Truth Seeker
New Member
Anyone interested in opening a recreational marijuana business in unincorporated Pitkin County next year will have to wait a few months to learn how their industry will be regulated.
And although the state government will start issuing recreational pot business licenses on Jan. 1, it's unlikely that the county will be ready to do so by then.
The Pitkin County commissioners decided on Wednesday to appoint county clerk Janice Vos Caudill as the agent in charge of accepting and processing licenses for recreational pot shops, grow operations, product manufacturing centers or testing facilities.
But the commissioners put off the process of making their own rules to govern the industry locally, and are planning to address the issue in several work sessions and public meetings before the end of the year. Because new pot businesses need both state and local approval to open, the delay amounts to a temporary ban on recreational marijuana businesses in Pitkin County until new rules are in place.
Commissioner Steve Child urged his fellow board members to move forward quickly with new rules, rather than letting them languish.
"A lot of other counties are taking a wait-and-see attitude," he said. "I think we should not shy away from accepting this challenge, but should do the leg work and the homework we need to do over the next several months."
According to figures compiled by the group Colorado Counties, Inc., 10 of Colorado's 64 counties have chosen to ban recreational canna-businesses temporarily, while 35 have elected to impose permanent bans in unincorporated areas. Another nine counties have voted to allow the businesses, and 10 are still making up their minds.
Child pointed out that in most of the counties where permanent bans are in place, county voters rejected Amendment 64. Seventy-five percent of Pitkin County voters approved the amendment, which legalized the cultivation, sale and consumption of limited quantities of pot among adults.
The state will begin accepting applications for recreational cannabis businesses from existing medical marijuana dispensary owners on Oct. 1, and will review them and forward them on to local jurisdictions. Yet because Pitkin County's rules may not be finalized until sometime next year, any applications that the clerk receives for local pot businesses in the meantime will be put on hold until the rules are ready.
Although Amendment 64 requires the state to respond to applications within 45 to 90 days, there are no such requirements for local jurisdictions like Pitkin County. If a local jurisdiction doesn't act on an application within one year, however, that application will expire, and the applicant will need to re-apply.
Follow the leader, or be it?
Much of Wednesday's discussion revolved around the question of whether Pitkin County should lead or follow on the recreational marijuana front, and on what, exactly, Pitkin County voters were saying when they approved Amendment 64 by such an overwhelming margin.
Commissioner George Newman argued Wednesday in favor of a one-year moratorium on recreational pot businesses. He said moving the recreational pot industry forward does little to advance the "health, welfare and safety" of county citizens.
As a resident of Emma and a frequent advocate for the county's rural neighborhood caucuses, Newman also echoed concerns recently voiced by caucus members about the potential for marijuana businesses to attract criminals interested in stealing their cash or their product.
"In unincorporated Pitkin County, my concern is crime and theft, which has occurred in this valley, not at grow sites, but at dispensaries," he said. "There have also been several cases around the Denver area where it has precipitated theft and crime."
Commissioner Rachel Richards countered that Colorado voters already have hashed out the health risks of legalizing marijuana, and have elected to move ahead.
"That debate was initiated during the election and Coloradans voted to decriminalize marijuana," she said. "I think it is inappropriate to conflate these social ills and drug abuse with recreational marijuana."
Newman contended that a temporary ban would give the county time to finish drafting new rules for commercial greenhouses, where most of the marijuana would presumably be grown. The county planning commission is preparing to present new greenhouse rules to the commissioners later this fall.
Yet Richards argued that it was a mistake to tie the fate of greenhouses in the county to marijuana exclusively, since they're used in cold climates to grow so many other crops.
"I don't want to see us limit the size of potential local food production greenhouses," Richards said. "If we shrink that in such a way that it becomes non-viable ... that would be counterproductive to our desires to maintain agriculture in Pitkin County."
News Hawk- Truth Seeker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Source: aspendailynews.com
Author: Nelson Harvey
Contact: Contact Us | Aspen Daily News Online
Website: County?s recreational pot rules won?t be ready by state?s deadline | Aspen Daily News Online
And although the state government will start issuing recreational pot business licenses on Jan. 1, it's unlikely that the county will be ready to do so by then.
The Pitkin County commissioners decided on Wednesday to appoint county clerk Janice Vos Caudill as the agent in charge of accepting and processing licenses for recreational pot shops, grow operations, product manufacturing centers or testing facilities.
But the commissioners put off the process of making their own rules to govern the industry locally, and are planning to address the issue in several work sessions and public meetings before the end of the year. Because new pot businesses need both state and local approval to open, the delay amounts to a temporary ban on recreational marijuana businesses in Pitkin County until new rules are in place.
Commissioner Steve Child urged his fellow board members to move forward quickly with new rules, rather than letting them languish.
"A lot of other counties are taking a wait-and-see attitude," he said. "I think we should not shy away from accepting this challenge, but should do the leg work and the homework we need to do over the next several months."
According to figures compiled by the group Colorado Counties, Inc., 10 of Colorado's 64 counties have chosen to ban recreational canna-businesses temporarily, while 35 have elected to impose permanent bans in unincorporated areas. Another nine counties have voted to allow the businesses, and 10 are still making up their minds.
Child pointed out that in most of the counties where permanent bans are in place, county voters rejected Amendment 64. Seventy-five percent of Pitkin County voters approved the amendment, which legalized the cultivation, sale and consumption of limited quantities of pot among adults.
The state will begin accepting applications for recreational cannabis businesses from existing medical marijuana dispensary owners on Oct. 1, and will review them and forward them on to local jurisdictions. Yet because Pitkin County's rules may not be finalized until sometime next year, any applications that the clerk receives for local pot businesses in the meantime will be put on hold until the rules are ready.
Although Amendment 64 requires the state to respond to applications within 45 to 90 days, there are no such requirements for local jurisdictions like Pitkin County. If a local jurisdiction doesn't act on an application within one year, however, that application will expire, and the applicant will need to re-apply.
Follow the leader, or be it?
Much of Wednesday's discussion revolved around the question of whether Pitkin County should lead or follow on the recreational marijuana front, and on what, exactly, Pitkin County voters were saying when they approved Amendment 64 by such an overwhelming margin.
Commissioner George Newman argued Wednesday in favor of a one-year moratorium on recreational pot businesses. He said moving the recreational pot industry forward does little to advance the "health, welfare and safety" of county citizens.
As a resident of Emma and a frequent advocate for the county's rural neighborhood caucuses, Newman also echoed concerns recently voiced by caucus members about the potential for marijuana businesses to attract criminals interested in stealing their cash or their product.
"In unincorporated Pitkin County, my concern is crime and theft, which has occurred in this valley, not at grow sites, but at dispensaries," he said. "There have also been several cases around the Denver area where it has precipitated theft and crime."
Commissioner Rachel Richards countered that Colorado voters already have hashed out the health risks of legalizing marijuana, and have elected to move ahead.
"That debate was initiated during the election and Coloradans voted to decriminalize marijuana," she said. "I think it is inappropriate to conflate these social ills and drug abuse with recreational marijuana."
Newman contended that a temporary ban would give the county time to finish drafting new rules for commercial greenhouses, where most of the marijuana would presumably be grown. The county planning commission is preparing to present new greenhouse rules to the commissioners later this fall.
Yet Richards argued that it was a mistake to tie the fate of greenhouses in the county to marijuana exclusively, since they're used in cold climates to grow so many other crops.
"I don't want to see us limit the size of potential local food production greenhouses," Richards said. "If we shrink that in such a way that it becomes non-viable ... that would be counterproductive to our desires to maintain agriculture in Pitkin County."
News Hawk- Truth Seeker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Source: aspendailynews.com
Author: Nelson Harvey
Contact: Contact Us | Aspen Daily News Online
Website: County?s recreational pot rules won?t be ready by state?s deadline | Aspen Daily News Online
