COUNCIL SAYS TOO MUCH UNCERTAINTY TO ENACT PERMANENT REGULATIONS

Whitefish Tables Vote on Medical Marijuana

WHITEFISH -- On Tuesday night, the Whitefish City Council voted
unanimously to table a proposal that would have outlined zoning
regulations and conditional-use permit criteria for medical marijuana
operations within city limits.

It was the second time the council has delayed voting on the
regulations, the first coming at a May 17 meeting. The city currently
has a moratorium on all medical marijuana businesses effective until
June 6, 2011.

The council said it would like to see how the medical marijuana
dilemma plays out in other Montana cities, particularly municipalities
with pending litigation. It also wants City Attorney Mary VanBuskirk
to research the issue further.

"I'm still as confused as I was in May," said Councilor Turner
Askew.

At the same May 17 meeting when it first considered the zoning
regulations, the council voted to extend a moratorium on medical
marijuana businesses. The moratorium had first been adopted on Dec. 7,
2009 as a six-month prohibition. With the time limit about to expire,
the council opted to extend the moratorium for another year.

The council, if it chooses, can again extend the moratorium next June
for one additional year.

From January to April, the Whitefish City-County Planning Board held
workshops and public hearings to plot out suggested zoning regulations
and governing standards for medical marijuana dispensaries, home
caregivers and growing operations within the city.

The planning board concluded that the best areas in town to locate
dispensaries are the WB-2 and WB-4 zoning districts. The WB-2 district
comprises the U.S. Highway 93 commercial strip from Mountain West Bank
to Highway 40, while the WB-4 zone is the business park district
located at the Baker Commons next to the Wave and new Emergency
Services Center.

The planning board recommended that dispensaries be allowed only with
conditional-use permits in these designated zones. And it outlined
certain guidelines, such as a 200-foot buffer from entities such as
schools, libraries and churches.

The recommended plan was passed on to the council, where councilors
voiced multiple concerns, including whether approving something that
is illegal at the federal level violates their oaths of offices,
police worries over enforcement and more.

After lengthy discussion, the council voted at the May 17 meeting to
delay its decision. Then on July 6, with public comment closed, the
council spoke briefly on the matter, reiterating some of its
previously mentioned concerns, before voting to table its decision
until a later date.