Council Weighs Cannabis Industry Support Amid Economic Strain

The West Hollywood City Council faced a cannabis industry on the brink during its July 7 meeting, debating a pivotal amendment to the marketing agreement with Emerald Village West Hollywood under item E.1. With nearly half of the city’s 12 licensed cannabis businesses struggling—three in receivership and two closed—the council wrestled with funding and policy amid economic distress.

Jay Handal from The Woods highlighted the crisis. “The cannabis industry is hurting… almost 50 percent of the businesses can’t make it right now,” he said, citing a significant tax contribution. “What you’re going to do now is you’re going to break our backs. The reality is simple: the cannabis industry is hurting” he warned. Scott Schmidt from Emerald Village was prepared with data: “We can account for 900 to 980 thousand dollars of additional revenue… since last July,” pointing to global marketing like the ICBC Berlin sponsorship. Steven Post from the Last Prisoner Project added, “We need to continue investing in Emerald Village… education is so needed,” noting Emerald Village’s support of their grassroots campaign to convince governors to grant clemency those imprisoned for previous cannabis offenses.

Staff, led by Director Laura Biery, recommended a five-month extension to December 31, 2025, using $55,627.87 in unspent funds, citing limited data on economic returns. An alternative proposed 11 months to June 30, 2026, with a $200,000 increase (total $446,000), per the staff report. The council also debated a $2% tax rebate, expiring June 30, 2025, costing $390,000 in lost revenue, with staff suggesting a return to 1.5%, while an alternative extended the full rebate. Security patrols, requiring hourly neighborhood checks, faced criticism—Jay Handal called them a “joke”. Lynn Hoopingarner questioned their purpose, saying,”I’d like to speak to the item of security. There’s a dispensary just at the foot of my hill and people buy their product and then they walk up the hill and smoke sitting on my front wall. So i called and asked about the security and their patrols and I was told by the owner that the security is there to patrol for security risks for the business, not to serve public safety. With that in mind I would ask you to revisit the whole security concept: what is it really about, who is it for and who does it serve.”
.

Vice Mayor John Heilman advocated for the 11-month term, 2% rebate, and security repeal, stating, “I don’t think imposing… this obligation to have security people out in the neighborhood makes sense any longer.” Councilmember Lauren Meister proposed a detailed alternative, suggesting, “If our tax says we can charge up to X amount, we don’t have to charge that amount. If we lowered it to the point where they’re getting the same money they’re asking for here on the condition that they put together a BID so that there is a formal marketing agent doing the marketing for all of the businesses as a whole… then as long as there’s a contract, the tax can be at this level until… we have the option of raising that tax back to the maximum level.” She added, “I’m just really tired having staff come back here every four months… let them have the control over their marketing,” advocating for a sustainable BID model. She also recommended increased Block by Block patrols in residential patrols. Councilmember Hang said the city should continue nurturing the industry and opposed the security guard requirement, calling it unnecessary and a waste of resources. He supported the 2% adjustment.

The motion passed: 11 months, $200,000, 2% rebate retroactive to June 30, and security removal, with patrols shifted to city programs.

Written public correspondence reinforced the urgency. Nickon Haddadi of Off The Charts, Amy Pagel of Zen, and Genevieve Morrill of the Chamber urged funding and rebate extensions, with Morrill highlighting patrol burdens. The decision balances economic relief against fiscal caution and give the cannabis sector some breathing room.