LAKEPORT, Calif. – A two-and-a-half-hour discussion on Tuesday regarding the enforcement of the county's new medical marijuana cultivation rules led the Board of Supervisors to ask county staff and law enforcement to return with a report on abatement process protocols.
Board Chair Denise Rushing had asked for the discussion, she said, after receiving calls from Northshore constituents, particularly residents of Spring Valley, who had marijuana plants abated from their properties in recent weeks by Lake County Sheriff's Office personnel.
The abatements have taken place under the auspices of Measure N, passed by voters in June.
Tuesday's discussion was emotional and, at times, heated, resembling other discussions the board has hosted on the marijuana issue.
The board took no vote on the matter, but directed staff to return at a future time with a report on how the measure has been enforced once more information is available.
The board – with Undersheriff Chris Macedo and Community Development Director Rick Coel present with the supervisors – took testimony and comments from a number of community members during the morning session.
During the meeting, four community members who said they had their plants cut down during Measure N enforcements came forward to speak.
One man, who identified himself as “Edwin,” said he is operating as a cooperative for family members and patients. He said he was not contacted ahead of time, that locks on his property were cut and plants taken down.
During questioning by board members, it was revealed that Edwin's property was zoned for rural lands, where outdoor grows are not allowed.
In another case, a woman said she and her husband, who both have a number of health conditions and rely on medical marijuana, had on their acre parcel six mature and six immature plants, which were cut down while they were away. A trailer they used for storage was red tagged and two of her puppies are missing.
Stan Eisenberg said he had 36 plants – with three recommendations – on an acre and a half. He said he also did not receive prior notice before his plants were abated.
Rushing told fellow board members during the discussion, “I did not and would not have voted for the measure had I thought that we were taking all of our code actions without code's oversight and handing them to them sheriff’s department.”
Lower Lake attorney Ron Green said constitutional matters – among them, illegal search and seizure – were at issue, and that administrative search warrants were needed for the abatements. He said the enforcements were clear violations of the Fourth Amendment, which he said the county will soon hear from a federal judge.
Community member Milos Leubner told the board he believed from the beginning that Measure N was flawed, and asserted that it passed because people were scared.
Rushing told Leubner she believed he was wrong. “I think Measure N passed because of really bad neighbors.”
Fish and Wildlife official describes abatements
The most detailed description offered during the meeting of the abatements that took place in Spring Valley on Aug. 1 came from Lt. Loren Freeman of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, who in the course of his statements asked the board to continue to support Measure N enforcements in order to protect the community.
Freeman – who went on the detail with sheriff's detectives and county Chief Building Official Michael Lockett – said he had prior knowledge of marijuana grows in Spring Valley and has worked several cases there.
Using Lake County Special Districts' metered water system, Freeman said he was able to identify 12 locations in Spring Valley where there was water usage of more than 150,000 gallons of water over four months, three times the normal amount. Some individuals have used more than 200,000 gallons in that same time frame.
Freeman said that during the Aug. 1 operation he was in in his uniform and a tactical vest, driving his marked vehicle in the lead position. The detail included four unmarked undercover sheriff's vehicles and a marked Building Department vehicle driven by Lockett, who was in plain clothes but had a badge on his belt.
He said he pulled over at 1540 New Long Valley Road and informed Lockett and the detectives that he had seen marijuana growing there last season. The gate was locked with a padlock, but Freeman said he stepped over the barbed wire fence and he, along with the detectives and Lockett, walked toward the residence. The detectives were all wearing camouflage, had their pistols holstered and no long guns.
There was no marijuana being cultivated there, and Freeman said they spoke with the homeowner before leaving, at which point Freeman said he thanked the man for his cooperation. Freeman portrayed the contact as calm, noting there were no raised voices.
From there, they proceeded into Spring Valley, inspecting approximately 30 properties for Measure N compliance, Freeman said.
When marijuana was cut, a summary abatement notice either was left at the location or handed to the properties' occupants, he said.
“It is my opinion that Measure N is about the preservation of our communities and the preservation of our natural resources,” Freeman said.
Noting the drought conditions around the state and in Lake County, Freeman said Measure N also is about water, explaining that a marijuana plant in the vegetative state can use up to 10 gallons a day. Individuals cultivating 25 plants can use 250 gallons a day, and up to 990 gallons a day – enough for two homes – if growing 99 plants.
“Under our current water restrictions, it seems ill advised,” he said.
He said the source of Spring Valley's water, Indian Valley Reservoir, is at only 3 percent of its storage capacity, with 25,353 acre feet of water stored. He said that totals about a year's worth of water for Spring Valley, or six months if considering evaporation and sediment buildup.
Freeman told the board about the “open field doctrine,” which allows police to walk across an open field or step over a barbed wire fence to make contact with residents. That, in general, is how the Measure N enforcements are being done, he said.
During the Spring Valley detail, Freeman said he was present in his capacity as a game warden.
Three of the locations that were abated are going to be the focus of criminal cases, Freeman said.
He explained that there were instances of marijuana plants being grown in Wolf Creek, and in some cases the banks of Wolf and New Long Valley creeks had been altered.
One person had installed a 2,500 gallon tank and a pump, and removed the last remaining water from Wolf Creek, Freeman said.
Macedo read to the board a letter from Lockett describing the abatements. Like Freeman, Lockett noted that the detectives were in camouflage, with badges displayed, and that no one pointed firearms at anyone. Nor were there any machetes, as has been alleged by the homeowner at 1540 New Long Valley Road.
Green, returning to the microphone, said he's very familiar with the open field doctrine, adding he has visited Spring Valley and that residents there have large fenced backyards, not open fields.
Coel told the board that fences were not being torn down during the abatements, adding that if law enforcement personnel aren't given consent to search a property they come back with a warrant.
Realtor Bobby Dutcher said Measure N gives the board flexibility to change it, and he suggested they have a group work with Sheriff-Elect Brian Martin to make changes to the ordinance.
He said he was aware of people “flagrantly breaking the law” by growing very large amounts of marijuana in Spring Valley.
Dutcher said he likes Measure N a lot more than two new marijuana-related measures headed to the November ballot. He suggested marijuana advocates are using the abatement issue to advocate for those alternate measures and against Measure N.
Dr. Rob Rosenthal of Middletown said he doubted that everyone whose properties were searched gave consent.
He accused the county of using Measure N to terrorize low-income people rather than going after the “bad guys.”
“That's a disgrace we all share responsibility for,” Rosenthal said.
Board considers next steps
At the end of public comment, Rushing – acknowledging the emotion surrounding the issue – said she wanted to see a review of summary abatement procedures and how they might be improved to maintain public trust.
Supervisor Jeff Smith said he felt there should be a notice given before abatement unless there is a flagrant violation.
“I would like to find some middle ground here,” Smith said. “That's all we’ve been trying to do for ages.”
Supervisor Anthony Farrington said he realized there was discontent over the enforcements and the rules.
“We have never been able to find middle ground or common ground,” said Farrington, referring to a perpetual cycle of challenges to county rules.
He suggested that if there truly are constitutional rights violations occurring that the courts may be the place to determine that. However, Farrington didn't support having the board make changes to Measure N.
People who don't want rules in place will continue to challenge any rules the board implements, he said. “I'm done playing that game,” said Farrington, noting that it's now up to the voters and if people want rule changes, they should put new measures on the ballot.
Rushing said she wanted to give people 48 hours' notice in cases where summary abatements are necessary.
Supervisor Jim Comstock said he wanted to hear the results of the sheriff's office's review of the enforcements before doing anything, and so far that information wasn't available.
Macedo explained to the board that the sheriff's office is undertaking an ongoing review of the new rules and how they are carried out.
He said the original intent “was to review how we do business regarding this new procedure after the season was done, to see if we needed to make any changes,” adding that the enforcements haven't gone on long enough for the review to be complete.
Macedo, who emphasized that the sheriff's office – not Community Development – is responsible for enforcement, said personnel have been professional and courteous when contacting people. He took issue with the attempts by community members to vilify the deputies who took part in the abatements.
“We're reviewing it just like we're reviewing a lot of stuff,” said Macedo, adding that there are going to be people accusing them of carrying out the enforcements incorrectly. “It's an emotional issue.”
He said the measure only was passed a few months ago and it constitutes a change. “Not everyone is comfortable with change,” Macedo said, adding that the agency wants to do the right thing by everybody.
Rushing asked County Counsel Anita Grant to take the lead in bringing the matter back for future discussion about protocols and procedures.
During the discussion Rushing also asked county staff to work with sheriff's personnel and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife on that future report.
Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.