FORT BRAGG, CA.,  9/30/24 – Mendocino High School seniors Kyle Villagomez and Frej Barty have been learning about the politics of elections in class. To see that process close up they helped with the League of Women Voters of Mendocino County candidates forum on Sept. 19 at Fort Bragg Town Hall.

They were pleasantly surprised to see how the five candidates for Fort Bragg City Council worked to unify, not divide. “There is so much division nationally,” said Barty. “I didn’t see that here. They were nice to each other and as a result, they were able to spend more time discussing the issues.”

Barty affirmed that he had favorites but he kept his choices to himself.

Five candidates—Bethany Brewer, Ryan Bushnell, Scott Hockett, Lindy Peters and Mel Salazar—are running for the two open four-year seats on the City Council. Each Fort Bragg resident registered to vote can choose two of the five.

“It seemed like all the candidates at this forum are doing this to make the town better,” Barty said. He thought it was good that the candidates promised to support whoever won and said he saw more cooperation, respect and less ego than is often the case in national politics. But in a nod to a frequent voter complaint, Barty said he would have liked more specifics about policies.

Four new candidates are running alongside incumbent Lindy Peters. In addition to serving on the council, Peters has been a volunteer member of the town’s fire board, a coach, and a local broadcaster. Although none of the four new candidates have experience as elected officials, each has a background in community service. Bethany Brewer has worked with the police department and schools on a grant program designed to battle the fentanyl problem and also as a personal trainer. Scott Hockett has been involved in the city’s blue economy initiative, which seeks sustainable development involving the ocean and has supported community efforts. He owns seven businesses and has been involved in fishing organizations. Equipment operator Ryan Bushnell worked for the city as a community service officer and in the county public works department, where his advocacy as a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) member won him the endorsement of the union. Mel Salazar said she and her husband moved here to be involved in the community. (Salazar’s husband is assistant brewmaster at North Coast Brewing and serves on the board of the Mendocino Coast Humane Society.)

Town Hall was packed full with over a hundred people attending in person. Some had to stand along the side to fit in. By the following day, the recording of the forum, posted on the city’s Facebook page, had received more than a thousand views.

Moderator Pat Dunbar asked questions, most of which came from members of the audience, who wrote them on paper before handing them to the two high school seniors to ferry them up to Dunbar. Dunbar said the forum was not intended to be a debate, and candidates should not interrupt or respond to others in their closing statements.

Issues that came up for discussion included annexing Noyo Harbor (which is in an unincorporated zone but takes advantage of Fort Bragg city services), cannabis dispensaries, the conflict in Gaza, and the impact of short-term vacation rentals on local housing. But the biggest issue by far was what is now happening with Skunk Train operator Mendocino Railway and the mill site property. After decades of planning for Fort Bragg’s waterfront after Georgia-Pacific shut down the lumber mill that took up most of the oceanfront property, the city is embroiled in litigation with the railroad, which acquired most of the property, an acquisition concluded in 2021. That issue overwhelmed all other audience questions by a wide margin, organizers said. All five candidates were asked if they had taken money from Mendocino Railway and all said no. In the subsequent discussion, each candidate said he or she would like to see development move forward on the mill site, although their approaches were different. 

Lindy Peters, who has served 22 years on the council, gave a lengthy explanation involving the status of city zoning efforts and litigation with the Skunk from the city’s perspective. Afterwards, Mel Salazar said those not on the council could not weigh in on the details, adding a caution:“I feel we don’t have all the facts here as candidates except Lindy,” she said. “And I believe it is a little bit unreasonable for the community to expect that any of us will have clear answers before being elected. The litigation hearings are in closed sessions, and until two of us are in office, we won’t have access to the full scope of this situation. Only then we can make informed and thoughtful decisions.”

Bethany Brewer added, “I’ll be happy when litigation is done and everybody can be in the same room and have a more cohesive conversation. I do think there is light at the end of this tunnel.”

Scott Hockett was focused on getting businesses established on the old mill site. “I would like both sides to come to the table and put the swords down and settle this thing for the better of the community, rezone it and we could create housing, aquaculture and put some jobs out there, serious paying jobs for our youth to be able to stay in this community and work out there. And the sooner the better, to settle this disagreement.”

Ryan Bushnell quipped, “I have not received any money from this company, but I do believe the only people winning right now are the lawyers.”

The scene was far different in 2022 when the League held a similar forum. Then 11 candidates vied for three four-year seats, with Jason Godeke and Marcia Rafanan topping the vote and incumbent Tess Albin-Smith also winning narrowly, despite running as a write-in candidate due to a filing mixup. At that election, Peters ran unopposed for a single two-year seat; now he is running for one of the two four-year seats.

At that 2022 forum, many of the candidates expressed strong opposition to the Skunk Train’s purchase of the property and how the railroad was dealing with obtaining permits from the city for renovation and repair of long dilapidated buildings. Two years later, the mood had clearly changed, and Peters and the rest were taking a more neutral approach to the dispute between city and railroad. The candidates were focused on progress at the mill site, not on who was to blame. Beyond the mill site legal issues, the lack of affordable housing garnered the most audience comments and questions. None of the candidates commented on efforts underway, such as the Newsom administration’s efforts to force more second units, the city’s innovative but stalled Mendocino Coast Housing Trust or even the Plateau, an affordable housing development led by Mayor Bernie Norvell and the city.

On cannabis, the four new candidates said they would not support making Fort Bragg a cannabis tourist destination. Peters said it already is but said he wants to limit the number of dispensaries in town to four and no more than two on any block. The views there had changed as well. Earlier in the century, cannabis was more accepted as a fact of life in the county. Now the opposition to cannabis dispensary expansion was strident, and the candidates showed zero affection for an herb widely used and grown locally.

“I was here when it was legalized,” Brewer said. “There are rules now, and I appreciate that, but I’d like to see more. I think we have too many dispensaries here. I think that those storefronts could offer something way more beneficial to our town.”

Peters backed the idea of annexing Noyo Harbor, saying city services were already provided and the area could benefit. He also backed plans to use an existing road as an exit from the harbor on the north side of the Noyo Bridge.

Hockett, whose businesses are located in the harbor, said annexation should wait until the mill site property is developed. Brewer said annexation was not a priority for her campaign. Bushnell said he was opposed but his mind could be changed over time. He said it was up to the people and businesses in the harbor. Salazar said she would listen to what townsfolk said before making a decision.

Peters also broke with the other four on the issue of Gaza. The others said the conflict was beyond the scope of the council or had no opinion. “This issue was brought to the Fort Bragg City Council in petition form,” said Peters. “It asked us, in very neutral language, to write a letter to ask for a ceasefire in Gaza and ask for peace. We had public input, we took a vote and we sent a letter for a ceasefire. It came to us through a petition signed by city residents, and that’s what councils should do. In certain instances, I think it’s okay for the city to take positions on national and international issues, especially when they affect us. This is a small community with few options, and our high school students were more likely to join the military than other communities because there weren’t too many options here.”

All five candidates said they would support a crackdown on illegal vacation rentals operating in the city as well as enforcing that all short-term rental landlords pay the city’s transient occupancy tax. 

“I absolutely would support that,” Bushnell said. “I do know that Airbnbs are currently only allowed in the central business district, but let’s be honest, they’re everywhere.” 

Peters agreed. “When they stay in an Airbnb, no money is going for a police call, no money is going for a fire call, no money is going into our our water enterprise fund, so that’s lost money that the city should have available to them to spend.”

Each candidate was asked to list endorsements. Bushnell had the SEIU endorsement, and Hockett was endorsed by Anderson Logging. Peters described his endorsement. “The only organization that has officially endorsed me so far is one of the organizations I answered questions to, and that was the Mendocino County Democratic Central Committee, and they have officially endorsed me as a candidate,” Peters said. “I also had every other council member that I served with as a team sign my nomination papers [and] that should tell you something there.”

At the end, Bushnell noted that voters have a choice among “five great people.” He promised to “support whoever wins and do what I can to help them. If I do win, then I will work as a team to make Fort Bragg better. I think that Fort Bragg does better when we all do better.” As the event concluded, the candidates gathered amicably for a group photo and exchanged smiles and even hugs.

This race will have two winners and three losers. Peters, 71, is a generation older than Brewer, 44, Hockett, 43, and Bushnell, 38. Peters came to Fort Bragg after a career in the Bay Area.

Salazar, 32, and her family moved to the area several years ago. The candidates, like many on the Mendocino Coast, have had multiple careers and jobs over the years. Bushnell is a Caltrans equipment operator and volunteer firefighter. 

Brewer said she is running to give back what the town has given her. “I am a third-generation Fort Bragg resident, and I grew up an at-risk teenager,” she said. “Raised low income here, I have been a recipient of the resources and the love that this community has to offer. I have eaten at the food bank, I have slept at the hospitality center, and I know and understand at the deepest level what the heart of Fort Bragg truly means.

“I’m running for a seat on city council to give a voice to the underprivileged, specifically the youth in our community,” she continued. “I want them to be seen and heard, because I am proof that success is the result of this support for more than 10 years.”

Salazar came to town a few years ago and doesn’t plan to leave. “I wasn’t born and raised here, but Fort Bragg has become my home,” she said. “Like many who have transplanted to a beautiful town, I’ve invested my heart and time in this community from volunteering at local events and youth sports. Planting roots [in the community] is essential as it shapes the future you’ll be a part of for years to come.”

Hockett briefly described his family’s long history in Fort Bragg that extends back a century. “My history is in 1999 I graduated from Fort Bragg High School,” he said. “I started commercial fishing right away. And since then I have opened a host of businesses, seven of which are currently active. I have had lots of employees, 36 or more currently.” Hockett also has led fishing organizations, especially during the pandemic

While there have been candidates in the past who took pride in dressing down, or dressing up like former Mayor Will Lee, the five were all dressed in business casual, with all three men wearing baseball caps. At the end of the forum, Peters asked for a moment to remember Jane Person, an important player in the League of Women Voters for many years as well as other coast organizations. She recently died in a fall at her home at age 82. A moment of silence followed.

(Correction- an earlier version of this story failed to mention that Jason Godeke was among the winners of the four year seat in 2022).

The post Fort Bragg City Council race features four political newcomers, one veteran appeared first on The Mendocino Voice | Mendocino County, CA.

FORT BRAGG 4/19/20 — Federal Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong has thrown out a case brought against Mendocino County and members of the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) by Andres Rondon, a legal cannabis grower whose operation was named Skunkworx. The case was filed over a Oct. 21, 2018 raid at Rondon’s farm on Pine Avenue in Potter Valley. He no longer is farming cannabis there. (See our previous coverage here. And a letter from Rondon here.)

The judge dismissed the case on the legal doctrine of “res judicata” meaning a case can’t be tried twice on the same set of facts in different courts. The case had already been tried in state court and also heard in state appeals court and thus could not be brought again in federal court, she ruled. 

A Mendocino County Superior Court judge (the state court) threw the first case out based on the fact that law enforcement officers have qualified immunity when acting in the scope of their jobs, even if acting on bad information. Qualified immunity has become an issue nationally as a national debate unfolds on legal protections for police officers sparked by the 2020 death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. New Mexico acted earlier this month to eliminate qualified immunity.

New Mexico became the third state to eliminate qualified immunity.

When Rondon was barred from seeking compensation for his losses in state court by legal immunity for the officers, he sued in federal court, where the claim has been barred by the fact the case has already been argued.

The focus on legal technicalities like qualified immunity and res judicata has disappointed Rondon, who hoped to have his “day in court” to show his product was legal and was misappropriated from him.

He said he has never had that day to argue liability and legality for the raid and his history as a ground breaking member of the local cannabis community. He was never arrested in connection with the case. The crop was destroyed by a chipper. The Mendocino Voice obtained confirmed evidence that Rondon had permits and a state license to grow at the site. Deputies claimed they did not find any evidence of a legal grow when they searched before the raid. There were allegations made that numbers may have been reversed in the address of the property during the process of searching for the permit and licenses.

Rondon’s attorney, Arthur Angel, declined to comment on the verdict. He said he was not planning to appeal. Rondon said he planned to respond with another letter to the editor of the Mendocino Voice.

Angel had argued that one plaintiff was new (Skunkworx) in the federal case and that the case touched on civil rights not available for redress in state court. The judge addressed those arguments in great detail and ruled against Rondon’s case and entirely in favor of the county’s arguments.

Christian Curtis, Mendocino County Counsel, and the county’s attorney on the case, had made two arguments, res judicata and also that the federal court could not compensate someone for a federally illegal product, no matter the facts of the case. Armstrong said the failure of the case on res judicata made it unnecessary to get to the more interesting charge of whether a marijuana grower can sue for damages in a federal court. The ruling was handed down March 31, without leave to amend. The ruling said nothing about who would pay court costs.

The post Federal judge tosses cannabis grower’s case against Mendocino Co., says it’s a redo from state court appeared first on The Mendocino Voice | Mendocino County, CA.

UPDATE 3/2/21 — Andres Rondon provided the Mendocino Voice with a copy of his state license and said he showed it to officers at the time of the raid. We were able to authenticate it through the CDFA.

“The temporary cannabis cultivation license you have was indeed issued by the California Department of Food and Agriculture on 2/1/2018, then it was extended (see the new attachment) and it expired on 5/31/2019, when a provisional license was issued; however, the provisional license was surrendered on 12/27/2019, ” said Rebecca Forée of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, by email.

ORIGINAL
MENDOCINO Co., 2/9/21 — Among the endless questions facing cannabis growers — or at least those who’ve actually made it through the regulatory tangle — is what rights they have to compensation if their product is seized and destroyed?

And as with many things in this industry in flux, the answer is still being defined in the courts and in the legislature. And in that evolving case law Mendocino County cannabis grower Andres Rondon has already struck out twice so far in state court, and now faces possible dismissal of his federal case.

Back in 2018 Rondon’s Potter Valley-based cannabis business, Skunkworx, was raided by Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office deputies. In 2019 he filed a lawsuit in Mendocino Superior Court alleging that, as a legal grower, his product had been improperly seized and destroyed. Then, when he lost the case in Superior Court and on appeal, he filed a new civil rights case in federal court, making the same claims. The federal civil rights violation lawsuit seeks $800,000 in damages.

Now lawyers for the County of Mendocino are seeking to have the federal lawsuit dismissed, on the premise that though Cannabis is locally legal, it remains federally illegal, and because the case has already been tried. To the legality of the cannabis in question, a California Public Records Act request to the County shows that Rondon filed for a cannabis growing permit in July 2017, prior to the raid, and withdrew the application in December 2019.

The motion to dismiss was set to be heard Jan. 13 in the courtroom of United States District Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong. Instead, the federal judge canceled the hearing and is now deciding the case based on submitted documents. No ruling had been issued as of Feb. 8, according to Armstrong’s online calendar

Arthur Angel, attorney for Rondon and Skunkworx, said in an interview that it’s “hypocritical” for the same local government that is in the process of regulating and taxing cannabis to seize and destroy a product being cultivated lawfully, and then hide behind federal law.

“You have to take a step back and look at this argument by the county. If it’s illegal, then they are co-conspirators,” Angel said. 

The raid

In October of 2018 Skunkworx Pharms owner, Andres Rondon, was in Southern California when one of his employees called to alert him of a robbery in progress, according to the lawsuit.

Trusting he could avail himself of the same options as any law abiding citizen, Rondon did the perhaps not-so-obvious thing, he called the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office to report the theft. According to court records, Rondon claims that officers showed up some two hours later, but that they didn’t immediately investigate the robbery, or even the vehicle left behind by the thieves. 

Instead, he says they left and came back with a search warrant and a wood chipper.

In the records Rondon further says that the deputies ran some 350 cannabis plants on the verge of harvest through the wood chipper and destroyed equipment and plant starts for 2019. The search warrant affidavit included in the court file shows that from the MCSO’s side the incident did begin with a call about intruders.

“Caller advised there were four subjects, dressed in police gear with long rifles coming onto their property and into their residence. The caller believed the suspects were not police but people dressed up as police, ” the county’s search warrant affidavit states. When deputies arrived on the scene they observed two subejcts on the property. “Both subjects fled the area and as of yet have not been contacted,” the affidavit reads.

While on the property, the responding deputies observed 14 grow houses. They called in and were told a search of records under both the name and address showed no permits to grow cannabis. Angel, Rondon’s lawyer, argues that the grows were permitted and that paper copies were available at the farm. Neither side presented proof of legality or illegality in the court files.

First came the state lawsuit in Mendocino Superior Court

Angry about what he saw as a miscarriage of justice, Rondon filed suit. Initially it seemed as though the case would help clear up some important issues about regulation and enforcement of cannabis laws. Though the case in federal court remains pending, the case in state court has already illuminated state laws that may not be to the linking of growers.

The case has highlighted existing state law that provides immunity to law enforcement officers, when on duty, even if the search itself turns out to have had legal problems, and even without an argument over legality or illegality. The state appeals court record also demonstrated there are state laws that say that when cannabis is seized, it can be destroyed on site, except for a sample used for evidence. The questions of whether the cannabis grow was legal or not, or whether the search was legal or not have never been litigated as part of this case. 

Appeals court says it can’t change state laws

Though the case in state court had not technically been resolved, it became essentially moot when the appeals court agreed with the Mendocino County Superior Court ruling that legal immunity protects officers of the law in performance of their duties from being sued, even if acting on bad information. In upholding the decision to dismiss Rondon’s suit in October, judges from California’s First Appellate District wrote that the application of governmental immunity in cases like his does cause hardships to legitimate cannabis farmers whose crops are mistakenly destroyed. “We are not unsympathetic,” the judges wrote. The appeals court pointed out that it would be up to the state legislature to change the laws. 

Another state law allows for the destruction of cannabis under a search warrant, whereas a different product would normally be preserved by those conducting the search.

“The deputy sheriffs—as Rondon alleges—were acting in the scope of their official duties, as they first obtained and then executed a search warrant authorizing them to search for marijuana. The warrant specifically authorized them to dispose of marijuana pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 11479, if applicable. Under certain conditions, this statute permits law enforcement agencies, after seizure of a suspected controlled substance such as ‘growing or harvested cannabis,’ to preserve a representative sample and destroy the rest,” the judges wrote.

Rondon v. Mendocino County CA1/4 – CourtListener.com

On to federal court

During the appeal process, Rondon’s lawyer Angel, then decided the state lawsuit was probably dead and focused on a new federal lawsuit he filed, where he hoped to prove and recover damages. That case is still in court, though the judge is currently considering a motion to dismiss. “Plaintiffs were engaged in the lawful cultivation of cannabis, having complied with all licensing and registration requirements of the state of California and defendant Mendocino County, as the complaint specifically avers. Their licensure and registration were shown on the databases maintained by the state and Mendocino County,” states an opposition to the county’s motion to dismiss, filed by Angel.

The defendants (the County of Mendocino) have never argued that the plants were illegal in the court case and Rondon faced no criminal charges related to the cannabis grow. According to the Mendocino Superior Court’s online list of court files, Rondon has never been charged with a crime in the county, appearing in 2016 and 2018 on civil matters.

Mendocino County Counsel Christian Curtis explained in an interview that from the County’s perspective the federal case isn’t about whether the cannabis was legal or not, but about the fact that previously litigated claims are not allowed.

The county is now making two arguments for dismissal, neither of which have anything to do with whether the weed was legal or not: that it should be dismissed because the case has already been litigated in state court, and because damages can’t be recovered in federal court from something which is federally illegal.

“The property in question is primarily Plaintiffs’ cannabis plants. Plaintiffs seek lost profits stemming from their inability to sell the cannabis,” Mendocino County’s motion to dismiss read.

“These damages, however, are unavailable, because the cultivation of cannabis remains prohibited by federal statute. Consequently, ‘Plaintiffs face the insurmountable hurdle that federal law does not recognize any protectible liberty or property interest in the cultivation, ownership, or sale of marijuana, ” the county’s motion reads.

Angel believes the case illustrates serious flaws in how marijuana is regulated by the county and how the law surrounding the emerging farm product is enforced. He said the county was more interested in litigating the case than investigating what really happened and creating a remedy

“I told them I’d be happy to speak to the sheriff, to the D.A. or whoever I needed to talk to and get to the bottom of this. They just blew me off. They remained irresolute throughout. From what I’ve heard informally some of this, by no means an isolated incident,” Angel said.

The post Mendocino Co. seeks dismissal of suit filed by Skunkworx owner, says grower can’t be compensated for federally illegal plant (updated 3/2) appeared first on The Mendocino Voice | Mendocino County, CA.

FORT BRAGG, 1/25/21 — When does a yes vote equal a no? One place was at Monday night’s Fort Bragg City Council meeting to decide the fate of a proposed new cannabis business.

Cannabis entrepreneur Brandy Moulton won a 2 to 1 Council vote Monday night, but that wasn’t enough to get approval for her plan to create a retail, manufacturing and plant-start microbusiness operation on Franklin Street in downtown Fort Bragg.

The council took the vote to overturn the Fort Bragg Planning Commission’s December decision to deny Moulton’s proposal. Moulton had envisioned a business, Moulton’s Sunshine Holistic, which would have used the old Floor Store building across from the Post Office and Purity Supermarket, constructing new facilities and even giving a worker a place to live onsite.

After losing at the Planning Commission Moulton appealed to the City Council — but because the city requires three votes to overturn a Planning Commission decision, no matter how many councilpersons are present, the 2 aye to 1 nay vote amounts to a “no.”

The Fort Bragg Council has five seats, but one is currently empty. Vice Mayor Jessica Morsell-Haye recused herself based on the fact she is an owner of the Golden West Saloon, located nearby and thus could have a conflict of interest. That left three councilmembers to make the decision about the dispensary-growing and manufacturing operation. So, the vote had to clear 3 to 0 for the project to move forward.

Mayor Bernie Norvell and Councilmember Lindy Peters voted in favor of the dispensary (to overturn the planning commission’s denial). But Councilmember Tess Albin-Smith voted no, killing the proposal. Norvell and Peters had attached conditions including a smell test, to have a way to control the permit based on odor, Moulton had detailed plans on how there would be no odor, but smells often come up as a question for cannabis operations. The plants would have been limited to small starts, commonly called clones. Norvell and Peters also attached a condition that clones grown on site be sold on site, not used off site, which was one of the primary concerns of the Planning Commission.

Moulton already owns the dispensary Sovereign, located in the “Henry’s Meadow” building south of Fort Bragg on Highway 1. She characterized the effort as basically a relocation at the meeting, albeit to a larger facility. In an interview after the meeting, Moulton said she hadn’t decided for sure whether she would reapply, and whether Sovereign’s location might be kept open regardless of what might happen with Sunshine Holistic. She currently rents the old Floor Store building. Albin-Smith encouraged Moulton to reapply, covering the conditions ahead of time that the planning commission had rejected.

The planning commission had denied the application mainly based on an extensive discussion about which use was the “primary” use, among retail, manufacturing and growing — and which two were subordinate. Moulton said the retail business was primary, while the other two, which are not generally allowed as primary uses in the downtown area, were subordinate.

This led to a discussion of whether the growing part of the business would sell cloned starts only at the retail store or would use them on Moulton’s other operations. Selling or transferring the starts for offsite use might mean that the primary business was really the growing operation. Moulton said the primary use would be selling in store, as there are no other nurseries within 60 miles and she anticipated strong demand, but couldn’t be sure, as is the nature of business. If all the plants grown onsite were being sold onsite, the growing operation would be a subordinate use to the retail store, Norvell and Peters reasoned. Moulton was ready to compromise and not take any of the clones off site.

“Bernie and Lindy are always objective. I don’t know Tess all that well,” said Moulton, in the interview. Moulton added that she felt the planning commission had been “very biased” against her. The council is scheduled to pick a new council person soon. That person could be key in preventing the council from being stuck in similar future situations where unanimous votes are needed. 

In an unrelated matter, Moulton is also the person who has sued Fourth District Mendocino County Supervisor Dan Gjerde in a free speech case over being banned from Gjerde’s county supervisor Facebook page. The case is still active in federal court, she confirmed. 

In other business, the council also heard that the city probably won’t have to provide a building to house a winter homeless shelter after all. Mayor Norvell reported that the Mendocino Coast Jewish Community Shul in Caspar has stepped up with an offer to give the homeless winter shelter a location for at least the last two weeks of March. The winter shelter is scheduled to close at the end of March. 

The temporary winter shelter for the homeless, operated by the nonprofit Hospitality Center, had itself been homeless until first the local Lutheran Church and now the Jewish Shul stepped forward. Norvell reported that Trinity Lutheran Church Pastor Randy Knutson spoke to his board and the church gave approval for running the winter shelter through March 15. The church first took on housing the shelter when it opened in January. The city had been scrambling to find a location within city buildings should it be needed to host the winter shelter, first looking at the C.V. Starr Community Center, then crossing that off the list and hosting a meeting last week about hosting the shelterin the old gymnasium behind city hall. The Shul is located on the grounds of the Caspar Community Center.

The council also approved by a 3 to 0 vote a transportation study for the Dollar General Project with consultant Fehr & Peers not to exceed $49,935. Councilperson Peters emphasized the money is from the developer, not from city bank accounts. See our previous coverage here:

Mayor Norvell recused himself from the Dollar General item based on a relative’s ownership of a nearby property. Vice Mayor Morsell-Haye then took over the meeting for the last two items, each of which related to the Dollar General proposal.

The post Downtown Fort Bragg cannabis business nixed by City Council on split vote — winter homeless shelter will find new home at Mendocino Coast Jewish Community shul appeared first on The Mendocino Voice | Mendocino County, CA.

FORT BRAGG, 10/14/20 — “These businesses have already proven to us they are good neighbors. I welcome them to Fort Bragg,” said Mayor Will Lee at Tuesday night’s regular council meeting.

The council started a process expected to last until April, 2021 in which a consultant will be hired to help prepare an ordinance that would allow commercial cannabis cultivation on inland industrial parcels, such as those north of Pudding Creek and east of Highway 1. Councilperson Jessica Morsell-Haye suggested a 1 percent tax on grower revenues, but relented when other councilmembers insisted that no special fees be imposed on cultivators.

Councilperson Lindy Peters pointed out the fees and taxes that the state already charges cannabis producers. Those costs are in addition to the 2.5 percent tax rate on gross income from the county of Mendocino.

“They are businesses like anybody else. I am 100 percent against giving them any kind of special tax,” said Vice Mayor Bernie Norvell.

“I found the vice mayor’s argument compelling. I can get on board with this.  I think it’s important we don’t get greedy here,” replied Morsell-Haye.

The plan is for growers to pay regular fees like building permits, but no extra fees because they are in the cannabis industry.  Each grower would have to go through a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process.  The city didn’t want to make the investment of doing a blanket CEQA for the entire town when there are so few parcels that qualify.  Thus the plan is to exempt the ordinance from CEQA . Then each applicant would need to deal on a case-by-case basis with odor, water use, and other questions addressed by CEQA. This approach differs from the county’s cannabis cultivation ordinance, which attempted to exempt applicants in the initial stages from going through individual CEQA processes, subsequently resulting in complications for applicants seeking permit approval on the state level.

Cannabis cultivation is actually already legal under the city’s microbusiness cannabis ordinance. The current effort is intended to regulate larger growing operations.

A local published cannabis scholar, Evan Mills, PhD, provided comments as to why outdoor cultivation is more natural and uses far less energy with the associated environmental costs of high electrical use that characterizes indoor grows. Peters said the city had considered outdoor grows, but after public comments in the initial process of a year ago, decided to go only with indoor growing in the forthcoming ordinance.

The council did not discuss why a consultant would be needed or the cost of hiring someone from the outside. One person providing public comment criticized the use of an outside contractor.

“This is overkill for what can be a simple staff project, especially at a time when the city is adding planning staff,” commented Jacob Patterson “We are better served by doing this work in house…This project is fiscally irresponsible. We can and should do better with the city’s limited resources.”

Cannabis cultivators said they need new legal places to grow. Area grower “Michael,”commenting live on Zoom, said if the city had a place where cultivation would be allowed, he would be there “tomorrow.”  Michael said the state may require all water used by an indoor grow be recycled and reused.

“It would be a bit of an extra fee on cultivators, but having a place to cultivate would be worth it,” said Michael.

Jon McColley, who runs the city’s first marijuana processing business, Root One Botanicals, said the company had processed over a ton of cannabis over the past year while following the rules set forth by the council. The company had applied for a cultivation permit, prompting the plan being considered Monday night, but later withdrew the cultivation application. McColley cited information that every guest in a hotel uses about 40 gallons of water, which multiplied out over all the guests has far greater water use than a cannabis grow would have.

The council did not vote but the consensus discussion gave direction to Sarah McCormick, of the city’s community development department, to move forward with a process that will include drafting a request for proposals to bring a consultant on board and reviews at subsequent council meetings.

Some 30 people attended the Tuesday night meeting by Zoom, where most meetings have just a handful of persons. 

Other business taken up by the council:

1. Budget: Reports of improved transient occupancy tax revenues means the city was able to readjust its budget, which it has done several times since revising the budget downward at the start of the pandemic. The Council approved a budget amendment that provides an additional $50,000 to Visit Fort Bragg, provides $25,000 for  the Noyo Center for Marine Science and $5,000 for the community garden project. 

2. Council members gave special recognition for City Clerk June Lemos for seven years of service to the city. Lemos was appointed by the City Clerks Association of California (CCAC) as a mentor to four Northern California city clerks. She was  also chosen by the CCAC as a member of their Membership and Inclusivity Committee to help make new city clerks feel more welcome and prepared at conferences and trainings.

“Thank you June, you are truly there every step of the way. You do make my job easier, thank you,” said Norvell during the meeting. Peters said Lemos has worked harder than any other clerk has ever had to work, because of a barrage of public records requests that has been going on this year, especially from one individual, whom he did not identify. “We are talking about hundreds and hundreds of pages of documents.  You are there many late nights processing these requests from city residents,” said Mayor Lee.  Lemos thanked the council for the proclamation. 

3. Later in the meeting, Lemos provided details about the extensive security the city is providing for the ballot box in front of city hall and for the delivery of ballots to the county (read more about the county’s elections here).

4. A closed session was held to discuss the city’s purchase of property at 90 W. Redwood Avenue, which does not include the building at that location. The city is now involved in price negotiations with Georgia Pacific for the property, according to the closed session agenda. City Manager Tabatha Miller said there was no announcement out of closed session about the negotiations.

5. Councilmembers heard that the Mendocino Coast Dog Owners Group (MCDOG) recently provided labor and improvements to the dog park at CV Starr Community Center, upgrading the dog park.  

6. Councilmember Jessica Morsell-Haye said she is feeling more optimistic about the Citizens Commission (for name change) after the third meeting of the group of local residents. The initial group was composed of 17 members, with two new members added at last week’s meeting.  Morsell-Haye said Vice Mayor Norvell attended and has agreed to join the group of community members going forward. The Citizens Commission sprang from a nationally publicized controversy over changing the name of Fort Bragg in an effort to rid the city of its namesake, former slaveholder Braxton Bragg (see our previous coverage here).

6. Heard a special presentation by Lia Holbrook of Project Sanctuary about activities happening as part of Domestic Violence Awareness month.

The post The Fort Bragg City Council plans to greet future indoor commercial cannabis cultivators with a promise of no special fees or taxes appeared first on The Mendocino Voice | Mendocino County, CA.

MENDOCINO Co., 10/13/20 — On Tuesday evening, tonight, the Fort Bragg City Council will consider how to create new regulations for growing cannabis to accompany its existing rules that govern both retail dispensaries and processing/manufacturing of cannabis products.

The Oct. 13 council meeting will be held by Zoom at 6 p.m.

A council subcommittee has presented a plan that suggests the council consider allowing cannabis cultivation in all inland industrial parcels zoned industrial, rather than just those north of Pudding Creek, as had been the original plan.

The council began working on plans for cannabis cultivation regulation in January 2018. In June 2019, the council gave direction to staff to develop an ordinance to allow and regulate commercial cannabis growing. 

“Several factors delayed said ordinance, including the withdrawal of a development application for a proposed commercial cannabis cultivation project (Root One Botanicals), staffing changes in City Hall, and the challenges involved with the associated environmental document, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),” the staff report for Tuesday night’s meeting states.  Root One Botanicals launched the first cannabis processing facility in Fort Bragg, located in the industrial area on the north end of Franklin Street. Two cannabis retail dispensaries have been launched this fall in Fort Bragg.

The plan under consideration sets a target date of April 2021 for implementation. The plan, as suggested by the Community Development Committee, suggests that no sales tax, or additional taxation specifically for cannabis, be collected. “Standard fees, as identified by the City’s Fee Schedule, in addition to fees associated with building permits as determined by Mendocino County will apply,” the report states.

The staff report states it would be appropriate to be found exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

“Staff has determined that environmental review should be conducted on a project-by-project basis to accurately assess the environmental impacts of each proposal. The adoption of the proposed ordinance does not allow construction of any building or structure or establishment of a new land use, but sets forth the regulations that shall be followed if and when a building, structure or land use is proposed to be constructed or a site is proposed to be developed,” the staff report states.

Water is identified as the key environmental issue created by cannabis cultivation in the report.

“Cannabis cultivation, similar to other agricultural land uses, is a high-water user and therefore may have individual or cumulative impacts on the City’s water supply. The individual and cumulative impacts on the City’s water supply will in part depend on whether well water is available for cultivation uses.

The availability, quantity and quality of well water is unique to every property and therefore, are appropriate for a site-specific evaluation. In order to address the specific impacts of cannabis cultivation in the City, staff is proposing that a water supply assessment be required as part of the use permit application submission to ensure the potential impacts to water supply are adequately addressed,” the report states.

Staff is suggesting that a request for proposals be circulated so that a private contractor can prepare the ordinance for the cannabis cultivation.

The post Fort Bragg to consider cannabis growing regulations at tonight’s city council meeting appeared first on The Mendocino Voice | Mendocino County, CA.