6.7 26-07651:00 P.M. - SECOND READING - Consideration of Adoption Ordinance to Amend Chapter 21, Articles 8, 18, 19, 27, and 68 of the Lake County Code regarding Commercial Cannabis Regulations
Your Board continued this agenda item on March 10, April 7, June 2, June 23, July 14, July 21 of this year.
Attorneys for Tom Lajcik and Margaux Kambara submitted public comment on their behalf about the amendments to the county’s cannabis ordinance in a letter, addressed to your Board, dated March 6, 2026.
In this letter, attorneys explained that the cannabis ordinance amendments are not exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act review as the County claims.
Environmental review is required.
Section 7 of the draft ordinance before your Board today to states, “The amendments modify the ordinance to increase restrictions . . . The general exemption applies in this instance because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus are not subject to CEQA. ”
The amendments do not increase restrictions:
• Background checks will no longer be required for all employees, contrary to a law enforcement recommendation given to the Cannabis Ordinance Task Force.
• The amendments remove requirements for applicants that are corporations, non-profit mutual benefit corporations, cannabis cooperative associations, limited liability corporations, limited partnerships, and trusts.
• An amendment proposes removing the current 10-year permit expiration and renewal requirements.
• The amendments loosen restrictions on construction times, allowing construction activities to occur two hours earlier (7 a.m. – 7 p.m.) Monday through Friday.
• The amendments increase Operational Hours by 35 hours each week for retail sale and delivery of cannabis goods .
• An amendment will allow cultivation operational hours to increase without restrictions: “… with flexibility to operate during hours essential for planting and harvesting periods.”
• An amendment proposes reduced frequency of compliance site monitoring visits.
• An amendment reduced the setback from a watercourse type.
The County’s original cannabis ordinance did not have CEQA review. This proposed cannabis ordinance, presented as amendments to the existing ordinance, does not adequately address cannabis issues such as cannabis odor. These amendments require environmental review.
28 July 2026
Good afternoon, Chair Rasmussen and Supervisors,
Your Board continued this agenda item on March 10, April 7, June 2, June 23, July 14, July 21 of this year.
Attorneys for Tom Lajcik and Margaux Kambara submitted public comment on their behalf about the amendments to the county’s cannabis ordinance in a letter, addressed to your Board, dated March 6, 2026.
In this letter, attorneys explained that the cannabis ordinance amendments are not exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act review as the County claims.
Environmental review is required.
Section 7 of the draft ordinance before your Board today to states, “The amendments modify the ordinance to increase restrictions . . . The general exemption applies in this instance because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus are not subject to CEQA. ”
The amendments do not increase restrictions:
• Background checks will no longer be required for all employees, contrary to a law enforcement recommendation given to the Cannabis Ordinance Task Force.
• The amendments remove requirements for applicants that are corporations, non-profit mutual benefit corporations, cannabis cooperative associations, limited liability corporations, limited partnerships, and trusts.
• An amendment proposes removing the current 10-year permit expiration and renewal requirements.
• The amendments loosen restrictions on construction times, allowing construction activities to occur two hours earlier (7 a.m. – 7 p.m.) Monday through Friday.
• The amendments increase Operational Hours by 35 hours each week for retail sale and delivery of cannabis goods .
• An amendment will allow cultivation operational hours to increase without restrictions: “… with flexibility to operate during hours essential for planting and harvesting periods.”
• An amendment proposes reduced frequency of compliance site monitoring visits.
• An amendment reduced the setback from a watercourse type.
The County’s original cannabis ordinance did not have CEQA review. This proposed cannabis ordinance, presented as amendments to the existing ordinance, does not adequately address cannabis issues such as cannabis odor. These amendments require environmental review.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Margaux Kambara
Lake County Resident