Supes ponder marijuana moratorium

Trinity County has joined the ranks of many cities and counties throughout the state weighing how to regulate medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, with the Board of Supervisors set to consider a possible moratorium on storefront operations at its Dec. 1 meeting.

There are currently no marijuana storefronts operating in Trinity County, but Sups. Wendy Reiss and Roger Jaegel said plans are forming to open one in Hayfork and their phones have been ringing with calls from concerned residents.

Reiss placed the topic of a moratorium on the board's agenda last week for discussion and asked County Counsel Derek Cole for input on what other counties and cities are doing.

He noted that California's medical marijuana laws are continually evolving and that in Trinity County, the focus to date has been on rules concerning cultivation. In more urban areas, the focus has long been on storefront dispensaries and a number of bans have been imposed.

Some have been challenged in court by marijuana advocates who believe California's Proposition 215 authorizing medical use based on a doctor's recommendation also implies protection for collectives dispensing the drug to their members as long as it's not for profit.

Cole said the courts so far have upheld the rights of cities and counties to use their own zoning ordinances to regulate or ban collectives and dispensaries within certain boundaries. An appellate court ruling is pending now on a ban in the city of Anaheim.

He said Trinity County's options range from banning marijuana collectives in any zoning district to allowing them to operate in certain zoning districts under specific use permit conditions. The county does not currently require business licenses for anyone, and it was suggested that may need to be part of the discussion.

Another option is for the Board of Supervisors to adopt a temporary moratorium on collectives and cooperatives, allowing time for the county planning commission to evaluate possibilities through its public hearing process and make a recommendation to the board. Approval of a moratorium requires a four-fifths vote of the board.

"It shouldn't be how do we ban it, but how do we allow it?" asked Sup. Howard Freeman, who indicated he will not support a moratorium he believes would harm people trying to comply with the laws "while the guerilla growers won't comply anyway."

He encouraged other board members "to go see some reputable storefronts in Humboldt and Shasta counties to see how they operate because if we're basing decisions on fear, we're coming from the wrong place."

Freeman added that cities like Los Angeles "have tons of storefronts because they don't have people growing. If I wanted to open a storefront in Trinity County, there's so much being grown here, it would not be profitable from a business standpoint. It makes no sense."

Trinity County Sheriff Lorrac Craig said that dispensaries selling marijuana for profit are clearly illegal "and I will go after them, but collectives or cooperatives are a different animal and it becomes a financial issue of whether they are making money and selling outside of their organization."

He added, "It's a mess. Frankly, my organization is not trained in the financial aspects of collectives. In my opinion, there's so much marijuana being grown in Trinity County right now, they can hardly sell it."

Craig said he knows of only one collective operating openly in Trinity County, but it's not running a storefront.

"There's plenty of land for collectives to operate here without taking them downtown," he said. "We know that in other counties, they have developed a criminal element around these storefronts, so let's keep them out of our business districts and let them operate in their own residences."

Marijuana advocates in the room urged the board to go slowly and explore how the county might profit from taxing collectives before shutting them down with a moratorium.

Vince Hubbell of Douglas City said he thinks requiring storefronts to open their books and verify patient use would be a good thing "because if it's handled in darkness, the activities get absolutely beyond control."

Sup. Judy Morris said she believes regulating storefront collectives "would help pre-empt some of the renegade activity by people taking advantage of the situation, doing it for profit and making it bad for all of you. I have some very liberal, progressive people calling me who have had it — the pressure is on us."

She said a temporary moratorium on storefront collectives would provide the county's reduced planning staff the time it needs to develop concrete options for the board to consider.

"This really needs to be well thought out with a chance for everybody to weigh in," she said.

Sup. Judy Pflueger said she is concerned "about protecting our legitimate growers when the law sort of gives them the right to do this. It's the mavericks that have moved in and taken over, causing problems for everybody. We can zone and regulate some of the locations, but don't forget it is the law or forget about the people it was meant to serve. I'd like to tax it and adopt some rules that are fair and equitable."

Sup. Roger Jaegel argued that the county has been trying for two years to weave its way through the state's convoluted marijuana laws. In the meantime, he said the problems associated with a proliferation of pot gardens have only gotten worse, prompting upset citizens to call him many times a week.

"I've heard a lot about protecting the legitimate medical users under the law, but we need to start looking at the rest of our citizens and the impact this is having on them," he said.

With a storefront preparing to open in Hayfork, Sup. Reiss said the potential criminal element is a big concern for the people calling her and she's had several discussions with people who are openly growing marijuana for profit, scoffing at the medical use limits because "there's big money to be made."

Regardless of what action the board takes regarding a moratorium at its Dec. 1 meeting, the storefront issue was sent to the planning commission to consider all options ranging from zero tolerance to zoning regulations permitting collectives to operate within town boundaries.