09-26-16 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Oregons Marijuana Laws locating in residential zones. In addition to those state requirements, cities can impose their own more stringent land use requirements and restrictions. Moreover, cities that desire to prohibit marijuana facilities altogether might also do so through amendments to their land use codes. Before considering this option, cities should work with their legal counsel to first determine if the wording of their zoning codes already prohibits marijuana operations, and if not, to identify the appropriate land use procedures and the amount of time it would take to comply with them. If the wording in a city’s zoning codes does not prohibit marijuana operations, the city has different options. One option is to add wording such as “an allowed use is one that does not violate local, state or federal law” to the city’s zoning code. Cities that adopt a prohibition that references federal law would then rely on existing mechanisms in their ordinances for addressing 9 zoning violations. It is important to note that under ORS 475B.063 (as amended in HB 4014, section 11), a land use compatibility statement is required as part of the OLCC’s licensing process. In particular, before issuing a producer, processor, wholesaler or retailer license, an applicantmust request a statement from the city that the requested license is for a location where the proposed use of the land is a permitted or conditional use. If the proposed use is prohibited in the zone, the OLCC may not issue a license. A city has 21 days to act on the OLCC’s request, but when that 21 days begins varies. If the land use is allowed as an outright permitted use, the city has 21 days from receipt of the request; if the land use is a conditional use, the city has 21 days from the final local permit approval. The city’s response to the OLCC is not a land use decision, and the city need not act on a LUCS request while a measure proposing to ban marijuana facilities is pending. Time, Place and Manner Regulations ORS 475B.340 (recreational) and ORS 475B.500 (medical) provide that local governments may impose reasonable regulations on the time, place and manner of operation of marijuana facilities. The League believes that, under the home rule provisions of the Oregon Constitution, local governments do not need legislative authorization to impose time, place and manner restrictions, and that the Legislature’s decision to expressly confirm local authority to impose certain restrictions does not foreclose cities from imposing other restrictions not described in state law. ORS 475B.340 and ORS 475B.500 provide that cities may regulate marijuana facilities by imposing reasonable restrictions on: 9 Under existing law, the League believes it is clear that a city may enforce civil regulations of general applicability (such as zoning codes, business licenses and the like) through the imposition of civil penalties. Although a city likely cannot directly recriminalize conduct allowed under state criminal law, it is a different legal question whether a city may impose criminal penalties for violating a requirement of general applicability when the conduct at issue is otherwise immune from prosecution under state law (i.e. whether a city may impose criminal penalties for operation of a medical marijuana dispensary in violation of a city’s land use code). Cf. State v. Babson, 355 Or 383, 326 P3d 559 (2014) (explaining that generally applicable, facially neutral law, such as a rule prohibiting use of public property during certain hours, may be valid even if it burdens expressive conduct otherwise protected under Article I, section 8, of the Oregon Constitution). Consequently, a city should work closely with its city attorney before imposing criminal penalties against a person operating a medical marijuana facility in violation of a local civil code, such as a zoning, business license or development code. Local Government Regulation of Marijuana in Oregon League of Oregon Cities | 19 May 2016 (Third Edition)