Ron Strider
Well-Known Member
"There are people in this room that have been waiting 20, 30 years for this."
Mike Lewis with the Inland Cannabis Farmers' Association presented his case for commercial cannabis to the Butte County Board of Supervisors, but his pleas, along with those of more than a dozen other marijuana advocates, were to no avail.
It was a packed house, as the board approved a motion Tuesday to temporarily ban commercial cannabis activity, with the exception of deliveries coming from out of the area to Butte County residents. This is keeping with the status quo, but the board was asked to give staff direction to draft an ordinance either banning or regulating commercial activity since the state will have the ability to start issuing licenses Jan. 1. That's part of Proposition 64 which passed in California in November, legalizing adult recreational use of marijuana.
Discussion over the agenda item lasted over two hours, with much input from the public, mostly in favor of regulation and not a ban. The board plans to revisit the ordinance in May 2018 and may consider putting together an ad hoc committee.
Bill Connelly, chair of the board, gave representatives for both sides of the argument up to 10 minutes to present their case, after county officials gave a presentation.
Casey Hatcher, public information officer for the county, reminded the board of the local laws restricting marijuana grows and of the fact that marijuana is still classified as a schedule 1 drug by the federal government. The board really retains local authority to ban or allow commercial cannabis activity, though transportation of those goods through the county could not realistically be banned, county officials said. The board can always modify ordinances after they are passed, Hatcher said.
A local sales tax on marijuana sales, if made legal by the county, could be imposed. Approval by at least four-fifths of the board and then approval by at least two-thirds of voters would be required. If the board went that route, it would have to consider to forward with regulation if the proposed sales tax measure did not pass.
Public comment
Lewis asked the board to step out of its comfort zone, as he said a ban would harm taxpayers and result in a growing black market. He said Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been advised to leave states where marijuana is legal alone. It remains unclear how or if Sessions will crack down on states allowing commercial activity.
"It's time to take your foot off the brake," Lewis said. "This is the beginning of the end of the black market."
He suggested forming an ad hoc committee to write an ordinance for regulation together and said several residents who were interested in marijuana businesses wanted to speak to the board.
"(There are) people who want to be legitimate," he said.
Bonnie Masarik represented those in favor of a ban. Starting with the smell and use of pesticides, Masarik said the voters had spoken, in voting down Measure L and said Proposition 64 only passed because of Chico's voters.
"Remember those days when Butte County was a nice place to live?" she asked.
She said there would be a "mass exodus" if the county allowed pot shops. She asked where the marijuana for the dispensaries would be grown.
"Hopefully not next to me," Mazarik said. "(Marijuana) is not a medicine, it's a mind-altering drug."
Contrary to that idea, several residents said they benefitted from the healing effects of cannabis. Others said the use of pesticides could be regulated.
Judith Schreuder, owner of Dutch Farm Organics, lives in Butte County but her products are only available in counties where cannabis sales have been legalized. She said most of her patients are over 50 years old and products go to children, too.
Schreuder told the board she envisioned a "Wellness Center" in Chico where residents could get medical marijuana. It would be nice to not have to meet Butte County residents in another town to give them a "baggie" at a mall or Trader Joes, she said.
"As if we are criminals," she said.
Dan Salmon said four of his friends had gotten over opiod addition with Cannabidiol, commonly referred to as "CBD." The compound counteracts THC, the chemical that gets people high. Placing a sales tax on marijuana businesses could help the county which is struggling to pay for fire services and to keep libraries open, he said.
Several residents said they were interested in going into the business of cannabis delivery.
One man said he wanted access to tested, clean products. He asked marijuana be treated "at least" as well as alcohol is.
Robert MacKenzie, a Chico-based land use lawyer, suggested that the county could have a marijuana industry like Napa's. He said delivery services are great because the locations can be safer and anonymous to everyone but the sheriff.
Though not in the majority, there were a few residents who voiced opposition to weed sales in the county. Some asked the board to take things slow and see what other counties did first.
Someone asked where all the others in opposition were. Masarik responded that they had jobs, drawing boos from the audience.
David Masarik questioned whether the county needed money so badly as to legalize marijuana sales. He said cultivation would "grow like wildfire."
"Is Butte County really that bad?" he asked, to yeses from the crowd.
Supervisors discuss
Supervisor Maureen Kirk wanted to clarify that deliveries were presently allowed, which county officials confirmed. She said she was not aware of any issues with drop-offs locally.
"I believe delivery is way of life in Butte County," she said. "I would be silent on that, allow that to go. That's the easiest one."
To stop that, the supervisors would need to make it illegal for Butte County to be an end point for recreational or medicinal cannabis, County Counsel Bruce Alpert said. He admitted that would be difficult to regulate after Supervisor Steve Lambert asked how that would work.
Kirk also said she would like to see one medical dispensary in the county, though she wasn't sure where it would go. Lambert said the county has the short end of the stick in regards to sales tax, compared to the cities.
Supervisor Larry Wahl then made a motion directing staff to ban commercial cannabis activities, excluding deliveries, to bring back a report in one year or less. The motion was not immediately seconded and further debate ensued. Kirk said she would like it to come back in six months.
Connelly said while "not for marijuana" himself, he saw that the county would be missing out on sales tax revenue with a ban.
"I heard pretty compelling discussion today," he said. "We should at least talk to other side on this."
He suggested the board consider allowing a dispensary only for deliveries, away from schools and in an industrial zone, where it wouldn't impact other businesses.
"Just a thought. I'm just thinking out loud," he said, suggesting forming a committee.
Lambert said he appreciated that the debates over marijuana had gotten more cordial, but that the board needed more time. Supervisor Doug Teeter voiced agreement. He said a committee could revisit the issue of regulation after seeing what the state and other counties decided to do.
The board directed staff to return with a report in May of 2018.
News Moderator: Ron Strider 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Butte County supervisors say no to commercial cannabis, for now
Author: Risa Johnson
Contact: Contact Us
Photo Credit: LA Weekly
Website: Daily Democrat: Breaking News, Sports, Business, Entertainment & Woodland News
Mike Lewis with the Inland Cannabis Farmers' Association presented his case for commercial cannabis to the Butte County Board of Supervisors, but his pleas, along with those of more than a dozen other marijuana advocates, were to no avail.
It was a packed house, as the board approved a motion Tuesday to temporarily ban commercial cannabis activity, with the exception of deliveries coming from out of the area to Butte County residents. This is keeping with the status quo, but the board was asked to give staff direction to draft an ordinance either banning or regulating commercial activity since the state will have the ability to start issuing licenses Jan. 1. That's part of Proposition 64 which passed in California in November, legalizing adult recreational use of marijuana.
Discussion over the agenda item lasted over two hours, with much input from the public, mostly in favor of regulation and not a ban. The board plans to revisit the ordinance in May 2018 and may consider putting together an ad hoc committee.
Bill Connelly, chair of the board, gave representatives for both sides of the argument up to 10 minutes to present their case, after county officials gave a presentation.
Casey Hatcher, public information officer for the county, reminded the board of the local laws restricting marijuana grows and of the fact that marijuana is still classified as a schedule 1 drug by the federal government. The board really retains local authority to ban or allow commercial cannabis activity, though transportation of those goods through the county could not realistically be banned, county officials said. The board can always modify ordinances after they are passed, Hatcher said.
A local sales tax on marijuana sales, if made legal by the county, could be imposed. Approval by at least four-fifths of the board and then approval by at least two-thirds of voters would be required. If the board went that route, it would have to consider to forward with regulation if the proposed sales tax measure did not pass.
Public comment
Lewis asked the board to step out of its comfort zone, as he said a ban would harm taxpayers and result in a growing black market. He said Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been advised to leave states where marijuana is legal alone. It remains unclear how or if Sessions will crack down on states allowing commercial activity.
"It's time to take your foot off the brake," Lewis said. "This is the beginning of the end of the black market."
He suggested forming an ad hoc committee to write an ordinance for regulation together and said several residents who were interested in marijuana businesses wanted to speak to the board.
"(There are) people who want to be legitimate," he said.
Bonnie Masarik represented those in favor of a ban. Starting with the smell and use of pesticides, Masarik said the voters had spoken, in voting down Measure L and said Proposition 64 only passed because of Chico's voters.
"Remember those days when Butte County was a nice place to live?" she asked.
She said there would be a "mass exodus" if the county allowed pot shops. She asked where the marijuana for the dispensaries would be grown.
"Hopefully not next to me," Mazarik said. "(Marijuana) is not a medicine, it's a mind-altering drug."
Contrary to that idea, several residents said they benefitted from the healing effects of cannabis. Others said the use of pesticides could be regulated.
Judith Schreuder, owner of Dutch Farm Organics, lives in Butte County but her products are only available in counties where cannabis sales have been legalized. She said most of her patients are over 50 years old and products go to children, too.
Schreuder told the board she envisioned a "Wellness Center" in Chico where residents could get medical marijuana. It would be nice to not have to meet Butte County residents in another town to give them a "baggie" at a mall or Trader Joes, she said.
"As if we are criminals," she said.
Dan Salmon said four of his friends had gotten over opiod addition with Cannabidiol, commonly referred to as "CBD." The compound counteracts THC, the chemical that gets people high. Placing a sales tax on marijuana businesses could help the county which is struggling to pay for fire services and to keep libraries open, he said.
Several residents said they were interested in going into the business of cannabis delivery.
One man said he wanted access to tested, clean products. He asked marijuana be treated "at least" as well as alcohol is.
Robert MacKenzie, a Chico-based land use lawyer, suggested that the county could have a marijuana industry like Napa's. He said delivery services are great because the locations can be safer and anonymous to everyone but the sheriff.
Though not in the majority, there were a few residents who voiced opposition to weed sales in the county. Some asked the board to take things slow and see what other counties did first.
Someone asked where all the others in opposition were. Masarik responded that they had jobs, drawing boos from the audience.
David Masarik questioned whether the county needed money so badly as to legalize marijuana sales. He said cultivation would "grow like wildfire."
"Is Butte County really that bad?" he asked, to yeses from the crowd.
Supervisors discuss
Supervisor Maureen Kirk wanted to clarify that deliveries were presently allowed, which county officials confirmed. She said she was not aware of any issues with drop-offs locally.
"I believe delivery is way of life in Butte County," she said. "I would be silent on that, allow that to go. That's the easiest one."
To stop that, the supervisors would need to make it illegal for Butte County to be an end point for recreational or medicinal cannabis, County Counsel Bruce Alpert said. He admitted that would be difficult to regulate after Supervisor Steve Lambert asked how that would work.
Kirk also said she would like to see one medical dispensary in the county, though she wasn't sure where it would go. Lambert said the county has the short end of the stick in regards to sales tax, compared to the cities.
Supervisor Larry Wahl then made a motion directing staff to ban commercial cannabis activities, excluding deliveries, to bring back a report in one year or less. The motion was not immediately seconded and further debate ensued. Kirk said she would like it to come back in six months.
Connelly said while "not for marijuana" himself, he saw that the county would be missing out on sales tax revenue with a ban.
"I heard pretty compelling discussion today," he said. "We should at least talk to other side on this."
He suggested the board consider allowing a dispensary only for deliveries, away from schools and in an industrial zone, where it wouldn't impact other businesses.
"Just a thought. I'm just thinking out loud," he said, suggesting forming a committee.
Lambert said he appreciated that the debates over marijuana had gotten more cordial, but that the board needed more time. Supervisor Doug Teeter voiced agreement. He said a committee could revisit the issue of regulation after seeing what the state and other counties decided to do.
The board directed staff to return with a report in May of 2018.
News Moderator: Ron Strider 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Butte County supervisors say no to commercial cannabis, for now
Author: Risa Johnson
Contact: Contact Us
Photo Credit: LA Weekly
Website: Daily Democrat: Breaking News, Sports, Business, Entertainment & Woodland News
