Answer: Local cannabis growers, aspiring commercial cannabis business owners, and Measure B authors.
Who doesn’t: Everyone else.
By now, you may have seen Measure B backers’ bumper stickers and yard signs telling you to vote yes for their commercial cannabis ordinance.
Look at their messaging below. See anything that benefits you?
Let’s break it down. Measure B backers say that if we vote yes for Measure B, we’ll get regulations, access, “A Green Deal for Plumas,” and a thriving/healthy local economy. The last one sounds good and beneficial, but let’s take them one at a time.
How do we non-growers and non-commercial cannabis business owners benefit from regulations? We don’t.
The ones who benefit are the growers who claim to want to be regulated. They claim that regulation will eliminate the black market. This is nonsense.
Black market growers don’t give a rodent’s rear end about Measure B or Prop. 64 or the state’s obsession with harnessing big bucks from regulated commercial cannabis.
The simple sad truth is that illegal growers will continue using our forests to grow cheaply and carelessly—especially as the black market only grows from the state’s overtaxation of cannabis products.
The regulation argument is a smokescreen. It’s not that Measure B backers want to be regulated—it’s that they want to be allowed to join the Green Rush in our little county, so they can profit from commercial cannabis.
Let’s say for the sake of argument that Plumas County can affordably regulate cash-only businesses. How can the county trust new cannabis business owners who, as growers, operated outside the law for years? How can they trust them to accurately self-report net profits for Measure B’s two-percent General Tax?
Now, I’m not talking about caregiver growers who played by the rules. I’m talking about growers who used cannabis patients to grow and sell the vast majority of their crop to dispensaries. Why would people who dodged regulation all this time suddenly be clamoring for it now?
This is perhaps Measure B backers’ most tired—and cynical—talking point. What is more affordable and accessible for patients than to grow one’s own two or three or six plants or to get it from friends, family and neighbors—as Prop. 64 allows? We know, they know, and patients know that there are plenty of people in Plumas who have extra cannabis to share.
Let’s say a patient chooses the Amazonian online shopping approach. Click, pay and wait for delivery. Measure B backers like to point out the illegality of patients using non-registered dispensaries’ delivery services. Does anyone truly believe that legality is something Measure B backers care about?
Besides, it’s only a matter of time before legal delivery services are part and parcel of Plumas patients’ orders of their medicine. Measure B backers’ arguments are not about “affordable access.” They’re about monopolizing access for maximum profit.
Healthy local economy
Measure B backers say we need their commercial cannabis ordinance in order to stimulate our feeble local economy. They say it will bring jobs and grow our county’s population. Sounds good except for the part about growing the population.
Question: What kinds of jobs and people come with commercial cannabis activity? Answer: “Trimmigrants.” Trimmigrants are transients who show up to trim buds off cannabis plants. They come at harvest, make some quick tax-free bucks, and skedaddle.
What other new Plumas jobs would come with Measure B and commercial cannabis activity? Manufacturing jobs making products like honey oil. Honey oil is a high THC-concentrated honey-colored goo produced when heating cannabis buds with a flammable.
Now imagine growing our county’s population with trimmigrants and manufacturers producing honey oil. Are these the kinds of jobs and people we want coming to our county? Do we want workers making concentrated THC goo popular among young users seeking more intense highs?
A Green Deal for Plumas?
Measure B backers say that if we vote for their commercial cannabis ordinance, Plumas will be rewarded with a “Green Deal.” Problem is that Plumas County officials say that the revenue generated by Measure B will likely cost the county in enforcement and regulation deficits. They say the best-case scenario will be a wash financially. Where’s the green in this deal?
According to the county’s analysis, Measure B backers’ “Green Deal for Plumas” looks more like a red herring.
The truth is that Measure B’s commercial cannabis ordinance will be a bad deal for Plumas—and for its voters. A Green Deal for Plumas is a promise Measure B backers can’t deliver.
And it’s the same promise other California counties have fallen for and now regret allowing commercial cannabis into their communities. It’s plain to them now that the costs greatly outweigh the benefits. Let’s learn from their mistakes and say no to this empty Measure B promise.
If we don’t defeat Measure B,
Our Board of Supervisors will have to adopt their ordinance with NO changes or revisions. It will become law AS IS. No turning back. No tweaking anything.
This is that Measure B backers are banking on. They tried shooting for the moon and everything they wanted in a commercial cannabis ordinance in 2017 with their cannabis working group. But fortunately, Plumas citizens rose up and said no.
Measure B is their Plan B for getting what they truly want—a piece of the Green Rush pie.
If we don’t defeat Measure B, our population will grow with people who care nothing for our county. Measure B backers admit that Plumas will have to spend more on social service problems—problems that Measure B will create.
If we don’t defeat Measure B, regulation and law enforcement costs will soar because many licensees won’t reliably self-report net income, so the county can collect the Measure B two-percent net-income General Tax.
The hard truth is that once many—not all—Measure B backers get their unconstitutional “priority resident” lifetime licenses, they won’t care about any Green Deals for Plumas.
Too much, too fast
The inescapable fact is that virtually every California county, area and city that has given in to commercial cannabis activity is getting a raw deal and regretting it. This is happening, in part, because the state is going too hard and moving too fast to create a viable commercial cannabis market.
One of our supporters is a retired banker who says that even if he were not against commercial cannabis, there’s no way he would invest in a commercial cannabis business venture in Plumas. He says it’s a losing financial proposition based on a bad business model.
One reason this is true is because sales taxes on cannabis products in legal dispensaries are absurdly high. In some cases they reach a bloated 35 percent of products’ prices. What does this do for the legal market? It shrinks it. What does it do for the black market? You know.
The truth is that Measure B and commercial cannabis is a bad deal for Plumas. It threatens everything we love and cherish about our county. Having more cannabis in Plumas means more risk to our environment, more social issues, less positive tourism, and more danger for our children.
Help protect Plumas County from commercial cannabis activity and Green Rush greed.