Auburn Cannabis Community Workshop - September 18, 2025

The City of Auburn held a community workshop on September 18, 2025, from approximately 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM to gather public input on the potential legalization of retail cannabis businesses within city limits. The workshop included an interactive presentation using Slido for real-time polling, discussions on benefits and concerns, and exploration of possible locations and regulatory approaches. The meeting was led by city staff, with members of the city council present as observers.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Several attendees expressed strong support for retail cannabis, citing potential tax revenue, economic growth, job opportunities, and the ability to capture revenue currently lost to delivery services from Sacramento and neighboring jurisdictions.
• One audience member argued that if Auburn does not allow retail, the county will likely approve it just outside city limits, causing the city to miss out on all related benefits.
• Another attendee highlighted that dispensaries in Sacramento have been excellent neighbors, with quick customer turnover and minimal traffic or safety issues.
• Concerns raised included traffic congestion (especially near highway 49 and high street), potential for poorly run operators, proximity to schools, and the need for appropriate locations away from residential areas.
• Multiple speakers emphasized that modern dispensaries are highly regulated and secure, contrasting with older perceptions.

Discussion Items

• Background and Current Regulations: Staff reviewed Auburn's current cannabis allowances: medical delivery is permitted, and indoor cultivation (up to six plants) is allowed with a police chief permit, though no permits have been issued. The council has been exploring retail since 2023, with formal direction sought in January 2024, and a draft ordinance discussed in August 2025 leading to this public outreach.
• Potential Benefits: Real-time polling showed participants listed benefits including additional tax revenue (projected to be the city's fourth-largest source), grant opportunities (e.g., Grass Valley and Nevada City received $3 million each for community projects), tourism draw, and new business growth.
• Potential Concerns: Participants cited traffic, poorly run businesses, inappropriate locations (near schools or parks), and the need for strict regulation. Mitigation ideas included limited operator numbers, security plans, away-from-school buffers, and transparent operations.
• Location Preferences: The city identified several possible zones: Highway 49 corridor, downtown, Old Town, and High Street. Audience input favored highly visible areas along Highway 49, with some suggesting the Save Mart shopping center or locations near the freeway for easy access. There was disagreement on whether to place dispensaries in tourist hubs like Old Town.
• Number of Licenses: Staff compared neighboring cities: Grass Valley uses a per‑capita formula (one license per 7,500 people), Nevada City allows one, Colfax and Plasterville allow up to three. The audience leaned toward one or two licenses initially.
• Selection Process and Community Partnership: Options discussed include first‑come, first‑served versus a competitive application process. Participants expressed interest in requiring dispensaries to contribute to community development, security, and local funds.
• Type of License: Both recreational (21+) and medicinal (with state ID and doctor's note) were considered. Medicinal carries a 600‑foot buffer from schools, which may affect location choices.

Key Outcomes

• The workshop was the first of two public meetings; the second is scheduled for September 24, 2025, at 6:00 PM (online).
• An online survey remains open until approximately one week before the October city council meeting; as of the workshop, 166 unique responses had been received.
• Staff will present the outreach results to the city council in October, requesting direction to draft a cannabis ordinance (or to continue public input).
• No votes were taken; the meeting was purely informational and intended to gauge community sentiment.