Inyo Supervisors discuss DRECP, medical marijuana

By Deb Murphy

Inyo Supervisors notes

  • The Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan showed up at Tuesday’s Inyo County Board of Supervisors’ meeting in a big box. Scaled down from the 8,000-page draft, the final Environmental Impact Statement, 2,000-plus pages, whittled down the acreage identified as Development Focus Areas for renewable energy to 388,000 out of the 10 million acres of Bureau of Land Management land within the scope of the report.inyo_courthouse1.jpg

    But, the County directed Planning Director Josh Hart to come up with a mildly worded protest that, according to Hart and County Administrative Officer Kevin Carunchio, will keep the County in the discussion. There were some small variations from the County’s Renewable Energy General Plan Amendment and a vague new land classification – Unallocated Lands. In the draft, the land masses now ID’d as unallocated were just white; now they’re white with lines through them, creating a bit of a mystery.

    Hart explained that those areas could be considered for development but would require amendments to the EIR. A pie chart illustrating land designations was identified as conservation lands. Chairman Matt Kingsley questions why no socio-economic analysis was done on the conservation category.

  • While the Town of Mammoth Lakes and Bishop have been scrambling to meet the March 1 deadline to beat state regulations on medical marijuana, the County opted for a wait and see strategy based on information from Paul Smith, senior legislative advocate for Rural County Representatives of California.

    According to Hart, Smith advised his constituents there would be “corrective legislation” to the three medical marijuana bills passed in Sacramento in October. The correction, Smith anticipated, would remove that deadline and allow cities and counties to pass their own ordinances that would override state regulations after March 1.

    Hart outlined the nuances of Assembly Bills 266, 243 and Senate Bill 643 that define complex structures for regulating and licensing medical marijuana but implementation is still up in the air. By waiting, the county can decide if it wants to impose other restrictions on cultivation, dispensaries and delivery. The conventional wisdom is these regulations will be in place as the framework for recreational use, a when-not-if legalization by ballot initiative.

    Jeff Griffiths was the first and only supervisor who was supportive of loosening the County’s ban on cultivation and sales. “Let’s look at what’s actually going on,” he said. “I don’t want to deny cultivation for those who use marijuana for medical reasons and delivery makes more sense than dispensaries.”

    Making the point that both activities are going on in the county, Griffiths was for “sustaining the status quo.” Dan Totheroh and Rick Pucci were both glad for the reprieve; Mark Tillemans and Kingsley both wanted an opportunity to gauge the feeling of their constituents.

 

, ,

7 Responses to Inyo Supervisors discuss DRECP, medical marijuana

  1. Trouble December 10, 2015 at 5:42 am #

    I’d wish they’d stop this circus and just legalize it.

     
  2. Zena Bradley December 10, 2015 at 7:37 am #

    Thank you Jeff, finally common sense related to Med. marijuana!

     
  3. Clyde A December 10, 2015 at 8:37 am #

    Stop standing in the way of legal medical marijuana users. I have three bulging disc’s in my back. I am in pain everyday, marijuana works for my pain control. I no longer use opiate based pain killers, the real drug problem in the US.

     
    • antoniolupi December 10, 2015 at 1:00 pm #

      @Clyde A

      If that’s true, I’m truly happy for you. Opiate based pain killers (legal, prescribed, and available) are far more damaging to our families and communities than marijuana, and any one who disagrees should consider themselves fortunate to not know the difference. Period.

       
  4. Trouble December 10, 2015 at 10:52 am #

    The medical marijuana joke has been going on for way to long. If a majority of the people in this country break a law because they know it’s not that harmful, they should be allowed to change it. Just like the stupid 55 mph law .

     
  5. Low-Inyo December 10, 2015 at 4:42 pm #

    Trouble….I agree with you on this one to a point….the medical marijuana has become a big joke..as far as not being harmful,for most it’s not,but for some it is,maybe not so much medically,but socially it can be a problem.At my job,just lost a co-worker that based his life around marijuana,morning,noon and night,…not good if the job is being around heavy equipment,dealing with the public and customers,and being late to work or missing days because of all-night partying.For people like Clyde above,medical weed is a good thing..but for others with lame excuses in order to get a med license and able to get high and/or deal,it’s ruined it for those that actually benefit from marijuana.Making it legal,who cares anymore….if some people want to go through life high as a kite,let em…..who cares,as long as they don’t drive while they’re stoned.If it benefits those medically,and not a reason to legally “party-hardy”,I agree they should be able to smoke it if it makes them feel better…with me,don’t see the big issue to legalize purchase….whoever wants to buy a bag,here in the Sierras’,and across the United States,a bag of weed is no more than a phone call,a short drive,or a walk away.

     
  6. show don't tell December 12, 2015 at 6:22 pm #

    I thought government was fighting the war on drugs http://humansarefree.com/2015/02/overwhelming-evidence-that-cia-is.html?m=0

     

Leave a Reply



KSRW · 1280 N. Main St. Suite J · Bishop, CA 93514 · 760-873-5329
Positive Projections Web Design