CLEARLAKE, Calif. – Confusion over wording in a city ordinance governing commercial marijuana rules has led to the calling of a special Clearlake City Council meeting this week to discuss an urgency ordinance banning marijuana cultivation on the west side of Highway 53.

The council will meet in closed session to discuss two potential cases of litigation beginning at 5:15 p.m. Thursday, Dec. 21, before the public portion of the meeting begins at 6 p.m. in the council chambers at Clearlake City Hall, 14050 Olympic Drive.

Under council business, council members will consider an urgency ordinance, Ordinance No. 202-2017, placing the proposed moratorium on commercial marijuana, or cannabis, cultivation businesses west of Highway 53 in the city limits.

The need for the urgency ordinance arose following the council’s Dec. 14 meeting when staff sought clarification regarding the wording of Ordinance No. 200-2017, which was approved Oct. 26 and Nov. 27.

City Manager Greg Folsom said confusion arose pertaining to one passage about cultivation, Section 18-12.020 b.1, which read: “1. Commercial Cannabis Cultivation is allowed only in the CB zones when all cultivation activities are conducted entirely inside a building utilizing no natural light, or in a hybrid greenhouse east of State Route 53 in CB zones.”

Folsom said that inaccurate punctuation – specifically, lack of a semicolon – had led to different interpretations of that paragraph.

At the Dec. 14 meeting, Folsom asked to know what the council’s understanding of the wording had been. “We just want clarification, what was it the council meant so that we can go forward with that.”

The majority of council members said they interpreted the language to mean that cannabis cultivation – whether indoors or outdoors – was to be allowed only on the east side of Highway 53.

Mayor Russ Perdock said the intention had been to leave the area on the west side of Highway 53 out of cultivation in order to encourage retail, resorts and tourism, with the east side available for cultivation purposes.

As of the Dec. 14 meeting, Folsom reported that the city had received one application for cultivation in an existing enclosed building utilizing no natural light west of Highway 53. He said at that time that no licenses have been granted for cultivation activities, as they must go through a process involving the planning commission.

Now, with the council having clarified its position, Folsom said that in order to implement the council’s stated direction, the ordinance’s language “should be amended to clearly reflect the legislative intent.”

The process to amend the ordinance will require at least two meetings of the council for a first and second reading, plus required public noticing, Folsom said in his report for Thursday’s meeting.

“Because that amendment will take approximately two months to implement and at least one applicant has inquired regarding commercial cannabis west of State Route 53, staff believes the Council should consider a moratorium placing a temporary ban on commercial cultivation in this particular area,” Folsom wrote in his report.

He said the moratorium would go into effect immediately and would not allow any commercial cannabis cultivation west of Highway 53.

Folsom explained that, based on state law, the initial moratorium is only valid for 45 days but can be extended up to two years.

“Staff does not believe a lengthy moratorium will be needed as this amended ordinance would take its place in a few months if the amended ordinance, or some version thereof, is adopted by the City Council,” Folsom wrote.

In other business, the council will hold a public hearing for the presentation and closeout of the Community Development Block Grant as required by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. That item originally had been scheduled for the Dec. 14 meeting but was held over at staff’s request.

Items on the consent agenda – items considered noncontroversial and usually accepted as a slate on one vote – consideration of a declaration of local emergency issued on Oct. 9 and ratified by council action on Oct. 12; consideration of continuation of a declaration of a local health emergency issued on Oct. 12 and ratified by council action on Oct. 18; and Resolution No. 2017-92 approving the commitment of Community Development Block Grant Program income funds.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.