Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #61
    ChefJayTay's Avatar
    ChefJayTay
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    Quote Barry wrote: View Post
    The trail should clearly be considered "parkland". It is self-evident.
    I don't agree. To the public, there's little difference. However, from the government perspective reclassifying this means a difference in who's paying for it. If it's parkland, will potential state & fed funds still apply? Who's in charge of repairs?
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  3. TopTop #62
    Dorothy Friberg's Avatar
    Dorothy Friberg
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    These trails are already maintained by Sonoma County Parks, from a government perspective. Probably state and fed funds would only be involved if grants were involved.
    Quote ChefJayTay wrote: View Post
    ...However, from the government perspective reclassifying this means a difference in who's paying for it. If it's parkland, will potential state & fed funds still apply? Who's in charge of repairs?
    Last edited by Barry; 12-07-2018 at 08:59 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. Gratitude expressed by:

  5. TopTop #63
    MikeH
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    They are owned and maintained by Sonoma County Parks, but that doesn't make them actually "parks" unless you choose to define them as such.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  6. Gratitude expressed by:

  7. TopTop #64
    Jeff Snook
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    The trails are in the Parks system because......there is nowhere else, administratively, for them to go.
    The park/no park setback is just all smoke and mirrors to continue to confuse the real issue.

    If the NIMBY's could work up enough hysteria about the color and placement of fire hydrants then they would insist that the county paint them another less offensive color because Cannabis needs to have the correct fire hydrate color and location to keep the community safe. Or some other nonsense that they will repeat ad nauseum They will inflate the community with lies and gross exaggerations for as long as their narrative profits them.

    I read the comments on the Gogola article and I was impressed by the arrogance of the new Graton NIMBY group. It is the same hype and posturing as the other NIMBY groups that have been a plague to us.

    In a FOG they are!
    Quote MikeH wrote: View Post
    They are owned and maintained by Sonoma County Parks, but that doesn't make them actually "parks" unless you choose to define them as such.
    Last edited by Barry; 12-09-2018 at 06:15 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  8. TopTop #65
    MikeH
     

    It's a Done Deal

    Bike Trails are now going to be "parks" as of Dec 11th; I know this because it is on the "Consent Calendar" meaning it is understood to have no opposition. I had expected this item to be on the Regular Calendar and be debated at least, so I am disappointed. Here is the agenda item -


    39. Cannabis Ordinance Park Setback Interpretation, ORD18-0009: Adopt a Resolution Providing an Interpretation that Class I Bikeways are Public Parks as referenced in the Cannabis Land Use Ordinance.

    Recommended Actions:
    Adopt a Resolution Interpreting Public Parks as referenced in the Cannabis Land Use Ordinance as all
    existing Federal Recreation Areas, State Parks, Regional Parks, Community Parks, Neighborhood Parks,
    and Class I Bikeways as designated in the Sonoma County 2020 General Plan.

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  9. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  10. TopTop #66
    luke32
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    Trying to understand - who is "us?

    Quote Jeff Snook wrote: View Post
    ...I read the comments on the Gogola article and I was impressed by the arrogance of the new Graton NIMBY group. It is the same hype and posturing as the other NIMBY groups that have been a plague to us.

    In a FOG they are!
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  11. Gratitude expressed by:

  12. TopTop #67
    Dorothy Friberg's Avatar
    Dorothy Friberg
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    The "hysteria" actually resides in the heads of the HEADS.

    Quote Jeff Snook wrote: View Post
    The trails are in the Parks system because......there is nowhere else, administratively, for them to go.
    The park/no park setback is just all smoke and mirrors to continue to confuse the real issue.

    If the NIMBY's could work up enough hysteria about the color and placement of fire hydrants then they would insist that the county paint them another less offensive color because Cannabis needs to have the correct fire hydrate color and location to keep the community safe. Or some other nonsense that they will repeat ad nauseum They will inflate the community with lies and gross exaggerations for as long as their narrative profits them.

    I read the comments on the Gogola article and I was impressed by the arrogance of the new Graton NIMBY group. It is the same hype and posturing as the other NIMBY groups that have been a plague to us.

    In a FOG they are!
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  13. TopTop #68
    Dorothy Friberg's Avatar
    Dorothy Friberg
     

    Re: It's a Done Deal

    Yaaaaay!!!

    Quote mikeh wrote: View Post
    bike trails are now going to be "parks" as of dec 11th; i know this because it is on the "consent calendar" meaning it is understood to have no opposition. I had expected this item to be on the regular calendar and be debated at least, so i am disappointed. Here is the agenda item -


    39. Cannabis ordinance park setback interpretation, ord18-0009: Adopt a resolution providing an interpretation that class i bikeways are public parks as referenced in the cannabis land use ordinance.

    recommended actions:
    adopt a resolution interpreting public parks as referenced in the cannabis land use ordinance as all
    existing federal recreation areas, state parks, regional parks, community parks, neighborhood parks,
    and class i bikeways as designated in the sonoma county 2020 general plan.

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  14. TopTop #69
    MikeH
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    This online comment to the BoHo article seems to summarize the message of FOG -
    Dian Hardy Re: "Grow-Site Pain"

    At no point in this article did Goggola cite the main reasons for residents' opposition to the project:

    "This mammoth project calls for 18 greenhouses, 30 parking spaces, 8' high perimeter fencing, 12 water tanks, 2 buildings (5050 sq. ft.), a security station, camera surveillance, outdoor grow, nighttime lighting - all accessed by narrow Railroad Street." (Joe Howard, Graton)

    Very disappointed in this failure to observe high journalistic ethics, Tom. The attempt to frame the article as an impeachment of the neutrality of Hopkins' role indicates you understand the valid reasons for opposition and concern yet have paid them no attention, instead opting for an attack on the 5th district supervisor and thus supporting cries of NIMBYism when this is absolutely not true. That's the story - go follow it, please!
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  15. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  16. TopTop #70
    Goat Rock Ukulele's Avatar
    Goat Rock Ukulele
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    There is nothing wrong with not wanting a very large scale marijuana operation in your back yard, most especially contiguous to dense residential. I'm not sure why that is hard for some to understand.

    This county is 95 percent ag land. There are thousands of pieces of land where this could be done that won't impact a residential neighborhod. I find it strange that anyone would want to develop those lots in this way knowing full well most of the people living in Graton are against it. I think it's crappy to do something like that.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  17. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

  18. TopTop #71
    ChefJayTay's Avatar
    ChefJayTay
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    Quote Goat Rock Ukulele wrote: View Post
    ....
    ...and they bought county AG land... and started work on a project in a county not unfriendly to the subject, and THEN the community rallied together to write rules against you.
    How would you feel?
    Would you like to find new property (likely at considerable financial loss), and rebuild because some people are unhappy down the block?
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  19. Gratitude expressed by:

  20. TopTop #72
    doghairnancy
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    This is not business as usual. We don't know what this is going to become. But we do know this is not food and it's not grown outdoors. It's something 'recreational' with the potential to have a massive impact on our lives, possibly greater than the wine industry, with all its negatives. We've been sold out to big business by our federal government. We aren't going to take a sellout like this by our local government.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  21. TopTop #73
    MikeH
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    Would a winery be better? Wall to wall grapes, tasting room, hospitality center and special events such as weddings not to exceed 30 per year? It appears the county will approve yet another one tomorrow:


    73. 1:40 P.M. - Appeal of a Use Permit approval for a new winery, wine cave, tasting rooms, marketing accommodations, and events, and industry wide events (Ramey Winery); located at 7097 Westside Road, Healdsburg. PRMD File No. UPE14-0008: Conduct a public hearing and at the conclusion of the hearing, adopt a Resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Board of Zoning Adjustment’s decision to approve the Use Permit for a 60,000 case winery, a new wine cave, conversion of an existing historic hop kiln building to a public tasting room and conversion of an existing historic hop baling barn to a reserve tasting room with a two-guest room marketing accommodation unit on the upper floor, 20 agricultural promotional events per year, and two industry wide event days per year on 75 acres. Appellants: Warren Watkins representing Healdsburg Citizens for Sustainable Solutions, Maacama Watershed Alliance, Forest Unlimited, Sonoma Coast Rural Preservation, and Todd Everett. Project Applicants: David and Carla Ramey on behalf of Ramey Vineyards LLC. (Fourth and Fifth Districts)
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  22. TopTop #74
    Goat Rock Ukulele's Avatar
    Goat Rock Ukulele
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    Quote ChefJayTay wrote: View Post
    ...and they bought county AG land... and started work on a project in a county not unfriendly to the subject, and THEN the community rallied together to write rules against you.
    How would you feel?
    Would you like to find new property (likely at considerable financial loss), and rebuild because some people are unhappy down the block?
    I guess I would feel like an idioit for not having a clue as to how the community would feel and act.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  23. TopTop #75
    MikeH
     

    Re: Huge industrial cannabis proposal near Graton

    If you want to follow what FOG is doing to stop this project here is the link. And there are various previous posts you can click on once there.

    http://winewaterwatch.org/2018/12/fo...-for-tomorrow/
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  24. TopTop #76
    karenm97's Avatar
    karenm97
     

    Petition re: cannabis proposal near Graton

    So it's on the board's agenda for tomorrow http://sonoma-county.granicus.com/Me...meta_id=254457

    and there's a kinda vague petition against the change. I signed it and also wrote a message to the Supes via their website.

    https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/ca...hash=CTdasFioq
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-08-2018, 02:06 PM
  2. Would you like a shot of industrial waste in your latte?
    By FluorideFree SoCo in forum General Community
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-29-2014, 06:02 PM
  3. strategies - resources against "military industrial complex
    By Toxic Reverend in forum Political Action Alerts
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-22-2011, 07:05 AM
  4. Industrial Agriculture: A Recipe for Disaster
    By ChrisFisher in forum WaccoReader
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-16-2011, 06:38 PM
  5. Help our county shelter win an industrial washer!
    By sealwatcher in forum Pets and other Critters
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-10-2011, 02:08 PM

Bookmarks