With their backs up against an early December deadline, the County of Santa Barbara’s plan to outright ban storefront-style medical marijuana dispensaries received unanimous votes of support this week from both the Montecito and the County Planning Commissions. A previous plan would have allowed such dispensaries in a small number of carefully selected parts of the county’s unincorporated areas, but the Board of Supervisors shot that down earlier this month. So on Wednesday, both planning commissions voted to move forward the newly crafted and overarching prohibition of medicinally purposed cannabis clubs in all of those unincorporated areas.
Two weeks ago, citing conflict between state and federal laws on marijuana and the notion that the City of Santa Barbara offers enough options for those in need, the supervisors voted 4 to 1 to send the proposed ordinance back to the drawing board, despite it receiving wide public and staff support at the County Planning Commission a couple weeks earlier. For the majority of the supes, the original ordinance — which would have allowed only seven possible locations peppered among Vandenberg Village, eastern Goleta, the unincorporated west end of Santa Barbara, New Cuyama, and Orcutt — was too permissive. The message from the board majority was simple: We want a complete ban.
Pressed with a December 6 deadline when the county’s current moratorium would end, the county’s Long Range Planning staff started anew and put together an ordinance that simply says no to any and all medical marijuana storefronts. (Non-storefront collectives are not impacted by the new regulations.) Keeping apace with the looming deadline, both planning commissions discussed the new ban on Wednesday. Despite varying degrees of misgivings about the new ordinance — 1st District Planning Commissioner Michael Cooney went as far as to opine, “I think we were on a better path the first time” — both commissions gave the thumbs up to the ban.
Wednesday’s approvals set the stage for the supes to once again take on the topic on November 1.



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace







Previous Month



Comments
Government, inept, intrusive, invasive, duplicitous, ingenuous, people. Why? Because they do not know where their duties reside and how to mind their own business.
Government is not of the people, by the people and for the people, government is of the few, for the few and not for the many.
I never see the right people in government. It is always the people who think they are special and do not even know when they should but out.
contactjohn (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 3:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well said John
iamsomeguyinsb (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 9:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Good! Effen Stoners!
bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 11:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
All those UCSB/SBCC students in Isla Vista that thought Doreen Farr was going to "fight for their right to party" if they voted for her are problably in catatonic shock @ this point :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Really wont change anything except now people will use more gas and drive back in forth from LA. So glad I don't live in SB anymore!
miked442 (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 1:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
But this is ok for the rich! Oh and I am sure they all have a designated driver?
Don’t miss the last two weeks of Tipsy Tuesdays at the Four Seasons Resort The Biltmore Santa Barbara (1260 Channel Dr.), this Tuesday, October 25, as well as Tuesday, November 1, from 4:30-6:30 p.m. The luxury hotel offers wines from a different S.B.-area winery each week for guests to enjoy while they take in spectacular oceanfront views. Admission is free; wines are sold by the glass. Ages 21+. Call 969-2261 for more info.
miked442 (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Nice plug there MikeD, shameless, but nice. Too bad I can't afford such luxuries, been taxed to death by the "progressives" & their policies.
I got mixed feelings on this move by the county. Keep in mind that I have NEVER used pot so I may be speaking out of line, but here goes.
On the 1 hand by passing this ordinance you eliminate the retail availability of pot in the area, but in order to do what exactly? Keep the stuff out of illegal user's hands?
The thing is when you create an atmosphere of prohibiton you get a clientele that gets a kick out of going against said prohibition.
Besides, the availability of pot is so widespread these days that it is just a feel good measure.
Somebody's up for re-election, let's get the "public safety" vote. Like I said, my feelings are mixed :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 4:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Exactly Henry, it is all about politics. Weed is available and is so easy to find anywhere, anytime. What is more scary and no one is doing anything about it is the "illegal" use of "legal" drugs. There will not be a "feel good" or "public safety" vote on prescription drugs anytime soon because there is way to much corporate money behind it. For example, if you look at the amount of UCSB/SBCC students brought into the ER on a typical weekend from say IV, most all of them are for prescription drug overdoses and alcohol poisoning or the combination of both (legal drugs). Not to mention the violence surounding the use of alcohol and prescription drugs. People brought in on weed overdoses, zero and I never have seen anyone smoke a joint and then go beat someone up.
There is a lot of money to be made off just a few pills. My Dad had both his knees replaced a few years back and I went to take care of him for a month. The pain killers he was given were the "choice ones" students would want to buy and mix with alcohol. I was in line at the grocery store and some kids in front of me were talking about getting some Percocet for the weekend. My Dad had the highest milligram dose they prescribe (because he needed it) and I asked them how much do you guys pay for one pill. They said anywhere from $80-$100 after they asked me if I had any. I went home looked at the bottle and did the math (300 pills), then I jokingly told my Dad, "hey I will be right back, I am going to go make $30,000 dollars and then refill your prescription on my way back". If I had I could have made more untaxed "cash money" than teachers make in a year, plus my Dad's health insurance would have payed for the bottle and the refill, you do the math.
So why is it so bad if you need it to go get a little weed (with a legal card) and not feel like you are dealing with drug dealers. It is safer to go to these dispensaries anyways. People talk about weed as a "gateway drug" and when you are getting your weed from a drug dealer they usually have other drugs with them. They will give you a few free samples to get you hooked then you just went through the "gateway" to another drug. Weed dispensaries do not have anything to sell you but THC based products. This way if you do need it at least someone is making a legit income on your true need. Not to say all these places play by all the rules but at least the person that needs it does not need to feel or be thrown into the same category as a drug dealer.
Bottom line is weed is out there and it is accepted by the majority of Californian's. People of all ages will continue to get there hands on it! It is like buying some beer or cigarettes for a minor, it happens. Why would California that is in so much debt not want the taxes but instead lock up good people in jail and pay even more! Do the math again...
miked442 (anonymous profile)
October 22, 2011 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
By enacting a permanent moratorium they are creating monopolies which are illegal. You'd think they have better things to waste their time on instead of trying to pander to a paranoid few voters (or are they themselves are also in that voting bloc?)
Over 50% of Americans polled now support fill legalization so you can bet it's closer to 65-70%. The genie is out of the bottle, if these people wish to be remembered in the same breath as Neanderthals on the wrong side of history then so be it. But in the long run they've already lost.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 22, 2011 at 10:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Seems Kamala Harris is clarifying her stance on medical marijuana and the state of California. She hasn't issued her AG Guidelines yet.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10...
sez_me (anonymous profile)
October 23, 2011 at 6:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Out of all of these "unanimous" voters, there will be someone's life that is compromised, or a relative or friend's, and the only relief they have is marijuana. They will change their minds once they witness a loved one writhing in pain, too weak to crawl to answer the door for a food delivery, and once the food arrives, they have NO appetite. I'm happy to go underground to help a person, again. If you insist....
It will be on our dime. It will be a crime.
Where is the humanity for another? We will never understand each other's pain completely, but to deny relief to another, and ban their ADULT choice on how they want to live their life is arrogant and ignorant.
Not to mention, political!
casaluna (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2011 at 10:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Funny how they shift it over to the city of Santa Barbara problem.. I guess its good for the City Tax Revenues if every one in the entire SB county is now going to buy it in the City of SB..
I guess we should not be surprised they deiced to do this.. its the easy way out for them.. Why do your job when you can vote to ignore it!.
thew (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2011 at 10:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thew: " Why do your job when you can vote to ignore it?"
There's an election coming up. Why would ANYBODY want to ruin it for themselves by voting on a controversial matter 1 way or the other? Pass the buck (or bong in this case), nothing to see here.
Casaluna: "arrogant and ignorant, not to mention, political!"
You nailed it! If pot is for medicinal reasons/purposes, fine, so be it. It's the "recreational" aspect I get thrown off by.
When you see your young (19-22 yr. old) neighbors fried recreationally to the point of zero motivation to do anything or acts that carry beyond their sphere of influence you do see the negative impacts of THC. But like casaluna describes:
"Writhing in pain, too weak to crawl to answer the door for a food delivery, and once the food arrives, they have NO appetite."
There comes a point when 1 has to say that maybe the easing of some restrictions is needed. Big difference between regulation & restriction.
Mike: "What is more scary and no one is doing anything about it is the "illegal" use of "legal" drugs."
Ain't that the truth! Even w/ something like NyQuil or Robitussin, there's highs anywhere you want them to be.
By the way, for some odd reason I thought you were plugging that event you used in your post, missed the fact you were using it to make a point, my bad. OOPS! :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2011 at 12:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The black market drug dealers are cheering! They'll have less competition if there are fewer cooperatives.
buckwheat (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2011 at 12:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Buckwheat, that is absolute truth. I've come to think that the politicos are in cahoots w/ the black market drug lords because it's $$$ in the bank for either party.
If the politicos illegalize it they can then levy fines to the offending suspects so they get their $$$.
If it's illegal the drug lords can then jack up the price of the stuff so they can get their $$$.
In the end, it's the user that pays through the nose to either the legislative/judicial branch or the black market branch :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2011 at 2:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There are whole industries dependent on cannabis being completely illegal. Not just law enforcement and legal industries but also the recovery industry and the drug cartels.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2011 at 9:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yes , weed should be legal- it is no more degenerate than alcohol - and second - quit whimperting about your bed sores and depression , most people smoke weed to get high . grow some balls and quit hiding behind mommys skirt
harryhaller (anonymous profile)
October 25, 2011 at 10:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ABCSB: "Kind of a cheap way out."
Yeah, for the powers that be, not the user/consumer, it's still costly :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
October 25, 2011 at 3:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have severe and chronic nerve pain (on a scale of 1-10 it's about a 13) as a result of breast cancer surgery and the damage that occurred to the nerves in my upper left quadrant. I have lived with this for almost 4 years. Sometimes I just don't know how to manage. However, about 2 months ago I was approved by a physician for medical marijuana. I use it to help me sleep at night. And yes, I know that there are MANY sleep aids out there but ask yourself, do you think she probably tried that, and then I will tell you yes. I've tried that. And that. And that. Keep them coming - In the last 4 years I have tried it all. I have no answers. Shame on you, Pedro Nava.
jiblet42 (anonymous profile)
November 1, 2011 at 8:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)