by Garth Meyer

The Redondo Beach city council moved forward Tuesday night in its effort to open two cannabis stores in town, on a 4-1 vote. Councilman Scott Behrendt’s “no” came with the request that no stores appear on Artesia Boulevard between Aviation and Inglewood Avenues.

He said it was a “red line” for him, offering to support the project with that caveat.

Tuesday’s vote further set direction for city staff as they draw up an ordinance to make parameters for the stores, such as operating standards, sales tax rate and procedures to apply for a permit. 

At the outset Tuesday,  Dec. 17, Behrendt stated that residents had never directly voted on whether they want retail cannabis in Redondo Beach. He noted that an online poll he conducted drew 370+ responses, the final results showing half of respondents were opposed to cannabis storefronts here. 

“There is not majority support in the community on this, at least in my interactions,” he said. “… Although I’m not personally in favor of it, I do think a reasonable and fair compromise would be what I’ve (requested) about Artesia Boulevard.”

Councilman Todd Loewenstein dismissed Behrendt’s poll.

“An online survey is probably the worst way to gauge public opinion,” he said. “I think it does a disservice. I would never rely on those type of polls.”

In public comment, six cannabis industry operators/representatives spoke, praising and thanking the city council for its work to get to this point.

District PTA Representative Melissa DeChandt gave an opposite view.

“I am a steadfast opponent of storefront cannabis. They normalize youth use. That’s hard, peer-reviewed data. A lot of that data collected in Los Angeles… Let’s not make money off the backs of our youth. It’s not worth it.”

Resident Jim Mueller decried the “parade of cannabis profiteers whispering sweet nothings in the (city council’s) ears… for a relatively paltry amount of tax money that Redondo Beach will get…” 

He said to Councilmen Nils Nehrenheim and Loewenstein, “Why don’t you survey your districts and see what your constituents have to say?”

The stores are projected to bring in between $200,000 and $450,000 per store per year, to the city’s $121 million General Fund (current budget).

Cannabis-interests in attendance also wished happy holidays to the council and made the point that well-run legal shops help remove illegal shops/activity out of the cities that legal stores open in.

Jonatan Cvetko, a member of the city’s cannabis task force formed in 2018 to study the matter, told the council of his change of position, due to the state of the industry, saying it is falling behind on paying taxes, and a public health risk from faulty product testing. 

“This council has not educated the community about the struggles the (cannabis) community has,” he said. “I remain opposed to this, respectfully.”

Council discussion Tuesday included the plausibility of keeping a store off of the stretch of Artesia Boulevard designated by Behrendt. 

Councilman Zein Obagi, Jr., said only a few spots would be possible on the street, which is in his district, suggesting another option could be South Bay Galleria, proposed to be remade into South Bay Social District. 

Councilmember Paige Kaluderovic asked Behrendt specifically what his concern is about the stretch on Artesia.

He answered that it was already oversaturated with similar types of businesses and that Councilman Obagi has worked hard on the effort to revitalize the street.

Kaluderovi said those all were important points. 

“Artesia is a very pointed question,” she said.

Councilman Nehrenheim spoke about how retail cannabis can allow the city better enforcement and compliance for the products sold here.

The tax rate was discussed, with a compromise settled on of 4.5%.

Transfer of permit ownership came up next – with Kaluderovic leaning toward prohibiting it. City Manager Mike Witzansky said to allow it would “maintain quality second operation.”

The council all agreed that whoever gets a permit needs to open a store within two years.

As far as where, they bandied about an earlier idea to require one shop in 90277 and one in 90278. That was decided against, for reasons that two ideal locations may be in the same zip code.

Elizabeth Hause, community services director, said at the conclusion Tuesday an ordinance could be ready to be reviewed Jan. 21 by the council.

Online comments on retail cannabis totaled five: four opposed, one in support.

Mayor Jim Light wrapped up the agenda item, defending the council against criticism that it has not moved fast enough on the subject.

“I think it moved along as expediently as it could,” he said. “Nothing that I did, but the work of staff and the council.”

Behrendt also suggested an area north of Manhattan Beach Boulevard for a possible store, away from residential, away from kids, and near freeways to bring in customers from other cities.

He earlier explained how he came to his conclusion. 

“My residents are against it, for good reasons,” he said. “It potentially sends the wrong signal, normalizes cannabis. Our city is already oversaturated with smoke shops, vape shops, liquor stores… (Notwithstanding), I’m open to a fair and reasonable compromise to allay the concerns of residents regarding cannabis shops in Redondo Beach. Specifically to have no storefront locations in areas frequented by high school and middle school students.”

The path to bring retail cannabis to town got a boost from a 2022 ordinance by the previous city council to allow up to two stores. 

In March, the council will swear-in two new members, due to term limits, and potentially a new mayor. ER