Neighbors record Supervisors comments on cannabis…..then and now
Neighbors: Preparing for Wednesday’s hearing. They listened to the April 2018 BOS meeting (cannabis study session) again to remember what the sups said about neighborhood compatibility.
Each supervisor Makes very specific comments: Direct quotes from the videos….
Susan Gorin: “I said at the very beginning neighborhood compatibility was my very highest priority”. “ The nonconforming DA parcels that surround the AR/RR and so many are zoned appropriately but not conforming in size or certainly in the surrounding and changing environment of rural residential neighborhoods”.
In reference to the actual cannabis business locations, She then discussed neighbors being the eyes and ears of the neighborhood and informing the county and permit Sonoma about tree removal, illegal electrical, not abiding by environmental regulations and permitting codes. “The mismatch has produced great angst in the community and I totally understand the perspective from the neighbors who are the eyes and ears on reporting their concerns”.
“I turned in a grow that was next to my house and caused me a lot of concern and it was 200 feet from my house”. After the meeting, Robert and I met James Gore and Robert gave him the packet about the 885 Montgomery lane grow. James said that the grow next to him “stunk”. I remember this conversation vividly.
In regard to setbacks, “lack of setbacks from indoor cultivation when I see a barn literally right on the property line and I know there is odor leakage from the facility, that in my opinion, is not in compliance with the spirit of the ordinance”.
She is referring to the barn on our property line and actually thanked Robert and me in her speech for sharing the pictures and making her aware of the situation.
“RR and AR zones were specifically excluded from cultivation that was done by the board on purpose to alleviate the conflict between grows in residential neighborhoods. Something has to give, increased setbacks, precluding AR/RR adjacencies. These are things I think we can work on”.
He then talks about the minimal parcel size and says “increased setbacks, prohibiting cannabis permits on parcels immediately adjacent to AR/RR”.
“I am really concerned about neighborhood compatibility. I don’t think we got into the weeds on that in the ordinance one and a half years ago. I really feel for these neighborhoods and the one size doesn’t fit all”.
She then discusses the hodgepodge of zones and says “it’s crazy and it doesn’t take into consideration the neighborhoods and we have to do a better job. We haven’t done enough due diligence to protect these rural neighborhoods and we need to make sure that neighborhood compatibility happens”.
“That was then, this is now”.