County Staff Pans Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative

Humboldt County Staff report cannabis with marijuana leavesNote: This reporter has spoken in opposition of HCRI on Attorney Eugene Denson’s The Right’s Organization show on KMUD Radio. 

Tomorrow, Tuesday, March 7, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors are inviting public comment after a staff presentation regarding the Board requested analysis and recommendation for the Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative (HCRI). 

HCRI supporters obtained over 7,000 signatures, more than required to make the March 2024 ballot. The HCRI purports to “Protect the County’s residents and natural resources from harm caused by large-scale cannabis cultivation.”

However, a twenty-seven page review by Humboldt County staff, released in the Supervisor’s agenda, concluded that while the intentions behind the initiative may be sincere, “The HCRI will have dire consequences to the cannabis industry in Humboldt County.”  

Some Areas of Concern in the HCRI Cited by the County 

  1. Number of permits being issued 
  2. Concentration of permits
  3. Larger grows being approved 
  4. Road evaluations 
  5. Use of groundwater for irrigation 
  6. Use of generators and switching to renewable sources 
  7. Cultivation transition space”

The HCRI says, “The transition from small-scale to large-scale cannabis  cultivation is adversely affecting the community and the natural environment…Concerns voiced by residents include: dust, noise, odor, glare, unsightly structures damaging scenic views, reductions in stream flows and water well production,  adverse effects on wildlife, dangerous road conditions, and road deterioration.” 

The staff report says, “The finding infers that every cannabis operation is filled with adverse impacts that are not being  addressed. This is simply not true.”

Staff argues current cannabis regulations are thorough, but the HCRI would make compliance more prohibitive, if not impossible, adding, “The HCRI could have the opposite effect by making compliance so difficult that the legal market is rendered not viable in Humboldt County… Making compliance even more difficult to participate in the legal market may encourage some to return to the illicit cannabis industry.” 

If passed, the HCRI would not prevent new large scale farms as intended, but instead impact all sized farms, debatably not achieving what it set out to.

The analysis stated, “These restrictions affect the  smallest of farms permitted in Humboldt County to the largest cultivation sites.”  

Multiple Permits

The HCRI says, “No approval of a permit for commercial cannabis cultivation shall result in either of the following: (a) any one person holding more than one active permit approved after the Effective Date of the Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative at the same time, or (b) more than one active permit approved after the Effective Date of the Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative on the same legal parcel at the same time.” 

County staff argue in their analysis, “Under the CMMLUO [Commercial Medical Marijuana Land Use Ordinance], a person can have up to four permits. Under the [Commercial Cannabis Land Use Ordinance] CCLUO a person may not have permits to cultivate more than 8 acres, but there is no limitation on the number of permits a person can have.”

As detailed in a previous article, small farmers and the Humboldt County Growers Alliance, are concerned about this diminishing their ability to diversify with on-site processing, in addition to micro and tourism businesses.

County staff concurred writing, “The flexibility provided by the CCLUO in the number of permits was designed  to allow farmers to have different types of permits to diversify their source of income. This  includes Community Propagation Centers, processing, distribution, manufacturing, and farm tours to name a few…This will affect many of the approved permits and make them non-conforming unable to even add additional water storage.” 

“No Expansion” Means No Solar or Water Storage Upgrades and More

The HCRI would additionally not improve environmental concerns according to staff, who wrote, “The HCRI has been written to effectively discourage existing permit holders from modifying their permits in any way.  This includes adding infrastructure intended for environmental protections or modification of activities or site configuration to adapt to the evolving industry.” 

Staff also found the approach in the HCRI to “protect …from harm caused by large-scale cannabis cultivation,” was ineffective and may have unintended consequences. 

The report reads,  “[The initiative] … develop[es] a regulatory system that renders most existing permitted farms non-conforming. This will place Humboldt County farmers at an increased disadvantage in the statewide cannabis market precluding permit modifications needed to keep pace with an evolving statewide cannabis industry and possibly preclude installment of new improvements for environmental sustainability.”

Market Misunderstandings in the HCRI

According to the county’s analysis, the HCRI also fails to notice current market trends. The county’s analysis says new applications are not a real concern, writing, “Submittal of applications for new cultivation under the current market conditions has effectively ceased. This is not expected to change in the near future and so the impact on new applications is not a primary concern.”

“Humboldt County Does Not Have Large Scale Farms”

The basis for the HCRI’s regulations is based on false premises, county staff wrote: “Some of the assertions in the findings are misleading or false. The most profound of these findings is that Humboldt County’s regulations allow large scale cannabis cultivation sites.”

The Staff analysis says, “Based upon the language of the initiative, anything over 10,000 square feet is a large-scale operation.”

Staff looks at the scope of “large scale” permits in the county v state, writing, “The largest farms in Humboldt County range between 7 and 8 acres. There are four farms this size. For comparison, in Lake County there are farms in excess of 60 acres and in Santa Barbara and San Bernardino Counties there are farms in excess of 100 acres. In a statewide market context, Humboldt County does not have large scale farms.”

The HCRI claims, “Humboldt County’s cannabis ordinances allow large-scale operations that threaten to displace small-scale cultivators.”  

The analysis states, “The initiative does not explain how approval of large-scale cultivation comes at the expense of … small-scale cultivation …the finding infers large new cultivators are dominating the permits being obtained in  Humboldt County and this is not true.”

To get a look at the scope of permit sizes and environmental impact in Humboldt, the County detailed in their staff report “Over 70% of the active permits are for existing cultivation sites,” adding,

“To date, the County has processed over 1,200 cannabis cultivation permits to approval, although the number of active permits as of January 2023 was 1,027 due to withdrawal and cancellations by permit holders. The total permitted cultivation area in the County is 332 acres… Out of 1,027 total active cultivation permits, 739 of those are pre-existing cultivation sites. A total of 210 permits have been approved for new cultivation.”

Cannabis Permits Approved New and Existing 

Of those permits still active today, 42% (or 309) are over 10,000 sq. ft., and 58% (or 430) are 10,000 and less. (Note: There are a substantial number of permits that are 10,000 sq. ft.)

As of December  31, 2016, “Over 2,300 applications were submitted,” according to the staff report. Approved cultivation permits in operation are less than half that amount (not including permit modifications).

Year

Total Cumulative Cannabis Permits Approved 

2017

106

2018

299

2019

535

2020

770

2021

1,138

2022

1,329

(including permit modifications)

Figures featured in the staff analysis. [Chart by Nichole Norris]

The report states, “Currently, the County has issued 1,027 cannabis cultivation permits and 118 other cannabis activity permits such as for manufacturing, dispensaries, nurseries etc.”

Retracting Industry Post Legalization

Staff also noted the HCRI failed to consider the number of pre-existing permitted sites which lessens potential environmental impacts when compared to new farms, in addition to the prominence of abatements that closed down over 1,200 farms entirely. 

Staff wrote, “The HCRI does not acknowledge that most of the approved cannabis permits are for pre-existing cultivation sites (sites that existed prior to legalization) and that for every new site that has been approved, five (5) have been removed through the Code Enforcement process.”

According to the class action lawsuit recently filed by the Institute for Justice regarding the “unconstitutionality” of the County’s cannabis abatement program, over 1,200 farms have received abatements as of early 2022.

The staff’s analysis explains the abatement program helped reduce the number of farms, writing, “Starting in 2018, the Planning and Building Department has pursued a program of identifying and abating illegal cannabis cultivation…. Over the last two years there have been no new unpermitted outdoor cannabis cultivation sites developing and previously cultivated sites are not being re-used. Much  of the illicit cannabis cultivation is now being done indoors and the Sheriff’s office has been  focusing on identifying these and serving inspection warrants on these properties.”  

Under HCRI New Farms Can Only be 10,000 Square Foot Farms or Less, and Other Permits Received After March Left in Limbo

According to staff, another false assumption made in the HCRI is there is, “Continued growth in the number of commercial cannabis cultivation permits and the amount of acreage under cultivation threatens the community and the environment.”

The staff report says in order to reduce environmental impacts the HCRI claims to “reduc[e] the caps on permits and acreage.”

Farms over 10,000 sq. ft. would be considered non-comforming under HCRI, and staff adds,

“The measure would also limit any other new approvals for permits [with] a cultivation area of [more than] 10,000 square feet…If the caps are exceeded, any new applications are to be placed in a queue and shall not be further considered or processed until the limits for permits or acreage fall below the limit.”  

There are already caps in place that are nearing their limits, said staff, who added, “The caps posed in the initiative may be exceeded just by processing applications that were  received prior to March 4, 2022. Applications received and completed prior to March 4,  2022, may still be processed; however, this creates significant uncertainty for applications  received after March 4, 2022…The HCRI significantly limits the issuance of any additional  cannabis permits beyond those already deemed complete as of March 4, 2022.”

Category 4 Road Requirements Threatens to Put Many Farmers Out of Business

Road requirements were another matter of contention with HCRI according to the county. 

According to staff, if the HCRI passed it would be, “a significant change that would dramatically affect existing cultivators.”

In their analysis it states, 

The HCRI would require new or expanded cannabis cultivation sites to be located on a  category 4 road (or same practical effect), this must be confirmed by a licensed engineer. The  CMMLUO did not include any road standards… If the road was the equivalent of a  Category 4 road no additional review is required. If it is less than a [C]ategory 4 road, an engineer must assess whether the road has the functional capacity to serve all existing traffic and the cultivation site.”

The report says this requirement provides, “No flexibility to consider context and volume of traffic on a road,” and it would also, “ increase costs for farmers to complete the analysis by paying for an engineer, and in the cost of upgrading the road to Category 4 which will probably not be feasible for 10,000 square feet of cultivation.”  

“Many applications that could still be pending at the time of initiative approval could then not  be approved because they are not on a Category 4 road,” staff added, meaning money and time invested so far  would be lost.  

Category 4 Road requirements imposed by the HCRI, would additionally be in “direct contradiction to the small farmer provision of the CCLUO, which waived the  road requirements when the cultivation area was 3,000 square feet or less and the farmers lived on the property,” according to staff, which added, “Even these small farmers would then become nonconforming.”

Water, Diversion and Forbearance

Staff wrote the HCRI imposed arbitrary diversion and forbearance dates that were not based on evidence, stating, This policy increases forbearance  period for diversions to March 1 to November 15 from the current default forbearance period  which is May 15 to October 31. The current county ordinance recognizes the state may require a greater or lesser period based upon water availability…The HCRI  does not provide any analysis or data to explain why the forbearance period should be uniformly increased locally and diverge from standards acceptable to CDFW or the Water Board. The HCRI  cites two studies, one of which was not conducted for our region.” 

Staff clarifies in their analysis that the “CMMLUO only allows diversion from surface water for pre-existing cultivators and those  who have a water right to do so. In situations where diversion is allowed, forbearance is  required. Every well that has been allowed for cannabis irrigation has been reviewed to  ensure it is not pulling from the underflow of a stream, creek, or river.”

Yearly Permit Renewal

One of the primary complaints for cannabis farmers since legalization, is the time intensive aspect of getting their permits approved, with many waiting years after submitting their application before they get approved. 

According to staff, the HCRI aims to, “Set a limit on the term of a permit  for 1 year, requiring renewal each year. The initiative is not clear on what the renewal process  would entail. This provision would allow the County to inspect the property without notice.”

Not only would this place unnecessary burdens on and added costs to the county, it would leave farmers in an unstable regulatory environment, according to the report.

The staff analysis reads,Placing a term limit on the permit creates unreasonable uncertainty for the business enterprise  by placing the permit in jeopardy each year…Under current circumstances this would involve the County processing over 1,000 renewal  applications per year…Discretionary permits (anything over 3,000 square feet) would be  subject to changing political and social influences each year. This does not provide a stable  regulatory environment.” 

Voter Approval Required for Changes Under HCRI

Another issue regarding the initiative according to staff, is the time it would take to change the county’s codes in the future because an election would be required.

The staff analysis reads, “Other than things that are expressly allowed to be changed by the Board in the initiative, any changes to the initiative would require a vote of the people, this would cement these regulations in place until the public wanted to change them…There are currently watershed caps…however under HCRI…the caps and limits can only ever be revisited by initiative (voter approval)…This approach does not consider the variability of the market.”

The report says the way the initiative was written is misleading, and added, “It is likely that the public does not understand this initiative.”

There are many more issues detailed by the staff and featured in their extensive report on the HCRI, which can be seen here.

Alternatives to the HRCI Proposed by Staff and Industry Leaders

Ross Gorden, the Policy Director for Humboldt County Grower’s Alliance (HCGA), reiterating past comments on HCRI, writing on the County’s report said,

“The county’s analysis makes it very clear that, regardless of the authors’ original intent, the actual effects of the HCRI would be devastating to every small farmer in Humboldt County, and lead to far worse environmental outcomes than the current ordinance. The proponents have a choice about whether they want to continue to advocate for a broken policy. They should take the opportunity to withdraw the initiative, and bring their concerns forward through an open public process where everyone can participate.”

The county’s proposed alternatives to the initiative were to educate the public about the unintended consequences of the HRCI. The staff report states the aim is to, “Seek to inform the public of the initiative’s many impacts if adopted…includ[ing] that the initiative would not protect the environment from large scale grows but would prevent Humboldt County cultivators from becoming more environmentally sustainable and competing in the legal market.” 

In addition the staff suggested, “Work through the Ad Hoc and a citizens advisory committee to develop a competing initiative for the March 2024 ballet…It is important to attempt to address the significant challenges that the initiative would pose. It is recommended an Ad Hoc Committee be formed to meet with the initiative sponsors to determine if there are alternative actions available that would better harmonize existing county cannabis regulations with those concerns raised in the initiative.”

“RECOMMENDATION(S):

That the Board of Supervisors:

  1. Receive the staff presentation on the Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative (HCRI).
  2. Allow public input on the findings of the Analysis and Recommendations
  3. Make a motion to form an Ad Hoc Committee to work on the following:
  4. Meet with sponsors of the HCRI to determine if alternative actions to voter consideration of the initiative are feasible
  5. Work with the HCRI sponsors, the public, cannabis industry stakeholders and staff to develop ordinance modifications,
  6. In the event items a and b above are not feasible, develop a strategy to respond to the HCRI as submitted”

We reached out the the authors and supporters of the HCRI however, due to unprecedented weather Mark Thurmond wrote, “We are snowed in and dealing with some emergency/urgency situations.  We have not been able to discuss the report and are not in a position to discuss it with you.”

We will update you here when the proponents make a comment, though you will likely hear supporters of the initiative at the Supervisors’ meeting tomorrow morning starting at 9 a.m. (agenda), though this item is not time certain so the item could come up at any time throughout the day.

Call/Zoom Public Comment:

When the Board of Supervisors announce the agenda item that you wish to comment on, call the conference line 720 707 2699, enter Meeting ID 846 4427 1317 and press star (*) 9 on your phone, this will raise your hand. You’ll continue to hear the Board meeting on the call. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR TV OR LIVE STREAM TO AVOID DELAYS.

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.

55 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Madrone is the best Supervisor in Humboldt
Guest
Madrone is the best Supervisor in Humboldt
1 year ago

So….what’s the score?

Humboldt = 1,329 cannabis permits approved

Mendocino = 8 cannabis permits approved

What the heck is going on in Mendo?

Seriously, I’m not a conspiracy person, but is there some sort of motive for Mendo not approving more permits?

Nichole Norris
Guest
Nichole Norris
1 year ago

While Mendocino is struggling indeed, its 1027 active cultivation permits today (not including those that went fallow, are not cultivation etc.) Some estimates say there were 10,000- 20,000 farms pre legalization in Humboldt.

Permanently on Monitoring
Guest
Permanently on Monitoring
1 year ago

Who really cares?

The Supervisors should all be fired.

Big Cannabis is now a thing, and growing it will be survival of the fittest…

Same as Alaska Fishermen:

If you are suffering, it’s because the Government favors big business, and because it’s easier to find culprits when taxes are not paid, fees are not paid or when illegal stuff happens…

Madrone is the best Supervisor in Humboldt
Guest
Madrone is the best Supervisor in Humboldt
1 year ago

Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative =

The Karen Initiative!

karen-hall-of-fame-01.jpg
A registered voter
Guest
A registered voter
1 year ago

The picture is purely an Attack: ad hominem
Pretty low way to just show photos and not discuss the merits.
The voters will decide in a democratic form of government.
Let the people decide or are you for a dictatorship?

No need to respond to this post as it only states the truth and supports the fundamental right of one person one vote.

Long live our free country!

THC
Member
THC
1 year ago

Lol, this should be interesting. I’ve never seen somebody try to give a goose CPR before, or are they just going to tear out the liver and make pate?

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  THC

Tear out the liver and make pate. A lot of people who were already put out of see this as retribution. Karma sucks.

Jerry Latsko
Guest
Jerry Latsko
1 year ago

When I arrived in this community a little over 40 years ago, many of what were called “counter culture” or ” hippie” folks were growing, smoking, and , often enough, selling weed. I’m not going to call it cannabis. Many of these same people were actively working against the rampant over logging of the forests by the likes of Charles Hurwitz’ MAXXAM. Hurwitz was a greedy guy from out of town who was extracting beautiful, useful resources in a destructive, overly fast way with no regard for the environment or the health of humans and other creatures. How strange it is now to see the same type of extraction of useful, beautiful resources by , in many cases, greedy big businesses with lots of lawyers and politicians helping. This initiative is merely an attempt to reign in some of the destruction. The planners, I’m afraid, have pretty much helped to make a mess of things in many people’s minds, so we are not real sure that what they recommend would be helpful. This thing should go on the ballot and win.

Sigh
Guest
Sigh
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Latsko

Buckle up Jerry, for post-blowback extravaganza. On this subject I mostly just sit back and eat popcorn. (Tho, personally, I’d like to see profit taken entirely out of a plant most everyone can grow at home).

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Latsko

Illegal methods were relied upon to take out the many and benefit the few. The many are now going to make sure the few lose too. Hope you paid off that permit, cause it’s over.

So hum friend
Guest
So hum friend
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Latsko

Jerry, this initiative doesn’t attempt to “reign in destruction”. That is so misleading.” Greedy big business, lawyers and politicians? Over half the farms in Humboldt are 10,000 sq feet. Those left are your friends and neighbors.. many were the ones fighting against Maxxam. Many are Stewards of the Earth. Striving to protect their homes and families . This garbage initiative and its over reach, strict language, and long list of requirements will stop all Humboldt County CANNABIS farmers from being able succeed. All of them. Forcing them back into the black market. That doesn’t protect our environment.
You seem confused about what it actually says. It doesn’t differentiate between any farms over 3000 sq feet. It makes regulations the county can’t actually apply, and will literally cost the taxpayers millions in added costs. . Hopefully as suggested, the county will sue the HCRI for everything they’ve got. Conversations on the best way to do that are actually happening. Read the bill. Read the 27 page report damning it. Then tell me this is something you can support 💯. Because it’s an all-or-nothing can not be amended bill full of garbage that won’t protect any of us. Do you really love the ghost town that Garberville has become? Can’t wait for the next land grab by Bay Area residents looking for cheaper homes?

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago
Reply to  So hum friend

Hmm…the only people I know left have huge farms and mansions and sell out of state. Upper class wealthy for sure. But they will put on their dirty jeans and pretend to be dirt farmers for the photo-ops. And they still have money buried. They will be fine in fact they will still be much better than the people who got attacked by John Ford…also- Garberville is over. You really need to accept that.

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  So hum friend

Should’ve opposed the satellite but you didn’t when it benefited you, you supported something highly illegal that violated all our rights. The satellite is still there. You aren’t going back to the black market. We are all being watched thanks to your support of government fraud. Now the industry is being canned legally. Actually legally with our votes and it has the blessing of so many of us. Treat your neighbors with respect and you may get some.

Support the destruction of your neighbors and don’t be surprised when they vote to do away with you too.

B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

Wait a second
Because I fought and battled against the planning department and their corruption and won.

I am now the enemy because I hold a 10k sq ft cultivation site.

Look closely and ask questions today.

106 permits approved in 2017.
How.many of those 106 were new cultivation?

I am guessing all.

Most pre-existing took three to four years. We were treated just as bad as if we were being abated

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  B Honest

Here’s the thing, after the greed rush, the majority of citizens in our county opposed weed. Then during legalization, the few saw they could use legalization to eliminate their competition, even though most people opposed weed already. So you attacked a destroyed your own team and removed them from the industry for your own benefit. Now, you are in the extreme minority because those of us who were kicked out have moved on and have no intention of going back. You “ate your own children,” now, the chickens are coming home to roost.

Don’t you like regulations? This is a Democrat county and democrats love regulations.

B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

Don’t you think it’s funny that some new cultivation permits took a year or less?

Those dorks may have been narc’s but no legacy grower would ever turn in a neighbor.

The problem is not one farm will ever be private again with satellite imagery.

Learn to adopt or comply and go legit

There really isn’t any other option

And to be clear no one wanted legalization. Government sucks period. The work and help friends before the public always.

Hence look into the time of new permits vrs pre-existing

farmer
Guest
farmer
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Latsko

yep our family were there packing in food to tree sitters and put our safety at risk..I wish people would actually educate themselves about what we do before they compare us to some salt farmer indoor bs

Brian Murphy
Guest
Brian Murphy
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Latsko

You obviously know little to nothing about the industry even after allegedly living here for decades. You obviously have not read the initiative and what the ramifications will have on legitimate businesses, and you’re generalizing ignorantly about a huge swathe of individuals.

Nanc
Guest
Nanc
1 year ago

Humboldt you need to go back and use common sense you can not tie up a business by over regulating every aspect. Just shameful!

Steve Koch
Guest
Steve Koch
1 year ago
Reply to  Nanc

Elections matter. Humboldt votes Dem and Dems are big into regulations, especially environmental regulations.

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  Nanc

Humboldt votes for regulations. You voted for regulations that crushed your competition. We are just protecting our neighborhoods now too. Don’t like it?

See you at the ballot box!

B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

You are jealous you were not smart enough to get a permit.

Look having a permit means nothing today without federal legalization.

California allowed monopolies in the retail sector and because of that Humboldt weed doesn’t get purchased.

You need to be vertical or you weed no matter how good just sits around or offered at below cost of production

So don’t hate those that got through the system just because you didn’t

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  B Honest

So you are attempting to insult someone’s intelligence who moved on into another industry and has been very successful, while you chose to remain in a dying industry?

Try being honest😂😂

B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

Dying industry. What are you talking about. Total sales last year was 23 billion and going to 50 billion by 2030.

It’s old strangled here in Cali
It will correct itself and Humboldt will be huge again unless people like you are who quit make it harder on us.

Thanks

Your that ex drink that roast his friends for a cocktail

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  B Honest

Lol. 2040 $1000 billion!!!!!

You realize the amount the county generated was close to $8 billion in revenue pre-legalization? That would be over 30% of the current nation wide legal market, and close to 1/6 of your projected market value in 2030.

What percentage of the market does Humboldt own now, post-legalization?

Humboldt will never “be huge” again due to market forces that are out of this small county’s control, such as proximity to markets, and the fact that hills are not conducive to legal operations. You have to have good soil on your land where you could grow in the ground, otherwise you will always be a non-competitor.

Math and simple economics are just not your friend.

B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

Omg
Where did you get $8 billion in sales pre legalization for our county???

That’s a big number.
The emerald triangle at one point sold 80% of America weed correct but the market was tiny compared to today.

Humboldt weed today is forced out of the market due to local authorization. San Louis Obispo only allowed three retail stores. The original owner is in jail and county supervisor committed suicide for accepting a bribe.

Those stores sold for $21 million
That is a retail monopoly.

The industry is vertical integration or die.

Humboldt will be huge once we organize as a team

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  B Honest

Dang sure I got that figure from this site or loco actually.

thetallone
Guest
thetallone
1 year ago
Reply to  B Honest

The lucrative weed economy of yesteryear will not return. It was a bubble created by prohibition, and, for a while, growers in the hills cornered the market because the only other pot around was imported and of poor quality. Pot is easier to grow than broccoli. Check the price of broccoli for a reality check.

Vet
Guest
Vet
1 year ago

I never grew more than 250 sqft and made a comfortable living for 20 years.
The idea of industrial cannabis makes me sic.

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Vet

Yes and weed used to be worth more than gold. You’re lucky to have been of the right age to cash in on that bizarre accident of history and tens of thousands of people’s lives were ruined to make it possible for you. It was never sustainable and this initiative only serves to punish the community as a whole because some nimbys are mad that agricultural activity they didn’t like almost happened on the farms they choose to live near

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago

Yeah- I always supported the War on Drugs so my prices could stay high. I’m totally responsible for all that. Sorry for destroying lives! LOL

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

You’re not responsible for it, but you benefited from it. We all did.

Pretending that the 250 sq ft of weed that could “ma[k]e a comfortable living” during the height of the drug war is some sort of relevant measuring stick for how people should operate in the market today is wildly ignorant of the suffering that made that comfortable living possible.

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago

Sure, that’s what it’s about. Don’t forget the support for the satellite and law enforcement that you had when it wiped out your competition. Now that the shoe is on the other foot you complain?

Hahahaha. Like I said, hope you paid off that permit.

B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

Wiping out the competition

Hahaha bro since 2014 when satellites were first introduced growing outdoors would become easy to spot.

You had one choice in 2016 go legal or get busted by 🛰️ in the sky

That was your choice to stay illegal instead of conformity into the system

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  B Honest

I don’t grow. I’m not a dope dealer, sorry. Your choice to stay in a dying industry that the majority of people no longer support.

2014 was the height of the green rush. Get your history straight. Sounds like someone’s upset.

Don’t let the door hit ya on the way out.

👋 bye bye

Last edited 1 year ago
B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

Not a dope dealer says it all

Hahaha you are so bitter go and get a hug

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

I’m not a permitted farmer. I don’t know where you got that idea.

The existence of shitty policy is terrible justification for more shitty policy

Ricky Bennis
Guest
Ricky Bennis
1 year ago

Plant 10,000sq.ft. of broccoli or cabbage. Can’t fight it, and it smells like farts. The Community will enjoy the $100 cash infusion.

Sigh
Guest
Sigh
1 year ago

“cash in” envy. guffaw!

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

At first look, I thought the picture on top with the gavel on it was a proper headstone for the Industry

Farce
Guest
Farce
1 year ago

Excuse me but is this the same Humboldt County who threw nearly everybody I knew under the bus and went on an abatement rampage designed to impoverish them all? Why yes it is! But now we think they have something relevant to say?! I don’t believe a word out of their crooked mouths. What I think I see is that they are doing whatever they can for their friends who paid them off with the proper finances and personal connections. This petition signed by over 7000 people and sure to pass really scares them but…not really. It gives them cover to blame all the destruction of the industry on this petition which has not even passed yet LOL! Look- the destruction has already been done- by the county. The cash has already been mopped up- by “consultants” and their ilk-and the county. The goose is already cooked. But they want to pretend that they gave us all a fair chance and devised a fair workable solution LOL!!Look- Humboldt County ran almost everybody out and they are now producing much more and better in other places. No way it’s ever coming back. And those wonderful “legitimate” permits walked through the office by Rex Bohn (“Consultant” Trevor Bohn) ha ha I’m cool if they all go down. It was a corrupt shit show all the way and the least we can do is finally kick them out of the hills so we can all get some peace and quiet. Sorry about the no more big bonuses for the big toys for the predators who drove right over their neighbors…sure that’s “legacy” okay maybe like the “legacy” of old Humboldt greed and genocide. Gold rush legacy nothing to be proud of…greed rush neither. It’s just sad history of the sad part of human nature….Grab all you can and screw your neighbors yeah right on assholes

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Farce

Somewhere in the neighborhood of zero people disagree with you that legalization was a shitty deal and that the county did almost all they could to make it shittier.

I fail to see the benefit of doubling down and making sure that the legal opportunities don’t exist just to spite the people you choose to use to exemplify what was/is a statewide problem.

The shittiest people I know in the weed business never even thought about going legal. They went to Oregon and Oklahoma and went big as hell in humboldt in absentia with some poor foolish 20 somethings spraying the god-knows-what on the boof houses.

You’ve got to stop taking out your emotional baggage around the way the whole cannabis golden goose died on the community around you. It doesn’t add anything at all

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago

So you shouldn’t have any issues with having to move on too right? Since it’s a failed industry?

Bye bye 👋

B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

It’s a booming industry
I am sorry you didn’t want to legally participate

Personal I am in debt because I went legal. I will be that way for another few years until we have national legalization

23 billion this year and going up to 50 billion by 2030

Corporate America won and small guys got fucked.

Humboldt has the last 736 legacy farmers from the past

They didn’t send any neighbor under the bus. I tried to help several neighbors go through the process.

Instead they claimed they wanted to remain outlaws. Well they both got abated and spent just as much as I did to get permitted.

The real issue is the planning department. They lied and placed pre-existing farms as the same status as abated farms.

Ask all 736 pre-existing they have a story to tell about dealing with incompetence.

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago
Reply to  B Honest

736. Sounds like you will lose this vote. This is as much about destroying the supervisor’s cash cow as anything.

“It’s a booming industry.”
“Personally, I’m in debt.”

Sounds like you really were the intelligent one.

You mad bro?🤣

Last edited 1 year ago
B Honest
Guest
B Honest
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

I am not mad at all. Sad to see such a bitter soul on yourself filled with hatred

Good luck and again go get a hug you really need one

farmer
Guest
farmer
1 year ago
Reply to  B Honest

Yep we lost just about everything we owned to get permitted. Watching the farmers get fooked by just about everyone in government and distros not paying not to mention fake environmentalists going to the dispensaries to buy indoor… lol. the thing is if you want to be here and you want to farm they can’t get rid of you. Keep your head up diversify and bide your time. Rebel spirit does not die they just made me sharper, stronger, and more willing to fight

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

It’s a failed regulatory structure around a booming industry. Our counties and our state failed to protect the interests of the majority of people working in the industry and instead used legalization to support the interests of a small number of wealthy and well connected concerns. It’s a shitty thing and many of us saw it coming and hollered a warning about it at the time. Ultimately, our voice in the emerald triangle is inconsequential when it comes to state issues. We just don’t have the numbers to impact state wide elections.

The bitterness evident in supporters of this horrible initiative is disgusting. Reminds me of a kid who doesn’t like the way the game has gone flipping over the board.

If this passes, remember how giddy you were when your neighborhood is nothing but bad actors and abandoned farms slowly degrading into the creeks and forests.

Iliketables
Guest
Iliketables
1 year ago

The county is already full of bad actors and abandoned farms degrading into creeks and forests.

Just like many good people were caught up in the supervisor’s greed to corner the industry as they saw fit, good people will be again caught up as people do away with the cash cow of the supervisors.

If you aren’t a permitted farmer this will in no way affect you.

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
1 year ago
Reply to  Iliketables

It will effect all of us. The industry is moving toward being entirely legal. Federal legalization is the final barrier to the vast majority of the market being dominated by permitted and legal channels.

Whether being a part of it is what makes the most sense for me or not, I have an interest in the economic and cultural value of small scale cannabis production for our county and community. You’ve made it clear that you are hostile to the idea of locally produced cannabis for your own reasons, that’s fine. But it’s not objective, it’s just your own bitter view.

Objectively, cannabis remains one of the most valuable agricultural crops our county can produce and we should be moving toward regulations that make the future of that segment more viable rather than arbitrarily eliminating it because some retirees want to enforce their deluded vision of rural living on everyone else.

Working farms aren’t great neighbors if you’re a city person who moved to the country to live out a fantasy of quiet solitude. But the working farms have a lot more value to our community than the rich assholes larping as homesteaders.

Yep humboldt
Guest
Yep humboldt
1 year ago

This is the perfect example of old white Nimbies ( just look up the sponsors) who are having an overblown reaction to what could have been ( but wasn’t…) a nuisance in their wealthy protected neighborhood. Now in their super righteous Karen-ways they are threatening a whole county and community of hard working small farmers in revenge mode, just so they can still feel special in their wealthy privilege . These people are terrible. Shame on them

farmer
Guest
farmer
1 year ago
Reply to  Yep humboldt

They aren’t nice people. Its a power and control thing. they could give a f if our kids starve

Erin K
Guest
Erin K
1 year ago

Is the public comment only via phone or is it a website can someone please send me a link?

Jeffersonian
Guest
Jeffersonian
1 year ago

The pot growers have ruined the land and streams, brought crime, evaded taxation, and demanded legalization. Now that the government has become just as greedy to profit from it, it has created a regulatory mess. There is no question that marijuana is the worst thing that ever happened here. It’s ironic and laughable watching the continuing saga.

thetallone
Guest
thetallone
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeffersonian

Worse than logging 95% of the old growth forests? Worse than genocide against the indigenous people? Worse than the fentanyl scourge & aloholism?