Cannabis Regulations

Town of Mammoth Lakes Cannabis Regulations

Over the last several years, California voters, and the state legislature created a legal framework to enable the cannabis industry to move into a regulated commercial market. In response to these changes, Town staff have been working on updating the Town's cannabis regulations to allow additional uses, such as recreational cannabis retailers and manufacturers/cultivators. Under the current regulations, only medical marijuana cooperatives (maximum of 2 dispensaries) and medical marijuana cultivation is permitted (current regulations can be viewed HERE).

Staff will be conducting a number of workshops to allow the public to provide input on the proposed cannabis regulations. Staff will use that input to draft the regulations and once drafted, the Planning and Economic Development Commission and the Town Council will review the regulations at public hearings prior to adoption.

Planning and Economic Development Commission Workshop - August 9, 2017

On August 9, 2017, the Planning and Economic Development Commission will be holding a workshop to discuss proposed cannabis regulations. The staff report for the workshop is available HERE.

Workshop Ad

Public Workshop - April 26, 2017

On April 26, 2017, staff conducted a public workshop to discuss proposed cannabis regulations and to provide information on what is allowed under Proposition 64 ("the Adult Use of Marijuana Act"). Additionally, staff asked a series of questions to gain feedback from the public. The workshop presentation is available HERE.

A summary of the responses to the questions asked of the public is provided below:

  1. Should there be a local tax for marijuana sales?
    The attendees were generally supportive of implementing a local tax on retail sales and the suggested tax amount ranged from 5-10%. There was general support for a cultivation tax, but no amounts were suggested.
    The soonest a tax could be implemented would be the next general election in November 2018 for a general tax.
  2. Is the proposed number of four (4) adult-use retailers and two (2) medicinal retailers appropriate?
    The attendee responses were mixed with regards to the number of retailers and the responses varied from maintaining the current quota of the two (2) medicinal cannabis retailers to having no cap on the numbers and allowing the market to regulate itself.
  3. Should the number of cultivation/manufacturing facilities in the Industrial Park be limited?
    Similar to the responses for the appropriate number of retailers, the attendee responses related to cultivation facilities in the Industrial Park were mixed and ranged from having a cap on the number of facilities in order to maintain adequate industrial space for other industrial uses to having no cap since there is limited vacant space and/or landlords willing to rent to cannabis businesses and the market will regulate itself.
  4. Of the three buffer options, which is the most desirable?
    Three maps were put on the wall and the public was asked to place sticker dots on their choice. The three buffer options presented were: (1) maintain the existing 1,000-foot buffer from schools (K-12), parks, and libraries for the commercial zones and the State required 600-foot buffer from schools (K-12), day care centers and child care centers; (2) use a 600-foot buffer from parks and libraries for the commercial zones and the State required 600-foot buffer from schools (K-12), day care centers, and child care centers; or (3) use only the State required 600-foot buffer from schools (K-12), day care centers, and child care centers. Of the three buffer options, there was unanimous support from the attendees for option 3 (see attachment 3 for the map options and sticker votes).