Measure A Makes Sense
As someone who has been in the industry for many years and currently operates several hundred square feet below the "cottage level" cutoff, I couldn't disagree with you more ("No Way on 'A'," Feb. 22). The proposed Sonoma County taxes are better than any of the other any other cannabis taxes in states where marijuana is legal—worse than Humboldt, but better than what has been proposed or passed anywhere south or east of here. Yes the "up to" 10 percent is scary. But this is a process in a process. The county, for those that have been involved, clearly wants to support small operators and not kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Welcome to the real world or regulation, taxes, OSHA, labor boards, etc. Guess what? We are finally being handed a legal and regulated industry. Scary, yes. Expensive, yes. But we also escape living in a world where what we do is illegal.
Yep, many of us are going to have scale up considerably. But we will have the freedom to do so without fear of Henry 1's flights twice a year. And, yep, a lot of players both small and large are pretty much done. If you can't produce a product that is good enough for the California market, your days are numbered. So be it. These are the people who have created much of the environmental, worker and criminal abuses in our region. Maybe you should have explained to people that without a tax in place the county doesn't issue permits. Without county permits, you can't get a state permit—meaning the cannabis industry in Sonoma County could become completely illegal for one or more years under a federal administration itching to screw the cannabis industry, and California in particular.
Word on Threet
Since Mr. Threet's primary function ("The Watchdog," Feb. 22) appears to be to reassure the public, nice, fluffy pieces like this will help the cause, but where are the questions from Tom Gogola for Threet regarding Sheriff Freitas' meeting with Attorney General Jeff Sessions?The Press Democrat reported on the meeting on Feb. 8. The Bohemian reported that "Threet said he will ask Freitas further questions next week when they are scheduled to meet." What were those questions and what were Freitas' answers? Enquiring members of the public wish to know. Gogola asked him to comment on the people commenting on the PD piece, yet apparently failed to ask Threet about the follow-up meeting with Freitas. C'mon, Boho, we need some answers.
This was surprising to read. The board of supervisors has always seemed to say they have no policy authority over the sheriff: "My own personal view of it is the government code does give the board of supervisors supervisorial authority over sheriffs, and that it's rarely exercised," Jerry Threet was quoted as saying.As it stands, it seems the only thing the sheriff is currently doing that the board of supervisors may have issue with is notifying immigration officials if inmates will be released. They do not honor 48-hour hold requests unless accompanied by a court order; in fact, it now seems it has been found unlawful to honor hold requests unless they come with a court order.
Write to us at firstname.lastname@example.org.