Extract Compliance Requirements From Municipal Cannabis Dispensary Permit Application

Skill: Cannabis Dispensary Permit Compliance Requirements Matrix

2. Failure modes the skill is correcting

• Treating the application packet as self-contained and missing requirements imposed only by the municipal code or submission guide.
• Following the form when it conflicts with the ordinance instead of treating the ordinance as controlling authority.
• Collapsing scoring criteria, eligibility criteria, completeness items, and post-issuance conditions into one undifferentiated list.
• Missing sequencing risk where a separate approval, license, or renewal date can lapse before the municipal process is complete.
• Failing to identify technical-document defects, including missing professional certifications, bonding support, or required calculations.
• Omitting ongoing obligations that are conditions of maintaining the permit after issuance.
• Describing deficiencies without assigning priority, remedy, and timing.

3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply

• The municipal code is the controlling source for substantive requirements; the submission guide and form are procedural aids unless they conflict with the code, in which case the code controls.
• Where the form and code diverge, identify the conflict expressly and treat the code-based rule as the operative requirement for compliance analysis.
• Requirements may arise from multiple sources: ordinance, submission guide, application form, referenced attachments, and cross-referenced municipal or state standards.
• Distinguish:
  • eligibility or threshold requirements,
  • submission-completeness requirements,
  • evaluation or scoring criteria,
  • and ongoing permit conditions.
• Ongoing conditions are not merely application items; they continue after issuance and may create enforcement, suspension, or revocation exposure if not maintained.
• Technical site, occupancy, or plan requirements should be checked against the cited municipal and fire/building methodology, not against a shorthand figure in the application.
• If a requirement depends on a professional seal, license, or certification, treat the absence of that credential as a document defect, not a substantive disagreement.
• If the packet references a separate license, registration, or authorization with its own expiration or renewal process, treat that as a distinct timeline that can affect municipal readiness.
• If the packet includes equity, mentorship, or program participation commitments, treat their timing as potentially overlapping with renewal or continued-operation obligations.

4. Analytical scaffolds

1. Enumerate the requirements universe before analysis:

   • form-based requirements,
   • ordinance-based requirements,
   • submission-guide requirements,
   • cross-referenced attachment requirements,
   • and ongoing post-issuance obligations. If only one source category is in scope, state that expressly.

2. For each requirement, capture:

   • requirement description,
   • source authority and citation,
   • whether the source is the form, the code, the guide, or a combination,
   • current status,
   • supporting document or omission,
   • remediation step,
   • timing or sequencing note.

3. Apply a uniform status scale:

   • Complete
   • In Progress
   • Gap
   • Conflict

4. Apply a uniform severity scale for each entry:

   • Critical
   • High
   • Medium
   • Low Use severity to indicate whether the item blocks filing, threatens eligibility, affects scoring, or creates post-issuance exposure.

5. For every legal proposition relied on, cite the controlling authority by name and section as reflected in the source set or generally recognized municipal/permitting authority.

6. For each Gap or Conflict, identify:

   • the operative rule,
   • the interacting document or requirement,
   • the consequence if not cured,
   • and the concrete remediation path.

7. Separate the matrix into at least these functional buckets:

   • filing completeness,
   • substantive eligibility,
   • evaluation/scoring considerations,
   • and continuing compliance conditions.

5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships

• Map any separate approval, license, or registration against the municipal application timeline and flag lapse risk where one process may expire before the other finishes.
• Flag any renewal deadline that intersects with mentorship, equity-program, or operational compliance commitments.
• Identify whether a requirement must be satisfied before submission, before scoring, before issuance, or continuously after issuance.
• Where the packet contains a calculation-dependent item, verify that the application uses the governing methodology rather than a proxy or shorthand figure.
• Where a technical exhibit or plan is referenced, check whether a seal, signature, or certification is required at the time of filing or only upon final approval.

6. Output structure conventions

• Produce a requirements matrix in a conventional table format with columns for:
  • requirement,
  • governing source,
  • source type,
  • status,
  • severity,
  • evidence in packet,
  • deficiency or conflict,
  • remediation action,
  • deadline or trigger.
• Precede the matrix with a short executive summary highlighting:
  • filing blockers,
  • code/form conflicts,
  • ongoing obligations,
  • and sequencing risks.
• Include a separate section for authorities and source mapping so the reader can trace each requirement to the municipal code, submission guide, or form.
• Include a dedicated remediation section that lists actions in imperative form, assigns them to the responsible role identified in the packet where possible, and ties each action to a filing, issuance, renewal, or compliance milestone.
• If a requirement is satisfied, say why and cite the supporting exhibit or packet location; if not, state the exact missing element rather than a generic deficiency.
• Keep the matrix comprehensive but avoid duplicating the same requirement under multiple labels unless the source imposes distinct filing, evaluation, and continuing-compliance obligations.