Pubdate: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 Source: Chico Enterprise-Record (CA) Copyright: 2016 Chico Enterprise-Record Contact: http://www.chicoer.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/861 Note: Letters from newspaper's circulation area receive publishing priority BUTTE COUNTY NEEDS TO ADD TEETH TO MARIJUANA ENFORCEMENT A law without an enforced penalty doesn't have much teeth. That's a problem Butte County must rectify when it comes to its rules on growing medical marijuana. The Board of Supervisors today can fine-tune the county's medical marijuana growing ordinance. The laws were passed overwhelmingly in 2014 and implemented last year. Citizens voted to limit the size of pot gardens that people could grow. The larger the lot, the more space a landowner could use, but the total was greatly reduced on all lot sizes. The county worked hard to force compliance last year, handing out 894 citations for violating the ordinance. Here's the problem: Those penalties allowed by the law amounted to $2.93 million in fines. However, just 6 percent of those fines have been paid - and the county says not to expect the number to grow because either the grower has left the area or hasn't responded to requests to pay up. Imagine that. If traffic tickets or tax delinquency were handled in such a manner - with a request to pay and no repercussions for not doing so - not only would most people avoid payment, but more people would break the law. There needs to be a lien placed on the property of people who don't pay the fine. Hard to believe that wasn't there all along. Fortunately, supervisors have a chance to correct that oversight today. County Counsel Bruce Alpert recommends four changes to the county ordinance, the most significant of which covers fines. As it stands now, the ordinance only allows the county to recover its administrative and abatement costs. If necessary, the county can place a lien on the landowners' property for that. According to Alpert, however, the ordinance "does not clearly state" that fines may be recovered via a lien on a person's property, just costs. Therefore, 94 percent of the fines weren't paid. Expect that number to rise next year if supervisors don't act. The amendments to the ordinance would clarify that the county could recover administrative and abatement costs as well as penalties or fines via liens. Another recommended change is to give the landowner or tenant 10 days rather than 20 to correct a violation. All of the four recommendations are common-sense changes. We find no fault with any of them. Based on a year's worth of lessons, we hope the supervisors agree and make the ordinance better. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom