Sonoma County eyes ‘streamlined’ permitting of cannabis cultivation

Sonoma County eyes ‘streamlined’ permitting of cannabis cultivation

All points in the supply chain matter. Without cultivators, there is no product on dispensary shelves. Overall, this is a good thing, though there are caveats. You can read the entire article here.

“The special status that cannabis cultivation permitting has enjoyed over the four years since it was legalized in the state of California by the passage of Prop. 64 may become a little less special later this year in Sonoma County, should a proposed General Plan amendment go into effect that will manage cannabis cultivation similarly to other crops’ agricultural uses.”

“Four public “virtual town halls,” each presenting the same information, will be held on two separate days, Monday, March 8, and Friday, March 12, to hear about proposed policy changes that the Cannabis Ad Hoc study group recommends. The recommendations would “streamline permitting for commercial cannabis cultivation in agricultural and resource-zoned areas of unincorporated Sonoma County,” according to the county’s public affairs office.

The listening sessions will provide the public an overview of staff’s recommended changes to cannabis operator permitting, and will collect feedback as part of the 30-day public comment period, which began on Feb. 16. The virtual town halls will be facilitated by B.J. Bischoff.

Additional comments can be emailed to Cannabis@Sonoma-County.org before noon on March 18, when a public hearing before the County of Sonoma Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled. The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, is expected to consider the proposed permitting changes April 13.

For more information, email Cannabis@Sonoma-County.org or call 707-565-2431.”

New Councilmember Kelso Barnett Supports Second Dispensary

New Councilmember Kelso Barnett Supports Second Dispensary

New Councilmember Kelso Barnett was interviewed on KSVY’s Morning Show this past Wednesday. Among other things, he commented on the current cannabis issue. He has no problem with a second dispensary. He understood that the city council originally wanted two dispensaries to encourage competition. He did express concern about the lengthy permit process and suggested it should be shorter. He also felt that the financial requirements imposed on applicants hindered a lot of small business or local Sonoma Valley entrepreneurs. He suggested looking for ways to foster a process that makes it easier for those local entrepreneurs who don’t have the large financial backing that other statewide or national operators have.

Public Comment to Sonoma City Council, March 1, 2021

Public Comment to Sonoma City Council, March 1, 2021

Good evening to the city council. First, as a private citizen, I’d like to thank the city council and staff for all their hard work in choosing a new city council member, it was no doubt a tough job, but very well managed. And I’d like to congratulate councilmember Kelso Barnett and welcome him to the Sonoma City Council.

Moving on to business, I’m here once again representing the Sonoma Valley Cannabis Group. We’d like to thank the city council and especially councilmember Amy Harrington for stepping up and directing our cannabis business question to all of the candidates at the previous council meeting.

What we found most enlightening about the responses to the question was the unanimous support for a second dispensary. Once again, community voices have reaffirmed the validity and importance of supporting a free market that would provide Sonoma Valley residents with a broader variety of products at more competitive prices. This is especially important for members of our patient community who need access to the widest choice of cannabis products possible to relieve serious and chronic symptoms.

We’d also like to thank planning director David Storer for his prompt response to our email question regarding the scheduling of the introduction of the amended cannabis ordinances to the city council. In his response, Mr. Storer suggested that the Council would likely review the amendments within the next few meetings between March 15 and April 19. What we’re not entirely clear on is whether the process of introduction and readings could begin at the next city council meeting and continue through the second half of April, or that the introduction and process may have to wait until the April 19 meeting.

We certainly hope it will be the former. Let’s please not fall into the can kicking syndrome that has plagued us off and on over the last years. As many others have expressed, city electeds and residents alike, it’s time to get this done. Thanks again for your time and have a good evening.