I support the appeal to disallow retail cannabis sales and add the following comment: When the classrooms at St Joseph school are in use, you can smell the smoke in the classrooms from people in or around the cannabis facility smoking it. The facility is way too close to the school and should not be there The City rules for the dispensary call for 600 feet of clearance it and a school and it is within about 30 feet which isn't far enough. converting the facility to retail use will create a much higher density of cannabis users which will exacerbate the problem; consequently, I an against using it for the retail dispensing of cannabis.
Sincerely,
Ronald Costa, Parishioner
I am a Catholic Mother of three young children. I have been told they are planning to reopen St Joseph’s School. The closure is only TEMPORARY. If this Marijuana Dispensaries, I will be forced to find another Catholic School. Why would I pay money to expose my children to Marijuana sales? We don’t even allow adds for cigarettes or alcohol, on T.V. billboards, magazines etc. This makes no sense to me.
I support the modification to the CUP at 1625 Del Paso Blvd. The applicants have continually demonstrated their commitment to the district and to Sacramento. Their plans to improve the building at 1625 Del Paso and ultimately have a cannabis retail business at the site would increase spending in the area and tax revenue to the city. With the City Council granting 10 new retail licenses for CORE participants, having a CUP at this building will provide an excellent opportunity for an equity applicant to move in and be ready to operate in a great location near complementary businesses such as King Cong Brewing and Shift Coffee. Please deny the appeals and allow the modification to the CUP.
Elsa Romo
(916)289-6156
Sean Loloee, Sean Loloee for City Council 2020
about 4 years ago
I support the appeals filed by the representatives of St. Joseph Catholic Church and I do NOT support the establishment of a cannabis dispensary at 1625 Del Paso Blvd. Please read attached letter for more details.
I’m writing to support this appeal. I’m a recent resident of north Sacramento, a parent and studying a masters in Public health. I am baffled at what the city has allowed in North Sacramento. In public health studies around the world there is evidence that shows that having establishments like smoke shops and dispensaries close to schools makes it more likely for youth to consider using, why? Simply because of exposure in their community. So to have a dispensary within 25 feet of a school has me thinking what is the real purpose behind the intention of the people behind these plans? Is it to bring business to the community and step on whomever it takes to make those profits. The plans that come into this community need to be thoughtful to those that live here, just because they tend to not speak up doesn’t mean they don’t care. in north Sacramento We deserve to have a good quality of life. The plans proposed go against the recommendations of public health and against health equity.
I am writing today to oppose this appeal in support of Mitsu Miyagi and Greg Vaughn. I have personally known both men for many years. They are positive role models, have good family values, and great examples of community members. For most of their lives, they have given back to the community in only positive ways and always do so with good intentions. Thank you for your time.
I am astounded that this racist proposal has gone this far. Did someone not notice that the pot parlor is virtually in the lap of St Joseph’s Catholic community? For 95 years they have served North Sacramento in too many ways to enumerate. Now they serve primarily poor, Hispanics, undocumented. St. Joseph’s is a beacon in a very hard scrabble area. Why are they being picked on? They already have an active massage parlor within feet of their much used multi purpose room on the school grounds. Try putting this near the mayor’s place of worship or Holy Spirit in Land Park. As for the school, when Bishop Francis Quinn was alive, he felt it important to keep 7 inner city schools going. His SUCCEED program did that. People are actively trying to open the school again. How can they possibly market the school with a massage parlor on one side and a retail pot parlor on the other? This proposal is blatant religious and ethnic bigotry.
This matter is a simple matter of equity. As we are in the middle of a national conversation about race and equity, let's look at this proposal. Would this be allowed in whiter, more affluent areas of Sacramento? How many dispensaries are located in North Natomas, River Park, the Pocket, or Curtis Park? Why is that? The over-concentration of these businesses is a new form of red-lining. Have we learned nothing from out past? BLACK LIVES MATTER. Sacramento is becoming increasingly separated into the haves and the have-nots. If these businesses are so good and healthy for communities, why are they concentrated in low-income areas? Why does District 1 have ZERO dispensaries? Do the wealthier and whiter children in those areas have more of a right to a quality neighborhood? Each area of the city should have an equal number of these businesses. The city council established a cap for a reason. Those some reasons should also be used in setting a cap in each council district.
I support the appeal on 1625. We have over 2.2 million sq ft of cannabis in d2. Why on earth would a dispensary be allowed on our business corridor and 22' from St. Josephs? This church and school and ball field are very important assets in this area. Not only are they long time property owners, supporters of the Hispanic community and all other community members in this area but they are good neighbors. They have beautiful grounds that are meticulously cared for - no litter, manicured lawns and trees. This Catholic church has been DISCARDED by the applicant. The community has been discarded by the applicant. The district has been discarded by the planning commission. Allen Warren changed the prohibited business list for Del Paso with NO community outreach. In a back room deal - he deceived the PBID director and had him agree to allowing smoke shops instead of prohibiting them. Mr. Warren's reasoning was a "high end" cigar shop at 1625 Del Paso BLVD. This is not a cigar shop.
I support the appeal to disallow retail cannabis sales and add the following comment: When the classrooms at St Joseph school are in use, you can smell the smoke in the classrooms from people in or around the cannabis facility smoking it. The facility is way too close to the school and should not be there The City rules for the dispensary call for 600 feet of clearance it and a school and it is within about 30 feet which isn't far enough. converting the facility to retail use will create a much higher density of cannabis users which will exacerbate the problem; consequently, I an against using it for the retail dispensing of cannabis.
Sincerely,
Ronald Costa, Parishioner
I am a Catholic Mother of three young children. I have been told they are planning to reopen St Joseph’s School. The closure is only TEMPORARY. If this Marijuana Dispensaries, I will be forced to find another Catholic School. Why would I pay money to expose my children to Marijuana sales? We don’t even allow adds for cigarettes or alcohol, on T.V. billboards, magazines etc. This makes no sense to me.
I support the modification to the CUP at 1625 Del Paso Blvd. The applicants have continually demonstrated their commitment to the district and to Sacramento. Their plans to improve the building at 1625 Del Paso and ultimately have a cannabis retail business at the site would increase spending in the area and tax revenue to the city. With the City Council granting 10 new retail licenses for CORE participants, having a CUP at this building will provide an excellent opportunity for an equity applicant to move in and be ready to operate in a great location near complementary businesses such as King Cong Brewing and Shift Coffee. Please deny the appeals and allow the modification to the CUP.
Elsa Romo
(916)289-6156
I support the appeals filed by the representatives of St. Joseph Catholic Church and I do NOT support the establishment of a cannabis dispensary at 1625 Del Paso Blvd. Please read attached letter for more details.
I’m writing to support this appeal. I’m a recent resident of north Sacramento, a parent and studying a masters in Public health. I am baffled at what the city has allowed in North Sacramento. In public health studies around the world there is evidence that shows that having establishments like smoke shops and dispensaries close to schools makes it more likely for youth to consider using, why? Simply because of exposure in their community. So to have a dispensary within 25 feet of a school has me thinking what is the real purpose behind the intention of the people behind these plans? Is it to bring business to the community and step on whomever it takes to make those profits. The plans that come into this community need to be thoughtful to those that live here, just because they tend to not speak up doesn’t mean they don’t care. in north Sacramento We deserve to have a good quality of life. The plans proposed go against the recommendations of public health and against health equity.
I am writing today to oppose this appeal in support of Mitsu Miyagi and Greg Vaughn. I have personally known both men for many years. They are positive role models, have good family values, and great examples of community members. For most of their lives, they have given back to the community in only positive ways and always do so with good intentions. Thank you for your time.
I am astounded that this racist proposal has gone this far. Did someone not notice that the pot parlor is virtually in the lap of St Joseph’s Catholic community? For 95 years they have served North Sacramento in too many ways to enumerate. Now they serve primarily poor, Hispanics, undocumented. St. Joseph’s is a beacon in a very hard scrabble area. Why are they being picked on? They already have an active massage parlor within feet of their much used multi purpose room on the school grounds. Try putting this near the mayor’s place of worship or Holy Spirit in Land Park. As for the school, when Bishop Francis Quinn was alive, he felt it important to keep 7 inner city schools going. His SUCCEED program did that. People are actively trying to open the school again. How can they possibly market the school with a massage parlor on one side and a retail pot parlor on the other? This proposal is blatant religious and ethnic bigotry.
This matter is a simple matter of equity. As we are in the middle of a national conversation about race and equity, let's look at this proposal. Would this be allowed in whiter, more affluent areas of Sacramento? How many dispensaries are located in North Natomas, River Park, the Pocket, or Curtis Park? Why is that? The over-concentration of these businesses is a new form of red-lining. Have we learned nothing from out past? BLACK LIVES MATTER. Sacramento is becoming increasingly separated into the haves and the have-nots. If these businesses are so good and healthy for communities, why are they concentrated in low-income areas? Why does District 1 have ZERO dispensaries? Do the wealthier and whiter children in those areas have more of a right to a quality neighborhood? Each area of the city should have an equal number of these businesses. The city council established a cap for a reason. Those some reasons should also be used in setting a cap in each council district.
I support the appeal on 1625. We have over 2.2 million sq ft of cannabis in d2. Why on earth would a dispensary be allowed on our business corridor and 22' from St. Josephs? This church and school and ball field are very important assets in this area. Not only are they long time property owners, supporters of the Hispanic community and all other community members in this area but they are good neighbors. They have beautiful grounds that are meticulously cared for - no litter, manicured lawns and trees. This Catholic church has been DISCARDED by the applicant. The community has been discarded by the applicant. The district has been discarded by the planning commission. Allen Warren changed the prohibited business list for Del Paso with NO community outreach. In a back room deal - he deceived the PBID director and had him agree to allowing smoke shops instead of prohibiting them. Mr. Warren's reasoning was a "high end" cigar shop at 1625 Del Paso BLVD. This is not a cigar shop.