County planners take up pot regulations, again

By Todd R. Hansen

   

FAIRFIELD – The Solano County Planning Commission is scheduled on Thursday to once again take up cultivation regulations for recreational and medical marijuana use, and to consider possible commercial activities in the unincorporated areas.

The commission meets at 7 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors chambers on the first floor of the county building, 675 Texas St., in Fairfield.

The public hearing is a continuation from Nov. 17 when the board reviewed a draft ordinance that set regulations for personal cultivation amounts, caregiver cultivation in the case of medical cannabis, as well as registration and permit requirements and fees.

The proposal would restrict cultivation to indoor grows.

The Adult Use Marijuana Act allows for six plants to be grown per residence, but it also allows the counties and cities to regulate how and where marijuana is grown.

The Board of Supervisors, prior to the seating of Supervisor Monica Brown on Jan. 10, has made it very clear that it wants the regulations to be as restrictive as possible.

Brown, who voted against the recently approved 10-month, 15-day extension banning marijuana businesses in the county, has sided more freely with open marijuana standards and supports commercial enterprises in the county. She views marijuana use in terms of the unnecessary burden to the criminal justice system, medical advantages and personal rights.

The proposed ordinance was met with general disapproval by those who attended the November hearing, some of whom accused the county of trying to block the rights granted with the passage of Proposition 64 on Nov. 8.

Several of those speakers also noted that indoor cultivation is more expensive.

There are those, however, who strongly support banning outdoor cultivation because they do not believe neighbors should have to put up with the odor of such gardens.

They also have concerns that outdoor gardens will attract more criminal activity, though residents who support outdoor gardens counter that their rights should not be impeded by the criminal behavior of others.

Moreover, several people also expressed their opposition to any registration or permit requirement as an invasion of their privacy, particularly the idea of an annual inspection with 24-hour notice by the county.

The commissioners also had a variety of concerns about the proposed regulations when they decided to continue the public hearing to Jan. 19. Among those concerns were about allowing outdoor cultivation on larger parcels in the unincorporated area.

The privacy issue also was raised from members of the commission.

In addition to the personal use elements of recreation and medical marijuana use, the commission has been tasked to get input from the public about allowing certain kinds of commercial marijuana enterprises.

Those businesses would be limited to cultivation, certain kinds of manufacturing and testing laboratories. They would be limited to industrial and manufacturing land-use zones.