Nevada County supervisors get 1st look at draft marijuana recommendations
Wade Laughter attended every meeting of the Nevada County marijuana citizen’s group.
A medicinal grower, Laughter spoke during public comment at many of them. At one meeting he told the community advisory group many people want to comply with new grow rules. However, they need time to come into compliance and have reasonable regulations.
Laughter spoke to a 16-member panel given the task of writing recommendations for a new cannabis ordinance. Its work is now complete. The input it provided over seven months to the county’s marijuana facilitator has been compiled into recommendations the Nevada County Board of Supervisors will examine today.
Laughter will attend the meeting.
“There’s no real conversation going on about the reason for the rules,” Laughter said.
The advisory board discussed setbacks, zoning and parcel sizes, and its input led to recommendations limiting personal and commercial grows based on those factors.
Laughter questioned the reasoning behind setbacks and parcel size, noting that some commercial activities are prohibited on four-acre parcels — the size of his land — but allowed on five acres.
“Again, why is that?” Laughter asked. “What is the ‘why’ of the rule?”
Other community members believe the advisory group made recommendations that could ruin neighborhoods.
Bob Hren, chairman of the Nevada County Republican Party, wrote in an opinion piecethat the panel has advocated for allowing three to six plants outdoors in single-family zones.
“If you live on small R1 city lots, you can expect to endure outdoor grows and the nuisances they produce, including the obnoxious skunk-like odors,” Hren wrote.
Hren also opposes any commercial activity in residential agriculture zones. He urges people to contact their supervisor.
“How did this complete disregard for protecting neighborhoods occur?” he states. “The (panel) in no way represents a cross section of the voters in our county. That was evident to any astute observer from the beginning. Some well-intentioned people served, but there was a disproportionately high number of (panel) members that represent or sympathize with growers.”
Supervisors will hear public comment at the 1:30 p.m. session of their meeting. They’re expected to take no action, other than accepting the panel’s report, calling its work complete and dissolving the group.
County officials have said supervisors will give staff direction on the as-of-yet unwritten grow ordinance at a future meeting, possibly on Feb. 13.
It’s unknown when the draft ordinance will reach the Planning Commission or supervisors.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Readers around Lake Tahoe, Truckee, and beyond make the Sierra Sun's work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.
Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.
Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User
Thirty-two percent of cannabis complaints couldn’t be confirmed in Nevada County because of locked gates, fences and other visual obstructions.