2022-03-15 CC Agenda - Public Communications - Misc - Cannabis2022-03-15 CC AGENDA
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION - MISC - CANNABIS
Harada, Patricia
From: Weaver, Tracy (City Clerk)
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 10:33 AM
To: *ALL CITY CLERKS
Subject: FW: Proposal For Cannabis Dispensary
Council received the email below.
Thank you,
Tracy Weaver I City Clerk
City of El Segundo
350 Main Street El Segundo CA 90245
310.524.2305 1 tweaver@elegundo.org I www.elsegundo.org
-----Original Message -----
From: Nicol Real Estate <kim@nicolrealestate.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 10:11 AM
To: ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS <ALLELECTEDOFFICIALS@elsegundo.org>; Gilberts, Joshua (Officer)
<jgilberts@elsegundo.org>; Martinez, Stephanie (Officer) <samartinez@elsegundo.org>
Subject: Proposal For Cannabis Dispensary
Dear Council & Elected Officials,
don't think I need to make formal introductions, but for record, my name is Kimberley Nicol and I am a resident of El
Segundo. I am writing to address the proposal of a Cannabis Dispensary in our community.
Prior to the pandemic, I was a volunteer at El Segundo Middle School for S years, followed by 2 years of being on
campus as a teachers aid. I also lead the IMPACT after school programs in which we would discuss everything from study
habits, to substance abuse, to bullying, to body image and self-esteem.
I care deeply for the kids in our community, which is why I'm writing this letter. I did not walk a buttoned up path to
where I am today. I abused every substance under the sun, and speak first hand to these messy experiences when
advocating for children, and for our schools.
I promise you this, a local Cannabis dispensary WILL increase the use, and abuse of drugs among under age kids in our
community.
If you build it, they will come. They will go with fake ID's, they will go with their older siblings who can legally buy it, or
they will just pay someone of age a little extra to go get it for them. Bottom line is, having a dispensary minutes from
their homes, just makes it that much easier for these kids to get their hands on it. After two years of increased
desperation, suicide, social isolation, and anxiety among kids post the pandemic, I'm trying to understand how anyone
could think this is a good idea.
Before making any decisions on this matter, I would encourage every council member on the Dias to sit down with both
our current campus resource officers and the previous ones to hear what they have to say about this, and the impact a
local dispensary could have on the increased presence of substances in our schools.
Best,
Kimberley Nicol
Nicol Real Estate Group
310-977-4885
https://Iinkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.nicoirealestate.com&c=E,l,ePcINii7uYW_S6KFAwKgXYQd
VVRduRE6UX3UzVVgCCeghgmS2KLEN27Ra7w7R2w_2QG41VEZVIgFwPR1AA5YTKVxtizChgi7XmKgg8VwQaHwdDOQZSzL
6z5e2A„&typo=l
kim@nicolrealestate.com
Harada, Patricia
From: Weaver, Tracy (City Clerk)
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 1:54 PM
To: *ALL CITY CLERKS
Cc: Hensley, Mark; George, Darrell; Allen, Michael; 'Joaquin Vazquez'
Subject: FW: Cannabis Issue
Council received email below.
Thank you,
Tracy Weaver I City Clerk
City of El Segundo
350 Main Street El Segundo CA 90245
310.524.2305 1 tweaver@elegundo.org I www.elsegundo.org
EL,EGUNDO
Where big ideius take off.
From: Dana Cisneros <dana@cisnerosfirm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 1:52 PM
To: ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS <ALLELECTEDOFFICIALS@elsegundo.org>
Subject: Cannabis Issue
Dear Hon. Mayor and City Council of El Segundo,
Many of us in the cannabis industry have been watching with great interest as the South Bay Cities respond to the ballot
initiatives proposed by Elliot Lewis and Damian Martin through individuals residing in your city. At the March 1, 2022
City Council meeting, you voted to continue the discussion to March 15, 2022, but I do not see the matter on the
agenda.
I implore you to take control of the matter by adopting your own Ordinance that takes into account the concerns of your
community.
In 2020, 1 assisted the City of Fullerton in exploring the cannabis question with their residents. Ultimately, that Council
determined to not proceed with the issue, but they made significant efforts to engage with the community. One of you
pointed out that this was not a hot issue when you were elected and therefore the decision should go to the
voters. While I appreciate the sentiment, I strongly recommend you provide yourselves with enough leeway to make
changes if you need to and protect yourselves with the legislative privilege in so doing. Sending an ordinance of this
nature to the voters will only serve to tie your hands in the future.
On March 1, 2022 there was some discussion of the litigious nature of the cannabis industry. This is partially true. For
the most part, applicants like their wounds and do their best to improve their application presentations. This only
happens in a merit based process, by the way. If you stick to strictly land use controls without hard limits on the number
of licenses, you will likely avoid litigation. It is also worth noting that the proponents of the ballot measure are the ones
that routinely threaten and sue the city and state; to date, I am not aware of them being successful in any such litigation,
albeit most are pending. So, the truth is, the cannabis industry is not litigious, the business pushing for this ballot
initiative is litigious. This is also likely why they left the possibility of an additional license being awarded by a Court — so
if they lose in the merit based process you or they design, they can sue for a license.
It is unfortunate that your experience with the cannabis industry is by force. I would welcome any of you to contact me
to schedule appointments to view the licensed operations my clients engage in to get a better feel for what operators
with even just one store can do and how they present to the community. I would also like to extend the offer to work
together on a public education campaign. I work with NORML, am on the California Legal Committee for NORML and
am active in our local chapter here in OC.
One of the issues you are going to hear repeatedly is that we need to keep our children safe. As a parent of a very
curious 6 year old boy, I can promise you that youth prevention is paramount to ensuring a successful industry — and the
best way to keep cannabis out of the hands of our kids is to regulate it. Last year, the IIHH released a study, whereby in
California, "Young -looking patrons without identification were denied entry at every marijuana retailer they visited for
the experiment. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety partnered with researchers from NORC at the University of
Chicago and the University of Minnesota to conduct the study, which also included a survey of law enforcement.
'Licensed marijuana retailers are clearly keen to follow the rules. They're aware that the industry hasn't won everybody
over yet, and they don't want to get shut down,' says INS Senior Research Scientist Angela Eichelberger, one of the
authors of the paper. 'It also probably helps that similar laws have been around a long time for alcohol, so ID checks are
an established routine."'
The truth is, we are all new to this. Regulation of the adult use/for profit market has only been around for a little over 4
years, and the first year was anything but what we expected. I can tell you, having applied in numerous cities
throughout California, that most cities do not get this exactly right the first time. Later in the process, they realize, for
example, that the care far more about local enterprise and job opportunities than the relative prior success of an
outside large cannabis company. In San Bernardino, for example, where I represent one of the successful applicants
standing shoulder to shoulder with the City in defense of its program, one of the major issues was that the Council was
unable to make any changes to the license caps until a year after the first process concluded. Having the ability to
modify the process when obvious problems occur is part of the function of local government. Leaving that matter to the
voters will tie your hands, and likely end up costing the City money in the long run. If you look at the operators now in
San Bernardino, you will see they are the same as you see in most any City with a merit -based process. By far, those
now listed on the City website did not apply for retail operations, but rather engaged in post -award transactions to take
control of those winning permits. I make no comment on whether this is good or bad, but rather to highlight the reality
— no matter what you do, you will end up with strong operators in your City. Here is the link to those currently operating
in the City; you need to click commercial cannabis from the tab with the list icon to reveal the cannabis companies in the
City.
Low license caps breed allegations of corruption, regardless of the circumstances. There are sore losers and people
crying foul at every step. While I respect your desire to vet these businesses and their operators beyond standard
background checks, I strongly recommend you consider a land -use based process rather than a merit based process to
insulate the City from litigation by keeping your decisions as objective as possible. This also provides the small
businesses and individuals in your community the opportunity to participate in the commercial cannabis industry,
something Prop 64 was supposed to ensure.
Please keep me updated on the progress of your discussions and program. If I can be of any assistance, please do not
hesitate to contact me or have your staff reach out.
***please note new address below***
Sincerely,
Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq.
The Cisneros Firm
505 S. Villa Real Drive, Suite 100
Anaheim Hills, CA 92807
Phone: (714) 660-9045
Cell: (949) 500-3240
eFax: (949) 258-9332
dana@cisnerosfirm.com
www.cisnerosfirm.com
WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure
under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure,
distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies and attachments.
The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless practices.
Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the
intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly
preserved.