Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 106

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #31
    jbox's Avatar
    jbox
     

    Re: Cannabis Tax: Yes or No?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Rustie: View Post
    ...If there is no such existing business tax for these other land cultivation industries then I think it fair to suggest that this proposed tax is not “the real world every other business has to deal with”. From that perspective, in my opinion, it's appropriate to question the motives and intentions behind this 'selective business tax'....
    Very good point. As a general contractor I know I never had to have a business license to operate in the County. It took me years after moving away from Berkeley to get the city to quit harassing me for a business license I didn't get because I did no work in Berkeley.

    The politicians at the County have been breathlessly hankering to tax the be-jesus out of pot. At a candidates night I hosted Noreen Evans had to have a hankie handy while salivating about her pot for potholes McIdea. I must say that is probably a better idea than the current tax proposal which just goes into the general fund for whatever may float into the minds of the supervisors. All they care about is gaining the maximum amount of control and revenue while letting the entrepreneur do all the work and take all the risk.

    I predict this will not solve any budget issues but will just drive up the cost and hassle of getting and growing weed. Really, the government wants to be everybody's unauthorized business partner while not providing anything of value to the "partnership". Same old BS. I'm voting no, if for no other reason than being against spending $400,000 for a special election rather than wait til the next one.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by 6 members:

  3. TopTop #32
    Valley Oak's Avatar
    Valley Oak
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Regarding taxation, I'm all in favor of it. As a matter of fact, I'm generally in favor of high tax rates, especially for the rich. That's why I have always strongly supported a very heavy progressive tax rate. (A progressive tax rate means that your percentage of taxable income rises as your income rises. For example, if you pay x% tax rate with a $50k annual income, then at $100,000 you should pay that same x% plus an additional 10% or 20%, etc.)

    If the proposed pot tax is fair and reasonable then I will change my position and vote in favor of Measure A. But that was not my initial impression when I first read the proposition. I could be wrong though. Furthermore, as an important part of the judicial history in the U.S., a former Supreme Court asserted, "The power to tax is the power to destroy." Many people still believe that marihuana is evil and taxing it to death is a way to not only control but also to destroy the budding weed industry.

    But again, if there is a good reason to support Measure A's pot tax then I will change my mind and cast my ballot in favor of it. But I haven't seen one yet. If there is a serious danger of a cannabis legal limbo that will rain hell on marijuana in general then and only then will I support Measure A. But how exactly would the 'legal limbo' unfold? I would like to know if it is indeed true. Please explain it to me.

    Thank you in advance, Edward
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  5. TopTop #33
    Evram
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    I'd just quote what's on the Sonoma County Growers Alliance site as to why it recommends a no vote:

    • The top tax rate of 10% would exceed profitability
    • The taxes are subject to changes by a majority vote of the Supervisors
    • Excessive tax rates for License Types 2 & 3
    • The funds go to the General Fund of the County and are not targeted
    • Timeline for reporting and tax payments due before permits are obtained
    • The cost burden of industry implementation falls on early adopters
    • The short timeline presented for the tax scheme left little opportunity for discussion that led to a lack of confidence in the County proposal
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  6. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  7. TopTop #34
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Evram: View Post
    I'd just quote what's on the Sonoma County Growers Alliance site as to why it recommends a no vote:
    The Sonoma County Grower's Alliance as taken a "neutral position with hardline concerns on the measure". The list quoted in the prior post is their "hardline concerns", but they DO NOT recommend a No vote. They are NEUTRAL.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  8. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  9. TopTop #35
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Here's the PD article about the tax:


    Sonoma County’s proposed cannabis business tax heads to voters

    GUY KOVNER
    THE PRESS DEMOCRAT | February 11, 2017, 10:09PM


    Legalizing marijuana in California was the easy part, given the cultural swing toward acceptance of the long-outlawed drug. Figuring out how to pay for regulation of the booming cannabis industry, however, could prove more problematic in Sonoma County and statewide.

    A cannabis business tax, proposed by the Board of Supervisors to cover the cost of implementing regulations for the newly recognized crop, will go before voters countywide in three weeks in a special election that is causing angst among the people who depend on marijuana for their livelihood.

    Measure A is the only countywide issue in the March 7 election, and mail-in votes are already being cast.

    An approved tax, at the proposed initial rates would generate $6.3 million a year from cannabis businesses outside city limits. County officials say the funding is critical to usher the pot industry out of the legal shadows.

    “Let’s legalize, let’s regulate and let’s tax,” said Shirlee Zane, the Board of Supervisors chairwoman. “They all come together, like it or not.”

    If the tax fails to win majority support, however, county officials say they will have to abandon a July 1 startup date for accepting cannabis business permit applications, a step that could cost pot operators the chance to get in line for state permits at the start of 2018 and possibly expose them to criminal prosecution.

    Continues here.
    Last edited by Barry; 02-13-2017 at 01:02 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  10. Gratitude expressed by:

  11. TopTop #36
    Evram
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Point taken, nevertheless, those are the concerns. : )

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Barry: View Post
    The Sonoma County Grower's Alliance as taken a "neutral position with hardline concerns on the measure". The list quoted in the prior post is their "hardline concerns", but they DO NOT recommend a No vote. They are NEUTRAL.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  12. Gratitude expressed by:

  13. TopTop #37
    eyemusic's Avatar
    eyemusic
     

    Re: Cannabis Tax: Yes or No?

    I asked myself the same question when I read the ballot measure. Do wine grape growers have to pay a similar tax in unincorporated Sonoma County. Do raisers of meat cattle? If not, why tax cannibis growers?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Rustie: View Post
    ...Is unincorporated Sonoma County land used for the raising of live-stock or fish farms (though technically these are not land cultivation industries) also subject to a similar tax?...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  14. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  15. TopTop #38
    kane's Avatar
    kane
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    I decided to vote no on the tax for the following reason; The County wants to set a tax rate without knowing what the actual burden will be of cultivation in the County.

    I'd prefer we study it for two to three years, charging the growers a small amount to pay for this study, then base any future grower tax on REAL data of costs to our infrastructure and services.

    Since I'm not a grower, the tax wouldn't burden me directly, but I am one who is leary of new taxes or increases in taxation as I can see the day coming, as a lower-income older person, when I will need to sell our beloved home due to the property tax burden.

    It's a crazy system we have where we incentivize churn of real estate sales to trigger reassessments and higher taxes, at the cost of losing long-term residents. What about continuity of community? OT, I know.
    Last edited by Barry; 02-13-2017 at 10:53 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  16. Gratitude expressed by 6 members:

  17. TopTop #39
    Sieglinde's Avatar
    Sieglinde
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Not seeing any opposition to this on the ballot, I went ahead and sent my absentee vote in with a yes vote. I would think if the Growers Alliance opposed this, they would have put an arguement in the ballot. I suspect I am not the only voter who has already voted.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  18. TopTop #40
    rossmen
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Thanks for voting, and did you really do your due dilligence? Did you not notice the narrow window the county allowed to provide feedback on the ballot info? If you read here, plenty of dispute. We will see, mailing my vote today, and at least i researched and considered both sides.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Sieglinde: View Post
    Not seeing any opposition to this on the ballot, I went ahead and sent my absentee vote in with a yes vote. I would think if the Growers Alliance opposed this, they would have put an arguement in the ballot. I suspect I am not the only voter who has already voted.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  19. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  20. TopTop #41
    jbox's Avatar
    jbox
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Barry: View Post
    The Sonoma County Grower's Alliance as taken a "neutral position with hardline concerns on the measure". The list quoted in the prior post is their "hardline concerns", but they DO NOT recommend a No vote. They are NEUTRAL.
    Barry, don't you mean they are "neutral" (wink,wink)
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  21. Gratitude expressed by:

  22. TopTop #42
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Here's my take:

    I think we should approve this first attempt of a cannabis tax and get the system up and running and see how it shakes out. I don't see any dealbreakers in the growers "hardline concerns". I think the tax should be adjusted to yield the maximum revenue for the county.

    If the tax rates are too high the retail price will end up too high and the market will revert to the underground economy that it is well accustomed to, and tax revenue will fall.

    As to the structure of the tax, that can also be adjusted once the market it up and functioning.

    So let's get everything up and running, including the tax revenue, now and adjust it as needed. This is huuge change in many directions! It's going to take some time to find its equilibrium.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  23. Gratitude expressed by 6 members:

  24. TopTop #43
    rekarp's Avatar
    rekarp
     

    Re: Cannabis Tax: Yes or No?

    Alcohol is taxed at $3.30 per gallon plus sales tax.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by eyemusic: View Post
    I asked myself the same question when I read the ballot measure. Do wine grape growers have to pay a similar tax in unincorporated Sonoma County. Do raisers of meat cattle? If not, why tax cannibis growers?
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  25. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  26. TopTop #44
    eggplant's Avatar
    eggplant
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    I am a CBD medicinal user and my experience of medicinal marijuana growers locally are that they are small cottage industries that make very little profit and support their clients who are coping with pain from cancer, AIDS, PTSD and aging afflictions like arthritis. Measure A is a tax that will wipe out the small cottage industries to make way for Big Pharma, a greedy industry if I ever saw one. Here is information from a flyer that I found helpful:

    Vote NO on A! This tax is fraudulent! We have no guaranteed it will be used for it's stated purpose.
    1. The measure claims to raise funds to administer the Sonoma County Cannabis Ordinance. However, the proceeds from this tax if passed will be put into the county general fund for their discretion. If there is a tax it should be put into a dedicated fund, administered by Sonoma COunty Agricultural Board.
    2. County claims the taxes will raise 6 million dollars. If the new industry is crippled or bankrupted it could raise Zero dollars and the Cannabis ordinance would place a crippling regulatory burden on an industry already struggling with state interference which will make medicines unaffordable. Please Vote NO on A!
    Last edited by eggplant; 02-13-2017 at 10:21 PM. Reason: to add a statement
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  27. Gratitude expressed by 7 members:

  28. TopTop #45
    eggplant's Avatar
    eggplant
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Unfortunately, going "underground" won't be so easy with the tax man breathing down your back = instead of helicopters we will have drones flying around out rural properties to see who is growing s small garden.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Barry: View Post
    ...If the tax rates are too high the retail price will end up too high and the market will revert to the underground economy that it is well accustomed to, and tax revenue will fall. ...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  29. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  30. TopTop #46
    Sieglinde's Avatar
    Sieglinde
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Did I do my due diligence? For a measure with no perceived opposition, yes. I do not really get into the weeds of tax policy and since I am not in any sort of agricultural business, I had no way to judge the effects on profits. My main motivation was to get retail sells started and this tax looked like the way they were using to get the permitting and other processes started in order to enable retail selling of pot. (My motivation was as a possible sometime medical user who does not want to go to the expense of seeing a "pot doctor" and paying for the card, when I may just need an oil very occasionally)

    The question of voter information is an interesting one. I belong to the League of Women Voters and we were taken by surprise by this election. So no forum will be available from us. Looks like there will be some sort of meeting about it on February 25th at the Glaser Center. https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/CAO/Cannabis

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by rossmen: View Post
    Thanks for voting, and did you really do your due diligence? ...
    Last edited by Barry; 02-15-2017 at 02:33 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  31. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

  32. TopTop #47
    Tinque's Avatar
    Tinque
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    I first want to thank WaccoBB.net for providing a forum in which one can express their views, pros and cons. One can read and try to sort out the facts, lies, exaggerated and/or minimized information and be able to come to, hopefully, the best conclusion in how to proceed in waging our votes, give our support or our disapproval in all matters .

    I have been perplexed about this whole tax issue. I have read and re-read lots of peoples thoughts on this subject and I feel just like I did when the realization that Ashton Kutcher was not going to be publicly broadcasting that " Ha Ha ", everyone has just been PUNKED and that the REAL candidates are going to be revealing themselves and we can now really start with the "REAL" election.WHEW !

    The whole political arena is such a huge " Hunger Game" and its easy to understand why people get discouraged and try to shy away, slowly but surely or at a complete cantor from the craziness.

    I think, first and foremost, that it was absolutely irresponsible and very manipulative to put together an expensive, " special election" for most any issue, ( except if, suddenly, IT WAS a fact, that we were "punked" and we needed to get out and REALLY vote on some REAL candidates, or there was hundreds of walking dead people coming into our pearly gates for real ), but this was and is obviously a very deceiving and not thought out or manipulatively thought out bill, that in reality is an ultimatum to the growers, etc., a power play and I think, in the regards to making decisions that affect all of us, we all should participate in discussion, in argument , in favor, in disagreement and should of been hashed out between everyone beforehand to make it work for everyone.

    Do I think there should be taxes... I think yes , but taxes in all areas should be regulated by the amount of money or cost to our environment and necessity.

    I feel that if things went the way they I think are intended to be, that we would pay our so called dues to the areas in which we live in and are taxed which of course would be used for maintaining our roads , our libraries , our schools our homeless and of course we would see this money working for everyone on a daily basis. I don't know if anyone has driven down Pleasant Hill Rd but I have almost been thrown across the road as well as possibly or probably severely damaging my vehicle while attempting to get from A to B, due to the severity of the potholes . Where does that Lottery money go? Where does our tax money go?

    Is it true that wineries do not get taxed, like this proposed plan being laid out for the cannabis industry people?
    How do chemicals are used on the grapes compare to cannabis?

    The whole thing needs much further discussion before it should be presented for a vote.
    That $400,00 plus should have been spent in a responsible, environmental, community needed manner.
    One should research how Oregon has/is successfully been managing in this business/trade .
    Last edited by Barry; 02-15-2017 at 10:45 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  33. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  34. TopTop #48
    rossmen
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Retail sales will happen whatever we in soco vote. And the state will get money. Measure a is all about the local scene. The simple way to look is more tax better? Government for sure!
    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Sieglinde: View Post
    ...My main motivation was to get retail sells started and this tax looked like the way they were using to get the permitting and other processes started in order to enable retail selling of pot. ...
    Last edited by Barry; 02-15-2017 at 12:32 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  35. TopTop #49
    Evram
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Apparently Sonoma County growers alliance has settled on its position. "The SCGA has surveyed our membership and found an overwhelming response opposing Measure A. We urge our membership and other citizens to vote NO on Measure A."
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  36. Gratitude expressed by 6 members:

  37. TopTop #50
    Shandi's Avatar
    Shandi
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    It seems that "adjusting or modifying" a tax is much more difficult than getting it aligned and fair at the beginning, which means due diligence on the part of those who will be taxed. This kind of action takes time, and many people have other priorities than to get involved in a tax they don't understand the effect it may have on them.

    This is how we get people in office that would never get in if so many people weren't in survival. I don't see this changing in my lifetime, but I'm a witness to more and more people unable to find housing, for their most basic survival. Yes, there are food banks, but when you have no place to cook it, then what?

    As a previous business owner, I don't see a wise step in "Getting it up and running first, then see how it shakes out." I've seen many businesses with this perspective. Many retail operations that I predicted (to myself) that would fail within a year or two, have left the scene. I can usually spot those when they first open, and do my predictions, while I secretly hope I'm wrong.

    This tax issue will be voted on without any or very little knowledge of the consequences. Then a call will go up for changes, from those who experience it negatively. I don't know anything about the tax ramifications, and where the money will go, but someone can enlighten me, I'm sure.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Barry: View Post
    Here's my take:

    I think we should approve this first attempt of a cannabis tax and get the system up and running and see how it shakes out. ...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  38. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

  39. TopTop #51
    Shandi's Avatar
    Shandi
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    I think you mean the Glaser Center; I've never heard of the Glazier Center.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Sieglinde: View Post
    ... Looks like there will be some sort of meeting about it on February 25th at the Glazier Center. https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/CAO/Cannabis
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  40. TopTop #52
    Shandi's Avatar
    Shandi
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    No one with a medical condition needs to "see" a doctor anymore. I got my recommendation online for $50, and yes it works! It's good for a year, so if I'm running low on my medicine when the year is almost up, I'd just buy enough to take care of my occasional needs for the following year. Also, prices do vary on herb, tincures, creams, etc.

    I bought a CBD cream at Mercy Wellness. It was a small jar for $16, which seemed expensive, but I don't use a lot. When I did some price checking online, I saw the very same thing for $45. So, it pays to price check...
    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Sieglinde: View Post
    ...(My motivation was as a possible sometime medical user who does not want to go to the expense of seeing a "pot doctor" and paying for the card, when I may just need an oil very occasionally)...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  41. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  42. TopTop #53
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Evram: View Post
    Apparently Sonoma County growers alliance has settled on its position. "The SCGA has surveyed our membership and found an overwhelming response opposing Measure A. We urge our membership and other citizens to vote NO on Measure A."
    Here's their full press release:

    SONOMA COUNTY GROWERS ALLIANCE ANNOUNCES STANCE ON MEASURE A
    Industry Group Opposes County Cannabis Tax

    Santa Rosa, Calif., February 13, 2017– The Sonoma County Growers Alliance (SCGA) is issuing its position on Measure A, the Sonoma County Cannabis Business Tax on Commercial Cannabis Business. SCGA OPPOSES MEASURE A. We are working directly with industry leaders and our membership to develop a fair and equitable tax structure to benefit Sonoma County. The SCGA has surveyed our membership and found an overwhelming response opposing Measure A. We urge our membership and other citizens to vote NO on Measure A.

    SCGA has outlined several areas of concern with the proposed tax measure that gave the organization and its membership extreme concern:

    • The top tax rate of 10% would exceed profitability
    • The taxes are subject to changes by a majority vote of the Supervisors
    • Excessive tax rates for License Types 2 & 3
    • The funds go to the General Fund of the County and are not targeted
    • Timeline for reporting and tax payments due before permits are obtained
    • The cost burden of industry implementation falls on early adopters
    • The short timeline presented for the tax scheme left little opportunity for discussion that led to a lack of confidence in the County proposal
    Sonoma County Growers Alliance is hosting a workshop for the community to discuss the County of Sonoma and Santa Rosa Tax proposal on March 3, at the Finley Center in Santa Rosa from 2-5PM.

    Sonoma County Growers Alliance is a community group organized to educate, collaborate and advocate for patient, cultivator and community rights and responsibilities. SCGA works cooperatively with all individuals, businesses, and regulatory bodies to ensure that reasonable environmental, social and economic standards are set in place, helping cultivators within the community to participate and thrive responsibly.


    Sounds to me likes the complaints from any other industry that doesn't want to be taxed (or taxed less).~ Barry

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

  43. Gratitude expressed by 6 members:

  44. TopTop #54
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    State Senator Mike McGuire chaired a public hearing on Feb 14 on the proposed Cannabis Tax.
    The Governor of Colorado and other speakers who have experience with legalizing Cannabis testified.

    You can see the full high-quality video by clicking on the image below.

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

  45. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

  46. TopTop #55
    SonomaPatientsCoop's Avatar
    SonomaPatientsCoop
     

    Re: Cannabis Tax: Yes or No?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza: View Post
    The pro-tax folks also argue that the federal attorney general, Sessions, will enforce California state laws, or the lack thereof. Federal authorities have competence ONLY in enforcing federal laws, not state; it is in the founding documents of the U.S.State authorities are responsible for enforcing their own state laws, not the federal govt.
    I am really not sure what your point is supposed to be?Cannabis IS a schedule I drug (worse then cocaine fwiw) under Federal Law. The "Cole Memo" during the Obama administration directed federal agencies not to enforce federal cannabis law in situations where operations where in compliance with state laws (you can trace the masive rise in, ahem, "backyard grows" in RR, AR, and even the cities to this rule.It is unknown if the "cole memo" will survive under Trump. FWIW- in his confirmation hearings, Sessions, on the topic of "legal" cannabis said it was not his job to chooses which federal laws to enforce- it was up to congress to change them. Regardless- the industry has a very powervul and adversial force as fed ag. And if the tax fails, and hence the county regulations can not go into force- the entire industry has their proverbial ass flapping in the wind. And for those that don't know, Federal sentences are 20 years for 50-99 plants and up to 40 years for up to 999 plants. (up to life beyond that). Plus financial fines. Add to this similiarly harsh sentences for "sales".And let us not forget- our Sheriff recently met with Sessions- along with many other sheriffs. And while immigration/sanctuaries was the hot topic reported, our sheriff reportedly was also discussing the cannabis industry (and not how to protect it).
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  47. Gratitude expressed by:

  48. TopTop #56
    SonomaPatientsCoop's Avatar
    SonomaPatientsCoop
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Shandi: View Post
    It seems that "adjusting or modifying" a tax is much more difficult than getting it aligned and fair at the beginning, which means due diligence on the part of those who will be taxed. ....
    While I agree with you in theory...we are also under very special circumstances here. To wit: if the tax doesn't pass, the county doesen;t issue permits in 2017. If the county doesn't issue permits, one can't get a state permit in 2018.

    The industry becomes illegal under county and state law. Which, to an extent, we in the industry are somewhat used to. But now throw in the fact we have a Federal AG who has not only said "good people don't smoke marijuana" but in confirmation hearings regarding the cannabis industry said it wa not up to him to decide what laws to enforce, it was up to congress to change them.

    For now the Cole memo, directing federal agencies to stand down when cannabis operations are in line with their state laws is our saving grace. If the tax measure fails- even this goes out the window.
    Last edited by Barry; 02-16-2017 at 11:43 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  49. Gratitude expressed by:

  50. TopTop #57
    SonomaPatientsCoop's Avatar
    SonomaPatientsCoop
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Evram: View Post
    Apparently Sonoma County growers alliance has settled on its position. "The SCGA has surveyed our membership and found an overwhelming response opposing Measure A. We urge our membership and other citizens to vote NO on Measure A."

    Hmm. As a member of SCGA I'll say they previously begrudgingly supported the tax- because the ramifications of it's failure were much worse. But since Tawni ogan got appointed to the head of the board of Heziekels Cal Growers Alliance out of Humboldt- which supports massive grows...a lot of positions have been seeming to change.

    to wit- the focus on the higher tax for large grows in SoCo and a focus on the "top possible tax" - which few believe will ever come into play- it was a safeguard to prevent more expensive special elections.

    I'll add- SoCo did their homework. They saw that in CO,OR, &WA taxes were set to high, discouraged people from coming into compliance and favored those with millionaire backers. SoCo did a good...far from perfect...but good job with this tax. It's somewhat higher then the emerald triangle in general- far less then what has been proposed of passed anywhere east or south of here.

    I'll add- SCGA's "survey" was pathetic. It was tilted in its questions toward big growers and offered no discussion of the other options (or lack there-of). SCGA has a lot of meetings coming up soon...and I will be deciding if this remains an organization I can support. But for now it increasingly looks like they are abandoning the small growers...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  51. Gratitude expressed by:

  52. TopTop #58
    SonomaPatientsCoop's Avatar
    SonomaPatientsCoop
     

    Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by rossmen: View Post
    ...Did you not notice the narrow window the county allowed to provide feedback on the ballot info? ...
    Narrow window? The county has been holding countless hearings on the regulations (of which taxes are part of) for well over a year.

    The "narrow window" was due to the march window for a special election, on an issue that the regs were finalized in what, november sometime? With a need to get them passed in time for state regs.

    For the people most affected by this...we had plenty of time and then some to give our input.

    God, I hope some of these people cringing about the taxes are going to be willing to cough up some $$ to a gofundme account when the little organic, boutique grow that provides them with their "medicine" is suddenly facing 40 years under federal law and a half million in state/county civil fines.
    Last edited by Barry; 02-16-2017 at 11:45 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  53. Gratitude expressed by:

  54. TopTop #59
    SonomaPatientsCoop's Avatar
    SonomaPatientsCoop
     

    Re: Cannabis Tax: Yes or No?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by jbox: View Post
    . I'm voting no, if for no other reason than being against spending $400,000 for a special election rather than wait til the next one.
    I'm sorry- but that is NOT realistic. The state is supposed to start issuing permits Jan 1st 2018 (yes, looks like they are behind schedule). One can't get a state permit (which they must have in 2018) without a county permit.

    The next general election is nov 2017. The county has to hire and train staff before permits can be issued. PMRD, just on general issues, is currently several months out on being able to act on anything.

    If this does not pass, no permits (or the county has to scramble and pull millions from the general fund in the hope another tax passes). Basically- the cannabis industry in SO will likely become illegal under state/local law for ~ 2 years- even more worrisome given our current federal AG.
    Last edited by Barry; 02-16-2017 at 11:46 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  55. Gratitude expressed by:

  56. TopTop #60
    SonomaPatientsCoop's Avatar
    SonomaPatientsCoop
     

    Re: Cannabis Tax: Yes or No?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Rustie: View Post
    ...Is a similarly structured business tax in place for unincorporated Sonoma County cultivation of produce, wine grapes, ornamental plants, cut flowers, hay, straw, grain etc? And as a side question: Is unincorporated Sonoma County land used for the raising of live-stock or fish farms (though technically these are not land cultivation industries) also subject to a similar tax?...
    Fair, and complicated question.

    Beyond the tax issue- the cannabis industry is being regulated beyond any other industry. Some issues- such as water use and environmental impacts, we are being regulated first. Many of these regs are coming to the wine industry, ag, and homeowners over the next few years.

    I was initially surprised- but came to understand, why some of the large wine interests and ag interests got involved in the meetings on the coming regs...

    As to the taxes- fair point. Alcohol and tobacco are the closet analogies.

    I'm unaware of any other ag crop with such potential for diversion to the black market. Alcohol is the only other one (grown in this state) with similiar social costs to consider. And cannabis is the only one in this state that the industry has caused billions of dollars in damage that needs to be addressed.

    I'll say, SoCo did a good job with this tax measure- at least as it is initially to be implemented. They looked closely at the (higher) tax rates in CO, OR, and WA and saw the problems it caused.

    Am I (being in the industry) thrilled with it? no. But it's more then good enough. And the alternative (no permits- being illegal for 2+ years under Trump/Sessions) is not an option. If this fails... I become unemployed- I will not risk my family under the current federal government.

    I prefer it pass- and then both the industry and the populace keep up pressure to insure the BOS doesen't kill the goos that laid the golden egg.
    Last edited by Barry; 02-16-2017 at 11:47 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  57. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-02-2016, 03:53 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-09-2015, 01:19 PM
  3. Housing Sweet Woman & Dog Seeking Temporay Housing June 7th through July 7th
    By wildheart in forum All Marin County Posts
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-07-2015, 09:28 AM
  4. Someone makes my argument vs. "taxation is theft" articulately!
    By podfish in forum National & International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-06-2011, 04:03 PM

Bookmarks