Pubdate: Sun, 03 Apr 2016
Source: Ukiah Daily Journal, The (CA)
Copyright: 2016 The Ukiah Daily Journal
Contact: http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/feedback
Website: http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/581
Author: Jane Futcher
Note: Jane Futcher is a Willits resident.

A WILLITS MJ BAN WOULD BE BAD NEWS

There were moments Monday, March 21, when the anti-cannabis fervor 
expressed by Willits Mayor Bruce Burton and his two good-old-boy 
sidekicks on the Willits City Council was reminiscent of "Reefer 
Madness," the 1930s propaganda film aimed at stirring up public 
sentiment in favor of the 1937 federal prohibition of marijuana. That 
ban continues today.

The council's five members, three of whom relied heavily on the 
belief that cannabis has harmed generations of Willits children, 
weighed in at a special council meeting on the merits of an outright 
ban of all marijuana use, cultivation and commerce within city limits.

The city's Ad Hoc Marijuana Committee- Mayor Bruce Burton and Council 
member Larry Stranske -concocted the ban. The two men were apparently 
directed by the council to explore the impacts on Willits of 
California's new Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (MMRSA).

A big problem with cannabis in Willits, Burton suggested, is the 
plant's strong smell, which sometimes disturbs neighbors. The city 
cannot remove the plants quickly via its cannabis public nuisance 
ordinance because the Willits enforcement process is slow and 
cumbersome. According to Burton and City Manager Adrienne Moore, the 
staff spends more time than it would like processing complaints and 
hearing appeals of nuisance citations. The process is apparently so 
lengthy that the offending gardens are often gone by the time the 
city can enforce the ordinance.

The city currently allows residents to grow no more than six plants 
in an enclosed and secure structure.

Attorney Lance explained to the council at the outset of the 
discussion that adopting a complete ban involves a change in zoning, 
and zoning changes require a full Planning Commission review with 
public comment period.

I think the proposed ban is short-sighted, vague, ill-conceived and 
unlikely to deter the purpose for which I think it is intended: to 
stop underground cannabis use, abuse and sales and to limit 
anti-social behavior that may be related to these activities. I'm 
convinced that passing a such ban on medical cannabis when the 
nation, state and county governments are marching toward full 
legalization of medical and possibly adult recreational use, would be 
as effective as sending a passenger train directly into an oncoming express.

Locals have long viewed Willits as hostile to cannabis. The city in 
the heart of the Emerald Triangle already bans dispensaries, 
signaling to other cannabis entrepreneurs that they're not welcome - 
despite the sign that arches over Main Street. That's the way three 
of the five city council members seem to like it.

In fact, Mayor Burton vowed Monday that he will never condone 
cannabis growing or commerce in Willits while the drug is on the 
federal government's banned substances list.

Mendocino County District Attorney David Eyster assured Burton from 
the podium that Willits has nothing to fear from the federal 
government. That's because, Eyster said, Congress passed a 2014 bill 
protecting states and local governments from federal prosecution if 
marijuana and industrial hemp operations are legal in those places.

About two dozen people spoke against the ban, arguing, among other 
things, that:

- -Cannabis is at the very minimum a billion-dollar industry in 
Mendocino County, allowing many residents to live, survive and 
generate tax revenues for the city of Willits through retail shopping 
and the use of local services.

- -Willits faces big financial losses when the Bypass opens.

- -A well-regulated cannabis industry can bring good jobs and 
businesses, such as cannabis testing labs, dispensaries and 
consulting companies to the city.

- -Cannabis will have less allure for children when it is legal.

- -If alcohol, a substance known to create serious public health and 
social problems is legal but regulated, why not bring medical 
cannabis into the light as well?

Only one person spoke in favor of the ban, a woman who said that as a 
teacher she had seen many Willits children harmed by the easy 
availability of marijuana.

Following public comment, Stranske shared his thoughts first, 
speaking strongly in favor of the ban and inviting those in the 
audience who don't like his views to run for his seat in two years, 
when he intends to face the voters again. Council members Madge 
Strong and Holly Madrigal opposed the ban. Madrigal argued that 
banning cannabis would simply add to the economic uncertainty caused 
by the recent decline in cannabis prices and the losses the city will 
face when the Bypass opens. Just when it looked like the old-boy 
majority would easily win passage of the ban, Council Member Ron 
Orenstein, who moments before had railed against the evils of 
marijuana, "dropped the other shoe" (his words).

Having read the new state MMRSA regulations, Orenstein confessed that 
he found the regulations well written and recommended that the 
council adopt some of the state's permit categories. Doing so, he 
argued, would allow the city to reap some of the economic benefits of 
the industry while closely controlling its regulation.

Whether Mayor Burton was swayed by Orenstein's implied defection, the 
emphatic public opposition to the proposed ban, Eyster's assurances, 
the objections of Madrigal and Strong, or all or none of the above, 
he proposed a delay in any action on the ban. When the city attorney 
has streamlined Willits' medical cannabis enforcement procedures, the 
council, he suggested, could take up the ban proposal again. His 
colleagues offered no objections.

A victory, of sorts, for cannabis.

But a very strange night.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom