Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.

Humboldt County, California, Measure A, Cannabis Measure (March 2024)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Humboldt County Measure A

Flag of California.png

Election date

March 5, 2024

Topic
Local marijuana
Status

DefeatedDefeated

Type
Referral


Humboldt County Measure A was on the ballot as a referral in Humboldt County on March 5, 2024. It was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported changing local regulations for cannabis cultivation, including limiting the number, type, and acreage of permits for commercial cannabis cultivation; requiring the county to investigate all public complaints and coordinate with state agencies; requiring an on-site inspection per year; limiting generator size and usage; and regulating water storage.

A "no" vote opposed changing local regulations for cannabis cultivation.


This measure required a simple majority to pass.

Election results

Humboldt County Measure A

Result Votes Percentage
Yes 9,220 23.80%

Defeated No

29,525 76.20%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Measure A was as follows:

Shall the measure changing local cannabis (marijuana) laws, including: new limits on the number of permitted grows; limiting new or expanded grows to 10,000 square feet, using natural light and artificial light of 6 or fewer watts per square foot, with restrictions on more or bigger buildings; new rules for water and generator use; prohibiting growers from holding multiple new permits; requiring at least one in-person, on-site inspection before yearly permit renewal; be adopted?

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Impartial analysis

The impartial analysis of the measure is below:[1]

INTRODUCTION. This initiative would impose new rules for cannabis (marijuana) grows in Humboldt County.

BACKGROUND. After California voters made cannabis legal, County Supervisors adopted local laws regulating grows.

Every California county must adopt a general plan regulating land uses. Coastal counties also adopt local coastal plans to regulate land uses in the coastal zone. Zoning ordinances must be consistent with general plans. This initiative amends the County general plan, local coastal plan, and zoning ordinance. Zoning permits are “discretionary,” i.e., issued by the Board of Supervisors, an appointed Commission, or staff after a public hearing; or “ministerial,” which typically means issued by County staff without a hearing.

THE INITIATIVE. The measure would limit the number of grows which can receive permits after it is adopted to roughly one-third those now allowed. It would prohibit new grows larger than 10,000 square feet (a bit less than a quarter-acre). It would allow larger, existing, permitted grows to continue, but would not allow them to be expanded. It would also prohibit permits for new grows using mixed outdoor and indoor cultivation using lights brighter than 6 watts per square foot. Outdoor grows and those using dimmer lights could be permitted.

Under current County laws, ministerial permits can allow up to 5,000-square-foot grows on parcels of 5 acres or larger and up to 10,000 square-foot grows on parcels of 10 acres or larger. The measure would require discretionary permits for new or expanded grows over 3,000 square feet. It would also require permits for an increase in grow area or in the “number or size of any structures used in connection with cultivation.” This would include drying sheds, greenhouses, nursery rooms, water tanks, and solar systems. Growers could not hold more than one new permit. The measure would forbid the County to waive a public hearing on a new or expanded permit. It would require the County to notify property owners within a mile of a grow of hearings; currently the County must notify those within 300 feet.

The measure requires applications for new or expanded grows on parcels served by private roads without centerline stripes to provide an engineer's report confirming roads meet Category 4 standards. Those require two lanes along which parking is forbidden and which serve fewer than 100 parcels, each limited to one dwelling. It will require more water storage for some grows, phase out generators, require studies of new wells to show no impact on other wells, and further regulate diversions from streams. It would require the County, before renewing an annual permit, to conduct at least one, on-site, in-person inspection on less than 24 hours’ notice to the grower, to find any permit or law violations at a grow have been fixed, and to investigate any comments or complaints about a grow. [2]

Support

Official argument

  • Mark Thurmond DVM, PhD, sponsor of the initiative; Elizabeth Watson PhD, sponsor of the initiative; Robert ‘Woods’ Sutherland, initiative supporter; Ken Miller MD, director of Salmon Forever; Mark Wheetley, former mayor of Arcata (Official Argument): Humboldt County isn’t doing enough to protect our communities, water, and wildlife from commercial cannabis cultivation. Measure A closes loopholes in current ordinances, improves enforcement and public participation, and better protects our watersheds, people, and wildlife. Measure A also sets fundamental cannabis policy in the County’s General Plan and prevents politicians from weakening its protections without a vote of the people. Measure A would: • Protect rivers, streams, and wildlife by: a) extending the period during which water cannot be diverted from streams and rivers, b) requiring studies to show new water wells will not impact streams, springs, or other wells, c) phasing out generators, and d) improving coordination with state water and wildlife agencies. • Add a goal to the General Plan supporting small-scale, high quality cannabis cultivation. • Discourage future large-scale farms by: a) limiting new and expanded permits to 10,000 square feet of cultivation area, and b) preventing approval of multiple new, active cultivation permits for the same person or on the same legal parcel. • Limit the number of permits and acreage under cannabis cultivation by capping the total number of permits and acreage at levels five percent above those allowed by existing approved, unexpired permits as of March 4, 2022 – a substantial reduction from the County’s current cap of 3500 permits. • Protect vested rights and property rights. • Improve public participation and official accountability by requiring public hearings and better notice of permit applications. • Support effective enforcement by requiring annual in-person, on-site inspections, correction of violations, and investigation of public complaints before permits are renewed.

Opposition

Official argument

  • Natalynne DeLapp, executive director of the Humboldt County Growers Alliance; Nancy Olson, CEO of the Greater Eureka Chamber of Commerce; Destry Henderson, president of the Humboldt Deputy Sheriff’s Organization; Jackee Riccio, executive director of the Cannabis for Conservation; Portia Bramble, executive director of the North Coast Growers Association (Official Argument): Humboldt needs a well-regulated legal cannabis industry, and Measure A is not the way! As advocates for our environment, public safety, local businesses, and small cannabis and food farmers, we urge you to vote NO on Measure A. Crafted behind closed doors by special interests, this 38 page citizen initiative would amend the General Plan to establish complex and unworkable restrictions only for legal cannabis businesses. Most of these broken rules could then never be fixed without an additional ballot measure. Measure A is anti-cannabis, anti-small business, anti-public safety, and antienvironment, and would put thousands of jobs and millions in tax revenue at risk. An analysis from the Humboldt Planning Department found that Measure A “could [make] compliance so difficult that the legal [cannabis] market is rendered not viable in Humboldt County.” Measure A is NOT an environmental initiative and would likely produce negative environmental outcomes. The Planning Department’s analysis found Measure A would “discourage existing permit holders from modifying their permits in any way,” including “adding infrastructure intended for environmental protections” such as water storage or solar panels. An analysis by the non-profit 501(c)(3) environmental group Cannabis for Conservation found the initiative “lacks both environmental and scientific rigor” and would result in increased “regulatory hoop-jumping for farmers, with no measurable, quantifiable, or data-supported conservation benefits.” Measure A is NOT a public safety initiative. It has unworkable restrictions that would only apply to permitted farmers, not unregulated farms, thus further encouraging illegal cultivation. Legal farmers are already heavily regulated by the county, the state Department of Cannabis Control, the Water Board, and Fish & Wildlife. To protect the environment, small farmers, Humboldt’s economy, and public safety, please join us in voting NO on Measure A.

Path to the ballot

This measure was put on the ballot through a vote of the governing body of Humboldt County.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in California

See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in California.

How to vote in California


See also

Footnotes

  1. Humboldt Gov, "Measure A," accessed February 26, 2024
  2. 2.0 2.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  3. California Secretary of State, "Section 3: Polling Place Hours," accessed August 12, 2024
  4. California Secretary of State, "Voter Registration," accessed August 13, 2024
  5. 5.0 5.1 California Secretary of State, "Registering to Vote," accessed August 13, 2024
  6. California Secretary of State, "Same Day Voter Registration (Conditional Voter Registration)," accessed August 13, 2024
  7. SF.gov, "Non-citizen voting rights in local Board of Education elections," accessed November 14, 2024
  8. Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  9. California Secretary of State, "What to Bring to Your Polling Place," accessed August 12, 2024
  10. BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, "Section 20107," accessed August 12, 2024
  11. Democracy Docket, "California Governor Signs Law to Ban Local Voter ID Requirements," September 30, 2024