Pubdate: Thu, 30 Jan 2014
Source: Chico News & Review, The (CA)
Copyright: 2014 Chico Community Publishing, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.newsreview.com/chico/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/559
Author: Howard Hardee

REEFER RULES RECONSIDERED

As Supes Move Forward on Medi-Pot Restrictions, Advocates Promise Public Vote

Just minutes before the Butte County Board of Supervisors meeting in 
Oroville on Tuesday (Jan. 28), a young man sat on a bench outside the 
chambers rolling what very much appeared to be a joint, evidently 
unconcerned by the county sheriff's headquarters located just up the sidewalk.

It was a sign that local pot advocates-some perhaps a bit more brash 
than others-had shown up in force to protest recently proposed 
changes to the county's medical-marijuana ordinance. Indeed, the 
chambers were filled to capacity with medi-pot growers and users, 
many of whom blasted proposed amendments to the ordinance as 
prohibitively restrictive during the public-comment section of the meeting.

 From the supervisors' perspective, it was a striking departure from 
previous board meetings regarding the cultivation ordinance. For 
months, vocal constituents have urged the panel to tighten 
regulations in order to address issues related to large pot grows in 
the county's eastern foothills-namely, environmental degradation 
caused by grading activity, a perceived increase in criminal 
activity, and general nuisances such as the plant's strong odor.

The supervisors responded last December by approving amendments that 
require any marijuana garden to be on a property with an "occupied 
legal residence" and permitted plumbing and sewage systems, and 
increasing fines for violations.

But those changes were relatively uncontroversial compared to those 
proposed at the Jan. 14 supervisors' meeting to limit the size of 
marijuana gardens by square footage rather than number of plants, 
thereby drastically reducing the county's current 99-plant limit.

"We knew the [restrictions] would be very contentious," Supervisor 
Steve Lambert said. "The thought was, 'Let's deal with what we can 
agree on, and then get back to what we know no one is going to agree on.'"

Supervisor Bill Connelly also acknowledged that the board is in "a 
tough situation."

"It's the only issue I've been called corrupt on by both sides," he said.

During a summary of the proposed amendments, Paul Hahn, the county's 
chief administrative officer, noted that nothing would change for 
parcels smaller than a half-acre. As currently written, the ordinance 
requires any marijuana grown on properties of that size be contained 
within a detached structure no larger than 120 square feet and set 
back at least 15 feet from property lines.

But much would be different for growers on larger properties, with 
new guidelines for setback distances and the required number of 
doctor's recommendations-which Connelly defined as a "written current 
recommendation signed by a licensed California physician"-for each garden size.

For instance, on parcels larger than a half-acre but smaller than 5 
acres, outdoor gardens would be permissible but limited to an area of 
50 square feet with 50-foot setbacks. In addition, growers with 
gardens of that size would need at least one doctor's recommendation.

Pot gardens on properties of between 5 and 10 acres would be limited 
to 100 square feet and would require at least 75-foot setbacks and 
two doctor's recommendations. Gardens on properties greater than 10 
acres in size could not exceed 150 square feet, and would need at 
least 150-foot setbacks and three doctor's recommendations.

The same setback rules would apply to the harvesting and drying 
process, which is often the most pungent stage of cultivation and, 
therefore, represents the greatest nuisance to neighbors. And while 
the current ordinance allows only formal complaints from neighbors 
within 1,500 feet of a property, the changes would allow "anyone to 
complain if they believe an illegal grow is occurring," Hahn said.

Prior to opening the floor for public comment, members of the board 
appeared to brace for heated arguments. Supervisor Doug Teeter 
reminded attendees to remain "respectful of the board," while Lambert 
added: "If you really have some constructive things to say, that'd be 
appreciated, but if you just want to say [the supervisors] are not 
the smartest people in the whole world, this is going to be 
counterproductive." Aside from a handful of emotional outbursts from 
speakers and members of the audience, civility was mostly maintained.

Several medicinal-marijuana users argued that the proposed limits 
would simply not allow for a sufficient supply of medicine. One woman 
said, "I'm stopping the growth of cancer in my body internally and 
externally with cannabis. You people are overriding my doctor. He's 
recommending I have 27 plants to cover my medical needs. I eat it for 
digestion, I use it for sleep and I inhale it for friendship."

Others pointed out that relying on a small number of plants puts 
growers and patients at the mercy of variables such as mold issues, 
pests and inclement weather, arguing that losing a couple plants 
would effectively cut off a year's worth of medicine.

Also present was Andrew Merkel, a local real-estate agent and 
medi-pot advocate who, along with local attorney Rob MacKenzie, 
helped organize the political action group Butte County Citizens 
Against Irresponsible Government. In recent weeks, Merkel and his 
supporters have worked toward launching an initiative that would 
prevent the supervisors from making further changes to the 
cultivation ordinance. He also announced his intentions to run for 
Supervisor Larry Wahl's seat, which is up for grabs this year.

"Go ahead and do it," Merkel said to the board, insisting the 
amendments would come to a public vote. "We are going to referend you."

The board seemed to agree with Merkel on that point. Shortly before 
the panel unanimously voted to move forward with the amendments, 
Supervisor Maureen Kirk acknowledged that "we are probably facing a 
referendum," while Connelly said, "Obviously, this is going to go to 
a vote of the people."

"And I swear to you, whatever happens with that vote, I will not do 
one single thing to change [it]," Connelly continued. "This has been 
vetted-it's been very public. When [the vote] comes about, we're 
going to live with it."

The board will hold a final reading of the amendments during the 
upcoming Feb. 11 meeting, but if Merkel's initiative petition is 
successful, adoption of the new rules would be put on hold until a 
November vote.

[sidebar]

Medi-pot activism:

Go to www.bcaig.org to learn more about Butte County Citizens Against 
Irresponsible Government, a political action group working toward 
launching an initiative that would prevent Butte County supervisors 
from making further changes to the medical-marijuana cultivation ordinance.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom