To the Editor:
This is our 3rd and final letter describing our experience going before local government last year in an attempt to protect our largely residential neighborhood from the ill effects of large scale Cannabis grows. The following are the criteria we needed to meet in order to request a Cannabis Prohibition District under Chapter 20.119.020 of the Mendocino Co. Cannabis Ordinance 10A.17.
"The CP (Cannabis Prohibition) Combining District may be applied to an area where a majority of the parcels allow residential use by right." The Planning Commission Staff report stated: "While commercial cannabis uses are not currently allowed within Rural Residential districts with less than a five-acre minimum, the applicants have included these parcels as part of the proposal because the agricultural parcels form a logical part and extension of the Rural Residential neighborhood." Yet, we were repeatedly questioned as to why residential properties should be allowed as part of our proposed district, and, we believe this may have played into part of the reason we were denied. We see it as a no brainer. Residential properties should be allowed as part of a Prohibition District because they can, and are, being impacted by these grows! It is exactly why the option to form CP Districts was written into the Mendocino Co. Cannabis Ordinance- to protect residents and their neighborhoods. These grows use the same roads as our homes, most public but some private, to access their properties. Many vineyard owners also have their own residences or rentals on their properties. There are also properties larger than the 5 acre minimum required to grow commercially intermixed amongst the rural 1 acre parcels.
The next criteria, "A CP District shall be composed of no less than ten (10) legally created contiguous parcels. No problem there. We submitted 133 petitions from among 198 parcels and households for an overall approval rating of 66 percent This percentage fulfilled the final criteria that the application must demonstrate support by petition of more than 60 percent of the affected property owners. 69 percent of the signed petitions were from the RR1 properties and 62 percent were from among Ag zoned lands, mainly vineyards, where growing is currently allowed. This combined total of 66 percent, clearly constitutes a two-thirds majority of citizens in this downtown area requesting a Prohibition zone.
From the inception of this push to allow "Commercial Cannabis" in Mendocino County and specifically in Ag Lands of 5 acres minimum, the Ordinance Chapter 10A.17 clearly states "Nothing in this Chapter is intended, nor shall it be construed to: "Allow persons to engage in conduct that endangers others or causes a public nuisance". It was verified by Planning Staff that we met all the minimum criteria to form this district and an additional consideration should be on "public health, safety, morals, peace, comfort, convenience, prosperity and general welfare", as cited in Chapter 20 of the MCC. As we mentioned in our two previous letters, many residents who petitioned to form this district testified at 2 different hearings and wrote letters regarding the nuisances these grows are causing; increased heavy truck traffic on rural residential roads, wells drilled and unmonitored despite drought conditions, attractive nuisance with worry of possible home invasions and decreased property values, just to name a few. We clearly believe we affirmed that serious nuisances are occurring beyond the one of smell only.
We long-time citizens of this area were dumbfounded that after our presentations and testimony, so much comment ensued by the Supervisors reducing all our concerns to basically one of smell. If that was not insult enough, despite our repeated voices saying we are concerned about our water, safety and environment as well as the increased stench, and that our quality of lives are being diminished by these new big grows and related activities, the growers basically accused us of being racist by saying our application was racially-motivated and fear based. Also, that we are Prohibitionists. Nothing could be further from the truth, but it was all presented to paint us in a bad light and as a major distraction from the real issues.
Are these actions indicative of people who want to be good incoming neighbors to us? We don't believe so. As we mentioned in our first letter, big monied growers, some from other Counties are paying cash for million dollar parcels, often vineyards, with the intent of growing pot. They are using resources and causing disturbances with little to no regard to the impact they are having on nearby residents. Comments were also made by a Supervisor of concerns there might be litigation brought against the County- by the growers we presume. We do not believe this should have been a qualifying factor for denial of our application either. Alleged threats of lawsuits sound like strong-arm tactics to us.
It was inevitable there would be pushback to all this proliferation of bigger Cannabis grows near residential areas. This could have been avoided if only the County had conducted a poll of the wishes of its citizenry in regards to this issue. Instead, policy was allegedly conducted behind closed doors. Many of us voted for legalizing recreational grows for personal use, not for mega grows as we see them coming into our residential neighborhoods. A majority of local residents who have paid taxes and contributed to Mendocino County in countless ways for decades expressed our voices loud and clear. Certain members of the Board chose not to listen to us, but rather to throw their support and deference to a few newcomers with attorneys.
We experienced a total distortion of our reasons for attempting to preserve our quality of life here in Redwood Valley which we have enjoyed for so many years. This two plus year journey we undertook resulted in an egregious disregard of the time, money, and hard work we exerted to go through this County-defined process. We felt largely ignored and dismissed by the people whose salaries we pay and whom we believe should be representing the majority of us. The time, energy and especially our tax-dollars being spent by our local government as a result of its decisions to continue to go down this Commercial Cannabis rabbit hole, is just plain sad. Something has to give and the change may ultimately have to come through the ballot box. Please, get out and vote Concerned Citizens of this County.
Thank you to all who took the time to read our letters, more will follow. We, the people, intend to continue to speak out for our rights to maintain our quality of life and fight for our beloved, and once peaceful and beautiful communities. Patchwork fencing, heavy water trucks and 18- wheelers on our small community rural roads, worry over water, potential crime and our environment- they are as much a nuisance as the increased stench of pot, Supervisors. They are impacting our public health, safety, morals, peace, comfort, convenience, prosperity and general welfare. We don't think we can get any clearer than this.
Respectfully submitted by Concerned Redwood Valley Citizens (CRVC)
-Christine Boyd, Cynthia Grant, Star Gilley, Frances Owen, Richard Sagan, Cyndi Barra Woskow Michael Woskow and others.
No comments:
Post a Comment