Pubdate: Tue, 05 Apr 2016
Source: Appeal-Democrat (Marysville, CA)
Copyright: 2016 Appeal-Democrat


Our survey on what area residents hope supervisor candidates discuss 
this election season was open online through the month of March and 
drew 204 responses. Here are some demographic breakdowns:

By age: The 31-50 group was represented by 88 responses; the 51-65 
group supplied 73 responses. The rest were divvied up in the 
remaining three age groups - those 20 and younger had only 4 responses.

By household income: Those making more than $100,000 supplied 30 
percent of the responses; and it stair-stepped backward from there. 
Those making $70,000 to $100,000 supplied 42 percent. Those making 
$25,000 or less had 15 responses.

By place of residence: More than 37 percent of respondents said they 
live in rural Yuba County; 23 percent live in an urban area of Yuba 
County; 26 percent said they live in urban Sutter county; 10 percent 
live in rural Sutter County.

Posted: Monday, April 4, 2016 8:14 pm | Updated: 8:15 pm, Mon Apr 4, 2016.

Candidates for county supervisor positions might do well to discuss 
marijuana cultivation, but they probably shouldn't let that 
conversation eclipse other issues.

In an online poll conducted by the Appeal-Democrat, about 70 percent 
of all respondents said it was an important issue for candidates to 
discuss, but more people said this issue was unimportant than they 
did any of the other issues, including economic development, public 
safety, land use and more.

Just more than 200 Sutter and Yuba residents participated in the 
unscientific survey. We were asking them to consider what they think 
it is important for supervisor candidates to discuss leading up to 
elections and asked them to rate several topics: unimportant; not too 
important; important; and highest priority. We also allowed 
respondents to comment on each issue, and to suggest other issues.

The first question was: "How important, to you, is the issue of 
regulation of marijuana cultivation?" We did not ask whether they 
were for or against harsher penalties or more relaxed regulation - 
only if the topic was important or not.

The topic was least important for the 31-50 age group (65 percent 
said it was important or highest priority). It grew in importance 
going up in age.

And by residence, not surprisingly, it was rural residents in either 
county who thought it was most important - 75 percent in rural Yuba 
County; 80 percent in rural Sutter County (though there was a much 
lower number of rural Sutter County respondents).

The topic was more important, percentage-wise, as household incomes dropped.

There were 81 comments made and it seemed like a fairly even split 
between those who might favor harsher or more lax regulation. A sampling:

With a history of often being the poorest county in the state, and 
agricultural receipts being the top earner, Yuba County should 
support jobs, farmers, and allow legal, regulated cannabis growing.

The "growers" in my neighborhood have been taking from the land and 
water and contributing nothing back - I no longer feel safe walking 
my dogs by their property as they have come out to question my 
presence in my neighborhood. ... I would say the new growers I have 
had contact with are not neighborly, community-minded folks - they are scary.

I don't believe there should be commercial grows in communities. 
However, I also believe if a homeowner desires to grow a reasonable 
amount. "No more than two plants, period."

Current ban and enforcement is wildly extreme to appease a small 
number of residents. We need something everyone can live with and 
stops our "new neighbors" from clearing off the tops of hills to 
plant their 100-plus fields.

As long as it's not causing crime and not around schools it shouldn't 
be a problem.

We need to make our area safe. Too many home invasions, killings not 
solved. Innocent people will be killed.

It's extremely important for patients to be able to grow their own. 
The county's grow ordinance is a complete slap in the face to people 
who use cannabis to treat their medical issues.

Treat it as any other agricultural activity, including all required 
licenses, permits, reports, EPA notices, water regulations, and so forth.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom