Katelyn Baker
Well-Known Member
Vowing to "get this done," members of the Plumas County Cannabis Working Group outlined their goals and objectives at their inaugural meeting Oct. 20. Supervisor Kevin Goss, who was elected group chairman, said he wanted "to develop an effective (medical cannabis) ordinance for Plumas County in a timely manner."
Group member Cindy Robinson said she, too, was concerned with timeliness.
Mat Fogarty, another group member, urged his cohorts not to "dillydally," but to "get issues out on the table." "The sooner the better, the less restrictive the better," he said.
Public member Michael James said the group needed to act quickly, but any ordinance "needs to be effective. Content is more important than time."
The emphasis on timeliness results from state regulatory guidelines that are expected to go into effect Jan. 1, 2018. Applicants for cultivation licenses will need to have a local license before they can get a state license.
Plumas County Planning director Randy Wilson painted a picture of an "unsettled" regulatory landscape. The goal would be to try to "match up" any local ordinance with state requirements "even thought it's a bit of a guessing game," Wilson said, because the state is still developing its rules.
Multiple state agencies, including the Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation, the Medical Cannabis Cultivation Program and the Office of Medical Cannabis Safety, are involved.
Growers will need waste discharge permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board as well.
Wilson said Cal OSHA was considering whether it needed to develop workplace safety rules for the industry.
"We want the local permit to be such that you can get the state permit," Wilson said.
County Counsel Craig Settlemire cautioned, "Jan. 1, 2018, is just around the corner in terms of process."
For example, he said, voters would have to approve any tax on cannabis, and there are lead times on elections.
If voters legalize recreational marijuana by passing Proposition 64 in next week's election, the regulatory situation would get even more complicated, Wilson said.
The ballot initiative includes changes to the current Medical Cannabis Regulation and Control Act, Wilson said. "It could change everything in ways we can't predict."
Wilson distributed a number of handouts that outlined issues the group will have to consider: outdoor, indoor and mixed cultivation; dispensaries; cannabis oil refineries; commercial versus private cultivation.
Other questions included what role the planning commission would play and what kind of environmental review the county might have to perform.
Wilson said he saw the planning commission vetting the working group's recommendations. The two advisory bodies might or might not agree, but ultimately county supervisors would decide on any local ordinance.
In forming the working group, county supervisors notably did not include any members of the planning commission, after the commission could not agree on a recommendation for the makeup of the group.
Harry Rogers, representing the Plumas County Growers Coalition, urged the working group to exempt any ordinance from environmental review.
Some counties have done an environmental review, some that have used an exemption have been sued and others have not done a review because their ordinances did not allow any new land development for growing or dispensing, according to material Wilson distributed.
Throughout the meeting, Wilson stressed location and compatibility, or how cultivation "fits the community." Compatibility is "about neighbors getting along."
Wilson pointed out how scarce private property is in Plumas County. Add in wetlands and 100-year floodplains and there are "severe limits."
He said he wanted the group to see zoning maps of the county at a future meeting so members could see "the opportunities and the constraints."
Goss ended the discussion by noting, "I don't believe in unenforceable ordinances. Let's get this done."
"Staff want to get it done, too," Wilson replied.
The standing room only crowd, made up mostly of growers, applauded.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Cannabis Working Group Outlines Goals
Author: Delaine Fragnoli
Contact: (530) 283-0800
Photo Credit: Shutterstock
Website: Plumas County News
Group member Cindy Robinson said she, too, was concerned with timeliness.
Mat Fogarty, another group member, urged his cohorts not to "dillydally," but to "get issues out on the table." "The sooner the better, the less restrictive the better," he said.
Public member Michael James said the group needed to act quickly, but any ordinance "needs to be effective. Content is more important than time."
The emphasis on timeliness results from state regulatory guidelines that are expected to go into effect Jan. 1, 2018. Applicants for cultivation licenses will need to have a local license before they can get a state license.
Plumas County Planning director Randy Wilson painted a picture of an "unsettled" regulatory landscape. The goal would be to try to "match up" any local ordinance with state requirements "even thought it's a bit of a guessing game," Wilson said, because the state is still developing its rules.
Multiple state agencies, including the Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation, the Medical Cannabis Cultivation Program and the Office of Medical Cannabis Safety, are involved.
Growers will need waste discharge permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board as well.
Wilson said Cal OSHA was considering whether it needed to develop workplace safety rules for the industry.
"We want the local permit to be such that you can get the state permit," Wilson said.
County Counsel Craig Settlemire cautioned, "Jan. 1, 2018, is just around the corner in terms of process."
For example, he said, voters would have to approve any tax on cannabis, and there are lead times on elections.
If voters legalize recreational marijuana by passing Proposition 64 in next week's election, the regulatory situation would get even more complicated, Wilson said.
The ballot initiative includes changes to the current Medical Cannabis Regulation and Control Act, Wilson said. "It could change everything in ways we can't predict."
Wilson distributed a number of handouts that outlined issues the group will have to consider: outdoor, indoor and mixed cultivation; dispensaries; cannabis oil refineries; commercial versus private cultivation.
Other questions included what role the planning commission would play and what kind of environmental review the county might have to perform.
Wilson said he saw the planning commission vetting the working group's recommendations. The two advisory bodies might or might not agree, but ultimately county supervisors would decide on any local ordinance.
In forming the working group, county supervisors notably did not include any members of the planning commission, after the commission could not agree on a recommendation for the makeup of the group.
Harry Rogers, representing the Plumas County Growers Coalition, urged the working group to exempt any ordinance from environmental review.
Some counties have done an environmental review, some that have used an exemption have been sued and others have not done a review because their ordinances did not allow any new land development for growing or dispensing, according to material Wilson distributed.
Throughout the meeting, Wilson stressed location and compatibility, or how cultivation "fits the community." Compatibility is "about neighbors getting along."
Wilson pointed out how scarce private property is in Plumas County. Add in wetlands and 100-year floodplains and there are "severe limits."
He said he wanted the group to see zoning maps of the county at a future meeting so members could see "the opportunities and the constraints."
Goss ended the discussion by noting, "I don't believe in unenforceable ordinances. Let's get this done."
"Staff want to get it done, too," Wilson replied.
The standing room only crowd, made up mostly of growers, applauded.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Cannabis Working Group Outlines Goals
Author: Delaine Fragnoli
Contact: (530) 283-0800
Photo Credit: Shutterstock
Website: Plumas County News
