Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing, and approve the hearing officer’s recommendation to uphold the denial of the business license application MJ21701212 submitted by EZ Greens, LLC, for a medical marijuana business located at 1355 West Willow Street.  (District 7)
Motion case. Thank you. Let's have hearing number three. Please report from. Financial management recommendation received supporting documentation into. The record. Conclude the hearing and approve the hearing officer's recommendation to uphold the denial of the business license application submitted by easy greens for a medical marijuana. Business located. At 135 five West Willow Street, District seven. Thank you. And I believe another oath is required to administer the oath. Witnesses, please stand. Do you and each of you solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the cause now and pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. Thank you, Mr. Modica. Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. The staff presentation will again be given by Brett Jaquez, our business services officer. Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. Before your recommendation to uphold the hearing officer's determination to deny the business license application, NJ 21701212. Submitted by Easy Greens LLC for Medical Marijuana Business located at 1355 West Rose Street in Council District seven. In addition to the counsel order, you have been provided the hearing officer's recommended recommendation and findings, the appeal hearing packet and the city's brief in support of its argument. To write some background on this item on February 21st, 2017, Easy Greens LLC submitted an application to operate a medical marijuana dispensary at 1355 West Grove Street on May 31st, 2017. The Department of Financial Management denied the business license application due to the proposed business location being within an area zoned exclusively for residential use, which is in violation of the Long Beach Municipal Code. Section 5.90.030. On June 8th, 2017, Easy Greens LLC filed an appeal of the business license application denial. And on July 18, 2017, the City Council referred the appeal hearing to a hearing officer on August ten, 2017. The appeal hearing was held and the presiding hearing officer assigned by the city clerk's office was Elio Palacios. On August 29, 2017, the hearing officer recommended that the denial of the business license application submitted by E-Z Green's LLC be upheld due to the proposed business location being in an area zoned exclusively for residential use, which is in violation of Long Beach Municipal Code Section 5.90.03. It is requested that the City Council accept the hearing officer's recommendation to deny this business license application. That concludes my report. And staff are available to answer any questions Council may have. Thank you. And Mr. City Attorney, do we need to ask for the appellant on this? Okay. Is there is the appellant present? Okay, please come forward. You have a reasonable amount of time to make your case. Let's just cue up 10 minutes here. I probably need that long. Okay, well, let's queue up five. Okay. Mr. Vice Mayor and City Council, thank you for giving me a chance to speak. Be a being that we applied for this this medical marijuana license. It is. It's currently zoned on is on the map. It is zoned residential. But that's that was our point of contention, why we appeal this process to begin with. My father purchased this property back on August 8th, 1980, from Mobile Oil Corporation. It was it was an existing gas station at the time. My father at that point converted it from a gas station to a convenience store dairy market, which is which is how it's been operated since that time. So for the past 37 years, it's been operated clearly as not a residential use. We we so since during that time we've had a beer and beer and wine license from state of California. And during that whole time and basically the zoning I believe we believe to be amid something made a mistake with the zoning not back in 2013. We we I think we realized that it was not zoned and we attempted to preliminarily change the zoning on this property. My father contacted various business owners along the the block that we were located on. Some of them did agree to for us to go ahead with the zone change and we would all split the cost. And then early 2014, we were approached as personally, we were approached by 7-Eleven to to purchase this building from us, along with the license, the beer and wine license. So at that time, my father tried to rush the process, going because the 7-Eleven was not going to purchase it, being zoned incorrectly. But at that time, my father, we met with Monica mendoza, who was at the was a planner at the time. And we had she and my father met with Linda, to whom was also in in the works for the city in planning. And at that time, they told us that the the zone change was already going to be part of this citywide general plan change. That's still hasn't occurred from 2014 til now. We were under the understanding that that process would have taken between six months to a year. And here we are three and a half years later and still has not been done. And I understand that there's a bunch of little hiccups that go along the way with that. But as a direct result of this this thing, we haven't been able to we were denied for this application, as well as not being able to sell our business and the building property to 7-Eleven. We've been we've definitely been harmed by this through the slow process. This is taken. And we're hoping to get this the zone change done, if possible, prior to this general planning, because we don't even know when that's going to happen. We'd like to apply for if we're not going to be able to open a dispensary, we'd like to still be in this in the medical marijuana business. But if the zoning is not changed by the time, you know, we'd like to do the cultivation side if possible. We're exploring that as well at least. But if that's yeah, that's that's basically we just want to get this thing done. This process is, you know, started from 2013 and like I said, it's been a commercial use since 1980 at least, at least. And I'm sure mobile operator discussed that as a gas station for 20 years before that. So that's all that saying. Thank you. So this time we'll get a public comment. Is there any public comment on the side of. Very good. Upfront. I don't know this specific location, but I would offer this suggestion to this city. There will be obviously a number of people that will always want to come down and we're going to try to do this. And in any neighborhood, they are problematic. Here would be my suggestion. If you feel that you have no alternative in some locations, this is what and this is what. In the final analysis you should you should do is take the top two or the next to the top floor of the Long Beach Police Department. Clear it out, rent out space, and then have a lottery. And people can apply for one of those places to operate a marijuana establishment there. And there's ample parking in the garage there for them to do that period. And that saves a considerable amount of time. It's there. They can go buy a lottery basis and for each district they will have a certain you'll work it out with a certain number of lottery spaces will be opened for each district. And then you go to the downtown, to the police department and do your stuff. The city then gets at least some revenue from it to offset the damage that will flow from being forced to sell it. Thank you. Thank you. So say no further. Is this public comment coming forward? Thank you. Is there any other public comment on this item? Okay. This is our last speaker. Thank you, Shirley Bassey. With regards to the denial of this license, I believe that it is in the overall best interests of the city being the medical marijuana and the regular kind. There is no difference between the two. It's all marijuana. It's it's all doing the same thing. So we have saved some toddlers. We have saved some met middle school high school children from walking by that business and getting a contact high. We've saved the necessity of the residents to have to explain to their children, what's that smell? Mommy, Daddy, what is that? We have saved a generation that live in that area from the necessity of getting that much more closer because marijuana is a gateway drug. We've saved that many children from being that one step close to the use of opiate drugs. Heroin. We saved them. Cigarets are now in front of us. They are in some of our houses, even though we've required now smoke free zones in restaurants and other public places. Because years later. Through cancer and death. And all kind of malfeasance in our human body. We have say we are now having to answer that question. But with with marijuana, we're going down the same road. And some of us years later. Are going to hear your children say, I don't care if you do put medical in front of it, Mommy. They offered me a joint and then they said, Well, why don't you try a primo. That's marijuana kid dipped in cocaine. And then they offered that to me. Dad. And while you voted, it was illegal. You said, Mommy, that you said you voted it right, Mommy. You're going to have to answer that in the generations ahead. As your children? Some of them. Who voted. I don't care if you are selling it legally now. You're going to have to answer your children and your children's children. Mark my words, some of you will weep for this decision. When you know, deep in your heart, forget what they have allowed you to do here in your heart of hearts, you are entertaining this not because you have a medicinal necessity. You're entertaining it because it is now the trendy thing to do. When you don't want to deal with the stresses of life and the many of us who are either Catholic or Protestant. I'll finish later. Thank you. So we closed public comment, but I see one additional speaker. Is this one or is this too one? This is one. So I leave that there. Well, you see something? Got it, Roberto. Well, you got something to say to me. Merry Christmas. You ain't got to say nothing to me. All right, so you have 3 minutes and time starts now. Well, I think you give an honor to Jesus. I don't. I disagree with her because I saw a documentary on the History Channel. Nixon was giving out marijuana, medical marijuana in 73 and everything. So. And I got glaucoma, I found out in 2011. And that's the first thing the doctor said to me is marijuana has no side effect. The team along the left hand approach that I take and the Santa press makes my eyes twitch so no one is all right. You know, I use all of them. But the thing is, is marijuana back in the days was the peace pipe, not the regular tobacco marijuana. And and the Native Americans wanted the indigenous holiday and everything. They were here last week. If we had they maybe they need to smoke marijuana because when we got finished and I got kicked out, everybody remembers. Right. And this is has to do with marijuana. When they got finished, the natives, you know we used to smoke piece pipe of cool but see when we got out there I was with the white lady and the white man and Fred that was over there and the police escort is to a car because it was a little commotion. They were following us, La Raza people. So what time we get out there? I'm in the back seat. They don't see me like this has to do. I'm getting to it. They say. You know. Yeah, now, come on. It's not a warning. I'm talking about marijuana. Why it needs to be. Now, come on. Don't do that. Because you got to hear this. We need marijuana because I would like to smoke marijuana with them and they would have peace, not jail. The ones who was here last week and if we had back in Long Beach and I could smoke a doobie with them, maybe they wouldn't be trying to beat us up and kill us. Okay. So the thing is, is Uncle Jerry would like that, but they don't. So the thing is, as far as them, what they did, they caught us and they try to reach in to take those phone and assaulted us. And then I went to police tell them it took too long to get there. So as vice mayor, before I leave, I want to ask you this. I want to make sure I wanted to make sure that step doesn't happen again because, hey, we come here to talk, not to fight, but if we got to be our own police, I'll do that and I'll go get some brothers a hand with that . But I don't want to do that because I don't feel like going to jail. And that's why we got the police. We got good police here. I remember when crack was all up in Long Beach. That was such a good job that this is a very safe city now. So just I just tell the police what's up and let me handle this because they handle this in Long Beach and hey, remember, next time they come with this indigenous stuff, when we get out there, I ain't having no more of that bull crap because the brother ain't having it. I'm gonna get some brothers down here. We're going to handle this. That's the last thing I'm saying. So, you know, hey, tell that man to handle his all that stuff. Hey, I ain't going down Long Beach. Thank you. And we didn't see Frances come forward. Francis, you have your 3 minutes. I am Francis, Emily Dawson Harris and I reside in District one and I wholeheartedly support this surge and this matter. I felt that the hearing officer's recommendation is sound and is and should be about the denial of the business license. I'm also staying on the subject matter. I kind of was listening to the appellant and I just was wondering about a point of clarification because I kind of got a inclination that there's a possibility that he realizes there's a probability that the license may be denied. And I'm kind of concerned about the matter about still having a business or something there. And I don't know if there's a separate business license that has to be got for. I'm kind of wondering what's going to happen with this denied? What's going to happen with the facility? Because I think that needs to be made clear as to what's actually going to happen with this location. Thank you very much and I appreciate it. Thank you. Public comment is close. We'll take it back behind the wheel. Councilmember Durango. Thank you, vice mayor. I know. I know. That little stretch of land between the river, the 17 freeway and Santa Fe as well. This property lies around the corner of Easy and Little Street, and it has been a dairy for town that I've been in Long Beach. But I wasn't sure. I wasn't aware about the early history that it was a gas station. So that's that's enlightening. We were saying that has been very difficult for Mr. Wayne and his son in their property is that they have made efforts to sell that property and make it something else and convert that use into something much more not only useful for the community but profitable for them. Of course, during the course of my being on the city council, it was revealed at that location it's what they call a legal non-conforming use, which complicates matters in terms of properties that are that are designated as such. So I want to ask our planet, our department service people, if they could please give a definition of legal or performing use so that we can proceed with with how we move forward with the time of the sale here. Kerry. I will respond to that. Thank you. Good evening, Honorable City Council, and thank you for your question, Councilmember Miranda. The legal, legal nonconforming use is one that was approved, legally permitted during a certain time, and then subsequently the codes changed. So, for example, for this particular property, it was zoned commercial back in the forties and fifties and sometime prior to 1979 it was zoned residential. And the existing development on the site, which was permitted legally at the time, remains legal, non-conforming and status, even though the underlying the zoning is are one which is residential and now only allows for residential uses. And and that that presents a quandary because it is a legal non-conforming use. Yet it was resolved to be residential and and so Mr. Wang feels that he's been treated unfairly and I don't blame him for that because he's not. Now at this point when he was trying to sell the property to 7-Eleven because 11 does sell wine and beer, he could no longer be that type of service. He could no longer be there. So he's of in a in a quite a quandary here in terms of what was he going to do with that property. It's not about marijuana. It's about his property and what he can do with it at this point. And it's a shame that that he was unable to at least be able to consider another use for that property. But then the law is a law. We did pass a measure m m it was the definitions are very clear in terms of where you could put some dispensaries and some growth. And being that this is in a place where there's a residential very nearby, he can't they can't convert that property into that. Also, when he did his application, there were a maximum of 23 points to achieve in the application. And he didn't he didn't get the 23 points. So he was deemed eligible to continue in the lottery. So at this point, it appears that Mr. Wang is not able to apply for a medical marijuana dispensary or apply for 7-Eleven or apply for any other use, which is a shame. So at this point I would like to direct staff of the audit services and Mr. Kaiser to please meet with the Wangs, talk to them, give them some ideas as to what would be a very usable, well appropriate use of that property that may be able to give them some relief and and give them an opportunity to stay along because it's been a long time for 30 plus years, they've become a part of the community. They also own the car wash down the street on the corner of Santa Fe and and well, so they they are very familiar with Long Beach. They're very familiar to the people who are who live in the West Palm Beach area. And I think that they deserve a fair shake. So, Mr. Warwick, is that possible that we can be able to work with the banks and this mayor, councilmembers, vice mayor, councilmembers, certainly will have an economic development department meet with the Wangs, talk about zoning, what opportunities that exist. Absolutely. Okay. All right. And again, you know, this this is a parallel situations where I did meet with planning a building during this period of time. We were talking about 711 and how the land you sell that was coming in. And we're looking at changing some of those those those rules. And that is one of the stretches right there that is very complicated because of that corner and plus the other properties that are to the west of him, where there's a church, there's a laundromat, there's a restaurant, and there's a a playground and a library. So it's very mixed and it's very a talk about nonconforming. I don't know what that street is in terms of where there's residential, whether it's commercial or what. It's very unclear. So we as we move forward, we're probably touching a little button here that they should at least wear this item. But it's it's something that we really need to clarify and get clear and territory that stretch land so that Mr. Wang and his son can can have an appropriate use of that property. So having said all of that, I recommend that we go ahead and accept the the recommendation of the of the administrative judge and move forward . I hope my colleagues will as well. Thank you. Thank you. And that motion has been moved and seconded. Councilman Art and any remarks? No, I think Councilman Urunga made the case and I support his motion. Thank you. Those are remarks. So members to. Catch a vote. Gonzales motion case. Thank you. So that concludes our hearings. So I just want to clarify the order of the meeting this evening. So right now we have just a few people queued up for public comment. Just five names we will take up public comment next.