City Council leaders approve tough stance against pot if Prop. 64 passes in November election

But if Proposition 64, also known as the Adult Use Marijuana Act (AUMA), passes on November 8, cities will indeed have some restrictive authority, but recreational use is a foregone conclusion. According to most polls, Prop. 64 is favored to pass, perhaps by as much as 60 percent of the vote.

As it is, councilmembers voted 4-1 Tuesday night to accept Smith’s recommendations to restrict its use, and if Californians vote in favor of Prop. 64, Lemoore will in fact be required to allow indoor growing for personal use, but the law gives local communities the authorization to “reasonably regulate” indoor cultivation of marijuana in private residences as well as ban outdoor cultivation of marijuana entirely – unless it becomes federally legalized. State law would allow an individual to grow six plants per residence.

And that’s about all that Lemoore residences will be able to do, and they’ll have to abide by strict building codes requiring all plants be grown indoors. Users will also have to do all their smoking within the confines of their homes.

Smith left little doubt as to where he stood on the issue. At the council’s Sept. 6 meeting, he cited the strong opposition of California’s law enforcement community, telling the council that every major state law enforcement association is actively opposing the AUMA, he stated in his report. Key opponents included the California Police Chiefs Association, California State Sheriffs Association, California Peace Officers Association, California Narcotics Association, and numerous local organizations and individual officials.

The local ordinance as read Tuesday night, and which will likely be finalized at its Oct. 4 meeting, will also prohibit commercial cultivation, processing, marijuana delivery, and dispensaries, meaning that those wishing to light up in Lemoore must do so only in the privacy of their homes. “It should not be a nuisance to your neighbor,” said Smith. “Not everyone is going to jump on the marijuana bandwagon.”

They won’t be able to buy it from a store, have it delivered, or allow large-scale processers to open up shop in Lemoore. However, cities like Lemoore could very well, in the future, create additional regulations or implement additional local taxes on locally grown marijuana.

Not all cities are taking the same stance as Lemoore. Lemoore’s neighbor to the west, Coalinga, has already taken action, but in a different direction, approving commercial marijuana cultivation with city limits including selling some of its property – the city’s dormant prison, Claremont Custody Center, to Ocean Grown Extracts for $4.1 million. Ocean Grown will turn the former facility into a medical cannabis oil extraction plant.

Lemoore Councilmember Billy Siegel, the only one to vote against Smith’s recommendations, seemed to suggest that the city may have been too hasty in nixing thoughts of commercial outlets and the tax benefits they may offer, and in a somewhat confusing array of thoughts, he seemed to suggest that if it’s going to be legal, why not, as a city, take advantage of the taxing opportunities, which may translate into increased funding for law enforcement.

“I think it’s near sighted,” said Siegel. “Smoking marijuana will be legal. What are we truly stopping? You can smoke it in your home, but we’re not going to let somebody make money? What is this policy really creating? What is it really prohibiting?”

He also cited local news reports that suggested that the City of Hanford may be considering a plan to allow a Bay Area medical marijuana distribution company to move into the former Pirelli tire plant and turn it into the state’s largest medical marijuana cultivation and distribution operation, which could generate up to $14 million in taxes per year to the city’s coffers. Hanford city officials, some of whom are intrigued by the proposal, say they will study the issue.

“I’m not trying to promote it … but if it becomes legal I’m certainly not one to sit here and say that this government is responsible for parenting everyone else,” said Siegel.  I don’t know that it’s right or wrong. I think we’re crossing the line. As a government I think we’re going too far.”

“This provides local control,” responded Chief Smith, “and it’s my job is to tell you what is best for the safety of the community, and I think bringing marijuana into the city for revenue is a terrible idea. That’s my personal opinion.”

“I would be very irresponsible if I told you that it would be a good idea to have a marijuana industry, and if we brought a million dollars into Lemoore every year, I know I’ll have more cops to put on the streets. Most of those cops will be chasing the marijuana industry and the problems that come with them. You all have the power to make the policy, and I’m providing you with the facts based on the best information I have.”

While the council’s current direction leaves little to the imagination, marijuana – if Prop. 64 passes – will be heavily regulated in Lemoore, but some councilmembers seemed to leave the door open a crack, just in case circumstances change. “We wanted to start here,” said Mayor Lois Wynne. “We’re really not sure where this is going. We’ll wait and see as far as other uses, industry, taxation. There are a lot of unknowns in this.”

Councilmember Ray Madrigal said that clearly he thinks Lemoore’s citizens want tough restrictions on marijuana, as evidenced by the results of the 2010 election in which marijuana legalization was on the ballot. It narrowly lost statewide, but the voters of Kings County turned it down by 67 percent.

“The state and the feds have taken a lot of control away from us,” said Madrigal, “but I think that also, based on what Chief Smith has presented, and what I know about this community from having lived here a long time, and the voting record on these kinds of things, I think that, by and large, the people of Lemoore do not want us to allow this right now, and I don’t know how that’s going to progress on down the road, how things will get as far as our economic situation. I’m confident that they, the majority of the people, would not want us to allow this kind of commercial activity in our city, regardless of how much it’s going to bring.”