YubaNet: Marijuana cultivation measure will not reverse outdoor growing ban, even if voters reject it

“The Nevada County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted 4-to-1 to implement an urgency ordinance that immediately prohibits outdoor marijuana grows and limits the number of indoor medicinal plants,” The Union reported on its front page on Wednesday.

“The board also voted 4-to-1 to place the issue on the June 7 ballot, giving county voters the option to uphold or discard that ordinance,” The Union continued.

But YubaNet has come up with a different conclusion. “Marijuana Cultivation Measure will not reverse outdoor growing ban, even if voters reject it,” YubaNet is reporting on Thursday afternoon.

“The ballot measure will only add language restricting the permissible use to the cultivation of medical marijuana. The measure is not a Yea or Nay vote on the urgency ordinance,” YubaNet reported.

“Several troubling questions deserve answers,” YubaNet continued.

YubaNet’s full report is here, and I would urge locals who are interested in this issue to read it.

Author: jeffpelline

Jeff Pelline is a veteran editor and award-winning journalist - in print and online. He is publisher of Sierra FoodWineArt magazine and its website SierraCulture.com. Jeff covered business and technology for The San Francisco Chronicle for years, was a founding editor and Editor of CNET News, and was Editor of The Union, a 145-year-old newspaper in Grass Valley. Jeff has a bachelor's degree from UC Berkeley and a master's from Northwestern University. His hobbies include sailing and trout fishing.

16 thoughts on “YubaNet: Marijuana cultivation measure will not reverse outdoor growing ban, even if voters reject it”

  1. YubaNet is now reporting this update:
    “Update: Thanks to BOS Chair Dan Miller for his response to our request for comment: ‘We are setting up a meeting with county counsel to get clarification on the ballot measure. Our understanding was a ‘yes’ on the ballot measure would uphold the provisions of the emergency ordinance and a ‘no’ vote would rescind the emergency ordinance and we would return to the previous ordinance. We will, however, confirm this with county counsel. In any event, thanks for raising the question because the intent is to allow the citizens to decide what they want.'”

  2. Did the supervisors read the ballot measure before voting? Did the Union research the story or just go by what a supervisor/sheriff told them? Since about the only remedy is a counter measure on the ballot, is there enough time to gather signatures before June. Did county officials know this and time their actions to make it more difficult for a counter measure to make it onto the June ballot? Did they talk about this before hand? Did they listen at all to the audience? Were their minds made up before even hearing from the public? Is this a fraudulent action on the part of country officials? Was this idea/action-plan hatched locally or did it come from some cookie cutter “constitutional sheriff” think tank and handed down through the ranks of the Tea Party?

    Yes there are many unanswered question.

  3. Joe,
    In the followup to YubaNet, Dan Miller said “the intent is to allow citizens to decide what they want.” So maybe the ballot language will be revised. We’ll have to wait and see.

  4. Does the general “public” understand what is in place and when voted upon, what will be frozen in time util the next appeal. It’s an educational process…

  5. I haven’t been following this very closely so is this correct, the BOS basically ignored the residents of the County and took the Sheriffs proposal and made it law to ban outdoor grows? No amendments or rewording of the law, straight from Sheriff Royals desk into being enforceable law. Even though I have a script to be able to grow 6 plants for cancer treatment if grown outdoors I would be in violation of the law despite it being legal in California?

  6. Drumroll please! The Union now weighs in: http://www.theunion.com/news/20170921-113/nevada-county-supervisors-to-publicly-state-intent-on
    What’s missing in the article is that the newspaper got it wrong earlier in the week. It should have acknowledged that. Podunk.
    This was the second sentence on Wednesday’s story; a retraction was in order:
    ““The board also voted 4-to-1 to place the issue on the June 7 ballot, giving county voters the option to uphold or discard that ordinance,” The Union continued.”

  7. Does anyone know the actual origin of the written document? Did the sheriff write it, county counsel, did they copy Yuba county’s law, ALEC, ????

    1. Great questions but no one is answering them. Anti-MJ activist Don (“I can’t believe that’s his resume”) Bessee’s silence on this matter has been deafening. More to come.

  8. Apparently this current debate is not about marijuana…it is about preserving “middle America[n] character and values” and creating a new set of laws to protect “..previously established culture..”

    Now somewhere I think I warned people that George Rebane was a crypto-fascisct, white supremacist, anti-American, anti-Constitutional propagandist for the Bund…..

    To learn more read this….
    _______________________________________________________________________
    Clashing Cultures Count

    George Rebane

    We read George Boardman’s ‘Nevada County’s supervisors cede leadership to sheriff on medical marijuana’ in today’s (18jan16) Union on last Tuesday’s BoS MJ prezo by Sheriff Keith Royal et al. Generally it was a good piece, we had some inevitable nits because the changing face of MJ production and consumption in CA is a complicated affair, especially when we translate it down to our county level. And Nevada County being a nationally known source of prime MJ doesn’t help sorting out how we should conduct business in the coming new world of pot.

    Readers know that years ago RR came off the fence on drugs and has supported selective and prudent legalization. Since then the debate has grown on how, when, and under what conditions should the county permit medical marijuana (MMJ) and recreational marijuana (RMJ) production and consumption. These considerations have been made even more complicated by the existence of conflicting federal and dynamic state laws re MJ in its various forms. And when we start picking apart all the components of legalizing the growth and consumption of the weed, we wind up as we have, in the weeds. The recent BoS hearing and vote by supervisors on a revised ‘emergency ordnance’ and the upcoming vote on an MJ initiative have not helped resolve anything in the minds of the two major factions – one facilitating its production and use, and the other essentially opposing all parts of the MJ scene in Nevada County.

    What I’d like to discuss here is recognizing the real conflict that is hidden underneath the layers of details of MJ grow parameters, neighborhood nuisance factors, and specifics of RMJ and MMJ distribution and consumption. The anti-MJ folks voice legitimate concerns about neighborhood nuisances, crime, underage consumption, etc. And these same people are essentially following the tactics of the anti-gun people in wanting to banish MJ from the county – i.e. make the attendant parts of a facile MJ economy so cumbersome and difficult that it will wind up being ‘constructively banned’.

    So let’s be clear, all these details and specifics aren’t the real issue – they comprise the fog that hides what really is on the minds of the anti-MJ people who are mostly right-leaning conservatives, and also what is apparent to the more strategically minded left-leaning progressives. The real issue is the ongoing battle for Nevada County between two very different cultures.

    The conservatives want this foothills community to retain its small town, middle America character and values even if we are located in a very liberal ‘left coast state’. The progressives see Nevada County as the next conservative enclave to conquer and convert into something much more receptive to achieving Agenda21 goals. A simplified view of the two contending communities would pit the more traditionally straight-laced, visibly patriotic, capitalistic, gun-toting, church going crowd against a modern version of the Gaia worshipping, drug comforted, secular humanist ‘hippie culture’, that looks forward to a one-world based on a non-western social order.
    Both sides believe that introducing a permissive MJ environment into the county is the most effective and fastest way to crack its current character, drive out the conservatives, and paint the county a solid shade of progressive blue. But for some reason we can’t put the contending cultures issue on the table, so we keep talking instead about the number of plants, inside vs outside grows, the smell, water usage, unsavory traffic in the neighborhoods, etc. The real issue here in Nevada County and all over the country (actually all over the world) is the preservation of distinct cultures. How can an established culture successfully defend itself against rapid and unwanted change by the purposive imposition (migration, immigration, colonization, …) of a counter-culture?

    The question is answered directly in other parts of the world where our traditions of liberty, property, and security are not practiced – the contending people simply resort to violence and fight it out to see who prevails. The world is still and has been full of such conflicts since days immemorial. I believe that here we would like to find a better way, but that cannot happen if we continue to deny that most of our society’s problems also revolve around clashing cultures.

    A better solution involves answering questions such as what rights does a previously established culture have for self-preservation. How can such rights be used to directly address and resolve cultural contentions? In short, in today’s world with more people, facile communication, and easy transport, can our body of law be expanded to recognize that a large landmass of abundant resources no longer suffices to separate large populations with differing values and cultures who once successfully practiced ‘e pluribus unum’ with minimal coercion from the national supra-cultural level?

    If so, then such an expanded legal system must provide for the self-determination of distinct cultures that can no longer avoid rubbing shoulders within the borders of a united sovereign nation-state that we can still call America. Else we will soon become yet another country with a single dominant command culture enforced by the government gun while pretending the politically correct lie of a multi-cultural society.

    http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2016/01/clashing-cultures-count.html#more

  9. It’s hard to imagine our towns attracting the college-educated millennials and high-tech firms with this “culture.” These people recognize the world has changed since “Father Knows Best,” “Bachelor Father” and “Leave it to Beaver” aired. No wonder the lingering perceptions of our region (“backwater,” “red necks,” “bumpkins,” “hillbillies” etc.) exists. We’re more apt to attract the hard-right, gun-toting, SOJ, Sagebrush Rebellion, John Birch, Constitutional Sheriff, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Oregon militia, Oath Keeper, Doyel Shamley, New World Order extremists. And it’s often found on the Op-Ed page (supposedly the “thinking” content) of The Union newspaper. Rebane sucks up far too much air time — on KVMR and in The Union — because of weak-knee management who won’t say “a little goes a long way.” So much to learn and enjoy from our educators, entrepreneurs, parents, students and others instead.

  10. “weak-knee management”. You hit the nail on the head. I’m done with KVMR. Stupidity and/or willfulness can easily be self-misconstrued as magnanimity if you come to believe your own BS.

  11. I also notice that those who long for preserving “middle America[n] character and values” often have the most personal problems. No self-awareness.

  12. It’s time to take this discussion to a higher level – please share this video to everyone you know who is concerned over this issue. Our County can not afford to be economically hamstrung by an ill-advised, hurried and (in my view) inept attempt to enforce a cultural bias very much not into the interests of all our rural and homesteading families and communities. Nevada County will not be turned into a giant “gated community” by shortsighted politicians.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s