By ROBIN CAYWOOD | Grass Valley
My family has a rich history in the alcohol and tobacco industries. My moonshiner grandparents opened one of the first legal bars in Appalachia Kentucky after Prohibition. Prohibition caused a thriving black market that my family benefitted from. And I grew up hearing stories of explosions in the woods, gunfights, and people getting poisoned from toxic materials used to build stills. Regulation of the industry has created obvious changes.
I see Measure W as potentially disastrous for Nevada County. When Prohibition ended, the country went through growing pains and mixed emotions. No matter your opinion about marijuana, the industry is being recognized and regulated in our state. California is steeped in marijuana culture. That is as much our history as the gold rush. The state has been working diligently on researching and creating policy that will allow California to remain a leader in this industry while addressing obvious concerns that come along with it, like pesticide use, water use, land use, crime, etc. They are proposing licenses to assure these concerns are being prioritized. If Nevada County votes “yes” on Measure W it will lock us into a ban, without the chance to consider the state’s new policies, essentially creating a “dry county,” which will be economically crippling. This ban could only be changed with another costly, time consuming, and contentious election.
There is a “middle path.” We do not have to choose either a complete ban or allow out-of-control, unregulated marijuana growing. I believe that most people in Nevada County agree there are real issues that need to be addressed, and share concerns about the environment, water use, and creating safe neighborhoods. A no vote on W allows a conversation to begin about how Nevada County can create a middle path that addresses these concerns. On April 14, “cottage” license legislation advanced in California. This proposed license is an example of a middle path for small counties like ours. It would allow small farms to have up to 25 plants on agriculturally zoned land with inspections to ensure safety to the community and environment. The county would collect fees for these licenses, and growers would need to stay in compliance to maintain and renew their licenses, which means that people will be more willing to comply than with just an ordinance. It would guarantee annual revenue to the county from licensing fees, as well as boosting local economy that generates tax revenue.
A no vote on Measure W allows Nevada County to carefully look at the issue with input from different perspectives, learn from other counties’ experiences, and create a well thought-out policy, rather than a rushed urgency-ban.
~ Robyn Caywood is a mother of two who lives in Grass Valley. She is a certified trainer in non-violent communication.
