Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative Seeking Signatures to go Before Humboldt County Voters

Cannabis reform initiative logo with a cannabis leaf on the left side, a family and a redwood tree on the right.On March 4th, the Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative (HCRI) was recorded with the Humboldt County records office. The recording is the first initial step in the process of getting the initiative on a ballot put before Humboldt County voters. The HCRI creators filed their Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition form as the group seeks around six thousand signatures to get the HCRI on the ballot.

HCRI is sponsored by Mark Thurmond and Elizabeth Watson, Kneeland neighbors, along with a group of senior community members concerned with the ongoing issues with the way in which Humboldt County is approaching legalized cannabis cultivation.

The initiative aims to mitigate social, economic and environmental issues caused by large-scale cannabis cultivation within the county. The initiative authors hope to achieve that by limiting the number of permits issued, cultivation square footage cap and generator usage while increasing county inspections and greater community input, in addition to other changes.

Support small-scale cannabis cultivation while preventing new or expanded large-scale cultivation:

The HCRI would limit new and expanded cultivation applications to 10K square feet or less. It would also limit new and expanded cultivation permits to outdoor, mixed light tier 1 (low wattage use of supplemental lighting) and nurseries. No other cultivation permit types would be allowed for new or expanded applicants.

Limit the number of permits and acreage under cannabis cultivation:

The initiative would limit the number of permits issued by the county to 1.05% of the permits already issued or in the process as of March 4th, 2022 per watershed. Once that limit is reached within a watershed, applicants for that watershed would be placed in a queue in the event that a permit holder surrenders their permit.

The cap would limit new permit applications to 10K square feet of cultivation canopy or less.

New applicants could not possess more than one permit per person or per parcel.

The initiative would allow the Board of Supervisors to decrease the permit and acreage caps without voter approval but would require voter approval to increase the permit and acreage caps in the future.

The initiative would also disallow new indoor cultivation permits to be approved after the processing of applications submitted prior to March 4th, 2022.

Reduce the impacts of cannabis cultivation on water availability and water
quality:

If approved, the initiative would lengthen the state’s forbearance period for Humboldt County cannabis cultivators. It would prohibit water surface diversions between March 1st and November 15th, annually. The initiative would also require analysis and monitoring of ground water use impacts on instream flows and other users reliant on the water source.

Pursuant to HCRI, the county would collaborate with resource agencies to mitigate and monitor the effects of commercial cannabis cultivation.

Permit holders would be required to have enough water storage to support the demands of their cultivation size and methods. The county would require the applicant or permittee to increase their water storage to meet the water demand of their cultivation site or decrease their square footage to match their current water storage capacity.

HCRI would require a hydrologic study verifying that the use of a well for commercial cannabis cultivation would not adversely affect any waterway or spring prior to approval.

The initiative also stipulates road compliance in an effort to mitigate runoff damage to creeks and streams. Any new or expanded cultivation permit accessed by a private road will be required to have a licensed engineer report stating that the road “meets or exceeds the Category 4 standard (or same practical effect).”

Ensure greater public participation and official accountability in decision making:

HCRI would require a broader public notice for permit applications and allowance of community participation in public hearings. Notices will be mailed to residents within one mile of the proposed permitted parcel, to all residents that requested notice of commercial cannabis applications, posted in at least three public locations in the general vicinity of the proposed commercial cannabis cultivation and be published at least twice in a newspaper local to the proposed commercial cannabis cultivation site.

The initiative would require a public hearing for all new or applicants, regardless of cultivation size. Require expanded public notice of cannabis cultivation applications.

All cultivation applicants, new or expanded, greater than 3K square feet would require “a conditional use permit, special permit or equivalent discretionary permit, and a coastal development permit where applicable.” The county may require use permits for cultivation applicants applying for under 3K square feet.

Ensure that annual inspections are performed, and permit holders are in compliance before renewing annual permit:

The HCRI would require the county to perform annual in-person, on-site inspections of every cultivation permit annually. The county may notify the permit holder of the inspection 24 hours prior to the inspection, but notification is not required.

Prior to permit renewal, the county would need to verify that the permit holder is in full compliance at the time of the renewal and that all complaints and public concerns have been investigated and cleared before permit renewal approval.

Limit use of generators:

To mitigate noise pollution and fuel spill risks, generator use will only be allowed in emergency use and be limited to use of a single 50-hp or less generator.

The restriction will be immediate for new and expanded applicants.

Current cultivators, except for those permitted prior to January 1st, 2016, will be required to comply by the new generator restrictions by June 30th, 2024.

Pre-existing cultivators approved for generator use will be required to phase generator use out by September 30th, 2025, at which time, those cultivators will also be limited to use of a single 50-hp or less generator in emergent situations only.

To read the Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative in its entirety, click here.
For more information, visit the Cannabis Reform Initiative website.
To view the Humboldt County Counsel title and summary of the HCRI, click here.

We will be publishing a follow-up article detailing the support and opposition to the Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative. 

 

 

Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules

Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

141 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago

First the watershed acerage cap isn’t clear. 1.05% of existing space allowed? Does that mean eliminate 98.5%? Or no more than 1.05% of the watershed? Why that oddly specific, harder to type figure?

Then the water forebearence starting in March is a little silly. Remember most years it’s raining and snowing hard in March. Remember this is water running through these applicants property that would be available for anything else other than weed. Stopping in April, or March doesn’t matter so much as the TOTALS. March doesn’t matter if you are proposing pushing dirt for a million gallon pond.(these huge algae ponds are gonna be a legacy problem in the future. I’m surprised regulators are pushing them as a solution)

I think it would be a mistake to “go hard” on smaller applicants. A permit should be achievable by a citizen if the application is allowed by law. Regulation shouldn’t be achieved by bureaucratic hurdles, but by policy. Say: 10k SQ.ft. cap. Say: no generators. But if you say “well, you can do all this if you fight the expensive hurdles” you get out of area money paying corporate lawyers and consultants to push anything through. If the permit fits all the conditions, and has merit according to what is the law, it shouldn’t have any more impact than tomatoes.
What about a clause mandating proof of residency for a certain amount of time in Humboldt prior to achieving a permit? A minimum amount of volunteer time for your local fire service, or school?

Thumbs 👎
Guest
Thumbs 👎
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

No generator use? Only in emergency situations?
Is getting rain for 30 days straight a emergency? Because that could happen, and using a generator will be necessary for all of grid farms.
Or maybe you don’t understand how a off grid power system works?

Permanently on Monitoring
Guest
Permanently on Monitoring
1 year ago
Reply to  Thumbs 👎

It’s suddenly come to my attention how many things happened 50 years or so ago…

The movie Vanishing Point for one, the end of the Hippies, the end of the Vietnam War, Watergate, Tommy by the Who etc, etc…

And the advent of Sinsemilla ended the tyranny of shitty Mexican weed…

Thanks, Humboldt for your many contributions of value, all those forestry majors and music majors who graduated from HSU and then hung on to do land deals and grow weight…

Guys, you are just done, too late to the party you started!

California is about to be buried in cannabis, cheap and available everywhere!

You could probably manufacture pure THC or CBD by genetically modifying yeast cells, but, the time of weed is just over!

It isn’t any wonder that 18 year olds today are upset with the Baby Boomers, but in 50 more years, the drugs will be different, and Humboldt won’t even be a footnote in history…

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago

Is the 1.05% a typo? Should be 105%?

Permanently on Monitoring
Guest
Permanently on Monitoring
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

Yes.

Now go watch HBO until it wears off…

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago

So are they saying only 1.05% more than already existing? Sounds like you know, could you explain?

Who actually watches HBO? Did you mean BHO? And no I don’t smoke or watch tv.

Permanently on Monitoring
Guest
Permanently on Monitoring
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

In that case, it’s obviously just sloppy proof-reading (I proof-read and spell-check, as a rule, but tend to meander from my thoughts and become loquacious)…

I’m glad someone doesn’t use weed: best of luck in all future endeavors…

Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

I’m guessing 105% of existing permits.or 5% more than today. You can’t allow .05 of a permit right!? I’m not sure how it’s actually written, but the size of the grow is more important. You could have a 10,000sq.ft. permit, or a100,000 SQ ft permit.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

Ok that makes more sense. Thanks for the answer. Better than the snarky perm on mon.

Gggg
Guest
Gggg
1 year ago
Reply to  Thumbs 👎

You live in humboldt county where redwoods grow because of abundant rain, seems like you should have thought of that. Roll with the punches like we all did for decades.

Thumbs 👎
Guest
Thumbs 👎
1 year ago
Reply to  Gggg

How’s PGE treating the environment? Your grid power system is destroying more of the environment then anything else in California

Thumbs 👎
Guest
Thumbs 👎
1 year ago
Reply to  Gggg

How many trees did PGE cut down last year? What is worse for the environment? occasional generator use? Or forest conversion for power lines?

Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago
Reply to  Thumbs 👎

I think they’re talking about running generators all the time at an operation designed to be electricity intensive, way out there without grid power. That requires fuel deliveries and has resulted in spills and fires. The forest is not being converted to power lines. Once clear cut line easements have grown back. The last few years it’s been in vogue to blame PG&E for fires we weren’t prepared for, so they responded by cutting trees around existing lines. It might suck but we asked them to do it essentially. They are definitely not putting up new lines, or clearing new easements. In fact people are complaining about that! So saying “converting forests” becomes hyperbole, or exaggeration.

Thumbs 👎
Guest
Thumbs 👎
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

Did you actually read the article?
It states “Pre-existing cultivators approved for generator use will be required to phase generator use out by September 30th, 2025, at which time, those cultivators will also be limited to use of a single 50-hp or less generator in emergent situations only.”
They are talking about all generator usage.
Also the forest will never grow back under the power lines, the plan is to continue to remove all vegatation as maintenance.
This is considered under Cal fire Law is a “conversion” where forest land is converted to non forest land.
Do you know how PGE generates power in California?
Do you know the carbon footprint of PGE?

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Thumbs 👎

Doesn’t the state regs rule out large gennies in a few years or can you just buy carbon credits and skip this requirement?

Thumbs 👎
Guest
Thumbs 👎
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

The New DCC regulations do not rule out generators. But there is is restrictions.
I am not talking about Large generators, this initiative rules out all generators except for “emergency” use.

Thumbs 👎
Guest
Thumbs 👎
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

This initiative would make it illegal to charge your solar system batteries twice a year when there is not enough sun.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Thumbs 👎

Sorry to hear this crap.

Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago
Reply to  Thumbs 👎

Wasn’t the problem they cut trees? Did they grow back? Do you think PG &E put the lines in 10 years ago over trees? They cleared the easements. The easements run through logging shows from the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

Thumbs 👎
Guest
Thumbs 👎
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

So if I plant a weed crop in a old clear cut will you say it’s ok?
Or is that only ok for PGE?
Or is only ok when it benefits you?

Huh?
Guest
Huh?
1 year ago

There are a handful of large farms in Humboldt, all being less that 10 acres. Which might seem like a lot, but it’s nothing like the “large scale” operations that exist in the state. The biggest farm right now is 138 acres. So while tiny struggling farms are being micro managed into extinction, big business is gaining ground every day.
This initiative comes from some old grey haired nimbys in Kneeland who got their depends in a twist when a big farm moved in near by. It was crafted with zero input from small farmers. The authors don’t fully understand the implications and effects this initiative would carry. It will only add further burdens and restrictions on already struggling small farmers and not really do much as far as mitigating impacts from large farms. So it will actually hurt Humboldt’s small family farms and help large farms by taking out some of their smaller competitors.
Hers a pic of what small farms are up against.

77C7BA8E-510B-4834-BEBA-15D018034B96.jpeg
thetallone
Guest
thetallone
1 year ago
Reply to  Huh?

Is that an actual pot farm? If so, where?

Huh?
Guest
Huh?
1 year ago
Reply to  thetallone

Yes. In Santa Barbra. That was a screen shot I took from a video that was sent to me.

Economics of scale
Guest
Economics of scale
1 year ago
Reply to  thetallone

Yes. This is the new normal. Cannabis farms like this will be everywhere in Cali in the next 4-5 years. Meanwhile we have our local community members coming up and wasting their time on ideas like this article.

Jay Beigh
Guest
Jay Beigh
1 year ago
Reply to  thetallone

That was the ‘Organic Greens’ farm owned by Juan Cisneros, a pepper farmer in Santa Barbara / San Luis counties.

I consulted on that farm from early in it’s existance as he had never grown cannabis and needed some guidance.

At the time it was the biggest in the Country and it soon (less than a week after it was featured in the LA Times) it because the biggest busted farm in the country. Almost a half a million plants and ~40,000lbs of trimmed weed confiscated. Juan had lied on his applications.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Jay Beigh

Damn

shivani pranyam
Guest
shivani pranyam
1 year ago
Reply to  thetallone

huge grow fields bigger than this are everywhere now. from oregon to the ca dessert and everywhere in between, there are hundreds and thousands of miles of huge grow fields. the proposal in this article is so out of touch. there are also huge warehouse indoors in oaklahoma and Everwhere in this state. this article acts as if canabis cultivation is exclusive to humbodlt. humboldt is becomming a minority grower.

Last edited 1 year ago
thatguyinarcata
Guest
thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Huh?

Absolutely an initiative written by people who have no clue what is actually going on within this industry.

The reality is, the nimbys will get their way by the hand of the market. Only a very few farms are likely to survive the next 2 years in our area.

There will be some benefits that arise from this, and there will be some costs. Unfortunately, I don’t think our community will be better off as a whole once the collapse of the local industry is complete. But we will all know how we feel about the results in the next year or so

Steve Koch
Guest
Steve Koch
1 year ago

I hate to see small farms and small businesses fail.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago

Spot on. Macroeconomic will do what enforcement could ever “claim” as a goal.

thatguyinarcata
Guest
thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

Yes, if the state and county didn’t have their heads up their asses they would be working overtime to support the development and success of small, regenerative farms all over the place. Not just cannabis, but also cannabis. Centralizing everything has made us incredibly vulnerable to every sort of emergency.

That sauce
Guest
That sauce
1 year ago
Reply to  Huh?

Well said, comment should be moved to the top

willow creeker
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Huh?

So, if this is what you’re up against, how will this initiative hurt you? You are already screwed if you are competing for volume.
When federal legalization hits, this Santa Barbara farm is going to be small potatoes. There is a lot of Ag land in the US that can be utilized for making distillate grade.
Also other countries, Columbia comes to mind.
Our only bet for local cannabis industry is for top quality, sun grown. That’s even a stretch.

I wouldn’t worry about this initiative if I had a cannabis farm, I’d worry about bigger things.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  willow creeker

WC, you’re probably right about this.

nah
Guest
nah
1 year ago
Reply to  willow creeker

Which is it, top quality or “sun grown” aka outdoor? More and more buyers are appreciating indoor when they visit the dispensary.

grey fox
Member
1 year ago

Sounds like a whole lot of new regulations to me. More regulation always helps.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  grey fox

Haha more regulation always helps? Helps who exactly?

grey fox
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

Whoosh over your head..

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  grey fox

It always helps the big guys, but I figured you might have another (original) idea. Never mind.

Steve Koch
Guest
Steve Koch
1 year ago
Reply to  grey fox

Yeah, I don’t like the additional regulations, either, what a pain.

Also limiting the permits distorts the market and enables people to make money just cuz they were able to grab a scarce permit.

Bozo
Guest
Bozo
1 year ago

Small scale dope farms… get out while you still can. See if somebody else with deep pockets wants to be a pot farmer, take what’s left of the money and run. Land in Central America is still pretty cheap.

Emerald Triangle means no soil. No water. Grim winters. No cheap labor.
Only reason dope it was established here was that the DA and Sheriff couldn’t (or wouldn’t) pursue thousands of plots on rural dead end roads.

Big agriculture will grow pot in good areas… and that is by thousands of tons. Meanwhile the new synthetic pot turns out 1 quart of THC for $6K. Latest venture is making THC out of mold cultures.
(1 quart of pure THC goes a long ways.)

cardenas_1.jpg
Jeffersonian
Guest
Jeffersonian
1 year ago

This is just another black market feeder

shivani pranyam
Guest
shivani pranyam
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeffersonian

to me, its not classified as much of a “market” once its below or at 6

thetallone
Guest
thetallone
1 year ago

6? Folks can’t even move it for 300/lb (that’s below $20/oz wholesale). Adjusted for inflation, it’s less than Mexican went for in the 70’s).

Homesteader
Guest
Homesteader
1 year ago

Sounds like a good way to put the final nail in the coffin for Humboldt Cannabis. After all, more regulation fixes everything, just like Prop 64 fixed the cannabis industry, right??

Economics of scale
Guest
Economics of scale
1 year ago

How out to lunch are these people?!?! Our farmers are getting crushed because they are stuck being too small and two stagnant with too many limitations already!
So let me get this straight, they want to put a cap on any entrepreneur cannabis farmer in our county while letting the rest of the state go bigger and better so our local farmers have to sit here and have a slow painful brutal death by economics of scale.
Whoever came up with this initiative needs to just keep their ideas to themselves. I will 100% NOT support this nor will I sign or vote for anything that limits our community members from trying to GROW their business.

John
Guest
John
1 year ago

I am a big fan of the large pot growers! They can use modern equipment (tractors) and educated people. The scale lets them be sufficiently regulated to ensure environmental protection and less labor per pound. The biggest benefit is they drive the price of the drug down which will help remove the incentive for small farms and may move the industry to more cost effective areas like the Central Valley.

Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago
Reply to  John

These big farms aren’t more environmentally or socially friendly. Sure, pay somebody meager wages to live in a trailer, enjoy meth and machete fights, if it takes a well paying entrepreneurial job from a family up here. They’re non efficient! Umm… you there! You in Trinity County! It’s environmental tewwible if you use water for weed! Leave it in the creek, so that it can make it to Claire Engle Dam, and be used to replace the Sacramento river, that replaced the San Joaquin, that is dry because it’s being over allocated all over the South Valley desert.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

Haha no one is using water that would drain to Claire Engle. Not too much happening up in T Center. And Coffee Creek. Lewiston, DC and JC are downstream of there. Most farms are in SF trinity watershed or drainages further south and west. I like the machete fight part though.

Guest
Guest
Guest
1 year ago

Glass House Brands – – opened in Ventura County, So. Calif. 5.5 mil sq ft greenhouse, used to grow vegetables now converted to cannabis grow.
Talk about H2O use! They get clones from Santa Barbara and expect harvest
in third quarter of this year.
The picture and video they provide are amazing. I don’t know how to get the picture here, but I did send it to Kym.

grey fox
Member
1 year ago
Last edited 1 year ago
Legallettuce
Guest
1 year ago
Reply to  grey fox

lol, craft cannabis. Now I know why this just keeps getting easier and easier.

Woed
Guest
Woed
1 year ago
Reply to  Legallettuce

Noone believes a word you type

Permanently on Monitoring
Guest
Permanently on Monitoring
1 year ago
Reply to  grey fox

Thanks for posting this view of cannabis reality and the envisioned future employers of Humboldt growers…

grey fox
Member
1 year ago

If they can produce product at $180-200lb they can undercut the whole mkt and drive damn near everyone else out.

Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago
Reply to  grey fox

Water? Where’s that come from? Wells? Claire Engle lake? Cheap ass water from a water district? It’s ok by the Water Board if those lettuce farmers use all your water down there! Could you put that grow in a county like Trinity, or Shasta County!?

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

Politically you could never put a grow a fraction of that size in Shasta or Trinity. I’m positive.

Yes the water use, often groundwater or canal water, is fine with SWRCB. It’s restricted by the local Program EIR mostly.

thetallone
Guest
thetallone
1 year ago
Reply to  grey fox

Holy shit, this is Steve DeAngelo’s wet dream.
https://www.glasshousebrands.com/

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago

If anyone cares enough anymore, they need to organize and counter this measure. Will the Humboldt trade groups fight back or roll over like they did with the incredibly unsustainable county sq ft tax only to complain once it was too late?

Ally
Guest
Ally
1 year ago

If the county had the people power to inspect everybody in person, they would have already done that. But they simply don’t have enough people for that.

farmer
Guest
farmer
1 year ago
Reply to  Ally

The county inspects every year and so does the state. We were inspected 4 times in 2020. The inspectors are usually pretty nice and do a lot of education. Granted I try very hard to keep up on compliance

Ally
Guest
Ally
1 year ago
Reply to  farmer

Sadly a lot of people just get helicopter flyovers 🙁

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  farmer

Not even close in Trinity. County once per 2-4 years and state once 1-2 years.

thatguyinarcata
Guest
thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  farmer

That’s not been our experience. We’ve had a total of 3 inspections in the last 5 years, 2 by the county and one from the state.

FMF
Guest
FMF
1 year ago

DO NOT SIGN THIS! This targets the last of the legal small farms that are doing things right! We care about the environment and our community, we are the good operators. This proposal is out of touch and has little to no input from the industry. It’s a misguided attempt to mislead the public. Read the fine print and ask questions! IT WILL NOT HELP SMALL FARMS

North westCertain license plate out of thousands c
Guest
North westCertain license plate out of thousands c
1 year ago
Reply to  FMF

Unfortunately too much scum has came to our area to grow.
Your argument doesn’t work anymore. The few “good ones” left should grow their own and get a job.

Fndrbndr
Guest
Fndrbndr
1 year ago

They were at the farmers market telling everyone that the initiative will be on the ballot if they get the required signatures or not.

shivani pranyam
Guest
shivani pranyam
1 year ago
Reply to  Fndrbndr

how? bcus they are communists??

JokerHat
Member
JokerHat
1 year ago

They can submit it to the supervisors who can either amend and adopt, or vote to put it on the ballot. Clearly they know the old boy handshakes to make sure the supes will go their way, whether it’s in the interest of the county or not.

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago

This initiative will definitely gat on the ballot and definitely win. People are very very sick of the entitled permit pansy mega-grows who treat their neighbors like crap. Generators all night, lights flooding out the stars, large traffic on back roads….the people in the towns will vote for this also as they also know the need to reign in a corrupted permitting system that has been manipulated by a couple supervisors and their consultant connections. And NO- this will not hurt Humboldt growers. Humboldt growers are already being destroyed by the corporate mega-farms elsewhere. There is no Humboldt weed industry, not any more. It is over. This initiative only seeks to restore peace and quiet in the hills…so the newcomers (the slick urban well-heeled well-moneyed want-to-live-in-the-country real estate buyers) will be comfortable and happy when they buy your old spots after your bankruptcy proceedings. Enjoy that “legalization” everybody!

Dragonfly
Guest
Dragonfly
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

Proposition 64 needs to be amended!! Sick of the greed and chaos brought into my neighborhood and community. The closure of longtime businesses and normalization of increased violence and heavy drug use. The diluted community and the burden to nonprofits, as well as, the impact on the environment and wildlife.

Our economy needs to go in the direction of growing Plant Based foods like Mushrooms!!!

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Dragonfly

Too late. Sorry.

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

That was a great comeback! It is too late for so many things…

Dragonfly
Guest
Dragonfly
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

This mentality is why this economy is going no where . People you need to look beyond the world of Cannabis and out of the smoke cloud. To outside markets that are recognized, funded by grants, ag loans etc.. Most of this county residents are oblivious to the millions of dollars that pass us by because everyone is looking in the wrong direction for financial stability. The climate here is perfect for growing Mushrooms. Check out MyBacon made in Albany, New York. Habit, a chain that is growing selling plant based burgers with no plant based bacon!!

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Dragonfly

Always be looking to adapt. As I get older I’ve learned that the only think I can count on is change.

Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago
Reply to  Dragonfly

So sounds like the only way to make it farming food is to be subsidized with USDA grants? If you think pot prices suck, wait til you start selling beans!

shivani pranyam
Guest
shivani pranyam
1 year ago
Reply to  Dragonfly

the closure of long time buisnesses was the objective of the plan.demic. the fake “legalization” (over-taxation, regulation) are more examples of this communisim that we must and will stop.

Dragonfly
Guest
Dragonfly
1 year ago

Oh Hog Wash. Businesses outside of the Cannabis Industry were screwed before the Pandemic. The Green Rush craze manipulated the youth, Seniors, basically most of the community. Politicians took advantage of the bullying and followed their own agenda. My favorite Pizza joint that had been around for decades closed. The Cannabis bullys manipulated 100’s of trimigrants and told them where to spend their money. This economy is a distortion of reality and Humboldt County is responsible for the economic crash by failing to to diversify.

thatguyinarcata
Guest
thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Dragonfly

Your favorite pizza place went out of business because “cannabis bullys” told their trimmers where to spend their money?

shivani pranyam
Guest
shivani pranyam
1 year ago
Reply to  Dragonfly

sounds like a pretty ungrouded story to me.
the plan.demic was put in place to deliberately ruin all human run buisness (non-corporate) world wide. did you not notice that wallmart and mcds were “allowed” to stay open, while locally owned buisnesses were made to close??
come back to reality, we need to unite for freedom here

Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago

Why?

Jay Beigh
Guest
Jay Beigh
1 year ago

//”did you not notice that wallmart and mcds were “allowed” to stay open, while locally owned buisnesses were made to close??”//

Turns out, no I didn’t notice that (because it didn’t happen).

I have Walmart and grocery stores and tiny small community general stores in my area — they all stayed open. Every. Single. One.

Nope!
Guest
Nope!
1 year ago

Do not sign – this initiative is ineffective and unnecessary. It will not help small farms at all and would do little to help the environment:

  • The industry is currently tanking & investors are slim. There are very few “mega” farm applications that are going into the County. Besides, the small local farmers are not competing with the few >1 acre Humboldt Farms, they are competing with 100+ acre farms down south. Unhelpful.
  • All new cultivation projects are already required to phase out generators, conduct engineered road assessments, and not divert surface water (requirements of Ordinance 2.0), so this initiative would only impact existing cultivators under the first ordinance (1.0), i.e. typically smaller, family farms. So any claim that this will “help” small farms is completely wrong, and it will also do nothing environmentally helpful for new farms since they are already held to extremely strict environmental standards.
  • For farms that are allowed to divert surface water (aka 1.0 farms) the current forbearance period (beginning April 1st) is backed by science and is regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board. Cultivators already have to check a gauge daily to see whether there is enough water in their specific watershed to divert or not (https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/cannabis/online_mapping_tool.html).
  • Small farms are already struggling and have invested dozens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in permitting fees, water storage, taxes, license fees, etc.
  • In my opinion, the real environmental damage is still coming from illegal/trespass grows. This initiative would do absolutely nothing to help with that issue.
  • This initiative, if passed, would NOT be able to be amended (unlike the current policies put in place by the Board of Supervisors, which can morph and change with public input and pressure).
  • Approved permits are already required to have an annual inspection; however, the County has historically been too overloaded to complete those inspections. How would this petition help that at all?
  • There are already existing permit caps by watershed. This initiative basically presents nothing effective, useful, or new.

Bottom line – change in cannabis policy IS needed, but this initiative is ineffective, hurts already struggling small farms, doesn’t significantly help the environment, does nothing to stop illegal/trespass grows, and cannot be changed with future public input.
DO NOT SIGN THE INITIATIVE, VOTE NO IF IT APPEARS ON THE BALLOT.

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago
Reply to  Nope!

But the people who rushed to get permits set into motion the neighborhood abatements. They didn’t care. So why should anybody care about them now? People were parading around with their permits and blowing out a few killer years while their neighbors got abated…those smug smiles on their faces as they dined heartily at the most expensive restaurants in town…everybody saw that happen. Now they want our help?!

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

United We Stand
Divided We Fall
But please tell me who joined the government program and left everybody else to get the hammer?

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

The permittees didn’t cause this. The end was coming for everyone and you either adapted, changed or got out. To think that illicit cannabis growing would have been saved if not for the “permit pansies” is a disillusion. Regulation came from the state and was dictated by city dwellers and urbanites. Triangle growers never had a chance. They were unable to even remotely organize into a strong enough force. They tried a bit, but each iteration only last so long and ultimately the macroeconomic started to win out.

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

Regulation came from the corporate-written model of “legalization” that was voted in. The debate before that vote had many locals unwittingly voting in favor thinking they could get permits and become richer w/ less consequences and more safety. Instead of fighting together against that terrible model of “legalization” the locals splintered- some seeking greater riches while others hoping it would fail and we would next get a more equitable model of legalization which had some protection for smaller mom n pop grows ie. legacy grows. When the proposition passed then regulation was left to individual counties. Less wiggle room but still an opportunity to stand together. We did not. CCV-H sold us all out. Those who had already blown up huge scenes and had huge stacks of cash went for the permits to enable them to blow up even more and pile more stacks of cash… even when John Ford stated that he would look at each new permit and draw concentric circles around it to begin abating in those circles….This is what happened. I get that people don’t want to admit it but this is why I must keep reminding us of our very history. I call them worse names than permit pansies but Kym won’t allow my term to be used. Yes- a few decent people also got permits and some of them were small and environmentally conscious. I’m sorry that they are being extinguished along with their old school good folks abated neighbors. But most were greedy and not good neighbors despite cloaking their intentions in self-serving new age bullshit and their lame justifications for selfish greed. We did not stand together to fight for fairness. And I have zero sympathy to allow these permit pansies to continue to light up the night sky and destroy the quiet of the forests by blowing off massive generators all night long, all year long. Once they have permits they cannot be stopped or corrected because it is a very corrupt system at work in this county. Perhaps if we did not have such a corrupted permitting system this petition would fail. I guess we shall see…

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

That’s a whole lot. Somewhat spot on, but the regs were not entirely left to local jurisdictions. CDFA wrote their own and then everyone still needed to follow CEQA. The entire scene was more or less over by 2016-2017 just took a long time to die. Agreed it was a corporate fake legalization but my point is that the city dwellers voted for it and there was no concerted lobbying by conscious farmers strong enough to change back the tide. The dam had broken and nothing anyone in the triangle could do to stop it. It is a force of human nature and the tragedy of the commons flooded the triangle. When a tsunami comes in there’s nothing you can do to stop it. If you think Ford and his circles are bad, check out trinity where the sheriff took millions from planning dept cannabis license fees to fund code enforcement. It starved the planning dept of resources and propped up TCSO and the general fund with fines. BOS actually used the fines to help pay to finish the new jail and buy the old bank in weaverville for cannabis division staff. Total slush fund and corruption. I don’t like it, but it’s not worth fighting for. I made my decision 4 years ago. Gave it a good try to only find no one else cared enough. Bummer, but I had some of the best days of my life pre2016.

nah
Guest
nah
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

Tha law had protection for mom and pops until the midnight hour, when the cap on farm size was removed. That aspect of your narrative is thus inaccurate.

mlr the giant squirrel in Eureka
Guest
mlr the giant squirrel in Eureka
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

Grow lights and generators powering them need to be outlawed in our rural areas. People live there for peace and quiet.

Outside Looking In
Guest
Outside Looking In
1 year ago

I’ve been growing my own weed for a while now, and it never occurred to me that I need to use a GD generator to do it – and YOU don’t need one to grow weed either.

That sauce
Guest
That sauce
1 year ago

Do you have grid power?

thatguyinarcata
Guest
thatguyinarcata
1 year ago

I’ve been making my own bread for a while now, and it never occurred to me that I need to use a GD giant commercial oven to do it – and YOU don’t need one to bake bread either.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago

Lol

Oh really?
Guest
Oh really?
1 year ago

You need a generator when you can’t get by on one run, and you want to run an indoor in your greenhouse in November, or February. Nobody would place their giant commercial bread oven out Titlow Hill Rd., to be run by a diesel generator! They’d put it in town with a service drop!

thatguyinarcata
Guest
thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

If titlow hill offered you some other economic advantage for your bread baking you might very well put the oven out there. The economics of growing weed off grid with generators is eliminating them much more efficiently than any over broad regulation will

JayBeigh
Guest
JayBeigh
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

If people hated the smell of bread in town, you might well need to move out to the countryside and run your oven on a generator.

Decisions on where to place a grow facility always seems simple to people until they go about actually making it work.

Thumbs 👎
Guest
Thumbs 👎
1 year ago
Reply to  Oh really?

If you live off grid, you need a generator. Or maybe you have never tried to live off grid?

MARGRO
Guest
1 year ago

Please don’t sign this initiative unless you support regulating farms into extinction. As an example, we had a dry February and a wet March. But, they want to ban water collection in March – which is already restricted to 10% or less of water flow and only allowed for 2016 applicants.
This initiative does not just limit permits, it provides the opportunity to disqualify a significant number of existing small permitted farms.
This in not about reform, it is about pushing our Humboldt farms into the illegal market with NO regulation, NO oversight and NO restrictions. This is bad for our environment, it is bad for our craft cannabis farmers, and it takes back the social justice gains made in the last 5 years.
Do we really need more oversight, more restrictions, more bureaucracy to an already overburdened system? The total amount of currently permitted farms in Humboldt is less than one square mile. We do not need protection against large scale farms, we need protection for our existing small legacy farms.
Let’s get this right – do not sign this unless you fully understand the content and the negative impact it will have on our cannabis farming community.

Entering a world of pain
Guest
Entering a world of pain
1 year ago
Reply to  MARGRO

A wet March? haha. Thats a good one

Arctostaphylos
Guest
Arctostaphylos
1 year ago
Reply to  MARGRO

For those not aware, this commenter (or someone by same name) is a consultant who makes money from the permitting/paperwork of farms, both brand new farms and legacy operations. Not surprising that they would be opposed to this.

Observer
Guest
Observer
1 year ago
Reply to  Arctostaphylos

More regulation means more work for consultants. So your assumption about motives falls flat.

mlr the giant squirrel in Eureka
Guest
mlr the giant squirrel in Eureka
1 year ago
Reply to  MARGRO

It’s the bad actors that disturb the rural peace and tranquility that brought this down on grower community.

Jerry Latsko
Guest
1 year ago

Comments by pseudonym are lamer than lame…

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Latsko

You don’t get it. Ok, no way to know you’re name is really who you are.

Larry Jetski
Guest
Larry Jetski
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

Sounds like…

sootoh namestay
Guest
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Latsko

It’s the internet Jerry .

No. One. Cares.

That sauce
Guest
That sauce
1 year ago

Very Happy to see the amount of people NOT in favor of this in the comments. This will NOT be a good thing for small farms even though it’s being branded as such. Everybody is already struggling enough. Please do NOT sign this petition, thank you.

Guest
Guest
Guest
1 year ago

Now that corporations have mega grows, Pelosi is lifting the Federal regulations. Guess corporate people are more important than citizen people. I bet those green houses produced a lot of vegetables for people, but cannabis will make them more money ha ha. Plus corporate persons only pay 20% income tax, where working class persons…….

Bozo
Guest
Bozo
1 year ago
Reply to  Guest

Follow the money.

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago
Reply to  Guest

Plus large corporations can write off their losses against profits made in other branches of their business to withstand years of growing at a loss. Not possible for a family outfit to do that! The borg will consume you all..enjoy your “legalization”!

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

Family farms should also structure their businesses to limit taxes. I’m still shocked how many are operating at sole proprietorships or disregarded LLCs.

Jay Beigh
Guest
Jay Beigh
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

Be careful now — LegalLettuce will be calling you “corporate” since that’s how he says he determines what percentage of licenses are ‘Wall Street’ or not … by looking at the license database for LLC/C/etc names.

Of course what he avoids is that as you say, even the small family farm should (and almost always does) use a corporate structure for all sorts of business reasons. You’re basically a dumbass if you don’t.

Last edited 1 year ago
Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago

I do not know Thurman. But I know a few real douches doing scenes out Kneeland, Showers Pass, etc. Not everybody sucks but I wouldn’t be surprised at all if these douches did stuff to legitimately piss off Thurman. Lots of old-timers do not like when new people come in and piss all over the neighborhood with little to no respect. I guess we’ll see if other people in the county are feeling run over also? It’s kind of like when the ballers and gro bros acted like asses and got the voters to rise up against ALL growers good or bad. These permit people can’t be abated and some behave terribly so everybody has to pay…I know that story! Don’t blame Thurman- blame the people that pissed him off and would not resolve with him, their neighbor

willow creeker
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

Tell it!

shivani pranyam
Guest
shivani pranyam
1 year ago

this proposal is nuts, incase you had any doubts.

id like to say i voted no on legalization in the 2000s whenever it was.

people, human beings, who believe “regulating” anything, and basically “tattliling” and thinking that they are on the “side of the gvnmt”?? really?? regulation is BAD. regulation. is. communisim. (have we learned this lesson yet??)

more regulations?? on What, i ask?? lol the $2-300 market??

this Riduculous proposal is trying to act like a cliquey “who gets to grow weed in humboldt”… honey, take a Drive, and a Gander. there are thousands of miles of mega super grows from oregon to the california desert.
but go ahead and regulate something which no longer exists. (“the market”)

and no, im not talking about our River (no longer existing). for those who wonder what causes climate change, there is a “wall” off of our coast made by harp. it blocks all incomming ocean storms makes our winters extreemly dry, when blue is in charge, to promote the climate change awareness so that they can regulate and tax you.

so keep believing the narrative!!! (said with love)

Huh?
Guest
Huh?
1 year ago

Finally someone else out there talks about it too! You can watch weather radar and see storms hit that thing like a brick wall. Then they curl around it to the north through Washington and BC and south near the Mexico border. The weather channel was calling it the RRR about 5 years ago. But it’s not talked about anymore.

Jay Beigh
Guest
Jay Beigh
1 year ago

Keep wearing the tin foil hat!!! (said with love)

Heidi
Guest
1 year ago

These rules should’ve been put into place in 2016, Humboldt County has really ruined the economy by giving out so many large grow permits to out of the area people. People aren’t buying new trucks new clothes or going out to dinner like they used to no one can afford it.

mlr the giant squirrel in Eureka
Guest
mlr the giant squirrel in Eureka
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi

The collapse of Humboldt’s economy is far more widespread than car dealerships and restaurants, ask around. There’s 25% less money circulating in the county.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi

Trinity tried to restrict licenses to residents and it was legally shot down. They still limited canopy and licenses (about 500 at 10k or less and 30 at 1 acre) and the economy barely sputtered along, mostly driven by illicit grows. People had high hopes and dreams but it was a mirage.

Fndrbndr
Guest
Fndrbndr
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

Trinity failed to comply with CEQA. All growing in trinity is illegal. Just what I heard.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Fndrbndr

Trinity has a PEIR, but never could retain staff or organize enough to process licenses and environmental review so most are provisional licenses. That’s gonna change starting this month, but it may take a few years to get everyone an annual. The true part, and sad, is that all county licenses are invalid and people have to decide to grow or not grow with only a state license. It’s far from perfect.

Fndrbndr
Guest
Fndrbndr
1 year ago
Reply to  Hayforker

Seems like you know what’s going on. CEQA is mandated by the state so how are the state licenses still valid?

Jay Beigh
Guest
Jay Beigh
1 year ago
Reply to  Fndrbndr

// “how are the state licenses still valid?”//

Provisional licenses are allowed (with tighter restrictions as time goes on) to operate without final CEQA approval.

Hayforker
Guest
Hayforker
1 year ago
Reply to  Fndrbndr

JB is correct. These farms are allowed to operate as provisionals for now. State provisional are only gonna be issued for less than two more years (as I recall). There might be another extension by state legislature but remains to be seen. Humboldt is much further ahead, mendo not so much. Trinity probably won’t get all CEQA docs approved before state ends provisionals… gonna be tight. I think mendo is in serious trouble.

shivani pranyam
Guest
shivani pranyam
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi

the thing is, this would work if it was state, or countrywide, lol. but i am anti regulation myself. let God be the regulator.

Last edited 1 year ago
nah
Guest
nah
1 year ago

Same god that gives bone cancer to children?

edited for content
Guest
edited for content
1 year ago

Oh good grief… this train has left the station. The Democrat Demagogues that run Kalifornistan with an iron fist have made sure that their woke corporate benefactors are going to get the lion’s share of profits at the expense of the little guy everywhere.

Any hack can grow a bit of weed for their own use without paying taxes or dealing with the permit process. Why on earth would anyone pay top dollar for weed they can grow themselves?

Last edited 1 year ago
thatguyinarcata
Guest
thatguyinarcata
1 year ago

The same reason people buy food they could grow themselves. Either they don’t have the space, or they have structured their lives so that it is more efficient for them to obtain money and trade it for quality products they like than to produce a lesser quality product themselves.

Lots of people just aren’t plant people and don’t take to plant care easily

edited for content
Guest
edited for content
1 year ago

I concur with your assessment that some will pay for services or products that they either can’t or won’t provide for themselves. I’ll pay good money for locally grown fruits and vegetables while mine are growing or between production. However, that isn’t on a monetary scale that cannabis farmers want for a budding flower from a simply grown plant. I believe that producers should be able to recoup their cost to produce. Just seems odd that politicians feel the need to overly tax one plant but have no taxes at all on others. The market will stabilize, but if the price of the buds, flowers, fruit or yield of any other plant is an indicator, then the market for the produce of this plant in question appears to be trending downward.

thatguyinarcata
Guest
thatguyinarcata
1 year ago

Yes, the market price has been dramatically inflated for decades due to prohibition. No sane person is expecting to receive prices comparable to the pure black market days.

The question at this point is simply how heavily state and local government will choke the remaining farmers. High quality cannabis flower is not that simple toproduce, compared to common garden produce. Obviously hobbyists can do it just fine at home if it’s something they are interested in, but the reality is that very few people care to do that sort of thing. There will continue to be a large market for cannabis flowers and the consumer will continue to pay a price that can support farmers who produce their product efficiently and at a high grade. Whether the government will make accessing those markets affordable or logistically possible to those farmers remains an open question

edited for content
Guest
edited for content
1 year ago

Farmers markets with locally grown products are common everywhere. Anyone stigmatizing cannabis is living in the Stone Age. Local farmers should be able to hock their wares at any farmers market. And farmers interested in having customers come to them, should be able to create a sampling area on their farms like wineries can. Eliminate the dispensaries. Pretty simple solution. And don’t tax the plant or the acreage used to grow it, tax the income. (Leave it to greedy politicians to come up with that multi-faceted, layer upon layer of bullshit taxes they imposed!)

Gonna be interesting to see what Congress does with marijuana reform. Guarantee them hucksters have seen the taxes collected by the states that have legalized it and now congress is going to want it’s cut. I won’t be surprised if the ATF adds another letter to their department.

nah
Guest
nah
1 year ago

The ideas (and what got conservative to go along with legalization) was that cannabis is subject to “sin tax”. They believe that smoking cannabis is immoral, but didn’t have a problem profiting from it via outrageous taxes.

nah
Guest
nah
1 year ago

It’s similar to tomatoes. Most people will have limited success in their first few attempts, then will produce OK quality. Not everyone who eat tomatoes wants the hobby of growing tomatoes.

In my 1911 I trust
Guest
In my 1911 I trust
1 year ago

They realize Humboldt isn’t an island and the cultivators in this county compete against the rest of the state and soon, the nation? Every place has less regulatory hurdles than here. Way to really try to hogtie the county and it’s ability to compete.

Also, no new indoor? That’s the only thing that actually can compete and sell in dispensaries. Or mixed light assisted deps. Both of which the proposers of this bill wish to do away with.

Is this these hanger-on weed haters last attempt to get weed out of Humboldt? It might be easier to move themselves than the weed at this point.

Last edited 1 year ago
losing proposition
Guest
losing proposition
1 year ago

trying to prop up the price with limits on business will only drive business elsewhere.

Some dude
Guest
Some dude
1 year ago

This is just a delusional attempt by some anti cannabis senior citizens who are out of touch with the times and reality of the current market. They are bitter about a legal farm in view of their house, and now are lashing out at families County wide. They should be ashamed for the assault on small farms in such a prejudice and stereotypical manner. Before spending there time and energy on such a negative campaign maybe they should have sat down to dinner with some of the small family farms fighting for survival and asked questions, gotten to know a few of them.,

Bearjoo
Guest
Bearjoo
1 year ago
Reply to  Some dude

God Bless Everyone… This was interesting board discussion… “The boardroom” of Humco. Times changed, people changed, but its still really pretty part of the world. I can see arguments on both sides on this one, but in the end God punished us for our sins. Now we can move on and turn to him or turn to growing Poppies or something really evil. Your choice. Good argument was made that weed is over on here. That is both tragic and comedic for me. I appreciate the way it was but recognize it might not be the way of the future. Good times. Bless Up.

Little grow in the prairie
Guest
Little grow in the prairie
1 year ago

Make no mistake about it, this is a measure sponsored by some wealthy NYMBYs from Kneeland that want to “preserve” their lifestyle, worried about a grow coming near. This was the result of the propose mega grow that made headlines a few month ago. They have phonily inserted language like “promote small grows” but the prop would make it super difficult from small farmers to exist. This is as anti cannabis as it gets..

Bill
Guest
Bill
1 year ago

It’s been long enough to legalize. If your farm isn’t legal by now so be it. Cut it off and call other states to organize with you. The greed is sick In California they love crashing businesses