Tag Archives: marijuana regulation

Planners grapple with deluge of pot grow applications

Planners grapple with deluge of pot grow applications

Daniel Mintz Mad River Union HUMBOLDT – Commercial marijuana permit applicants have responded to the county’s call for completing their paperwork and the Planning Commission is gearing up for what one commissioner described as “a big iceberg heading our way.” In a report to commissioners at their July 13 meeting, Planning Director John Ford said

Today’s Mad River Current: Who gets busted for growing pot, who does not and how much pot can you legally have?

Humboldt County is estimated to have between 8,000 to 10,000, and maybe even more, marijuana grows. Pot is everywhere. Piles of shake are sometimes left on the side of the road. Buds get dropped in tip jars. You can drive around and see and smell marijuana plants. There’s a grow there and a grow here,

Don’t let the cannabis industry write its own rules

California Cannabis Voice Humboldt (CCVH) has written a draft ordinance that would regulate the marijuana industry and has submitted it to the Board of Supervisors. The next step in this process should be for the supervisors to take the draft ordinance and shove it in a “public input” folder along with all the other letters

Cannabis industry group offers up draft ordinance

Daniel Mintz Mad River Union HUMBOLDT – The Cannabis Voice Humboldt advocacy group has opened its draft marijuana regulation ordinance to public comment, describing it as a grass-roots effort that reflects the county’s agrarian identity. California Cannabis Voice Humboldt (CCVH) marked the emergence of the latest draft of its ordinance with a June 30 public

County Shifts Focus on Outdoor Grows

Weighing geographically-divided community opinion, the county has extended its consideration of a draft outdoor medical marijuana ordinance and will narrow its initial focus to impacts that affect neighborhoods. The complex issues related to outdoor grows were again mulled over by the Board of Supervisors at its May 7 meeting. A discussion on the ordinance didn’t