They talked about cannabis for 50 minutes on Tuesday, but in the end Osoyoos Town Council only made one decision – to prohibit any government-run retail outlet and to leave pot sales exclusively to private enterprises.

Council received a thorough 30-page report from Gina MacKay, director of planning and development, outlining the issues council needs to decide. But councillors opted to punt the matter back to administration for more information.

Councillors and administration weren’t sure that the town could prevent a provincially run store in Osoyoos, though MacKay said she believes the town has that power.

The B.C. government says, “Licenses will not be issued without the support of local governments, which will have the authority to make local decisions, based on the needs of their communities.”

“I don’t feel threatened by provincial legislation that may or may not come our way,” said Councillor C.J. Rhodes, speaking in favour of a motion from Councillor Mike Campol to limit cannabis sales to private businesses only.

“If it does, provincial legislation always trumps everything that we do anyway, so I’m prepared to move forward with the recommended option.”

Campol argued that limiting cannabis sales to private businesses only would create opportunities for people within the community and those that might want to come to Osoyoos.

But who should be allowed to operate retail stores was only one in a series of questions town administration sought direction on from council. The other questions went unanswered.

Council voted in March not to hold a public consultation on the issue. Instead the issue has been largely driven by councillors Campol and Rhodes, with other council members sometimes weighing in.

Much of the discussion revolved around the appropriate distance that cannabis retail outlets should be located from schools and parks.

The staff report noted that some communities have taken the lead from Vancouver, which prohibits cannabis sales within 300 metres of a school, community centre, park or another cannabis dispensary.

Campol argued that there should not be a restriction on proximity to parks and he questioned whether the 300-metre restriction on locating near a school made sense in a compact community.

“What’s been suggested with 300-metre proximities, which is essentially a kilometre – math isn’t my best friend – could be that we can’t do anything,” Campol said, referring to the limited amount of commercial zoning.

MacKay corrected him, pointing out that there are 1,000 metres in a kilometre.

Although MacKay’s report included maps showing the areas covered by buffers of 300, 100 and 50 metres, Campol requested mapping showing 150- and 200-metre buffers.

Councillor Jim King agreed that 300 metres is too large a buffer for this community.

“But 100 metres, I will not support,” he said. “It’s too close to a school. Somewhere in the middle, I think, has to be looked at very seriously,” King said.

Rhodes suggested an irregular buffer, in which the distance from the elementary school might be 300 metres in the west, but a smaller distance in the direction of the lake.

But Barry Romanko, town chief administrative officer, cautioned against this approach. It could result in situations of property owners questioning why their property is outside the buffer zone while someone else’s property is in, he said.

Having the edge of the buffer a consistent distance from the centre of the schoolyard would take the anomalies out of the decision if the town had to defend it in court, Romanko said.

Council also debated whether having retail outlets close to parks would result in increased consumption in parks. Currently consumption of alcohol and cigarettes is prohibited in parks, but there are frequent violations of these bylaws.

Rhodes argued that people who buy liquor or cigarettes don’t necessarily consume them when they step out of the store.

“We have to have a convenience factor for a product that will become legal in our country,” he said. “That is not even in the same hemisphere as smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol.”

Rhodes argued that there are no restrictions on alcohol and tobacco sales close to a park and that cannabis shouldn’t be singled out.

Campol also argued that business license fees should be set high because it’s not yet known whether the province will provide municipalities with a share of cannabis taxation revenue.

This would help to offset bylaw and police enforcement costs, he said.

Campol noted that one reason for not wanting provincial stores is that the province wouldn’t have to pay for a business license, so the town wouldn’t receive this revenue.

Council decided not to touch the core recommendation of MacKay’s report – that called for “site-specific zoning” for cannabis businesses, as opposed to the usual practice of requiring businesses to locate in the appropriate existing zones.

With site-specific zoning, council would consider the merits of a location on a case-by-case basis and that property would be rezoned to permit cannabis sales.

Campol disagreed with site-specific zoning, because of the cost and the need for a public hearing each time.

Rhodes said he didn’t feel comfortable making a decision on this and he wanted more information.

“I make decisions based on the information that I have,” he said. “I know it stalls that and it makes it look like we’re not moving forward with it. Site-specific does have some benefits – not all of it – there’s pros and cons for everything, but I’d like to know those details.”

MacKay and Romanko agreed to bring back more information.

“We’re kind of getting our feet wet today and looking at all of the issues,” said Mayor Sue McKortoff.

Romanko said that despite pressing council for decisions, there is really no hurry.

“Oct. 17 will come, but that’s not to say that the doors have to be open on Oct. 17,” he said, referring to the date when recreational cannabis will become legal.

RICHARD McGUIRE

Osoyoos Times