SeaTac has taken a “legal time-out” from allowing medical marijuana facilities in the city.
The SeaTac City Council unanimously passed a moratorium on Medical marijuana dispensaries and collective gardens after concerns over the conflict between new state law and federal law were raised.

According to City Attorney Mary Mirante Bartolo, SeaTac has not received any applications for a license nor does the city currently have zoning to accommodate such an operation. Bartolo also pointed out that the approval or denial of a license could result in legal repercussions for the city, as the state and federal laws currently conflict.

Bartolo therefore suggested a moratorium until the state Legislature has a chance to revisit the existing laws.
"Most districts I've looked at so far have taken the moratorium. Doing the moratorium puts us in a legal time-out," Bartolo explained.

The only stipulation, Bartolo pointed out, is that after adoption, a public hearing regarding the moratorium would need to be held within 60 days. The moratorium would then be valid for six months, starting from the day it passed. The council would be able to renew the moratorium as it ran out, but each renewal would require another public hearing.

"I think the moratorium is a good choice," said councilman Rick Forschler.

Other council members offered their support as well, but with caveats.

"I wish [the Governor] had vetoed the entire thing so they could start [the legislation] over," said Councilman Tony Anderson. "This is just the beginning, and it's going to continue to be challenging."

Members of the community also added their own comments. "The moratorium would allow us to think about this in a logical manner, to get the best possible endgame," SeaTac council candidate Michael Kovacs said.

The council also accepted a bill to put the elected mayor government issue on the ballot this November for SeaTac residents. Though it passed unanimously, many individuals stepped forward, speaking both for and against the measure.

Barry Ladenburg, also running for a council seat, said, "Switching to an elected mayor won't necessarily be more cost effective. The accountability will be exactly the same as it is right now."

He also responded to an earlier comment by elected mayor supporter Earl Gipson, regarding outside influences in the city elections:
"If you have a strong mayor, you're going to have much more outside interests than you do now," Ladenburg said.

Gipson also shared his comments with the council. "How is the election of a mayor, how is our democracy, dangerous? An elected mayor must please 51 percent of the electorate versus the four council members the appointed city manager must please."