DOWNTOWN POT GREENHOUSES ARE A HISTORICALLY BAD IDEA

Once upon a time, we might have asked what they were smoking.

But in the case of the medical-marijuana greenhouses that the mayor
and a dispensary operator want to build in downtown Dunsmuir, there's
not really any doubt. And, though it might be medicinal, it's having
side-effects.

Look, patients in California have every right to use marijuana --
which in turn means someone needs to grow it. Dunsmuir Mayor Peter
Arth makes a fair point when he argues that it's time to bring
growing "into the legal light" instead of relying on shady,
clandestine sources, including the illegal plantations that
increasingly plague the north state's backcountry.

But does that mean the grow houses belong in downtown Dunsmuir?

Set aside, for a moment, the question of whether greenhouses --
whether they're growing cannabis or camellias -- would fit within the
historic district. The Dunsmuir Avenue lots, which Arth owns, are
vacant today. Any new construction would, at least potentially,
change the neighborhood's character, though a greenhouse is a much
bigger change than, say, a new commercial building.

Set aside the effect the greenhouses would have on the tourism that
is Dunsmuir's trademark. Take a quaint little fishing town with its
beautiful canyon setting and surprisingly good restaurants -- and
throw in cannabis growing on the main drag. Well, everybody needs a
niche, but betting on this one looks like quite the gamble.

No, the serious question is that of security. Greenhouses filled with
plants worth, potentially, thousands of dollars apiece need to be in
a discreet location. Between curious teenagers and hardened
criminals, there are just too many people who'd be tempted to smash a
window and grab the plants -- even across the street from the
Siskiyou County sheriff's substation.

If the proposed location defies common sense, so did Mayor Arth for
chairing the Thursday evening City Council where the proposed project
on his property was discussed, along with the more general question
of whether Dunsmuir needs a marijuana-cultivation ordinance. How
plain does a conflict of interest have to be?

The mayor rationalizes the situation, arguing that the council wasn't
voting on his specific project but simply having a general discussion
of marijuana cultivation. That's true, as far as it goes, but the
discussion was prompted primarily by Arth's proposal, and he
obviously has a personal financial stake in its outcome.

Perhaps there's no direct harm, but any city councilor with an adult
sense of ethics would have recused from the meeting. Instead, Arth
was wielding the gavel. It's bizarre.