Pubdate: Sun, 05 Jul 2015 Source: Appeal-Democrat (Marysville, CA) Copyright: 2015 Appeal-Democrat Contact: http://www.appeal-democrat.com/sections/services/forms/editorletter.php Website: http://www.appeal-democrat.com Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1343 Author: Eric Vodden AREA VEXED BY MISHMASH OF POT RULES From Yuba County officials' perspective, there is a bit of a domino effect that comes into play when talking about regulating medical marijuana cultivation. The notion is growers were pushed out of Butte County and into Yuba when the former enacted tighter growing regulations and when voters last year "It was presented to people that it was all but legalized here (Yuba County)," said Supervisor John Nicoletti. That has at least been partially borne out when growers at times went before the board last year, appealing fines and saying they weren't aware of county regulations. Likewise in Nevada County, voters last November turned away Measure S, portrayed by opponents as a loosening of enforcement regulations. It followed a campaign that was "rife with controversy," the Union of Grass Valley reported. It all goes to show Yuba County is hardly acting in a vacuum when it comes to challenges to its new, stricter marijuana cultivation ordinance. In reality, Yuba County is just a piece of a confusing patchwork of different local ordinances in different communities, proposed state legislation and potential 2016 ballot measures. Trying to keep track of it all requires constant vigilance and a mammoth spreadsheet. Yuba's ordinance, being challenged in court, bans outdoor growing and limits indoor growing to a dozen plants in a qualified accessory structure. While there is no outright ban on dispensaries, there is also no planning designation through which to apply for one. A Democratic legislator whose bill regulating medical marijuana was passed by the Assembly has referred to the numerous local debates as "the Wild West." "I think we can all agree that stronger regulation is needed ... and is long overdue," said Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Alameda. There have been victories on both sides, though the recent tote board seems to favor tightening restrictions. Still, Placer County supervisors, faced with standing-room-only crowds, recently backed off on banning grows. Tulare County supervisors also declined to impose a complete ban and decided to instead focus on enforcement of its existing law. "A lot are holding back now," said Roger Morgan of the anti-medical marijuana organization Take Back America. "They are being told it will be legal anyway and have decided to wait and see what happens." Officials for the pro-medical marijuana group California Norml could not be reached for this report. Others have followed the example of Yuba County - or rather Yuba County has followed them. Shasta County voters last year upheld a new ordinance under which much of Yuba's is based. Sacramento County also bans outdoor cultivation. In Southern California, voters in Yucca Valley and Riverside recently rejected allowing marijuana dispensaries in their cities. But, with all of the political fights in cities and counties, there is also proposed state legislation that would give the state more control over regulating medical marijuana. AB 266, already passed by the Assembly, would create an Office of Marijuana Regulation within the governor's office and increase state involvement when locals consider regulations. Area Assemblyman James Gallagher, R-Nicolaus, opposed the bill, saying it would diminish local control. He has said it would likely undergo revisions before being considered by the Senate. "There is a role for the state to play, but my feeling is it creates an overreaching state bureaucracy that could usurp local control," Gallagher said earlier. All of the local battles and the state legislation may end up being moot anyway if any of five proposed statewide measures or constitutional amendments make it to the 2016 ballot. Four would legalize marijuana statewide for recreational use, Morgan said. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom