Cannabis has been a subject of ongoing debate for over ten years within the Nevada County Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Scofield has transitioned from being a strong advocate for banning cannabis—an effort ultimately overturned by a public vote—to now collaborating with the cannabis alliance to establish cannabis cultivation as a legitimate business in the county. While there has been notable progress, challenges remain, requiring continuous revisions to the cannabis ordinance to both support the industry and maintain neighborhood compatibility. Each change inevitably brings its own set of challenges and potential controversies. Currently, six major changes are being considered:
1. A maximum of three retail dispensaries are being proposed in select unincorporated areas of the county through a competitive selection and use permit process. The suggested areas include South County, Penn Valley, North San Juan, and Soda Springs. To oversee this process, a Retail Commercial Cannabis Application Evaluation Committee, consisting of five community members appointed by the Nevada County Board of Supervisors, would be established. Potential locations include Combie Road and Streeter Way, though after factoring in restrictions regarding sensitive sites, only one or two viable sites remain. Based on public feedback from the recent South County Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) meeting, South County may be removed as a potential location.
2. The proposal includes allowing for manufacturing, indoor cultivation, distribution, and testing laboratories in Industrial (M1) zone districts in unincorporated areas of the county. Streeter Road is currently identified as a possible location for manufacturing.
3. A proposed Exclusion Zone combining district would prohibit all commercial cannabis activities within its boundaries. However, during the recent MAC meeting, the practicality of this zone was called into question, as it would require unanimous agreement from all landowners in the proposed zone to be implemented.
4. The ordinance would allow for temporary cannabis events or markets in commercial zones. Subject to the approval of an Administrative Development Permit, these events could be held in C1 or C2 zones within designated Community Regions, Village Centers, or Rural Centers as outlined by the General Plan. Licensed cannabis event organizers would be permitted to sell and allow the consumption of cannabis goods onsite. The events would be limited to a single day and operate between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. While there are no restrictions on the number of permits an applicant could receive, the MAC meeting suggested imposing limits on the number of event days per applicant and location.
5. A proposed amendment would require all cannabis sold to be grown exclusively in Nevada County. This would build on the current cannabis ordinance, which allows micro businesses with storefront retail sales. Under this proposal, products grown, cultivated, manufactured, or processed outside of Nevada County would not be permitted for sale, display, or offer.
6. A final proposal would mandate that all property taxes be paid prior to the issuance of cannabis permits, a requirement that Supervisor Scofield believes should have been included in the original ordinance.
Although the public comment period will close before this article is published, Supervisor Scofield encourages feedback and welcomes comments or questions.
Source: nevadacountyca.gov