Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
   

OCTOBER 3, 2006 RANCHO RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - CONSIDERATION OF (1) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS LICENSES AND (2) AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, STORES, OR CO-OPS IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY OCTOBER 3, 2006 RANCHO RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -CONSIDERATION OF (1) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS LICENSES AND (2) AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, STORES, OR CO-OPS IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY OCTOBER 3, 2006 RANCHO RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -CONSIDERATION OF (1) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS LICENSES AND (2) AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, STORES, OR CO-OPS IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY



TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM: Carol Lynch, City Attorney

DATE: October 3, 2006

SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF (1) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS LICENSES AND (2) AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, STORES, OR CO-OPS IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY

Attachment: A - PDF

RECOMMENDATION

Read Ordinance No. ____ “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS LICENSES” by title only, waive further reading, and introduce the ordinance.

Read Ordinance No. ____-U “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS OF URGENCY” by title only, waive further reading, and adopt the ordinance.

Read Ordinance No. ____-U “AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, STORES, OR CO-OPS IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS OF URGENCY” by title only, waive further reading, and adopt the ordinance.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A. Business License Provisions

Under the current City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops (“marijuana dispensaries”) would be required to obtain a business license before operating in the city. The City’s business license ordinance was enacted solely to raise revenue for municipal purposes, and is not intended for regulation. RPVMC § 5.04.030. The business license provisions, being non-regulatory in nature, do not require that the business in question be lawful under federal or state law.

Although state law, in conflict with federal law, makes limited allowance for the personal possession, cultivation and use of marijuana for medicinal purposes when prescribed by a doctor, it is not clear that the distribution of marijuana products to numerous individuals from a marijuana dispensary would be lawful under state law, and is currently unlawful under federal law. City officials who authorize activities that violate federal law could potentially incur co-conspirator liability.

Some neighboring cities have indicated that owners of marijuana dispensaries have recently attempted to establish marijuana dispensaries within their communities. Generally speaking, cities in which marijuana dispensaries have established have experienced adverse secondary impacts to the public peace, health, safety and welfare.

To avoid those disruptions to the public peace, health, safety and welfare, we recommend that the business license provision be amended to clarify that no business license issued authorizes illegal or unlawful conduct, and to require that all applicants must affirm that the business engaged in does not furnish or provide any service, good or product that is illegal under federal, state or local law. If adopted as an urgency ordinance, the ordinance requires a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council for adoption.

B. Land Use Moratorium

Further, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Zoning Ordinance does not currently contain regulations governing or excluding the operation of a marijuana dispensary in any zone in the City. Because those uses are not specifically prohibited, it could be argued that they are substantially similar to other uses allowed by the Development Code. As noted above, it is not clear that the distribution of marijuana products to numerous individuals from a marijuana dispensary would be lawful, and generally speaking, where such uses have been allowed, adverse secondary impacts to the public peace, health, safety or welfare have been experienced.

In order to prevent the establishment of a marijuana dispensary within the City’s jurisdiction before the Planning Commission and City Council have time to adopt a permanent ban or some other restrictive regulation designed to protect public health, safety and welfare, an interim moratorium ordinance that would temporarily preclude the establishment of a marijuana dispensary in the City is urgently needed. If adopted, the moratorium would be in effect for an initial 45 days and may thereafter be extended for up to a total of two years. During the pendency of the moratorium, City staff will promptly refer to the Planning Commission for its input and recommendation on amendments to the City’s Development Code. If adopted as an urgency interim ordinance, the moratorium requires a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council for adoption.

BACKGROUND

In 1996, the California voters approved Proposition 215, known as the “Compassionate Use Act of 1996” (“Prop 215”). This law is codified in Health and Safety Code (“HSC”) Sections 11362.5 et seq. The intent of the proposition was to enable persons needing marijuana for medical purposes to obtain and use it without fear of criminal prosecution under limited and specific circumstances.

In 2002, the California Supreme Court affirmed that Prop 215 made the possession of marijuana for medical purposes noncriminal. (People v. Mower, 28 Cal. 4th 457 (2002)).

In 2003, the California Legislature enacted SB 420, codified as HSC Section 11362.7 through 11362.83, which attempted to implement Prop 215 and provide additional legal protections and limitations. Under that law, patients or primary caregivers who possess, use and/or cultivate (either solely or collectively) medical marijuana are not subject, solely on that basis, to criminal liability. (HSC §11362.765).

Under these state laws, various non-profit organizations have been established to operate marijuana dispensaries as the “primary caregiver” to medical marijuana patients. According to Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group advancing legal medical marijuana therapies and research, these marijuana dispensaries operate in about 100 locations throughout the state. Some of them operate similarly to a retail store for members as part of a patient and caregiver “collective.” These marijuana dispensaries may describe their operations using various terminology, such as collectives, cooperatives, clubs, associations, stores, shops, etc.

In contrast to state law, federal law prohibits the possession, distribution, or manufacture of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. (21 U.S.C.§ 841 (a)). In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the distribution of marijuana through a medical marijuana dispensary was illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act, rejecting a medical necessity defense (United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers’ Cooperative and Jeffery Jones, 532 U.S. 483 (2001)). Similarly, in 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the federal government’s prohibition applied to intrastate manufacture and possession of marijuana for medical purposes notwithstanding California laws authorizing it (Gonzales v. Raich, 162 L.Ed.2d 1 (2005)). However, the Court did not expressly invalidate Prop 215. As a consequence there is an existing conflict between state and federal law.

A subsequent Ninth Circuit holding puts cities on notice that a city cannot invoke federal immunity for a marijuana dispensary operator by designating that operator as an “official” city dispensary operator (United States v. Rosenthal, 454 F.3d 943 (2006)), from which it can be inferred that city officials could potentially incur co-conspirator liability if they authorize activities that violate federal law.

Due to the federal prohibition on marijuana, licensed pharmacies do not carry or sell medical marijuana. Therefore, medical marijuana dispensaries in the form of patient cooperatives have been established to provide medical marijuana but do so with, what some assert, is limited oversight by the state and with limited regulatory enforcement systems in place to address fraud, abuse, and other problems.

DISCUSSION

The principal land use issue to be addressed by the City is whether there are specific impacts to the health, safety, and welfare of the community from the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries and similar facilities, and if so, what type of zoning or other regulatory limitations are appropriate as related to these uses for the City.

Actions Taken by Other Cities to Regulate or Ban Marijuana Dispensaries

According to one source, of the 478 cities in California, approximately 24 allow marijuana dispensaries but impose regulatory permit requirements on their operation. Some of those cities include San Francisco, Berkeley, Oakland, West Hollywood and Whittier. Other cities in California (approximately 28) have acted to ban medical marijuana dispensaries. Some of the cities with bans include Fresno, Pasadena, Costa Mesa and San Rafael. Approximately 69 cities have moratoriums on marijuana dispensaries while they develop their own appropriate response to those types of facilities.

Lawsuits challenging city ordinances were filed against four of the cities that imposed complete bans on marijuana dispensaries. Earlier this year, the plaintiff dropped its lawsuits against the cities of Concord, Pasadena and Susanville. The lawsuit against the City of Fresno, according to the Fresno Superior Court website, is off-calendar and there has been no activity since December 21, 2005.

Secondary Neighborhood Impacts in Cities that Allow Marijuana Dispensaries

In the course of evaluating marijuana dispensaries, several cities have noted secondary neighborhood impacts from the operation of those facilities. A memorandum from the City of Rocklin, attached hereto, summarized some of the secondary impacts of dispensaries operating in several cities. Those secondary impacts include:

- buyers on their way to a dispensary accosted by street level dealers trying to sell at a lower price;

- people smoking marijuana in public around the facility;

- people coming into the community from out of town to obtain marijuana;

- marijuana DUI by people who have obtained it from the dispensary;

- attempts to burglarize dispensary buildings;

- criminal element drawn to the dispensary location;

- marijuana dealers who have a doctor’s recommendation are purchasing from the dispensary and then conducting illegal street sales to those who do not have a doctor’s recommendation;

- street criminals in search of drugs are robbing medical use patients for their marijuana as they leave the dispensary;

- thefts and robberies around dispensaries that support illegal drug commerce;

- businesses adjacent to marijuana dispensaries are impacted by the concentration of criminals that sometimes associate with dispensaries; and

- complaints that other illegal drugs are being sold inside dispensaries.

Various news reports, also attached, indicate that marijuana dispensaries have been subject to armed robbery takeovers, resulting in the death of one robber, and have been charged with being fronts to launder money for organized crime. The views of one organization that promotes the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries are expressed in a Letter from Americans for Safe Access, dated March 18, 2005, which is also attached.

Long-Term Options

In addition to adoption of a moratorium on medical marijuana facilities, which is only a temporary measure, there are various long-term options available to the City for addressing medical marijuana dispensaries. Those long-term options include:

- Take no formal action based on the position that these activities are illegal under federal law and that they cannot be allowed in the City.

- Prohibit the granting of any business license if the business would violate city, state, or federal law (as set forth in the attached draft ordinance amending the business license provisions).

- Amend the business permit regulatory scheme in Chapter 5.10 of the Municipal Code so that it would be applicable to marijuana dispensaries. That regulatory scheme currently prohibits issuance of a business permit to businesses subject to Chapter 5.10 that are unlawful. An example of possible amendments to the City’s business permit regulation are set forth as Attachment A.

- Prohibit the granting of any use permit if the use would violate city, state, or federal law.

- Amend the Development Code to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries city-wide.

- Amend the Development Code to classify the use as a retail use and allow them in commercial zones.

- Amend the business permit regulatory scheme in Chapter 5.10 of the Municipal Code and amend the Development Code.

- Impose a minimum distance between dispensaries and sensitive uses such as residences and schools.

- Impose a minimum distance between different dispensaries.

- Restrict the total number of allowable dispensaries in the City.

- Restrict the total number of marijuana plants allowable at a single dispensary.

- Require a CUP or some form of special permit.

- Require a background check of the business operators and employees.

- Limit hours of operation and amount of cash kept on premises, and impose other security requirements, such as requiring the presence of security guards.

- Prohibit onsite cultivation and consumption.

- Prohibit the sale of other products on the premises, including alcohol.

- Impose accountability and recordkeeping requirements on employees, primary caregivers, and patients.

In order for City staff to develop the most appropriate set of regulations that would fit the City’s interests, staff believes an immediate modification of the City’s business license regulations would be a first step in preventing the establishment of unlawful businesses within the City, and a moratorium would preserve the land use status quo and provide time for the City to evaluate the options and come up with the best long-term solutions to the issue.

CEQA Findings

City staff believes that it can be seen with certainty that the adoption of the ordinance has no likelihood of causing a significant negative effect on the environment because the ordinance will maintain the current environmental conditions arising from the current land use regulatory structure as adopted by the City without change or alteration. It is therefore exempt from the application of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 C.C.R. 15061(b)(3)).

Urgency Ordinance – Business License Provisions

In addition to the regular ordinance adopting the above-described business license provisions, the Council is also being asked to adopt an urgency ordinance effecting the same amendments. Because the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and to risk the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public, it is urgent that the City adopt a business license provision requiring that all new businesses or renewing businesses affirm that their operation within the City will not violate City, state or federal law. Thus, the City Council must adopt the proposed urgency ordinance by at least a four-fifths vote and further must find that it is necessary that the proposed ordinance take immediate effect for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety. Staff believes the following facts, which are set forth in Section 4 of the urgency ordinance, provide the legal basis for making these findings:

“The City of Rancho Palos Verdes issues business licenses for businesses doing business within its boundaries. The City currently has not established any express provision forbidding a business to open its operations in the City or continue to operate in the City if the business conducted violates City, state or federal law. Because of the lack of such provision, medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops could be established in the City at any time unless this ordinance is immediately adopted. The establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City, in violation of federal law, has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and to risk the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public. Further, public officials and employees are put at risk for being co-conspirators if required to issue business licenses to businesses whose activities violate federal law. Thus, it is urgent that the City adopt this ordinance requiring that all applicants affirm that their business will not conduct activities that are illegal under the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, the laws of the State of California, or the laws of the United States of America, and clarifying that business licenses do not authorize the conduct of unlawful businesses or activities. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby finds that there exists a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare requiring this change in the business license provisions; further hereby finds that this ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety; hereby declares the facts constituting the urgency; and passes this ordinance by at least a four-fifths vote of the City Council. Accordingly, this measure is adopted immediately upon introduction pursuant to Government Code Section 36934 and shall take effect immediately pursuant to Government Code Section 36937(b).”

Urgency Ordinance – Land Use Moratorium

The Council is also being asked to adopt a land use moratorium as an urgency ordinance. Because the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City before appropriate procedures and regulations are enacted has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and to risk the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public, it is urgent that the City prevent such uses from establishing within the City’s jurisdiction before the Planning Commission and City Council have time to adopt a permanent ban or some other restrictive regulation designed to protect public health, safety and welfare. Thus, the City Council must adopt the proposed urgency ordinance by at least a four-fifths vote and further must find that it is necessary that the proposed ordinance take immediate effect for the preservation of the public peace, health, safety and welfare. Staff believes the following facts, which are set forth in Section 4 of the urgency ordinance, provide the legal basis for making these findings:

“The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is responsible for adopting and implementing land use regulations within its boundaries. The City currently has not established any express criteria permanently banning or regulating the establishment, location or scope of operations for medical marijuana dispensary, store, or co-op uses. The establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and to risk the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public. Such land uses could be established in the City at any time unless this ordinance is immediately adopted. This City Council hereby determines that it does not want such facilities established within the boundaries of the City during consideration by the Planning Commission of whether to adopt a permanent ban or some other restrictive regulation designed to protect public health, safety and welfare. Allowing marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops to establish within the City before the Planning Commission and the City Council have considered this matter would be a failure to adequately govern and protect the peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The City’s staff will immediately refer this matter to the Planning Commission. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby finds that there exists a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare requiring this moratorium on marijuana dispensaries, stores, and co-ops pursuant to Government Code Section 65858; further hereby finds that this ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety; hereby declares the facts constituting the urgency; and passes this ordinance by at least a four-fifths vote of the City Council. Accordingly, this measure is adopted immediately upon introduction pursuant to Government Code Section 36934 and shall take effect immediately pursuant to Government Code Section 36937(b).”

CONCLUSION

If the City Council concurs with Staff’s recommendation, the City Council should read the attached Business License Restriction Ordinance by title only, waive further reading, and introduce the Ordinance and read the attached Business License Restriction Urgency Ordinance by title only, waive further reading, and adopt the Business License Restriction Urgency Ordinance. Additionally, if the City Council concurs with Staff’s recommendation, the City Council should read the attached Land Use Moratorium Urgency Ordinance by title only, waive further reading, and adopt the Land Use Moratorium Urgency Ordinance.

ALTERNATIVES

The City Council could give Staff additional direction about these issues, which could be incorporated into a revised ordinance(s), or the City Council could decline to adopt the either or both ordinances.

Respectfully submitted,

Carol Lynch, City Attorney

Reviewed by,

Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:

Draft Business License Ordinance

Draft Business License Urgency Ordinance

Draft Land Use Moratorium Urgency Ordinance

Attachment “A”

City of Rocklin Memorandum, July 13, 2004

Oakland Tribune, news article, Aug. 20, 2005

S.F. Tribune, news article, June 23, 2005

WeHo News, new article, May 18, 2006

San Gabriel Tribune, news article, Aug. 17, 2006

Riverside County District Attorney’s Office White Paper, Sept. 2006

Americans for Safe Access, Mar. 18, 2005

ORDINANCE NO. ___

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS LICENSES

WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes issues business licenses for businesses doing business within its boundaries; and

WHEREAS, in 1996, the California voters adopted Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act (“Prop 215”), decriminalizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes, which was augmented by the State Legislature in 2004 and codified at Section 11362.5 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code; and

WHEREAS, widespread implementation of Prop 215 was delayed due to several ensuing court cases challenging its validity; and

WHEREAS, the California Supreme Court has stated that Prop 215 makes the possession of marijuana for medical purposes non-criminal (People v. Mower, 28 Cal.4th 457, 472 (2002)); however, the federal courts have not recognized such a medical necessity exception under federal law (United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyer’s Cooperative, 121 S. Ct. 1711 (2001)); and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the federal Commerce Clause powers gave Congress the authority to enact the Controlled Substances Act, which bans, among other things, the cultivation, use and transfer of marijuana for noncommercial purposes even though that cultivation, use and transfer occurs completely within the State of California, so that the federal ban covers marijuana cultivated, used or transferred pursuant to Prop 215; however, the Court did not expressly invalidate Prop 215 (Raich v. Ashcroft, 125 S. Ct. 2195 (2005)); and

WHEREAS, a subsequent Ninth Circuit holding puts cities on notice that a city cannot invoke federal immunity for a marijuana dispensary operator by designating that operator as an “official” city dispensary operator (United States v. Rosenthal, 454 F.3d 943 (2006)), from which it can be inferred that city officials could potentially incur co-conspirator liability if they authorize activities that violate federal law; and

WHEREAS, the City has not yet established any express criteria permanently banning or regulating the issuance of business licenses for medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops; and

WHEREAS, at least two neighboring cities recently discovered that a medical marijuana dispensary was established within each of their jurisdictions; and

WHEREAS, with the expansion of medical marijuana dispensaries in other cities, it is foreseeable that a medical marijuana dispensary may seek to establish its business within the boundaries of the City; and

WHEREAS, cities have experienced adverse secondary impacts to the public peace, health, safety and welfare around medical marijuana dispensaries, such as an increase in thefts and robberies in support of illegal drug commerce; and

WHEREAS, the City Council is concerned that the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City, in violation of federal law, has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding neighborhoods and the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public, and further, that public officials and employees are put at risk for being co-conspirators if required to issue business licenses to businesses whose activities violate federal law;

NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 5.04.050 of Chapter 5.04 of Title 5 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby revoked and replaced as follows:

“5.04.050 License and tax payment required.

A. There are imposed upon the businesses, trades, professions, callings and occupations specified in this chapter license taxes in the amounts prescribed in this chapter effective upon the effective date of this chapter. It is unlawful for any person to transact and carry on any business, trade, profession, calling or occupation in the city without first having procured a license from the city so to do and paying the tax prescribed in this chapter or without complying with any and all applicable provisions of this chapter.

B. This section shall not be construed to require any person to obtain a license prior to doing business within the city if such requirement conflicts with applicable statutes of the United States or of the state. Persons not so required to obtain a license prior to doing business within the city nevertheless shall be liable for payment of the tax imposed by this chapter.

C. No business license issued by the city pursuant to this chapter shall be construed as authorizing any conduct or continuance of any illegal or unlawful business or practice, or the furnishing, sale, or providing of any service, good, or product that is illegal or prohibited under the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of California, the federal and state constitutions, this Code, or any other applicable law, ordinance, rule or regulation. Any such business license shall be void.”

Section 2. Section 5.04.110 of Chapter 5.04 of Title 5 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby revoked and replaced as follows:

“5.04.110 Application—First License

A. Upon a person making application for the first license to be issued hereunder for the applicant’s business for a newly established business, such person shall furnish to the collector a sworn statement, upon a form provided by the collector, setting forth the following information:

1. The exact nature or kind of business for which a license is requested;

2. The place where such business is to be carried on, and if the same is not to be carried on at any permanent place of business, the places of residences of the owners of same;

3. In the event that application is made for the issuance of a license to a person doing business under a fictitious name, the application shall set forth the names and places of residences of those owning said business;

4. In the event that the application is made for the issuance of a license to a corporation or a partnership, the application shall set forth the names and places of residence of the officers or partners thereof;

5. In all cases where the amount of license tax to be paid is measured by gross receipts or by the number of dwelling units, of square feet of commercial or industrial buildings constructed as provided in this chapter, or by the number of vehicles used or other computation, count or similar criteria, the application shall set forth such information as may be therein required and as may be necessary to determine the amount of the license tax to be paid by the applicant;

6. An affirmation by the applicant that the business will not be an illegal or unlawful business or practice, and that it will not furnish or provide any service, good, or product that is illegal or prohibited under the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of California, the federal and state constitutions, this Code, or any other applicable law, ordinance, rule or regulation;

7. Any further information that the collector may require to enable the collector to issue the type of license applied for;

8. If the amount of the license tax to be paid by the applicant is measured by gross receipts or by the number of dwelling units or square feet of commercial or industrial buildings constructed as provided in this chapter, or by the number of vehicles used or other computation, count or similar criteria, the applicant shall estimate the gross receipts or number of bedrooms and dwelling units or number of square feet of commercial or industrial buildings constructed, or the number of vehicles to be used or other criteria, respectively, for the period to be covered by the license to be issued. Such estimate, if accepted by the collector as reasonable, shall be used in determining the amount of license tax to be paid by the applicant; provided, however, the amount of the license tax so determined shall be tentative only, and such person shall, within thirty days after the expiration of the period for which such license was issued, furnish the collector with a sworn statement, upon a form furnished by the collector, showing the actual gross receipts or number of dwelling units or square feet of commercial or industrial buildings constructed, or number of vehicles or other criteria, respectively, during the period of such license, and the license tax for such period shall be finally ascertained and paid on the basis of such actual gross receipts, number of bedrooms and dwelling units or square feet or number of vehicles or other criteria, as the case may be, after deducting from the payment found to be due, the amount paid at the time such first license was issued.

B. The collector shall not issue to any such person another license for the same, or any other business, until such person shall have furnished to the collector the sworn statement and paid the license tax as required in this section.”

Section 3. Section 5.04.120 of Chapter 5.04 of Title 5 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby revoked and replaced as follows:

“License—Renewal

In all cases, the applicant for the renewal of a license shall submit to the collector for his or her guidance in ascertaining the amount of the license tax to be paid by the applicant, a sworn statement, upon a form to be provided by the collector, setting forth such information concerning the applicant’s business during the preceding year (or such other period as may be applicable if the license tax period is less than one year) as may be required by the collector to enable the collector to ascertain the amount of the license tax to be paid by said applicant pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. Such form shall also include a signed affirmation by the applicant that the business will not be an illegal or unlawful business or practice, and that it will not furnish or provide any service, good, or product that is illegal or prohibited under the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of California, the federal and state constitutions, this Code, or any other applicable law, ordinance, rule or regulation.”

Section 4. The City Council declares that, should any provision, section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance be rendered or declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective by any final action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases and words of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each provision, section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more provisions, sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases or words be declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective.

Section 5. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places in the City within fifteen (15) days after its passage, in accordance with the provisions of Section 36933 of the Government Code. The City Clerk shall further certify to the adoption and posting of this Ordinance, and shall cause this Ordinance and its certification, together with proof of posting, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of the Council of this City.

Section 6. This Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the thirty-first (31st) day after its passage.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this _______ day of October, 2006.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

______________________________

MAYOR

ATTEST:

__________________________________

CITY CLERK

I, CAROLYNN PETRU, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is true and correct copy of Ordinance No. ___ approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at a meeting thereof held on the _____ day of October, 2006.

__________________________________

CITY CLERK

APPROVED AS TO FORM:



CAROL W. LYNCH, CITY ATTORNEY

ORDINANCE NO. ___-U

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS LICENSES AND ADOPTING FINDINGS OF URGENCY

WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes issues business licenses for businesses doing business within its boundaries; and

WHEREAS, in 1996, the California voters adopted Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act (“Prop 215”), decriminalizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes, which was augmented by the State Legislature in 2004 and codified at Section 11362.5 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code; and

WHEREAS, widespread implementation of Prop 215 was delayed due to several ensuing court cases challenging its validity; and

WHEREAS, the California Supreme Court has stated that Prop 215 makes the possession of marijuana for medical purposes non-criminal (People v. Mower, 28 Cal.4th 457, 472 (2002)); however, the federal courts have not recognized such a medical necessity exception under federal law (United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyer’s Cooperative, 121 S. Ct. 1711 (2001)); and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the federal Commerce Clause powers gave Congress the authority to enact the Controlled Substances Act, which bans, among other things, the cultivation, use and transfer of marijuana for noncommercial purposes even though that cultivation, use and transfer occurs completely within the State of California, so that the federal ban covers marijuana cultivated, used or transferred pursuant to Prop 215; however, the Court did not expressly invalidate Prop 215 (Raich v. Ashcroft, 125 S. Ct. 2195 (2005)); and

WHEREAS, a subsequent Ninth Circuit holding puts cities on notice that a city cannot invoke federal immunity for a marijuana dispensary operator by designating that operator as an “official” city dispensary operator (United States v. Rosenthal, 454 F.3d 943 (2006)), from which it can be inferred that city officials could potentially incur co-conspirator liability if they authorize activities that violate federal law; and

WHEREAS, the City has not yet established any express criteria permanently banning or regulating the issuance of business licenses for medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops; and

WHEREAS, at least two neighboring cities recently discovered that a medical marijuana dispensary was established within each of their jurisdictions; and

WHEREAS, with the expansion of medical marijuana dispensaries in other cities, it is foreseeable that a medical marijuana dispensary may seek to establish its business within the boundaries of the City; and

WHEREAS, cities have experienced adverse secondary impacts to the public peace, health, safety and welfare around medical marijuana dispensaries, such as an increase in thefts and robberies in support of illegal drug commerce; and

WHEREAS, the City Council is concerned that the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City, in violation of federal law, has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding neighborhoods and the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public, and further, that public officials and employees are put at risk for being co-conspirators if required to issue business licenses to businesses whose activities violate federal law; it is therefore urgent that the City adopt this ordinance to require that all applicants affirm that they will not conduct activities that are illegal under the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, the laws of the State of California, or the laws of the United States of America while clarifying that business licenses do not authorize the conduct of unlawful businesses or activities and, and

WHEREAS, this ordinance is presented as an urgency ordinance because the above-referenced facts increase the possibility that a medical marijuana dispensary may be established in the City before the City has enacted appropriate regulations, and is, therefore, necessary for preserving the public peace, health, and safety;

NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 5.04.050 of Chapter 5.04 of Title 5 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby revoked and replaced as follows:

“5.04.050 License and tax payment required.

A. There are imposed upon the businesses, trades, professions, callings and occupations specified in this chapter license taxes in the amounts prescribed in this chapter effective upon the effective date of this chapter. It is unlawful for any person to transact and carry on any business, trade, profession, calling or occupation in the city without first having procured a license from the city so to do and paying the tax prescribed in this chapter or without complying with any and all applicable provisions of this chapter.

B. This section shall not be construed to require any person to obtain a license prior to doing business within the city if such requirement conflicts with applicable statutes of the United States or of the state. Persons not so required to obtain a license prior to doing business within the city nevertheless shall be liable for payment of the tax imposed by this chapter.

C. No business license issued by the city pursuant to this chapter shall be construed as authorizing any conduct or continuance of any illegal or unlawful business or practice, or the furnishing, sale, or providing of any service, good, or product that is illegal or prohibited under the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of California, the federal and state constitutions, this Code, or any other applicable law, ordinance, rule or regulation. Any such business license shall be void.”

Section 2. Section 5.04.110 of Chapter 5.04 of Title 5 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby revoked and replaced as follows:

“5.04.110 Application—First License

A. Upon a person making application for the first license to be issued hereunder for the applicant’s business for a newly established business, such person shall furnish to the collector a sworn statement, upon a form provided by the collector, setting forth the following information:

1. The exact nature or kind of business for which a license is requested;

2. The place where such business is to be carried on, and if the same is not to be carried on at any permanent place of business, the places of residences of the owners of same;

3. In the event that application is made for the issuance of a license to a person doing business under a fictitious name, the application shall set forth the names and places of residences of those owning said business;

4. In the event that the application is made for the issuance of a license to a corporation or a partnership, the application shall set forth the names and places of residence of the officers or partners thereof;

5. In all cases where the amount of license tax to be paid is measured by gross receipts or by the number of dwelling units, of square feet of commercial or industrial buildings constructed as provided in this chapter, or by the number of vehicles used or other computation, count or similar criteria, the application shall set forth such information as may be therein required and as may be necessary to determine the amount of the license tax to be paid by the applicant;

6. An affirmation by the applicant that the business will not be an illegal or unlawful business or practice, and that it will not furnish or provide any service, good, or product that is illegal or prohibited under the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of California, the federal and state constitutions, this Code, or any other applicable law, ordinance, rule or regulation;

7. Any further information that the collector may require to enable the collector to issue the type of license applied for;

8. If the amount of the license tax to be paid by the applicant is measured by gross receipts or by the number of dwelling units or square feet of commercial or industrial buildings constructed as provided in this chapter, or by the number of vehicles used or other computation, count or similar criteria, the applicant shall estimate the gross receipts or number of bedrooms and dwelling units or number of square feet of commercial or industrial buildings constructed, or the number of vehicles to be used or other criteria, respectively, for the period to be covered by the license to be issued. Such estimate, if accepted by the collector as reasonable, shall be used in determining the amount of license tax to be paid by the applicant; provided, however, the amount of the license tax so determined shall be tentative only, and such person shall, within thirty days after the expiration of the period for which such license was issued, furnish the collector with a sworn statement, upon a form furnished by the collector, showing the actual gross receipts or number of dwelling units or square feet of commercial or industrial buildings constructed, or number of vehicles or other criteria, respectively, during the period of such license, and the license tax for such period shall be finally ascertained and paid on the basis of such actual gross receipts, number of bedrooms and dwelling units or square feet or number of vehicles or other criteria, as the case may be, after deducting from the payment found to be due, the amount paid at the time such first license was issued.

B. The collector shall not issue to any such person another license for the same, or any other business, until such person shall have furnished to the collector the sworn statement and paid the license tax as required in this section.”

Section 3. Section 5.04.120 of Chapter 5.04 of Title 5 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby revoked and replaced as follows:

“License—Renewal

In all cases, the applicant for the renewal of a license shall submit to the collector for his or her guidance in ascertaining the amount of the license tax to be paid by the applicant, a sworn statement, upon a form to be provided by the collector, setting forth such information concerning the applicant’s business during the preceding year (or such other period as may be applicable if the license tax period is less than one year) as may be required by the collector to enable the collector to ascertain the amount of the license tax to be paid by said applicant pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. Such form shall also include a signed affirmation by the applicant that the business will not be an illegal or unlawful business or practice, and that it will not furnish or provide any service, good, or product that is illegal or prohibited under the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of California, the federal and state constitutions, this Code, or any other applicable law, ordinance, rule or regulation.”

Section 4. Findings. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes issues business licenses for businesses doing business within its boundaries. The City currently has not established any express provision forbidding a business to open its operations in the City or continue to operate in the City if the business conducted violates City, state or federal law. Because of the lack of such provision, medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops could be established in the City at any time unless this ordinance is immediately adopted. The establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City, in violation of federal law, has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and to risk the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public. Further, public officials and employees are put at risk for being co-conspirators if required to issue business licenses to businesses whose activities violate federal law. Thus, it is urgent that the City adopt this ordinance requiring that all applicants affirm that their business will not conduct activities that are illegal under the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, the laws of the State of California, or the laws of the United States of America, and clarifying that business licenses do not authorize the conduct of unlawful businesses or activities. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby finds that there exists a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare requiring this change in the business license provisions; further hereby finds that this ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety; hereby declares the facts constituting the urgency; and passes this ordinance by at least a four-fifths vote of the City Council. Accordingly, this measure is adopted immediately upon introduction pursuant to Government Code Section 36934 and shall take effect immediately pursuant to Government Code Section 36937(b).

Section 5. The City Council declares that, should any provision, section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance be rendered or declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective by any final action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases and words of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each provision, section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more provisions, sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases or words be declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective.

Section 6. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places in the City within fifteen (15) days after its passage, in accordance with the provisions of Section 36933 of the Government Code. The City Clerk shall further certify to the adoption and posting of this Ordinance, and shall cause this Ordinance and its certification, together with proof of posting, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of the Council of this City.

Section 7. This Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect immediately upon adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this _______ day of October, 2006.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

______________________________

MAYOR

ATTEST:

__________________________________

CITY CLERK

I, CAROLYNN PETRU, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is true and correct copy of Ordinance No. ___U approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at a meeting thereof held on the _____ day of October, 2006.

__________________________________

CITY CLERK

APPROVED AS TO FORM:



CAROL W. LYNCH, CITY ATTORNEY

ORDINANCE NO. ___-U

AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, STORES, OR CO-OPS IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS OF URGENCY

WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is responsible for adopting and implementing land use regulations within its boundaries; and

WHEREAS, in 1996, the California voters adopted Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act (“Prop 215”), decriminalizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes, which was augmented by the state legislature in 2004 and codified at Section 11362.5 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code.

WHEREAS, widespread implementation of Prop 215 was delayed due to several ensuing court cases challenging its validity; and

WHEREAS, the California Supreme Court has stated that Prop 215 makes the possession of marijuana for medical purposes noncriminal (People v. Mower, 28 Cal.4th 457 (2002)), however, the federal courts have not recognized such a medical necessity exception under federal law (United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyer’s Cooperative, 121 S. Ct. 1711 (2001)); and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the federal Commerce Clause powers gave Congress the authority to enact the Controlled Substances Act, which bans, among other things, the cultivation, use and transfer of marijuana for noncommercial purposes even though that cultivation, use and transfer occurs completely within the State of California, so that the federal ban covers marijuana cultivated, used or transferred pursuant to Prop 215, however, the Court did not expressly invalidate Prop 215 (Raich v. Ashcroft, 125 S. Ct. 2195 (2005)); and

WHEREAS, the City has not yet established any express criteria permanently banning or regulating the establishment, location or scope of operations for medical marijuana dispensary, store, or co-op uses; and

WHEREAS, at least two neighboring cities recently discovered that a medical marijuana dispensary was established within each of their jurisdictions; and

WHEREAS, with the expansion of medical marijuana dispensaries in other cities, it is foreseeable that a medical marijuana dispensary may seek to establish its business within the boundaries of the City; and

WHEREAS, cities have experienced adverse secondary impacts to the public peace, health, safety and welfare, such as an increase in thefts and robberies around medical marijuana dispensaries in support of illegal drug commerce; and

WHEREAS, the City Council is concerned that the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City before the City has enacted a permanent ban on such facilities or imposed appropriate restrictive regulations has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and to risk the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public, and that it is therefore urgent that the City study the options available regarding enacting a permanent ban on such facilities or imposing appropriate restrictive regulation on medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops to prevent the adverse impacts that may result from the unregulated establishment, placement and operation of such uses in the City; and

WHEREAS, given the time required for the planning commission to review this issue and report to the City Council, it is foreseeable that operators of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, co-ops, and others could submit applications for such uses and/or proceed with the development of medical marijuana facilities, which may be incompatible with the result of this planning process, and before appropriate regulations and safeguards are in place; and

WHEREAS, this ordinance is presented as an urgency ordinance because the above-referenced facts increase the possibility of the unregulated development of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City, and is, therefore, necessary for preserving the public peace, health, or safety;

NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Interim Prohibition on Marijuana Dispensaries, Stores, and Co-ops. No marijuana dispensary, store, or co-op, intended to provide marijuana for medicinal or any other purpose, shall locate, commence, obtain license for or be entitled by the City, in any zone, or any parcel, or at any place, public or private within the City. For purpose of this interim ordinance the term “marijuana dispensary, store, or co-op” shall be broadly and liberally interpreted to mean and include any location, structure, facility, vehicle, residence, or similar to the same used, in full or in part, as a place at or in which marijuana is sold, traded, exchanged, bartered for in any way, made available, located, stored, placed, or cultivated, including any of the foregoing if used in connection with the delivery of marijuana.

Section 2. No Conflict with State Law. This interim ordinance shall in no way limit qualified individuals’ right to possess, use, or cultivate marijuana for their own medicinal purposes as is presently authorized by the laws of the State of California as set forth in the applicable provisions of the Health and Safety Code. However, this interim ordinance shall not be interpreted as an opinion on the conflict between California’s medical marijuana laws and the Federal Controlled Substances Act.

Section 3. CEQA Compliance. The City Council hereby finds that it can be seen with certainty that this urgency ordinance has no likelihood of causing a significant negative effect on the environment and accordingly both the City Council’s action of adopting this ordinance and the effects derivative from that adoption are found to be exempt from the application of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 C.C.R. 15061(b)(3)). This finding is premised on the fact that the adoption of this urgency interim ordinance will maintain the current environmental conditions arising from the current land use regulatory structure as adopted by the City without change or alteration.

Section 4. Authority. The City Council adopts this interim urgency ordinance, effective immediately, prohibiting the establishment of any marijuana dispensary, store, or co-op, as defined herein, in any zoning district of the City pursuant to the authority set forth in California Government Code Section 65858.

Section 5. Direction to Staff. The City Council hereby directs staff to promptly refer to the Planning Commission for its input and recommendation on amendments to the City’s Development Code.

Section 6. Moratorium term. This Ordinance shall expire, and the moratorium established hereby shall terminate, forty-five (45) days after the date of adoption unless extended by the City Council, at a regularly noticed public hearing, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858. The City Clerk’s office shall undertake all actions legally necessary to extend this interim ordinance in the event the studies and reports desired by this City Council will not be concluded on or before the forty-fifth day subsequent to the adoption of this interim ordinance.

Section 7. Findings. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is responsible for adopting and implementing land use regulations within its boundaries. The City currently has not established any express criteria permanently banning or regulating the establishment, location or scope of operations for medical marijuana dispensary, store, or co-op uses. The establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops within the City has the potential to cause adverse impacts to surrounding development and to risk the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and the general public. Such land uses could be established in the City at any time unless this ordinance is immediately adopted. This City Council hereby determines that it does not want such facilities established within the boundaries of the City during consideration by the Planning Commission of whether to adopt a permanent ban or some other restrictive regulation designed to protect public health, safety and welfare. Allowing marijuana dispensaries, stores, or co-ops to establish within the City before the Planning Commission and the City Council have considered this matter would be a failure to adequately govern and protect the peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The City’s staff will immediately refer this matter to the Planning Commission. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby finds that there exists a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare requiring this moratorium on marijuana dispensaries, stores, and co-ops pursuant to Government Code Section 65858; further hereby finds that this ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety; hereby declares the facts constituting the urgency; and passes this ordinance by at least a four-fifths vote of the City Council. Accordingly, this measure is adopted immediately upon introduction pursuant to Government Code Section 36934 and shall take effect immediately pursuant to Government Code Section 36937(b).

Section 8. The City Council declares that, should any provision, section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance be rendered or declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective by any final action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases and words of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each provision, section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more provisions, sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases or words be declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective.

Section 9. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places in the City within fifteen (15) days after its passage, in accordance with the provisions of Section 36933 of the Government Code. The City Clerk shall further certify to the adoption and posting of this Ordinance, and shall cause this Ordinance and its certification, together with proof of posting, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of the Council of this City.

Section 10. This Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect immediately upon adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this _______ day of October, 2006.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

______________________________

MAYOR

ATTEST:

__________________________________

CITY CLERK

I, CAROLYNN PETRU, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is true and correct copy of Ordinance No. ___U approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at a meeting thereof held on the _____ day of October, 2006.

__________________________________

CITY CLERK

APPROVED AS TO FORM:



CAROL W. LYNCH, CITY ATTORNEY