Snookered by Prop. 64? Most of us were.


Legal marijuana in California is upon us, and it’s an absolute mess.

But not for commercial growers. They’re the ones with capital enough to deal with the stiflingly expensive state hoops and regulations. They’re set to cash in—and they’ll do so at the expense of small growers. Why? Because that’s the way California wanted it. Prop. 64 was a means to an end; it was a necessary legal hurdle clearer for big cannabis bucks.

Unlike the pro-commercial cannabis lawmakers in Sacramento who see small growers as insignificant collateral damage, we’ve got nothing against those who had hoped to get in on the Green Rush. It’s nothing personal. We simply do not want commercial cannabis activity and all that implies in our county.

Where do you stand on commercial cannabis in Plumas?

Before you answer, consider these big grow risks to Calaveras, Siskiyou, Humboldt and other counties:

  • Increased crime
  • Continued financial and social degradation of communities
  • Enhanced risk to wildlife, environment and water resources
  • Lack of regulation enforcement

These are just some of the negative side effects that would afflict Plumas County, if commercial cannabis is allowed here. To learn more about our issue, feel free to peruse, and click the LEARN tab at top right.

2 comments on “Snookered by Prop. 64? Most of us were.

  1. Greg Kinne says:

    It doesn’t help for you to imply that people who voted for prop 64 are fools. This is a small community, and if you want respect, putting people down won’t get it. I’ve been here 38 years, and in my circle of friends the support of 64 has not changed. Supporters never wanted Commercial cultivation here. People supported it because it is a far less damaging and more interesting recreational drug than alcohol. I’ve read “Marijuana debunked” and some of the referenced studies. The “damage” is way overblown. There are risks but we accept them because they are small and humans need recreational drugs. If you drink alcohol you are a recreational drug user. The positive value of Marijuana is huge, that is why people use it. Just the value as an exit drug for opiate users is huge.
    While forming a group for a community action years ago, my friend Bill Coates said ” I only want to be part of this group if it is positive.” Great thought from a great man. I try to live that, not always successfully.

    1. Webmaster says:

      Hi, Greg
      Thanks for your comments. I don’t think that people who voted YES on Prop. 64 are fools. On the contrary, I think they voted for decriminalization of recreational marijuana use and legal personal and medicinal growing. What many did NOT vote for is commercial cannabis grows in their communities. My point is that lawmakers in SAC and big cannabis used Prop. 64 and its verbiage to pave the way for the state and big growers to cash in on the Green Rush. The snookering refers to how most Californians voted for rec legalization and are getting or having to fight against commercial cannabis and big marijuana interests. My piece is not meant as a put down or to make fools out of anyone. I think our group is positive and hope we can continue this conversation.

Leave a Reply