SHASTA, TEHAMA SUPERVISORS TAKE OPPOSITE STANDS ON MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES

Shasta and Tehama counties went in opposite directions Tuesday as they
voted on 45-day moratoriums on medical marijuana outlets.

Shasta County supervisors rejected their attorney's recommendation for
the moratorium on medical marijuana outlets in unincorporated areas
while the Tehama County supervisors passed a similar measure 4 to 1.

The urgency ordinances would have halted issuance of use permits to
medical marijuana facilities to give the county staff time to collect
information and possibly suggest a new zoning ordinance for the
co-ops, County Counsel Michael Ralston said. The Shasta County
moratorium could have been extended for up to two years if warranted,
he said.

The cities of Anderson and Shasta Lake already have passed similar
legislation. Charles Jackson of Red Bluff talks with Donna Will of
Tehama County on Tuesday after Tehama County supervisors approved a
45-day moratorium on medical marijuana outlets. Jackson supported the
supervisors' action while Will opposed their stance.

Michael Vasquez of Trinity Gardens Inc. speaks to Shasta County
supervisors Tuesday during a public hearing on the moratorium
suggested by County Counsel Michael Ralston. The supervisors rejected
the moratorium that would have halted use permits to medical marijuana
dispensaries for 45 days.

Shasta County Supervisor Les Baugh voiced his support for the
moratorium and opposition to the continued establishment of medical
marijuana collectives, but the other supervisors weren't as eager to
agree.

Supervisor David Kehoe questioned the necessity of an "urgency"
ordinance.

"What are we trying to stop here?" he said. "What are we trying to
do?"

Several county department heads weighed in.

Director of Resource Management Russ Mull said he felt the moratorium
was a stall tactic and wouldn't accomplish anything.

"What you're looking at is a horse that has long been out of the
barn," he said.

Current zoning codes already in place should be able to adequately
cover medical marijuana facilities, he said.

Mull said the dispensaries can be placed under any number of zoning
descriptors that would prohibit them from being opened near schools or
other sensitive areas.

From a law enforcement standpoint, District Attorney Jerry Benito
said the laws on medical marijuana are ambiguous and therefore hard to
enforce.

Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko said he supported the moratorium and
thought it could eliminate confusion within his department and other
law enforcement agencies.

"It's time to step back, see what the laws are and what other
communities have done in California," he said.

Kehoe said the Sheriff's Office should take action against any illegal
activity within medical marijuana outlets but didn't see how the
moratorium would solve any problems.

The board sent the matter to the county Department of Resource
Management for review, and Mull said one of the first things the
department will do is notify a recently-opened collective in
Cottonwood that owners must apply for a use permit. Then the
department will review existing zoning code to determine if any areas
need clarification or if a new ordinance is needed, he said.

After the Shasta County supervisors' meeting, Michael Vasquez,
secretary to the board of directors for medical marijuana collective
Trinity Gardens Inc., said he agreed with the county that some co-op
regulations need to be looked at.

"We're open to what the county has to say," he said. "We don't want to
see crime. We stay away from schools and other institutions."

In Tehama County, Supervisor Charles Willard cast the sole dissenting
vote.

Willard said he didn't understand the urgency of the matter. No
incidents have been reported to law enforcement regarding dispensaries
in the county's unincorporated areas, he said.

"Why are we rushing to do this when there aren't any issues reported?"
he said. "It's like a witch hunt."

Willard said the county shouldn't need a moratorium to conduct a study
on the issue, but the other board members felt differently.

"Very simply, there are zoning requirements for drug stores (and)
there are additional requirements for drugs stores," Board Chairman
George Russell said. "The dispensary is considered a pharmacy. So I
felt it was reasonable that the topic be analyzed by the planning
department and others to determine what their thoughts are."