FOG UPDATE – That County cannabis survey!

Note: Survey ends Monday September 6th

FOG UPDATE – That County cannabis survey!

You may have received PRMD’s “Cannabis Visioning Survey,” but if not, it is available online until Monday, September 6. It consists of up to 24 questions (copied below so you can read them beforehand), and should take about 10 minutes to complete. Depending on your responses, some subsequent questions will or will not be asked. It is helpful to print the survey by copying and pasting and then mark your answers before starting the survey.

We urge you to take the survey to help ensure that the viewpoints of ordinary residents are considered. Our suggestions for more straightforward questions in a standardized format were rejected. A lot of our issues that would have required simple yes/no responses were not included.

Click here to connect to the survey. If you have already started one you received from the County and didn’t finish you may still start a new one on the website.

You will be frustrated with this survey because sometimes you don’t agree with either answers or the question is framed to elicit a particular response. Many questions are annoying, and reflect what the cannabis industry wants. Some use jargon that growers know but non-growers will not. Feel free to skip any questions if you agree with none of the answers. Some questions are manipulative, so don’t fall for it. If you think both answers are equally important or the question feels like a trick, don’t answer or if there is a scale, leave the button in the center. You certainly don’t have to answer questions about your age or income or even your district if you prefer not to.

We think the most important questions to answer yes to are:

  • Should Exclusion Zones be included in the new ordinance [areas where cannabis operations are prohibited]?
  • Should a temporary moratorium be imposed on cannabis permitting?  This would stop the onslaught of ministerial permits where residents have no ability to object.

In addition, be sure to answer no to allowing cultivation in rural residential and agricultural residential zoning (The question is: “We’ve heard many requests to consider allowing small-scale cannabis cultivation in Rural Residential and Agricultural Residential zoning”).

FOG has been holding back on updates to ease everyone’s email burden, but don’t be fooled into thinking that things have calmed down. There is full-time work going on behind the scenes and a lot is happening in preparation for the EIR scoping and for two upcoming Board of Supervisors meeting, Tues. 9/21 and Tues. 9/28. Stay tuned!

Anna Ransome for Friends of Graton (FOG)

HERE IS THE SURVEY TEXT. THIS IS NOT THE ACTUAL SURVEY WHICH CAN BE ACCESSED WITH THE LINK ABOVE.

 

Countywide Cannabis Visioning Survey

 

The following survey will help inform development of a draft framework for the new cannabis ordinance. These are just some of the issues being examined by staff. Many questions are intended to learn more about comments from the public visioning workshops and small group outreach sessions. We will be conducting additional outreach as the ordinance revision process continues.

 

1. Which jurisdiction do you live in?

Unincorporated Sonoma County

I don’t know

An incorporated city in Sonoma County

A different county or state

 

2. Which District do you live in?

District 1

District 2

District 3

District 4

District 5

 

3. Is it more important to avoid over-concentration of cannabis operations or to limit the number of geographical areas where cannabis can be grown in the county?

Avoid over-concentration (i.e., limit the number of operations in close proximity to each other by allowing cannabis operations to be permitted throughout the county) Limit cannabis permitting to fewer geographical areas (i.e., limit the number of areas where cannabis can be permitted by allow clustering of multiple permits in close proximity to each other)

 

(with a scale that moves from one question to the other)

 

4. We’ve heard ideas about an appropriate size limit for cannabis cultivation. Please rank the following as the most appropriate method (1) to the least appropriate method (4) to limit the size of cultivation areas.

Impose a cultivation square footage limit per parcel

Break the county into specific geographical areas, and impose a cultivation square footage limit within each area

Impose a cultivation square footage limit for the unincorporated county as a whole

Do not impose a local cultivation area size limit

 

5. If there is a cap on total cannabis cultivation area, should the ordinance encourage fewer, larger operations or more, smaller operations?

Fewer, larger operations More, smaller operations

(with a scale that moves from one answer to the other)

 

6. Should Inclusion Zones be included in the new ordinance (areas where cannabis operations are encouraged and permitting can be streamlined)?

Yes

No

 

IF YOU ANSWER NO, YOU DON’T GET THE FOLLOWING THREE QUESTIONS.

7. Which is most important to consider when determining Inclusion Zones?

  • Areas where potential environmental impacts (e.g., water, odor, traffic) would be minimal, as determined by technical analyses in the Environmental Impact Report
  • Areas which would locate cannabis operations further from residential neighborhoods

 

8. Would you be willing to live next to an inclusion zone?

Yes

No

 

9. Should Exclusion Zones be included in the new ordinance (areas where cannabis operations are prohibited)?

Yes

No

 

IF YOU ANSWER NO, YOU DON’T GET THE FOLLOWING QUESTION.

 

10. Which is most important to consider when determining Exclusion Zones?

Areas where potential environmental impacts (e.g., water, odor, traffic) could occur, as determined by technical analyses in the Environmental Impact Report

Areas which would locate cannabis operations near residential neighborhoods

 

11. We’ve heard concerns about how cannabis operations interact with their surroundings. Please rank the following most frequently cited concerns from most important (1) to least important (6)

Groundwater availability (i.e., I don’t want cannabis operations to negatively impact the groundwater supply)

Neighborhood safety (i.e., I don’t want cannabis operations to increase security risk in my neighborhood)

Odor (i.e., I don’t want to smell cannabis operations)

Separation (i.e., I don’t want cannabis operations located near my residence or near other sensitive uses)

Transportation network (i.e., I don’t want cannabis operations to negatively impact existing road conditions or traffic levels)

Visual resources (i.e., I don’t want to see cannabis operations)

 

12. We’ve heard comments about cannabis cultivation might negatively impact water resources in the county. In general, areas where groundwater is most available also have the highest population density. Is it more important to locate cultivation in areas of high groundwater availability or keep cultivation away from highly populated areas?

Locate cannabis cultivation in areas of high groundwater availability Locate cannabis cultivation away from highly populated areas

(with a scale that moves from one answer to the other)

 

13. We’ve heard comments about cannabis odor. Which is the most appropriate method to mitigate offsite odor impacts.

Physical barriers – Require cannabis operations to be located within structures

Separation – Require minimum setbacks from cannabis operations

 

14. We’ve heard comments related to what an adequate setback might be and how those setbacks should be determined. Please rank the following as the most important (1) to the least important (4) aspect to consider.

Odor minimization

Noise minimization

Safety buffering

Visual impact minimization

 

15. We’ve heard many requests to consider allowing small-scale cannabis cultivation in Rural Residential and Agricultural Residential zoning. If cultivation size was limited to cottage-sized operations, could it be compatible with surrounding residential uses in these areas?

Yes

No

 

IF YOU ANSWER YES TO THE ABOVE QUESTION, YOU GET THE FOLLOWING QUESTION:

 

16. Please rank the following from most potential (1) for compatibility to least potential (3) for compatibility

  • Indoor cultivation (specialty cottage – state currently allows up to 500 square feet)
  • Mixed light cultivation (specialty cottage – state currently allows up to 2,500 square feet)
  • Outdoor cultivation (specialty cottage – state currently allows up to 25 mature plants)

 

17. If allowed by the State, should on-site cannabis consumption be allowed?

Yes

No

 

18. Rank the following potential locations as most suitable (1) to least suitable (5) for on site cannabis consumption:

Associated with cultivation operations in Agricultural and Resource areas

Associated with cultivation operations in Industrial areas

Associated with dispensaries or other retail operations (e.g., tasting lounges) in Commercial areas

Associated with visitor-serving uses (e.g., bed & breakfast inns, cannabis tourism) in Agricultural and Resource areas

Associated with visitor-serving uses (e.g., bed & breakfast inns, cannabis tourism) in Residential areas

 

19. Would you be interested in an educational program about the regulation of cannabis in Sonoma County?

Yes

No

 

20. Should a temporary moratorium be imposed on cannabis permitting?

Yes

No

 

21. Please rank the following from most important (1) to least important (3) to include in a moratorium:

  • New permits which are approved if they meet code standards; no site-specific review or public notice is conducted (Zoning Permits)
  • New permits which are either approved of denied after a site-specific review and public notice are conducted (Use Permits).
  • Renewals of currently operating permits

 

22. Please check one only:

Asian/Pacific Islander

America Indian/Alaskan Native

Black/African American

Hispanic/Latino

White

Two or more races

Prefer not to answer

 

23. What is your age?

Over 65

40 to 65

18 to 39

Under 18

Prefer not to answer

 

24. What is your household income?

Under $30,000

Between $30,000 and $49,999

Between $50,000 and $74,999

Between $75,000 and $99,999

Between $100,000 and $150,000

Between $150,000 and $250,000

Over $250,000