Lake County, California, Measure O, Medical Marijuana Regulations Initiative (November 2014)

Voting on Marijuana
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local marijuana Local marijuana tax

A Lake County "Medical Marijuana Control Act" Initiative, Measure O ballot question was on the November 4, 2014 election ballot for voters in Lake County, California, where it was defeated.

Measure O would have rescinded the county's current regulations and restrictions on medical marijuana - approved by voters in June 2014 under the name Measure N - and established the regulations summarized below.

Supporters of Measure O argued that county regulations were too strict, too difficult to enforce and badly written, proposing Measure O as a way to fund marijuana regulation enforcement wholly through fees on cultivators and boost the economy while ensuring patients get their medicine.

Opponents argued that Measure N was responsible and would successfully curtail the commercial medical marijuana industry, thereby keeping drug abuse and drug-related violence and nuisances at bay. They argued that Measure O would have done away with the Measure N restrictions responsible for allowing a healthy tourism industry and encouraging the growth of the community and economic health of the county. Critics of Measure O claimed it was too lenient and would have allowed widespread commercial marijuana growth.

Voters narrowly approved Measure N, a referendum on a previously council-approved ordinance establishing regulations and restrictions on medical marijuana cultivation. Measure O would have overturned Measure N and established new regulations as summarized below.

Election results

Lake County, Measure O
Result		Votes	Percentage
d No		10,606	61.4%
Yes		6,674	38.6%

Election results via: Lake County General Election Results

Competing measure

See also: Lake County "Freedom to Garden Human Rights Restoration Act" Initiative, Measure P (November 2014)

According to the county counsel, Measure O competed with Measure P, which sought to introduce a "human right to gardening," which included the cultivation of cannabis and precluded certain restrictions found in both current laws and the proposed Measure O. If both Measure O and Measure P had received more than 50 percent approval, the one with the most "yes" votes would have been enacted, and the other would have been rejected. Measure P was defeated in the November 4, 2014, election.

Even though these initiatives were competing measures, the chief opponents of Measure O also opposed Measure P.

Daniel McLean, a spokesman for the Emerald Unity Coalition, which supported Measure O, said the following about the difference between the competing measures and the position of the coalition on Measure P:

“	Measure O is in alignment with the tax & regulate model that we see happening in more and more places all around the country. (ie Washington, Colorado, soon Oregon and many others including California). It creates clear and specific guidelines and generates revenue for the county for enforcement purposes. Measure P has no limits on plant count or size or placement, no revenue generated for the county, no clear guidelines for law enforcement. If measure P were to pass and measure O were to not pass, I would be indifferent to its enactment. I think P would highly likely be legally challenged by the county and highly likely it would be overturned due to the lack of professional legal input that was obtained during its drafting process.	”
—Daniel McLean, a spokesman for the Emerald Unity Coalition

Text of measure

Ballot question

The question on the ballot appeared as:

“

Shall 'The Medical Marijuana Control Act Initiative Measure' which seeks to repeal any then-existing County regulations contained in Article 72 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance and to establish new regulations regarding the size, location, and manner in which medical marijuana may be cultivated in unincorporated areas of Lake County be adopted? (quote)

”

Title and summary

The following ballot title and summary of Measure O was provided by the office of the county counsel:

“	THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA CONTROL ACT INITIATIVE MEASURE If adopted by the voters, this initiative would repeal any then existing County regulations contained in Article 72 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance and establish new regulations regarding the size, location, and manner in which medical marijuana may be cultivated in unincorporated areas of Lake County. The proposed initiative seeks to prohibit cultivation on vacant parcels except for contiguous parcels as defined therein. It would further provide that cultivation is an accessory use to an existing Permitted Residential Use of a legal parcel as defined therein, and the qualified patient or primary caregiver engaged in individual cultivation must reside at the site of the legal parcel. The proposed initiative measure would prohibit outdoor cultivation by qualified patients and primary caregivers on all legal parcels with certain exceptions as to legal parcels with Permitted Residential Use. For a parcel less than one acre in size, more than four plants per parcel is prohibited and all collective cultivation is prohibited. If the parcel is at least one acre but less than five acres in size, more than twelve plants is prohibited. If the parcel is at least five acres in size, more than forty eight plants is prohibited. The proposed initiative would establish setbacks on legal parcels with Permitted Residential Use which would prohibit outdoor medical marijuana from being cultivated or otherwise placed: 1. Within twenty feet of any property line or within twenty five feet of any off site residence, measured from the edge of the cultivation area in Zoning Districts R1, R2, R3, and PDR, and on all legal parcels of less than one acre in size; 2. Within fifty feet of any property line or within seventy five feet of any off site residence as measured from the edge of the cultivation area on parcels which are at least one acre but less than five acres in size and on parcels which are at least five acres but less than twenty acres in size. The proposed initiative would create a Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division in the County Community Development Department which would oversee and enforce compliance with this ordinance. The proposed initiative would create a Medical Marijuana Enforcement Officer position whose functions and duties would be the same as the Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division. The proposed initiative would require that no Medical Marijuana Enforcement Officer shall be hired by the Community Development Director unless ratified by a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors following a public hearing on the qualifications of the applicant. The proposed initiative would require that all collective cultivation activity of more than twelve plants per legal parcel must be registered annually with the Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division before plants are planted and would require payment of a fee per plant, not to exceed $50 per plant. This initiative would provide that any violation of the ordinance would constitute a public nuisance subject to the abatement procedures described therein and would subject the violator to civil actions and administrative penalties. Additionally, the violator may be charged with an infraction.	”
—Anita L. Grant, Lake County Counsel

Full text

The full text of the initiative ordinance that would have been enacted by the approval of Measure O is available here.

Support

Initiative proponents' logo

Supporters

Proponents of the "Medical Mariuana Control Act" created a website to advocate for a "yes" vote on Measure O.

The following individuals signed the official arguments in favor of Measure O:

• Margaret Greenley, middletown business owner
• Tino Gamber, real estate broker
• Daniel McLean, Registered Nurse
• Joey Luiz, Clearlake City Councilmember
• Adelia Leonard, Moms for CBD’s

The Emerald Unity Coalition also supports Measure O.

Arguments in favor

Supporters of Measure O gave the following reasons to approve the initiative:

“

Protects our neighborhoods by creating a new medical marijuana enforcement division Protects the environment with summary abatement of nuisance gardens Supports itself with per plant fees on cultivation Creates local jobs and stimulates the economy

”

Proponents focused on the immense economic importance of the marijuana industry and argued that Measure O would repeal the badly written Measure N and establish and completely fund an important marijuana enforcement division from a fee on marijuana cultivators. They argued that Measure O had sufficient protections against harm to the environment and community, while encouraging prosperity in the county and ensuring the convenient availability of medical marijuana to the sick.

Daniel McLean, a spokesman for the Emerald Unity Coalition, criticized the current restrictions, saying Measure N “denies people the ability to grow small amounts for themselves," promoting Measure O as a good compromise between medical marijuana growers and patients and residents who do not want marijuana cultivation in their neighborhoods.

Official arguments

The following was submitted as the official argument in favor of Measure O:

“	Measure O, the Medical Marijuana Control Act (MMCA), is a forward thinking regulatory solution to the cannabis cultivation issues facing our community. Medical Marijuana is an emerging industry that generates at least 120 million dollars annually in Lake County, more than all the other agricultural crops combined. Measure O acknowledges the dramatic financial contribution that cannabis provides for our county, and provides a way to keep the cottage industry vibrant, while mitigating the negative impacts of criminal production on the community. If this revenue is removed from our economy, it will create an economic disaster which will negatively impact all businesses and residents. Our small economy cannot afford such a giant financial loss. Vote Yes on Measure O! Unlike the current ordinance, Measure O requires registration and advance payment of $50 per plant fee for collectives and anyone cultivating more than 12 plants per parcel. This will generate substantial revenue for the Community Development Department, and make it easy for law enforcement to determine who is legal and who is not. These fees are 100% generated from cannabis cultivators, so the general public will not pay a dime. The fees collected from cultivators will fund a new Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division, and staff to oversee and enforce compliance. Measure O includes an educational requirement that will encourage good land stewardship. It will implement strong environmental controls to protect our precious natural resources and watershed. Under Measure O, marijuana will be the most strictly regulated crop in Lake County. Yes on O! Measure O’s stringent rules will make good neighbors out of patients growing their own medicine, while making it difficult for criminal growers who seek to exploit California’s medical marijuana laws for profit. For a better economy, a better environment, and safer neighborhoods, vote Yes on Measure O!	”
—Margaret Greenley, Tino Gamber, Daniel McLean, Joey Luiz and Adelia Leonard

Opposition

Protect Our Lake County campaign logo

Opponents

A campaign called Protect Our Lake County was started to urge a "no" vote on both Measure O and Measure P.

The following individuals signed the official arguments in opposition to Measure O:

• Annette Hopkins
• James S. Comstock
• William E. Kearney
• Beau Moore

Lake County Sheriff Frank Rivero, the Lake County Farm Bureau and the Lake County Chamber of Commerce also opposed Measure O, supporting Measure N and the current ordinance.

A group called Save Measure N also opposed both Measure O and Measure P.

Arguments against

Opponents of Measure O and Measure P had taken up the slogan:

“

Stop Commercial Pot Grower Abuse

”

They argued that Measure O and Measure P were created by pot growers to boost their own profits and without concern for what is best for the county. They argued that the increased commercial pot growth allowed by Measure O and Measure P would bring with it an increase in crime, drug abuse and drug-related violence and nuisances. They also pointed out that pot growers tried to do away with the county-approved regulation ordinances in place through June's Measure N referendum, but voters approved the restrictions.

Sheriff Rivero said, “Marijuana grows do not belong in residential neighborhoods... My hope is Measure N stays firm and we can continue to abate all this stuff, this illegal growing."

Official arguments

The official arguments in opposition to Measure O said that the initiative would:

• Increase crime through eliminating protections and allowing more commercial marijuana cultivation
• Be unenforceable
• Be unsustainable
• Put a burden on taxpayers
• Put a strain on the water supply, increasing water rates
• Increase pollution through fertilizer runoff and other environmental threats

The following was submitted as the official rebuttal to arguments in favor of Measure O:

“	Vote No on Measure O. This Measure is supported by out-of-town commercial marijuana growers who want to increase their profits at the expense of Lake County’s quality of life. The misleading claims being made by the commercial marijuana growers just don’t square with Facts: Fact #1: Measure O will damage Lake County’s economy. The abusive practices, intimidation and violence of commercial marijuana growers are Well Documented. They are a major cause of Lake County’s high unemployment, reduced tourism, loss of jobs and lack of economic development. Expanding commercial marijuana operations will make our economy even worse. Fact #2: Measure O has Nothing to do with medical marijuana which is readily available to Lake County patients who need it. Measure O was written to guarantee Huge Profits for commercial marijuana growers—not access to medical cannabis for patients. Fact #3: Measure O will Raise Water Rates for Lake County residents. Commercial pot growers are water hogs. In Spring Valley, twelve marijuana growers were recently caught using 150,000 gallons of water in just 4 months! Community Leaders say Vote No on Measure O because it takes away local control and gives profiteering marijuana growers a green light to pollute the environment. Law Enforcement opposes Measure O because it increases violent crime and gang activity in our communities. Farmers and Ranchers oppose Measure O because of its harmful unregulated impacts on our lands, streams and lakes. Don’t let marijuana growers profit at our expense. Please join us in Voting No on Measure O.	”
—Annette Hopkins, James S. Comstock, William E. Kearney and Beau Moore

Reports and analyses

Impartial analysis

The following impartial analysis was prepared for Measure O:

“	If passed, this voter initiative measure repeals existing County regulations contained in Article 72 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance regulating medical marijuana cultivation and establishes new regulations regarding the size, location, and manner in which medical marijuana may be cultivated in unincorporated areas of Lake County. The measure prohibits cultivation on vacant parcels except for contiguous parcels as defined therein. The measure provides that for a parcel less than one acre in size, more than four plants per parcel is prohibited and all collective cultivation is prohibited. If the parcel is at least one acre but less than five acres in size, more than twelve plants is prohibited. If the parcel is at least five acres in size, more than forty eight plants is prohibited. The measure creates a Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division in the County Community Development Department to oversee and enforce compliance with this measure and creates a Medical Marijuana Enforcement Officer position. The measure prohibits the Community Development Director from hiring a Medical Marijuana Enforcement Officer unless the hiring is ratified by a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors following a public hearing on the qualifications of the applicant. The measure requires that all collective cultivation activity of more than twelve plants per legal parcel must be registered annually with the Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division before plants are planted and would require payment of a fee per plant, which may not exceed $50 per plant. This measure provides that any violation of the ordinance constitutes a public nuisance subject to the abatement procedures described therein and would subject the violator to civil actions and administrative penalties and may be chargeable as an infraction. The measure provides that it is the intent of the voters of the County of Lake to prohibit a department, agency, commission, officer, or employee of the County from using any County funds or resources to assist in the enforcement of federal controlled substance laws to the extent said laws are inconsistent with California medical marijuana laws unless such assistance is required by federal or state law or court decision. Except as to certain activities which are delineated in the measure, this measure states that it is the intent of the voters of the County of Lake to prohibit the County from accepting any federal funding or participating in a task force that accepts federal funding or revenue sharing that would be used to investigate, cite, arrest, prosecute, or seize property based on offenses otherwise legal under California medical marijuana laws. To the extent that this ballot measure is a competing measure to another voter initiative on the ballot, if both the measures are approved by a majority of voters, only the one ballot measure that receives the most votes will be come effective. A “Yes” vote is a vote to approve this measure. A “No” vote is a vote to reject this measure.	”
—Anita L. Grant, Lake County Counsel

Related measures

• Lake County Marijuana Cultivation Ordinance 2997 Referendum, Measure N (June 2014) a

Recreational

a Washington D.C. Marijuana Legalization, Initiative 71 (November 2014)

Colorado:

• Nine local 2014 marijuana measures in Colorado

Maine:

a City of Lewiston Recreational Marijuana Legalization Measure (November 2014)
a City of South Portland Recreational Marijuana Legalization Measure (November 2014)
Town of York Recreational Marijuana Legalization Measure (November 2014)

Massachusetts:

• Massachusetts Congressional Districts Marijuana Legalization Public Policy Question Advisory Votes - Eight Districts (November 2014)

Michigan:

• Local marijuana measures in Michigan

New Mexico:

a Santa Fe County Marijuana Decriminalization Advisory Question (November 2014)
a Bernalillo County Marijuana Decriminalization Advisory Question, Measure 1 (November 2014)
City of Albuquerque Marijuana Decriminalization Measure (November 2014)
City of Santa Fe Marijuana Decriminalization Initiative (November 2014)

Wisconsin:

a Dane County State Legalization of Marijuana Referendum (April 2014)

Medical

California:

a City of Santa Ana Council-Referred Medical Marijuana Regulation Ordinance, Measure BB (November 2014)
d City of Santa Ana Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative, Measure CC (November 2014)
d City of La Mesa Medical Marijuana Initiative, Proposition J (November 2014)
d City of Encinitas Medical Marijuana Initiative, Proposition F (November 2014)
d Nevada County Medical Marijuana Cultivation, Measure S (November 2014)
a Butte County Medical Marijuana Ordinance 4075 Referendum, Measure A (November 2014)
d Butte County Medical Marijuana Initiative, Measure B (November 2014)
a Shasta County Outdoor Medical Marijuana Ordinance Referendum, Measure A (November 2014)
d Lake County "Medical Marijuana Control Act" Initiative, Measure O (November 2014)
d Lake County "Freedom to Garden Human Rights Restoration Act" Initiative, Measure P (November 2014)
d City of Weed Permitting Licensing of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Advisory Question, Measure L (November 2014)
a City of Weed Outdoor Marijuana Cultivation Ban Advisory Question, Measure K (November 2014)
a Lake County Marijuana Cultivation Ordinance 2997 Referendum, Measure N (June 2014)
City of Imperial Beach "Compassionate Access Ordinance" Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Act (June 2014)
City of Napa Medical Marijuana Dispensary Referendum (November 2014)
City of San Jose Medical Marijuana Regulation Act of 2014 (November 2014)

See also

• Local marijuana on the ballot
• Lake County, California ballot measures
• November 4, 2014 ballot measures in California
• Lake County "Freedom to Garden Human Rights Restoration Act" Initiative, Measure P (November 2014)

External links

Suggest a link

• Lake County Elections Office website

Support

• Medical Marijuana Control Act website, accessed October 1, 2014

Opposition

• Save Measure N website, accessed October 1, 2014
• Protect Our Lake County website, accessed October 1, 2014