LAKEPORT, Calif. – An interim urgency ordinance is expected to appear before the Board of Supervisors in two weeks in order to temporarily address major health and safety issues with marijuana cultivation around the county.
That was the outcome of a two-hour discussion the Board of Supervisors held Tuesday afternoon as it began to formulate direction for county staff on how to handle the escalating problems during the cultivation season.
Community Development Director Rick Coel said he would come back with something along the lines of three outdoor plants in community growth boundaries – with three plants allowed indoors – or up to six outdoor plants outside of those boundaries. No grows would be allowed on vacant parcels.
He said the hope would be that a cultivation ordinance advisory committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors would be able to continue its work.
During the two hour discussion board members heard from a large number of residents from around the county – including many who made the drive from Middletown – about their concerns over how large marijuana grows have deteriorated their quality of life and safety, destroyed property values, increased criminal activity, and led to the injury or death of pets and livestock.
Board Chair Rob Brown said the board needed to address the county’s “obvious problems” with marijuana cultivation, the sooner the better. “The voters want something done.”
Supervisor Jim Comstock said there has been an explosion in the number of grows west of Middletown.
“It’s an epidemic,” he said, adding, “We need to deal with it right here, right now.”
Supervisor Denise Rushing, who along with Supervisor Anthony Farrington sits on the cultivation advisory committee, said that group for the most part unanimously agreed that “mercenary grows” needed to be addressed.
Supervisor Jeff Smith said environmental concerns need to be handled, too, adding that the county had backed off of enforcing rules against marijuana as it would have done against winegrapes.
Coel said his department could quickly address RV occupancy on vacant parcels where grows are located. However, they can’t remove the plants.
He said there needed to be an ordinance that clearly prohibits commercial grows and gives the sheriff’s office more enforcement ability, including plant removal. Coel said there also needed to be a plant limit for residential areas.
Smith wanted a provision requiring written permission from a property owner to allow renters to grow, stating there are liability issues now due to the federal crackdown.
Coel said the advisory committee has been working very hard. “I’m impressed with the progress they’ve made to date.”
He said both his department and the sheriff’s office have strategies for moving forward.
“We are going to start hitting things pretty hard here, but an interim ordinance would make a big difference,” Coel said.
Farrington said the advisory committee had been concerned about the board trying to resurrect its cultivation ordinance, and he didn’t want the process derailed.
A wide variety of concerns
Rob Rosenthal, a Middletown doctor on the advisory committee, agreed that they needed to target the large commercial grows and grows on vacant lands – “the people who are gaming the system and the people who are aware they’re breaking the law” – but he believed the sheriff’s office could do that already, without an urgency ordinance.
He also was concerned about property owner consent for grows, and told the board that the state guaranteed at least six plants.
“A lot of people don’t need more than two or three plants,” he said, but that’s provided they know how to grow.
Rosenthal said he thought six plants were enough. At a pound of pot per plant, Rosenthal said that amounts to a quarter ounce a day, which is probably twice the amount that most people use.
“I am never offended when people are arrested for violating state law,” Rosenthal said.
Rosenthal said he was the lone dissenter in a Monday advisory committee vote on allowing up to three plants outdoors on smaller residential lots because he wanted the group to pass something that’s “bulletproof.”
Smith brought up complaints from his constituents about odor. Rosenthal acknowledged, “I wish that marijuana didn’t smell. That would solve a lot of problems.”
Several Middletown residents told the board of their concerns about the increasing number of grows, and their frustration in watching their neighborhoods be taken over with dangerous activity.
“I know the supervisors are trying, I know that. I know you tried on your first ordinance,” said Don Blakeslee, a longtime property owner.
He said he can walk away from his property “but that’s not fair,” adding that he’s upset that there seems to be more concern for the growers than residents who they’re victimizing.
Armond Urbano, who is a substance abuse expert, said he’s now dealing with a massive grow next door to his home.
Pointing to the large number of Middletown residents at the meeting – about 400 years’ worth of residency in that town – Urbano asked, “When was the last time you saw us all here?”
He was concerned about damage to his water supply, attacks on animals, danger to children and families, and a host of other concerns.
“We need to all wake up,” he said.
Rushing said there’s no disagreement that something has to be done. “How do we come up with something that will deal with these ridiculous and horrible situations without triggering the initiative process?”
Jack Laird described dealing with violence in his neighborhood, as well as roving dogs belonging to growers that savaged his miniature horses. One of the horses had to be euthanized while the others have required expensive veterinary care.
“Nobody has any responsibility for it,” he said. “They just disappear.”
Brown said there has been an invasion over the last couple of months due to this “idiotic measure” put on the ballot, referring to Measure D, which was defeated by Lake County voters June 5.
Finley resident Phil Murphy asked Coel where the main problems were located in terms of zoning. Brown said the grows are everywhere.
Murphy wanted to know if the board could limit it the grows in scale and zoning to where marijuana wouldn’t be an issue. “The bottom line is, commercial pot grows have to go somewhere,” adding that he thought it should be on agricultural land.
Brown said that’s what the original county ordinance was for, and he’s happy to have growers go somewhere other than Lake County.
Rushing said they could talk all day about everybody’s point of view. “We need to talk about specifics. Making law is really hard.”
Murphy told the board, “Today the criminal element has won again.”
“Because we’re going to do an interim ordinance?” asked Brown
No, said Murphy, rather because he said the county had eliminated the ability for people to cultivate in the right way. Brown said other pot growers were responsible for that.
Lower Lake attorney Ron Green told the board they need to balance peoples’ rights, and he asked the board to respect the rights given to patients by Proposition 215 and SB 420.
Paula Vess of Spring Valley said she’s fought issues with large pot grows next to her property for years.
“We are victims of these terrorists, because that’s what a lot of these people are, whether you want to believe it or not,” she said.
Brown said he’s inclined to do what is best for citizens who have spoken up loud and clear.
“Right now we just need to clean the trash out of Lake County,” he said.
Coel laid out his plans for what he would bring back. Farrington said he would wait to debate the specifics once a draft urgency ordinance came back to the board.
County Counsel Anita Grant also encouraged the board to wait to discuss the specific points Coel was proposing.
“Right now you’re debating something in the abstract,” Grant said.
Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .