Supervisors Rob Brown and Jim Comstock worked with County Counsel Anita Grant and Community Development Director Rick Coel to draft the six-page urgency ordinance.
Grant noted during the meeting, “The point here is to buy you a little breathing room to ensure that you address everyone's rights under the law.”
Brown said the proposal was in response to an “explosion” of collective and dispensary openings that started this spring after the board began discussing the fact that the county's zoning ordinance doesn't specifically allow for them. That had led to notices of violation on six such establishments, which the board agreed to stay.
He said the board wasn't going to discuss the merits of medical marijuana or Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, which allow medical use of the drug in the state.
Brown said his intention was for the temporary moratorium only to affect those dispensaries and collectives which had opened after the Notices of Violation were issued in April.
“Anybody who's planning on putting one in right now or is in the process of putting one in shouldn't be allowed to put it in,” said Brown.
Supervisor Jeff Smith pointed to news reports about other areas dealing with similar issues. That same day, the boards of supervisors for Shasta and Tehama counties considered similar urgency ordinances to place temporary moratoriums on collective and dispensaries, with Shasta voting one down and Tehama approving their version.
Rushing asked if anyone can explain why the issue is coming up so frequently.
“Because there's a lot of money to be made in it,” said Brown.
Smith said it's also harvest time, but he believed many jurisdictions want to get ahead of what is happening with such marijuana sales outlets.
Before opening public comment, Board Chair Denise Rushing set some ground rules for the large number of people in the chambers.
“I'm going to need to cut you off if you talk about the medical benefits of marijuana,” she said. “We've had plenty of that already. That's not what this is about.”
She said a committee to deal with the zoning issues hasn't been formed, and that the effort is taking place all in the public eye.
Lower Lake attorney Ron Green presented several suggestions to alter the resolution which he and retired District 1 Supervisors Ed Robey drafted. He said they were meant to clarify the moratorium's language.
He wanted the document's third paragraph changed to note that the Lake County Zoning Ordinance does not “presently explicitly allow” dispensaries and collectives. “The reason for that is that the zoning ordinance may in fact allow for medical marijuana dispensaries under the category of similar uses that are permitted in each zoning class,” Green said.
He said dispensaries are most similar to pharmacies and drug stores, as well as liquor stores.
“Where does the Lake County Zoning Ordinance presently allow it anywhere?” asked Brown.
Green said he interpreted some of the commercial zoning language to allow for similar uses.
Comstock said he wanted to hear from Grant and Coel on Green's points.
“Whether this would be similar to a pharmacy, I disagree with that type of interpretation,” said Coel, noting that a pharmacy has a licensed pharmacist and retail facility. “It's just a different setup than a storefront collective or dispensary.”
Rushing said she was concerned because she didn't intend for them to discuss the zoning ordinance, just the moratorium. Grant recommended they leave that language alone, since it could potentially limit future discussions on that point.
Green also suggested that the language about which dispensaries would be affected was ambiguous. He said it should be made clear that, from this point forward, no new dispensaries or collectives should open.
During the discussion Grant clarified that the draft ordinance was meant to keep in force a stay of enforcement against the six establishments that had received notices of violation. “The board is perfectly able to freeze it as of today,” she said, but they should set operations standards in case people try to argue about when they really opened.
Brown said it was better to leave the language the way it was so that those outlets that had received the notices could still operate.
Of the ones that have opened since the spring notices went out, Brown said, “They acted at their own risk, and they're not allowed. Until we get this ordinance figured out, they're not allowed.”
Green said some of they may not have understood that they were opening at their own risk.
Supervisor Anthony Farrington said all dispensaries should comply with state law, and if they do they should be allowed to operate. An additional suggestion by Green and Robey was meant to address those concerns, he said. He also suggested having collectives and dispensaries show proof of operation.
Of the nine community members who spoke, seven were for the moratorium and two against.
Middletown resident Fletcher Thornton said he wanted to see the temporary moratorium go into effect so rules could be established. He said there's a new dispensary on Main Street in Middletown, 150 feet from a school.
“Don't tell me it's not allowed, because it's there,” he said, adding he'll ask the Middletown Area Town Hall to make suggestions to the board about how to zone dispensaries.
Ronda Mottlow said she didn't support the moratorium, which she said was just another way to deny access to medical patients in need. Considering the county's rural nature, Mottlow said concentrating the establishments in the cities is a disservice to the people who need the drug.
Dave Moses, managing partner of all Alternative Solutions dispensaries from here to Los Angeles County, also opposed the temporary moratorium. He said a community committee needs to be established in Lake County, as has been done in other areas, to draft rules.
He accused Brown of benefiting from marijuana-related arrests from his bail bonds business, and also referred to the problems Brown has had on his property will illegal marijuana growers.
After Moses left the microphone, Brown defended himself, saying no one growing marijuana on his property was involved with medical marijuana, and his private business is irrelevant to the discussion.
Moses started making comments from the back of the room as Brown was speaking. “If you wanna say something come up here and say it. Don't pop off from the back,” Brown replied.
Rushing told Moses he had to stop yelling from the back. When he didn't stop, she used her gavel for the first time this year.
Other community members who are part of collectives said they favored the temporary measure.
Diane Barkey of New Day Herbal Center in Clearlake Oaks said they sometimes give medical marijuana away free to those who need it. “We're here for the patient,” she said.
Saying she supported the moratorium, Barkey added, “Most of us are in it for the right reasons, and I know we are.”
Frank Molina, who owns a dispensary in Nice, echoed Barkey's sentiments. He said he's seeing a proliferation of collectives and dispensaries, and suggested it may be appropriate to set a limit for each area.
Walter Zuercher, speaking on behalf of the Clear Lake Riviera Community Association, said they strongly support the ordinance. Dispensaries and collectives belong in places with good police protection, he said.
Anita McKee, an area resident, said a dispensary recently reopened in a residential area in the Clear Lake Riviera. During its previous opening the area suffered crime issues, she said.
The board unanimously accepted the urgency measure with Green's revisions, minus the addition of the word “explicitly” to the third paragraph.
Rushing suggested they needed to agendize a future discussion about forming a community committee to discuss zoning matters connected to dispensaries and collectives.
E-mail Elizabeth Larson at
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
