any provision in this Chapter, or part thereof, or the application of any provision or part to any person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions and parts shall not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this Chapter are severable." As explained by the California Supreme Court in Gerken v. Fair Political Practices Com. (1993) 6 Cal.4th 707, 714, quoting Calfarm Ins. Co. v. Deukmejian (1989) 48 Cal. 3d 805, 821: "'Although not conclusive, a severability clause normally calls for, sustaining the valid part of the enactment, especially when the invalid part is mechanically severable....' " And yet, ... "'[s]uch a clause plus the ability to mechanically sever the invalid part while normally allowing severability, does not conclusively dictate it. The final determination depends on whether the remainder ... is complete in itself and would have been adopted by the legislative body had the latter foreseen the partial invalidity of the statute ... or constitutes a completely operative expression of legislative intent ... [and is not] so connected with the rest of the statute as to be inseparable....'" "The three criteria for severability are that the invalid provision must be grammatically, functionally, and volitionally separable." (Park At Cross Creek, LLC v. City of Malibu (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 1196, 1211 [emphasis added], citing to Calfarm Ins. Co. v. Deukmejian, supra, 48 Cal. 3d at p. 821.) Courts have held that for a SH 1 2 3 4 5 6' 7 8 10 11 12 13 n provision to be grammatically separable, "the valid.and invalid parts can be separated by paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or single words." (Park At Cross Creek, LLC v. City of Malibu, supra, 12 Cal.5th at p. 1211, citing to People's Advocate, Inc. v. Superiors Court (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 316, 330.) "Functional severability refers to whether the surviving sections are capable of independent application," while "[v]olitionai severability refers to whether the voters would have adopted the initiative without the invalid provisions." (Park At Cross Creek, LLC v. City of Malibu, supra, 12 Cal.5th at p. 1211, 1 Iciting to Pala Band of Mission Indians v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 54 Cal.AppAth at p. 586.) Volitional severability has been characterized as follows: "'[T]he provisions to be severed must be so presented to the electorate in the initiative that their significance 14 may be seen and independently evaluated in the light of the assigned purposes of the 15 enactment.. The test is whether it can be said with confidence that the electorate's 76 attention was sufficiently focused upon the parts to be severed so that it would have 17 18 separately considered and adopted them in the absence of the invalid portions."' 19 (Gerken v. Fair Political Practices Com., supra, 6 Cal.4th at pp. 714-715, quoting 20 People's Advocate, Inc. v. Superior Court, supra, 181 Cal.App.3d at pp. 332-333.) 21 Section 3 of Measure O provides: 22 "It is the intent of the people of the City of San Bernardino in 23 enacting this measure to: 24 A. Provide for a means of cultivation, production, 25 manufacturing, testing, transportation, distribution, dispensing, acquisition, and use of marijuana by persons 26 who qualify to obtain, possess, and use marijuana for 27 purposes consistent with State law." [Emphasis added.] 28 -14- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i Similarly, regarding the overlay zones, section 5 of Measure O (adding Chapter 19.420 to the City's Development Code) provides: ... [I]t is the further intent of this chapter to regulate the location, cultivation, production, manufacturing, testing, transportation, distribution, dispensing, acquisition, and use of marijuana in a manner that is consistent with the State Compassionate Use Act ("CUA"), the State Medical Marijuana Program Act ("MMPA"), and the State Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act ("MMRSA"), as well as with laws and regulations that have been or may be enacted by the State regarding the same, including but not limited to marijuana for medical or recreational use. [Emphasis added.] This provision goes on to recognize that marijuana businesses "have the potential of causing serious adverse secondary effects upon the community," that it is the intent of Chapter 19.420 "to minimize this potential impact," and that "[t]o do so, to adopt ... regulations that ... [p]rovide for a means of cultivation, production, manufacturing, testing, transportation, distribution, dispensing, acquisition, and use by persons who qualify to obtain, possess, and use marijuana for purposes consistent with State law " (Measure O, §19.420.010, emphasis added.) i 18 I The repeated use of the terms "dispensing, acquisition,,and use" alongside the 19' terms "cultivation, production, manufacturing, testing, transportation, [and] distribution" 20 21 demonstrates that the measure was intended to create a unified marijuana industry in 22 � San Bernardino, embracing ail aspects of the industry from cultivation through retail 23 sales and ultimate use by the consumer. 24 Although some provisions in Measure O pertain only to marijuana dispensaries, 25 26 and therefore might be severable grammatically and functionally, the initiative was 27 presented to the electorate as an indivisible ballot measure—an all-inclusive regulatory 28 -15- 1 2 3 4 5 6 structure to govern not only the cultivation and manufacture of marijuana, but also the retail sale of marijuana through licensed dispensaries.' If the provisions governing the marijuana dispensaries had been deleted from proposed Measure O, it seems unlikely that the voters would have adopted a measure that simply allowed certain businesses to cultivate and manufacture marijuana without 7 providing some means of dispensing the product to the public. It is reasonable to 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 assume that many of those who voted in favor of Measure O were as interested in buying marijuana in their community as they were in allowing others to grow it. Accordingly, even if the Overlay Zone 2 provisions are grammatically and functionally separable, thus meeting the first two prongs of the severability test, they are not volitionally separable, thus failing the third prong. U Conclusion For the reasons explained above, Measure O is invalid. It creates a zoning monopoly for the dispensing of marijuana, due to "spot zoning" which lacks a rational basis. It,allows only two addresses within the City.to qualify for business licenses for the dispensing of marijuana. These two addresses are separated from each other by several miles and are surrounded on all sides by similarly -situated, yet non -qualifying, properties. There is no showing that the public interest supports the selection of these two locations alone. While the portion of Measure O allowing marijuana cultivation, manufacturing, testing, transportation, or distribution—but not dispensing—may not suffer from the same defects, Measure O cannot be salvaged by striking the portions applicable to is Moreover, Measure O was arguably enacted in anticipation of the passage of California's Proposition 64 — the Adult Use of Marijuana Act — which was designed "to establish a comprehensive system to control and regulate the cultivation, distribution, transport, storage, manufacturing, processing, and sale" of both medical marijuana and adult -use cannabis. (See, Cal Bus. & Prof. Code, § 26000, subd. (b)(1), (2).) -16- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 dispensaries, because Measure O contemplated a complete industry within the city, from cultivation through retail sales. It is reasonable to infer that many of the voters why approved Measure O were as interested in being able to buy marijuana within the City as they were in allowing others to grow it. Dated: January 18, 2018. -17- e. David Cohn, Judge of the Superior Court << Previous Rule [ Back to Title Index ] Next Rule >> rq�a 2018 California Rules of Court 8 Printer -friendly version of this page Rule 3.1690. Announcement of tentative decision, statement of decision, and judgment (a) Announcement and service of tentative decision On the trial of a question of fact by the court, the court must announce its tentative decision by an oral statement, entered in the minutes, or by a written statement filed with the clerk. Unless the announcement is made in open court in the presence of all parties that appeared at the trial, the clerk must immediately serve on all parties that appeared at the trial a copy of the minute entry or written tentative decision. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2010; previously amended effective January 1, 1969, July 1, 1973, January 1, 1982, January 1, 1983, and January 1, 2007.) (b) Tentative decision not binding The tentative decision does not constitute a judgment and is not binding on the court. If the court subsequently modifies or changes its announced tentative decision, the clerk must serve a copy of the modification or change on all parties that appeared at the trial. (Subd (b) amended effective January 1, 2010; adopted as part of subd (a); previously amended and lettered effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective January 1, 2007.) (c) Provisions in tentative decision The court in its tentative decision may: (1) State that it is the court's proposed statement of decision, subject to a party's objection under (g); (2) Indicate that the court will prepare a statement of decision; (3) Order a party to prepare a statement of decision; or (4) Direct that the tentative decision will become the statement of decision unless, within 10 days after announcement or service of the tentative decision, a party specifies those principal controverted issues as to which the party is requesting a statement of decision or makes proposals not included in the tentative decision. (Subd (c) amended effective January 1, 2010; adopted as part of subd (a); previously amended and lettered effective January 1, 2007.) (d) Request for statement of decision Within 10 days after announcement or service of the tentative decision, whichever is later, any party that appeared at trial may request a statement of decision to address the principal controverted issues. The principal controverted issues must be specified in the request. (Subd (d) adopted effective January 1, 2010.) rtto:J,+.; v:., couris.c2.gev]crosiruiesiin=_x.e`:: ?#iife=thteeClisfkid='uie3_1r9� 1121118, 7:0-2 APS! Page 1 of 3 (e) Other party's response to request for statement of decision If a party requests a statement of decision under (d), any other party may make proposals as to the content of the statement of decision within 10 days after the date of request for a statement of decision. (Subd (e) amended and relettered effective January 1, 2010; adopted as subd (b); previously amended effective January 1, 1969, and January 1, 1982; previously amended and relettered as subd (d) effective January 1, 2007.) (f) Preparation and service of proposed statement of decision and judgment If a party requests a statement of decision under (d), the court must, within 30 days of announcement or service of the tentative decision, prepare and serve a proposed statement of decision and a proposed judgment on all parties that appeared at the trial, unless the court has ordered a party to prepare the statement. A party that has been ordered to prepare the statement must within 30 days after the announcement or service of the tentative decision, serve and submit to the court a proposed statement of decision and a proposed judgment. If the proposed statement of decision and judgment are not served and submitted within that time, any other party that appeared at the trial may within 10 days thereafter: (1) prepare, serve, and submit to the court a proposed statement of decision and judgment or (2) serve on all other parties and file a notice of motion for an order that a statement of decision be deemed waived. (Subd (t) amended and relettered effective January 1, 2010, adopted as subd (c); previously amended effective January 1, 1969, July 1, 1973, and January 1, 1982; previously amended and relettered as subd (e)effective January 1, 2007) (g) Objections to proposed statement of decision Any party may, within 15 days after the proposed statement of decision and judgment have been served, serve and file objections to the proposed statement of decision or judgment. (Subd (g) amended and relettered effective January 1, 2010; adopted as subd (d); previously amended effective January 1, 1969, and January 1, 1982; previously relettered as subd (t) effective January 1, 2007.) (h) Preparation and filing of written judgment when statement of decision not prepared If no party requests or is ordered to prepare a statement of decision and a written judgment is required, the court must prepare and serve a proposed judgment on all parties that appeared at the trial within 20 days after the announcement or service of the tentative decision or the court may order a party to prepare, serve, and submit the proposed judgment to the court within 10 days after the date of the order. (Subd (h) amended and relettered effective January 1, 2010; previously amended effective January 1, 1969; previously amended and relettered as subd (e) effective January 1, 1982, and as subd (g) effective January 1, 2007.) (i) Preparation and filing of written judgment when statement of decision deemed waived If the court orders that the statement of decision is deemed waived and a written judgment is required, the court must, within 10 days of the order deeming the statement of decision waived, either prepare and serve a proposed judgment on all parties that appeared at the trial or order a party to prepare, serve, and submit the proposed judgment to the court within 10 days. (Subd (i) adopted effective January 1, 2010.) Q) Objection to proposed judgment Any party may, within 10 days after service of the proposed judgment, serve and file objections thereto. (Subd 6) adopted effective January 1, 2010.) (k) Hearing The court may order a hearing on proposals or objections to a proposed statement of decision or the proposed judgment. (Subd (k) amended and relettered effective January 1, 2010; adopted as subd (t) effective January 1, 1982; previously relettered Fi.IO:(!`vV4.,l.COUriS.0 0 °CYSr:lss"nex.cf ?* e=t�;ree&' _. Q•g (� t?; I�nki� - uie3_i5y0 1{21,118; 7:52 AM ?age 2 of 3 as subd (i) effective January, 2007.) (n Signature and filing of judgment If a written judgment is required, the court must sign and file the judgment within 50 days after the announcement or service of the tentative decision, whichever is later, or, if a hearing was held under (k), within 10 days after the hearing. An electronic signature by the court is as effective as an original signature. The judgment constitutes the decision on which judgment is to be entered under Code of Civil Procedure section 664. (Subd (1) amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted as part of subd (e); previously amended and relettered as subd (h) effective January 1, 2007, and as subd (1) effective January 1, 2010.) (m) Extension of time; relief from noncompliance The court may, by written order, extend any of the times prescribed by this rule and at any time before the entry of judgment may, for good cause shown and on such terms as may be just, excuse a noncompliance with the time limits prescribed for doing any act required by this rule. (Subd (m) relettered effective January 1, 2010; previously amended effective January 1, 1969, and July 1, 1973; previously amended and relettered as subd (g) effective January 1, 1982, and as subd (j) effective January 1, 2007.) (n) Trial within one day When a trial is completed within one day or in less than eight hours over more than one day, a request for statement of decision must be made before the matter is submitted for decision and the statement of decision may be made orally on the record in the presence of the parties. (Subd (n) amended and relettered effective January 1, 2010; adopted as subd (h) effective January 1, 1983; previously amended and relettered as subd (k) effective January 1, 2007.) Rule 3.1590 amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted as rule 232 effective January 1, 1949; previously amended and renumbered as rule 3.1590 effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective January 1, 1969, July 1, 1973, January 1, 1982, January 1, 1983, January 1, 2007, and January 1, 2010. [Back to Top ] ^t?P:ll':v 1! ce ;-s.ca. ev;cr�s/r e<ji dex.cfm?iii;2=three&iirkid=s ie3_1�50 1;21/18,'.562 AN! Page 3 of 3 TEXT OF EMERGENCY REGULATIONS application is for an M -license or A -license; (2) If the applicant has already submitted an application for annual licensure, the application number: i3) The legal business name of the applicant entity; (4) The full legal -name. mailing address, phone number, email address, and affiliation of the designated responsible Party who shall: (A) Be an owner with legal authority to bind the applicant entire; (B) Serve as agent for service of process; and C Serve as primary contact for the application. (5) The physical address of the premises; (6) A copy of a valid license, permit, or other authorization issued by a local iurisdiction, that enables the applicant entity to conduct commercial cannabis activity at the location re,guested forthe temporary license. For the purposes of this section. "other authorization" shall include, at a minimum, a written statement or reference that clearly indicates the local iurisdiction intended to grant permission to the applicant entity to conduct commercial cannabis activity, at the premises. (cp When the applicant provides a license permit, or other authorization from the local iurisdiction where the licensed premises will be or is located. the department shall notify, the contact person for the local jurisdiction pursuant to section 26055 of the Business and Professions Code. If the local iurisdiction does not respond to the department's notification within ten (10) calendar days. the department maV issue a tem orary license to the applicant. (d) A temporary license issued pursuant to this chapter shall be valid for one -hundred twenty (120) days from the effective date. No temporary license shall be effective prior to January 1, 2018. (e) A temporary license may be extended for additional ninety (90) day periods if a complete application for licensure has been submitted to the department pursuant to section 8102 of this chapter. (fl_Atemporary license does not obligate the department to issue an annual license nor does the temporary license create a vested right in the holder to either an extensiun of the temporary license or to the granting of a subseouent annual license. 10 Temporary applications and licenses are exempt from fees. (h) This section shall remain in effect until January -1. 2019. Authority: Sections 26012 and 26013. Business and Professions Code. Reference: Sections 26050.1 and 26055. Business and Professions Code. 8101. Annual License Application Fees. Page 4 of 63