Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th
Thats not what zane said. I don't get why you name 64 as back burner. Don't more recent laws trump older laws, especially when they are constitutional amendments approved by the citizenry? Why should voters throw more meat into the shark tank? Is that going to settle anything?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
you lost me there. This has nothing to do with Prop 64- which is still a looooong way from coming into play.
This has to do with MCRSA - Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act.
For those who don't understand the larger picture- prop 215 and SB 420 never legalized commercial production of medical cannabis- it only provided a legal defense. For 20 years the industry got to get away without having to abide by zoning regualations, environmental laws, labor laws, taxes etc etc.
Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th
Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th
The supervisors have done a lousy job on this issue. they have already brought in 2 large outside companies (out of state). one of the larger local grow businesses is starting up in San Luis Obispo, as the gov't there is welcoming.
i have little faith in the supes (even road repair is primarily patches, so the problems are rarely fixed, & much of the labor is local jail crews which get paid little, less than $.30 per hour).
tax makes sense, but let's put something on the table that says 5% at each level.
i understand residential concerns, but i don't understand the problem w. small grows, cottage operations, in unincorporated areas where there are land buffers--seems like a sweeping plan that is poorly thought out.
(wasn't the PD the paper that covered the CannaCraft police bust in a very one sided way.
since the charges were dropped why wasn't the medical equipment returned by the SRPD?).
i believe we can do much better. start w. that 5% across the board tax and clean up some of the issues, & i will happily vote yes. today i will vote no. i wish i felt more upbeat about the supes & the process.
Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th
Well, my guess is that those signs are there for plantation owners who do not WANT to be taxed.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
Can anyone with a better understanding of the shadowy world of PAC's unravel who is actually behind the hundreds of "No on A" signs lining river road, 116, and elsewhwere....
Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
Thats not what zane said. I don't get why you name 64 as back burner. Don't more recent laws trump older laws, especially when they are constitutional amendments approved by the citizenry? Why should voters throw more meat into the shark tank? Is that going to settle anything?
Again, you lost me. Prop 64 is not a constitutional amendment.
The states focus is on getting MCRSA up and running- the regulation of the medical cannabis industry. State permitting will (in theory) start jan 1 2018. There was hope that much of prop 64 regulations could be built off this infrastructure- potentially allowing much of the medical industry to transition to adult use with some simple paperwork.
Now- with statements from the Trump admin...things are more complicated and there is a strong interest- from both the industry and those in government to keep the two seperate.
IF you followed CO, OR, WA... the process of setting up adult use...and transitioning from a medical system...was very slow, painful, and an almost constant one step forward/two steps back.
I'll add here- I voted against prop 64. It was very poorly written and created undue chaos and cost just when the state was (finally) trying to get medical right. Regardless- we are a good year, probably 2...maybe more depending on what Trump does from having any Adult Use system in this state.
And again- these taxes- and regulations have nothing to do with prop 64/adult use... other then the reality that we are the guinea pigs for how the "legal" market will ultimately be regulated and taxed.
And please point me to what statement from Zane you are referring- because as someone who attended pretty much every county meeting on the subject- everyone from pmrd to the BOS, and everyone in between regularly state they were ONLY dealing with medical- adult use/prop 64 would be something to be dealt with later.
Re: Cannabis Industry Taxation- Special Election March 7th
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Icssoma:
The supervisors have done a lousy job on this issue. they have already brought in 2 large outside companies (out of state). one of the larger local grow businesses is starting up in San Luis Obispo, as the gov't there is welcoming.
>snip<
tax makes sense, but let's put something on the table that says 5% at each level.
i understand residential concerns, but i don't understand the problem w. small grows, cottage operations, in unincorporated areas where there are land buffers--seems like a sweeping plan that is poorly thought out.
>snip< .
Late response I know.
But I'm a little confused as to most of your comments.
Out of state players? Are you talking about MN et al- which have applied for or received permits in Santa Rosa- which has nothing to do with the county/BOS ? Because the only big out of county/state operations I'm aware of got shut down by PMRD...and the county is not issuing permits until at least July.
And again- the tax rate for grows is NOT 10%- that is a theoretical max. The proposed tax for grows is well under the 5% tax for processors- and for cottage grows way, way, way under the 5%.
I fully agree BOS f****d up royally banning grows in unincorporated RR and AR. That said, to play devils advocate- the "industry" also f****d up. Let's be honest- as the feds backed off- and the state/county had no regulations- we saw an explosion of as****s blowing up their backyards and pissing off their neighbors...and causing all sorts of problems. The BOS should have let regs take out the bad players. And the good players WILL work to change the current situation.