I'm not in Cali, but +K for your efforts SeaMaiden!!!
-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
California--Amador Co. residents, we need you! Tri-county area may be interested
I'm not in Cali, but +K for your efforts SeaMaiden!!!
S
SeaMaiden
Many thanks, Dawn Patrol, it's appreciated.
S
SeaMaiden
Attended the planning commission meeting last night, and we were able to get many more locals in there. This stood us in good stead, because we convinced the commission, along with the director of health and human services, to revise the proposed draft ordinance.
The proposed draft was modeled after Kern County's ordinance--12 plants per parcel. We got them to amend the proposed draft ordinance to allow 12 plants/qualified patient, 6 patients per parcel. That's a small victory, because we didn't expect any changes to be made, however, I feel that we have a long way to go as far as maintaining patients' rights.
What will help change the landscape will be the forthcoming judicial reviews and decisions upon which many municipalities are basing their incredibly restrictive laws.
Like I've been saying, if we don't regulate ourselves, the regulating will be done for us.
Many, many thanks to Tom Liberty and the Amador patients who showed up to represent and speak! Great job!
The proposed draft was modeled after Kern County's ordinance--12 plants per parcel. We got them to amend the proposed draft ordinance to allow 12 plants/qualified patient, 6 patients per parcel. That's a small victory, because we didn't expect any changes to be made, however, I feel that we have a long way to go as far as maintaining patients' rights.
What will help change the landscape will be the forthcoming judicial reviews and decisions upon which many municipalities are basing their incredibly restrictive laws.
Like I've been saying, if we don't regulate ourselves, the regulating will be done for us.
Many, many thanks to Tom Liberty and the Amador patients who showed up to represent and speak! Great job!
T
toughmudderdave
The thing that I found most disconcerting throughout this whole fiasco is that everyone, other than the Planning Commissioners themselves, didn't seem too enthused to really address the issue. Truth be told, The Planning Dept's recommendation to the commissioners last night was lifted right from the pages of Kern County's ordinance...AND THEY EVEN ADMITTED TO IT! That said to me that the planning department took all the information we all gave at the workshops, all the info that Dr. Hartmann (director of Health and Human Services and MMJ advocate)...and completely disregarded it. Why? It was probably too much effort for them to come up with something. Easier to just "lift" and existing ordinance and call it yours.
Thankfully, we rallied together. We spoke...and the commissioners listened. We now need to prepare for the the next public hearing.
Thankfully, we rallied together. We spoke...and the commissioners listened. We now need to prepare for the the next public hearing.
S
SeaMaiden
Aye, preparations are underway.
There may be one good thing coming out of all of this--we're organizing ourselves (let's hope at least, eh?).
There may be one good thing coming out of all of this--we're organizing ourselves (let's hope at least, eh?).
Yes, all the California counties seem to be following exactly the same playbook, as directed by the DEA. The DEA has threatened nearly every municipal officer with arrest if they allow cultivation. That is why you see them following the same process in lockstep.
What they do is copy the most restrictive ordinance they can find that passed, and just put that before the BoS or city council. They spend many days "listening" to the public, but in the end they ignore it all and do what the DEA tells them to do.
Until the DEA and FEDs are challenged in court this will continue. And if California votes to legalize, there will be even worse consequences coming down from the Feds... But before that happens, get ready for a media blitz from the Feds, and LOTS of high profile busts before the vote on legalization. They're going to try to portray marijuana in the worst light possible...
What they do is copy the most restrictive ordinance they can find that passed, and just put that before the BoS or city council. They spend many days "listening" to the public, but in the end they ignore it all and do what the DEA tells them to do.
Until the DEA and FEDs are challenged in court this will continue. And if California votes to legalize, there will be even worse consequences coming down from the Feds... But before that happens, get ready for a media blitz from the Feds, and LOTS of high profile busts before the vote on legalization. They're going to try to portray marijuana in the worst light possible...
no doubt it's getting testy.........but on the positive it may offset the oversupply underpriced market that has been the norm for too long.........
it could even go back to the days when C.A.M.P. first hit the trail.......hearing the choppin' of the copter blades put ya in cold sweats.............lets hope not.......
ganj on........
it could even go back to the days when C.A.M.P. first hit the trail.......hearing the choppin' of the copter blades put ya in cold sweats.............lets hope not.......
ganj on........
Skip thanks for your opinion on all of this. I agree with you-especially this ^ ^ part. I've been telling Peeps this for months, what I expect to see starting this summer. I'm not sure how to react or what to grow.
Even us 12 plant legal patients are now starting to wonder in fear if we are going to be the next target of this Blitzkrieg by our not so compassionate goverment.
SeaMaiden your posts as well are informative and important. Yes it is good we are organizing and working together. Peace and be well...DD.
S
SeaMaiden
Thanks to you both, Doobie and Skip, for your input. First, it helps keep this issue on the forefront--Amador County is neither the first nor the only county/locality to take such drastic measures against voting citizens. Second, we just need more voices.
You see, we are not only citizens of the United States of America or citizens of <insert your state here>, we are both. We (should) have power in both realms, though our power on a federal level is decidedly less, or at least more difficult to make changes to.
This is why it's important to organize through the NGO (non-governmental organization), so as to protect those who wish to participate while ensuring their needs and rights are met.
You see, we are not only citizens of the United States of America or citizens of <insert your state here>, we are both. We (should) have power in both realms, though our power on a federal level is decidedly less, or at least more difficult to make changes to.
This is why it's important to organize through the NGO (non-governmental organization), so as to protect those who wish to participate while ensuring their needs and rights are met.
S
SeaMaiden
***UPDATE***
This morning at 10:30am the Amador County Board of Supervisors will be reviewing, discussing and taking possible action (vote) on the new draft ordinance as proposed and amended by the Planning Commission. Amador County patients will be there IN FORCE. The planning director is advising the BoS to adopt the draft ordinance, which we see as an incremental victory.
Added to that the recent Fourth Appellate Court ruling on the City of Lake Forest vs Evergreen Holistic Collective, and we've got us an interesting row ahead of us to hoe.
This morning at 10:30am the Amador County Board of Supervisors will be reviewing, discussing and taking possible action (vote) on the new draft ordinance as proposed and amended by the Planning Commission. Amador County patients will be there IN FORCE. The planning director is advising the BoS to adopt the draft ordinance, which we see as an incremental victory.
Added to that the recent Fourth Appellate Court ruling on the City of Lake Forest vs Evergreen Holistic Collective, and we've got us an interesting row ahead of us to hoe.
S
SeaMaiden
Very disappointing morning yesterday. The BoS took the draft ordinance and began placing many additional restrictions on growers, all the while talking about representing the people in our county who didn't (read: couldn't be bothered) show up to any of the workshops or meetings. When we walked in, we had a draft ordinance that was actually more generous, though still highly impinged on rights afforded us by state law, than that of Mendocino's ordinance.
We're still allowed 12 plants per person, but only 2 patients may cultivate on a parcel, instead of the Planning Commission's recommended 6 patients. This puts us at a solid 24 plants per parcel, which apparently, based on what was said during the meeting, what they'd planned on outside the meeting in the first place. Can you say Brown Act violations?
Then, for the first time ever, they trotted out Mendocino's new ordinance (possibly another violation of the BA)! They began using language and discussing issues that, while having been brought up before, had been dismissed, such as a fencing requirement, outdoor lighting (what???), basically cherry-picking what aspects of the Mendo ordinance they wanted for Amador, while absolutely ensuring that patients would NOT be able to grow enough medicine for themselves. Interestingly enough, the one feature of the Mendocino ordinance they didn't adopt into Amador's was the language concerning legal collectives and cooperatives with storefronts.
In fact, they're cherry-picking what state laws they want to apply and how they wish to apply them, while inferring that it's the federal government guiding their actions through its threats to other municipalities. We now have in the ordinance a ban on any cultivation within 600' of any facility where children might be (save the children!), modeled after what ALREADY EXISTS IN STATE LAW, but is specified to be applicable ONLY TO STOREFRONTS, specifically NOT INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS. So Amador just put a stop to that, no one can cultivate if, for example, they live near a church.
If you're not familiar with Amador, Google it, then start mapping churches. It's unbelievable how many churches are needed in a county with a total population around 40,000.
In fact, I might be coming back to edit this post, I was extremely mad yesterday by the time I walked out of the BoS meeting.
One good thing, I got to meet Sara Herrin. She is one of three people currently being prosecuted in Tuolomne for their activities related to their collective. She's a hospice nurse with over 20 years experience in hospice. At this time the Tuolomne DA and judge are trying to say that she and the other defendants can NOT use the MMJ defense for their activities, despite the fact that they are specifically protected by law. She drove all the way up to Amador to see what's happening here, even got up and spoke to the BoS. I hope to be able to write more about what's going on with Sara, as her case needs to be more widely known. (Probably deserves its own thread!)
One really good thing from all this: Patients on Amador County are becoming more and better organized. We have confusing court rulings that must be sorted out at the Supreme Court level, one of the more recent being those two appellate court rulings that affect the status and legality of storefronts. A huge part of the problem we have in Amador is that we are not allowed a single storefront. This is why patients MUST be allowed to cultivate in the most economical manner available to them.
We're still allowed 12 plants per person, but only 2 patients may cultivate on a parcel, instead of the Planning Commission's recommended 6 patients. This puts us at a solid 24 plants per parcel, which apparently, based on what was said during the meeting, what they'd planned on outside the meeting in the first place. Can you say Brown Act violations?
Then, for the first time ever, they trotted out Mendocino's new ordinance (possibly another violation of the BA)! They began using language and discussing issues that, while having been brought up before, had been dismissed, such as a fencing requirement, outdoor lighting (what???), basically cherry-picking what aspects of the Mendo ordinance they wanted for Amador, while absolutely ensuring that patients would NOT be able to grow enough medicine for themselves. Interestingly enough, the one feature of the Mendocino ordinance they didn't adopt into Amador's was the language concerning legal collectives and cooperatives with storefronts.
In fact, they're cherry-picking what state laws they want to apply and how they wish to apply them, while inferring that it's the federal government guiding their actions through its threats to other municipalities. We now have in the ordinance a ban on any cultivation within 600' of any facility where children might be (save the children!), modeled after what ALREADY EXISTS IN STATE LAW, but is specified to be applicable ONLY TO STOREFRONTS, specifically NOT INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS. So Amador just put a stop to that, no one can cultivate if, for example, they live near a church.
If you're not familiar with Amador, Google it, then start mapping churches. It's unbelievable how many churches are needed in a county with a total population around 40,000.
In fact, I might be coming back to edit this post, I was extremely mad yesterday by the time I walked out of the BoS meeting.
One good thing, I got to meet Sara Herrin. She is one of three people currently being prosecuted in Tuolomne for their activities related to their collective. She's a hospice nurse with over 20 years experience in hospice. At this time the Tuolomne DA and judge are trying to say that she and the other defendants can NOT use the MMJ defense for their activities, despite the fact that they are specifically protected by law. She drove all the way up to Amador to see what's happening here, even got up and spoke to the BoS. I hope to be able to write more about what's going on with Sara, as her case needs to be more widely known. (Probably deserves its own thread!)
One really good thing from all this: Patients on Amador County are becoming more and better organized. We have confusing court rulings that must be sorted out at the Supreme Court level, one of the more recent being those two appellate court rulings that affect the status and legality of storefronts. A huge part of the problem we have in Amador is that we are not allowed a single storefront. This is why patients MUST be allowed to cultivate in the most economical manner available to them.
Good Work SeaMaiden...
Good Work SeaMaiden...
Good Work SeaMaiden...
SeaMaiden..Oh boy...where do I start? Thank you for posting, by doing so you help all of us keep up with what might happen in our areas and how you're dealing with it. Good luck to the sick and suffering Peeps in your county with people like that doing the governing. As for the 600' rule..I hope they're considering that in the South, USA, near the tobacco farms. I'm a common sense person and what harm can come of a kid seeing plants growing? I just don't get that. they'd be worse off seeing cigarettes behind the counter of every store they visit? Always a huge display almost with-in reach of their tiny hands.
This is excellent news and you can tell it from your candor in this post SM...best wishes to all of you...DD
great read SeaMaiden. You have done a fantastic job reporting this. I hope all these issues get worked out. I dont know how long the Supreme Court takes to rules or even get it on there agenda It seem it will be years before any real resolution will be made if we have to wait for them to rule...
Keep fighting the good fight Girl!!! You knew you were in for a battle and you got one. You know there will always be hidden agendas and people trying to get things done the way they want in the easiest way they can manage.
Maybe for the next meeting you should get some volunteers to help you discretely smoke the room out before things get going and see what happens
Maybe for the next meeting you should get some volunteers to help you discretely smoke the room out before things get going and see what happens
S
SeaMaiden
Heh, DP, we've discussed bringing in clones or seedlings to the meetings, some slight acts of civil disobedience. It's right next to the sheriff's department and county jail, so booking would be a breeze.
If anyone's on facebook, would you please follow the link in my signature and hit the 'Like' button on the page? We need more likes for Collective Patient Resources so we can get facebook goodies and a custom url. I'm keeping the page up to date on the happenings not just in Amador, but in adjacent counties as well as California.
I think I screwed up when I went ahead and published the new timeline style. It won't let me install a 'subscribe' button.
An aside: I got to meet Sara Herrin the other day. She is one of nine others subject to a series of raids and arrests in Tuolomne County of dispensaries and collectives. They are currently being denied the right to use the MMJ defense, despite state law, despite their professions (she's a hospice RN), despite any and every thing except the DA's and presiding judge's personal views.
If anyone's on facebook, would you please follow the link in my signature and hit the 'Like' button on the page? We need more likes for Collective Patient Resources so we can get facebook goodies and a custom url. I'm keeping the page up to date on the happenings not just in Amador, but in adjacent counties as well as California.
I think I screwed up when I went ahead and published the new timeline style. It won't let me install a 'subscribe' button.
An aside: I got to meet Sara Herrin the other day. She is one of nine others subject to a series of raids and arrests in Tuolomne County of dispensaries and collectives. They are currently being denied the right to use the MMJ defense, despite state law, despite their professions (she's a hospice RN), despite any and every thing except the DA's and presiding judge's personal views.
S
SeaMaiden
Well, our local paper, the Ledger-Dispatch, took their time publishing an article on 'the pot ordinance'. I'd post it here, at least give the link, but after a comment was made about one of the supervisors that was sharp, scathing in fact, I've been IP-banned.
I cannot even VIEW the paper. Please allow me to present you with a screenshot.
Btw, it's not a problem with the publication's site. Viewing using a proxy shows it's up and being updated (with the 'offending' comment removed, no reason given thus far).
I'm not giving the whole story, but I have a copy of what was initially posted, what's up now, screenshots of what's up (anyone who wants to go through the trouble of registering for this publication can also view the article and comments as they stand in whole), etc.
I feel my rights have been violated. This is a news publication (ok, ostensibly). It's used by the county and others to give legal notification, for example, of things like this Tuesday's board of supervisors meeting where the draft ordinance, now called Chapter 19.86, will be being discussed and have possible action taken.
There's more to *that*, too, but the point is that I wasn't noticed even though I'm supposed to be noticed by the county specifically about this ordinance, they rely on publishing legal notice in a paper that gets published maybe TWICE PER WEEK. Those days are supposed to be Wednesdays and Fridays, but hell if I know if they still do it.
And then this one publication has BANNED me from viewing any part of the site!
Now, what rights have been violated? I don't know! But I feel violated. I should be able to view a journalistic publication that's used in an official capacity, and I cannot. Not to mention, you should see what I see. Oh, here! You can see what I see.
I cannot even VIEW the paper. Please allow me to present you with a screenshot.
Btw, it's not a problem with the publication's site. Viewing using a proxy shows it's up and being updated (with the 'offending' comment removed, no reason given thus far).
I'm not giving the whole story, but I have a copy of what was initially posted, what's up now, screenshots of what's up (anyone who wants to go through the trouble of registering for this publication can also view the article and comments as they stand in whole), etc.
I feel my rights have been violated. This is a news publication (ok, ostensibly). It's used by the county and others to give legal notification, for example, of things like this Tuesday's board of supervisors meeting where the draft ordinance, now called Chapter 19.86, will be being discussed and have possible action taken.
There's more to *that*, too, but the point is that I wasn't noticed even though I'm supposed to be noticed by the county specifically about this ordinance, they rely on publishing legal notice in a paper that gets published maybe TWICE PER WEEK. Those days are supposed to be Wednesdays and Fridays, but hell if I know if they still do it.
And then this one publication has BANNED me from viewing any part of the site!
Now, what rights have been violated? I don't know! But I feel violated. I should be able to view a journalistic publication that's used in an official capacity, and I cannot. Not to mention, you should see what I see. Oh, here! You can see what I see.
Attachments
S
SeaMaiden
Yet another BoS meeting, tomorrow morning at 9am, to hear public comment on, discuss and take possible action on Amador County zoning ordinance called Chapter 19.86--Medical Marijuana Cultivation.
It is declared a public nuisance, i.e. a per se nuisance.
Patients are meeting this afternoon to discuss the meeting and its potential outcomes, what statements we want to make and get on record.
In the meantime, I/we are still banned from even viewing our local newspaper online, completely and totally.
It is declared a public nuisance, i.e. a per se nuisance.
Patients are meeting this afternoon to discuss the meeting and its potential outcomes, what statements we want to make and get on record.
In the meantime, I/we are still banned from even viewing our local newspaper online, completely and totally.
Why are you banned from reading your local news online? I don't understand this.. I would think the news paper would be up in arms about that..
odogyouknow
Member
So you can put out 24 plants this year on your parcel? or is it 12 flowering?
S
SeaMaiden
Each patient is being allowed 12 plants TOTAL. Doesn't matter the age, sex or size. We're only allowed to cultivate for 2 patients on each parcel.
It is CPR's belief (Collective Patient Resources) that this is a violation of the spirit and intent of the laws already enacted by vote of the people and the state legislature.
Thing is, there was no TOS/TOU/UA violation. There was no notice given, no opportunity to correct (they could have just done what they did--remove the 'offending' comment), nothing. They could have removed our/his posting abilities, but still let us view the publication.
This is what he wrote:
It is CPR's belief (Collective Patient Resources) that this is a violation of the spirit and intent of the laws already enacted by vote of the people and the state legislature.
I don't understand, either. My husband wrote a comment that was initially published along with the most recent article on the wrangling over this ordinance. He called out one supervisor in particular--John Plasse. It was up for maybe a day, then next thing I know he's telling me that 'we're' banned, and sure as shit, as long as I'm trying to view the paper from home I'm banned right alongside him.
Thing is, there was no TOS/TOU/UA violation. There was no notice given, no opportunity to correct (they could have just done what they did--remove the 'offending' comment), nothing. They could have removed our/his posting abilities, but still let us view the publication.
This is what he wrote:
