Memorandum
Date: March 10, 2026
To: The Honorable Lake County Planning Commission
From: Mireya G. Turner, Community Development Director
Mary Claybon, Senior Planner
Subject: 11:00 A.M. - PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of Ordinance to Amend Chapter 21, Article 27 regarding Commercial Cannabis Regulation
Executive Summary: At the Board meeting on October 7, 2025, the Board received a presentation from Staff regarding the bifurcation of the cannabis regulation update into two portions. The first draft ordinance, included as Attachment A, would make certain amendments to Article 27, where the current cannabis regulations are located, in addition to many other commercial land uses. The department is comfortable proposing the following amendments to qualify for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Common Sense Exemption (Section 15061(b)(3), which allows certain projects to bypass environmental review when there is no reasonable significant impact. The future ordinance would create Article 73, a new chapter of the Zoning Code to include uses exclusive to cannabis. The items included in this draft Ordinance have been approved by the Cannabis Ordinance Task Force, and approved in concept, by the Board of Supervisors. The Planning Commission added recommendations at their meeting on December 11, 2025, and the Agriculture Advisory Committee made further recommendations at their meeting on January 26, 2026. Both sets of recommendations are included at the end of this memorandum.
The table included as Attachment 1 lists the amendments to Article 27 for the following topics:
• Setbacks from off-site residences
• Maximum canopy
• Applicant and Property Owner Identification and Background Checks
• Operating Hours
• 10-year Permit Duration and Renewal
• Opt Out and Reduced Canopy Options
• Exclusion Areas
• Farmland Protection Zone - development standard
• Riparian Setbacks
• Annual Performance Review - Reports and Process
• Incomplete and Abandoned Applications
• Setbacks from hemp cultivation
• METRC - Track and Trace Tags
• Other nonsubstantive amendments, including grammar corrections and removal of Community Development Department from Background Check Evaluation to reflect current process
New text is identified in bold, with removed text identified by strikethrough. To manage the overall size of the table, sections removed in their entirety have been described without including the text.
At the Planning Commission meeting on December 11, 2025, the following recommendations received consensus.
• Increase recommended setbacks as follows:
|
Setback |
Proposed by Staff |
Planning Commission Recommendation |
|
|
|
From Offsite Residence(s): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
• The Planning Commission should retain annual review of the cannabis permits in summary format; with CDD Staff determining the timeline and process.
• Remove “make every effort” from description of Staff using the same method as the State to evaluate cannabis canopy during an annual compliance monitoring site visit.
• Require anchor points for greenhouses within the FPZ - Farmland Protection Zone; prohibit concrete slabs, and deny the project if anchor points are not feasible.
• Require background checks for all employees, not just full-time employees. (This recommendation received consensus, but was not a unanimous vote.)
• Add requirement on Opt Out and Reduced Canopy filings to be postmarked no later than June 1st, and required to use the CDD form.
• Request the Board of Supervisors reopen consideration of the “FPZ” Farmland Protection Zone Exclusion Zone.
At its meeting on January 26, 2025, the Agriculture Advisory Committee made the following recommendation:
• Setbacks: Support a setback that will minimize impacts to offsite residences. Explore more quantitative data, such as the inverse square principle, starting with an 800 ft setback for 10,000 sf canopy of outdoor, and increasing from there.
Applying the inverse square approach would result in the following setbacks, as shown with a baseline of 200 ft and 800 ft from a 10,000 sf canopy. Public input received regarding the inverse square approach is also attached to this agenda item.
|
Setback (from Offsite Residence(s) |
Inverse Square (Baseline: 200’ setback for 10,000 sf canopy |
Inverse Square (Baseline: 800’ for 10,000 sf canopy) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recommended Action: Staff requests consideration of the draft ordinance with a public hearing. Should the Board have no proposed amendments, Staff recommends the first reading of the ordinance, to be read in title only, and advancement of the ordinance to the next available agenda for second reading and possible adoption.