Chillicothe — Council had their last session of the year, with only a little excitement – passing the 2025 budget but failing to table the ‘cannabis moratorium.’
Council approved the $27M budget after three readings, without needing a special session after the final regular session of the year as they sometime do…but that was after a special session last Monday solely for the purpose of giving the ordinance a second reading.
City Auditor Krystal Spetnagel said the 2025 budget was “pretty normal” and comparable to previous years. She said they have about $27M of projected revenue for the general fund, which equals projected expenses – so the budget is balanced, as required by state law.
Spetnagel said there are many big projects built into the budget, with capital projects totaling almost $30M. That includes $20M for the sewer plant remodel. It has been under way for a few years, but it should be finishing up in 2025, and the city will begin paying it off.
Hear her in her own words in my brief video interview with her on the subject.
Unlike previous sessions, only a few people showed up in the audience, presumably regarding the proposed cannabis dispensary moratorium. Two spoke on it, with regular speaker John Thacker saying that he was disappointed that its revision apparently involved adding only “temporary” to “moratorium” its title.
Council also acknowledged that the change was only on the agenda and not in the ordinance, so they voted to add the word to the actual language.
Thacker said he doubted the ordinance is really even needed, and that council members risk being voted out next year.
Under old business, council member Dustin Proehl also said he felt the ordinance was unnecessary, and motioned to have the item tabled – though that have would put it on pause for only the current council session. (Council voted to not read it last time, which had the same effect.) That motion failed 3:4 with two members absent, so it will be at third and final reading in the next council session.
Law Director Anna Villareal was asked to speak on it, but said simply that the ordinance would regulate only the location of future cannabis dispensaries (like not close to schools), and not what was sold inside.
I spoke with her and an assistant law director after the council session, and they pointed out that the issue is not well understood: that there are two kinds of cannabis / THC state regulations, the city ordinance would affect only one type, there is only one dispensary of that type within city limits and no requests for more, and that the state already prohibits that type within 500 feet of a school, church, library, or park.
I hope to speak with Villareal more after Christmas to help clarify the situation. Council had proposed this legislation in response to her request for it.
Most of the council session was recorded in two parts on YouTube and one part on Facebook, with a brief computer outage…but almost completely without sound.
