SANFORD — The Sanford City Council is poised to vote Tuesday on an emergency ordinance that would allow the city to enforce laws on home marijuana growing operations.
As well, they’ll hold a public hearing and first reading of on another proposal that addresses standards for cultivation of marijuana for personal medical or recreational use.
If enacted after a public hearing Tuesday evening — emergency ordinances require one reading, rather than two — the first ordinance would allow the city to crack down on medical or recreational marijuana growing operations at multi-family dwellings, said Community Development Director Ian Houseal. Provisions in the emergency proposal spell out that the growing operation not be visible from the street, must be set back 25 feet from the street, and must be surrounded by a six foot tall fence.
“We have a unit in town growing in plain sight, (at) a multi-unit,” said City Councilor Lucas Lanigan, who chairs the city’s marijuana task force. He said that operation, which Houseal explained is located on a roof-top of a multi-unit building, sparked crafting of the proposed ordinances.
The proposed ordinances are aimed only at home cultivation, whether for medical or recreational use.
As the city last year was crafting standards for the cultivation of medical marijuana, home cultivation got overlooked, said Lanigan.
If approved by the City Council, the emergency ordinance would be in effect for 91 days. Houseal said the goal is to then adopt the measure into the city’s zoning codes.
Public hearings on both ordinances will be conducted during the City Council meeting that commences at 6 p.m.. on Tuesday.
The proposed ordinance that sets standards for home growing allows the city to declare the operation a public nuisance if growers don’t comply, or if the growing operation creates odors, smoke, and a host of other impacts that disturb neighbors or public areas, or if the cultivation causes law enforcement to respond more than three times in a one-year time frame.
The proposed standards include that marijuana may be grown on the premises of a single family home and that cultivation at two-family homes and greater or mixed use properties would not be allowed unless the owner resides full-time on the property. Tenants must have written permission from the property owner to cultivate marijuana.
Two portions of the draft standards proposal are to be amended, Houseal and Lanigan say.
Originally, the proposal mandated that the cultivation area not exceed 47 square feet, but is expected to be increased to 120 square feet. As well, the cultivated area must be secured to prevent unauthorized entry. The proposal mandates a 25 foot set back from the street and from lot lines for an outdoor grow, which must be screened from observation by a six foot fence.
For indoor grows, any structures used in cultivation must comply with city electrical and fire codes. The draft proposal spells out that the total wattage of all devices used to aid cultivation must not exceed 1,200 watts, but that would be amended to a requirement for an electrical sub panel instead. As well, the structure must have proper ventilation to prevent mold and to prevent odors or particles from becoming a public nuisance, the proposal states.
Houseal pointed out that there have been a number of fires in the state attributable to marijuana operations — including a fire in a multi unit building in Lewiston, he said.
He said residents may grow marijuana, but that standards must be met to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents and to make sure housing is safe and children aren’t placed at risk. and housing is safe and kids aren’t put at risk.
Structures used must be homes, containing a functioning kitchen and bathroom.
Sale, donating, giving or granting of marijuana from home grows is prohibited under the proposal except as provided under state law.
Both proposals call for fines of $100 to $2,500 per day for non compliance.
— Senior Staff Writer Tammy Wells can be contacted at 324-4444 (local call in Sanford) or 282-1535, ext. 327 or twells@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less