Katelyn Baker
Well-Known Member
On Tuesday, Nevada County's Board of Supervisors will consider a draft of interim rules on marijuana cultivation to replace its current ordinance that bans outdoor cultivation and allows 12 plants to be grown indoors.
The draft would allow up to 25 plants on properties of 20 or more acres.
"It's not near enough," Patricia Smith, president of the Nevada County chapter of Americans for Safe Access, said after the draft was released.
Smith, who has served on a county-organized ad hoc committee to help craft the interim ordinance since Measure W's failure on June 7, echoed similar sentiments shared by medical marijuana advocates at a town hall meeting earlier this week.
They recommend that parcels over 20 acres should be allowed up to 50 plants in proper zones. They also want county regulations that will allow collectives and to throw out a per-plant fine structure. And they encourage their supporters to share the message with supervisors.
(I)s the growing community making the same mistake that some suggest the supervisors and sheriff made earlier this year, by mistaking the defeat of a ballot measure for a mandate to further push their own position on cannabis cultivation in our community?
"Basically," Smith told the town hall audience, "just tell them you don't appreciate them not honoring the vote of the people."
But is that really the case?
The supervisors said months ago they would repeal their ordinance if Measure W failed. They also said they would bring together stakeholders to discuss the future of grow regulations.
The ad hoc committee met three times to develop the interim ordinance. The supervisors will consider it Tuesday, when they would repeal the ban on outdoor cultivation - if four of the five supervisors vote in favor.
Over the course of the committee meetings, county officials have increased the number of plants it would allow on the large properties on three occasions to the 25 plants allowed under the draft to be considered Tuesday. The county has shown at least some willingness to compromise.
Have the medical marijuana advocates offered any concessions through the course of the committee's work? Or are they only advocating for the opportunity to grow more marijuana? County officials have said the 50-plant threshold growers seek could trigger the California Environmental Quality Act, which requires local governments to identify environmental impacts and mitigate them, if necessary.
Perhaps more to the point, is the growing community making the same mistake that some suggest the supervisors and sheriff made earlier this year, by mistaking the defeat of a ballot measure for a mandate to further push their own position on cannabis cultivation?
Following the 2014 defeat of Measure S, which would have allowed 60 immature or 48 mature plants on 20-30 acres of land, Nevada County came forward in January with its urgency ordinance banning outdoor cultivation and limiting indoor growing to 12 plants. Supervisors also put the matter in the hands of the public by placing Measure W on the ballot.
By a verdict of a 59.4 percent vote against, the community made it clear there was no mandate.
Medical marijuana advocates might do well to remember that Measure S was defeated by an even wider margin - 66.4 percent against - than Measure W.
As a result of the June election, Nevada County's growing community got a seat at the table to help determine what will be our community's standard on the cultivation of medical marijuana. But to expect to see the magnitude of change they seek in a matter of weeks is unrealistic. The matter is still subject to the approval of our elected officials. And that still occurs through a political process. So far, we have only seen the first few steps on a long path.
Following Tuesday's meeting, an advisory committee is expected to be formed to work on writing a permanent set of rules. In the draft interim ordinance released Thursday, county officials noted "consensus was not reached" during the committee meetings.
Short of consensus, the result of the conversations should show each side fairly working with the other. Neither side should expect to get everything it wants. In the end, western Nevada County should hope for regulations that reflect a commitment to provide patients access to medical marijuana, while also respecting the rights of residents to live without the negative impacts of cannabis cultivation.
But to get there, we will all need to work together and show patience in the process. We'll need to act as a true community.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Cannabis Question Requires Cooperation, Patience
Author: The Union Editorial Board
Contact: (530) 273-9561
Photo Credit: Creative Commons
Website: The Union
The draft would allow up to 25 plants on properties of 20 or more acres.
"It's not near enough," Patricia Smith, president of the Nevada County chapter of Americans for Safe Access, said after the draft was released.
Smith, who has served on a county-organized ad hoc committee to help craft the interim ordinance since Measure W's failure on June 7, echoed similar sentiments shared by medical marijuana advocates at a town hall meeting earlier this week.
They recommend that parcels over 20 acres should be allowed up to 50 plants in proper zones. They also want county regulations that will allow collectives and to throw out a per-plant fine structure. And they encourage their supporters to share the message with supervisors.
(I)s the growing community making the same mistake that some suggest the supervisors and sheriff made earlier this year, by mistaking the defeat of a ballot measure for a mandate to further push their own position on cannabis cultivation in our community?
"Basically," Smith told the town hall audience, "just tell them you don't appreciate them not honoring the vote of the people."
But is that really the case?
The supervisors said months ago they would repeal their ordinance if Measure W failed. They also said they would bring together stakeholders to discuss the future of grow regulations.
The ad hoc committee met three times to develop the interim ordinance. The supervisors will consider it Tuesday, when they would repeal the ban on outdoor cultivation - if four of the five supervisors vote in favor.
Over the course of the committee meetings, county officials have increased the number of plants it would allow on the large properties on three occasions to the 25 plants allowed under the draft to be considered Tuesday. The county has shown at least some willingness to compromise.
Have the medical marijuana advocates offered any concessions through the course of the committee's work? Or are they only advocating for the opportunity to grow more marijuana? County officials have said the 50-plant threshold growers seek could trigger the California Environmental Quality Act, which requires local governments to identify environmental impacts and mitigate them, if necessary.
Perhaps more to the point, is the growing community making the same mistake that some suggest the supervisors and sheriff made earlier this year, by mistaking the defeat of a ballot measure for a mandate to further push their own position on cannabis cultivation?
Following the 2014 defeat of Measure S, which would have allowed 60 immature or 48 mature plants on 20-30 acres of land, Nevada County came forward in January with its urgency ordinance banning outdoor cultivation and limiting indoor growing to 12 plants. Supervisors also put the matter in the hands of the public by placing Measure W on the ballot.
By a verdict of a 59.4 percent vote against, the community made it clear there was no mandate.
Medical marijuana advocates might do well to remember that Measure S was defeated by an even wider margin - 66.4 percent against - than Measure W.
As a result of the June election, Nevada County's growing community got a seat at the table to help determine what will be our community's standard on the cultivation of medical marijuana. But to expect to see the magnitude of change they seek in a matter of weeks is unrealistic. The matter is still subject to the approval of our elected officials. And that still occurs through a political process. So far, we have only seen the first few steps on a long path.
Following Tuesday's meeting, an advisory committee is expected to be formed to work on writing a permanent set of rules. In the draft interim ordinance released Thursday, county officials noted "consensus was not reached" during the committee meetings.
Short of consensus, the result of the conversations should show each side fairly working with the other. Neither side should expect to get everything it wants. In the end, western Nevada County should hope for regulations that reflect a commitment to provide patients access to medical marijuana, while also respecting the rights of residents to live without the negative impacts of cannabis cultivation.
But to get there, we will all need to work together and show patience in the process. We'll need to act as a true community.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Cannabis Question Requires Cooperation, Patience
Author: The Union Editorial Board
Contact: (530) 273-9561
Photo Credit: Creative Commons
Website: The Union
