Petaluma cannabis grower's permit success illustrates lumbering regulatory process
Sonoma County’s largest approved legal cannabis grow to date appears set to harvest its first plants late next year.
While that’s good news for Petaluma cannabis farmer Sam Magruder, it also illustrates the bureaucratic difficulties that have plagued the cannabis growing process in unincorporated Sonoma County since cannabis became legal statewide in 2018.
To get a conditional use permit to grow up grow up to an acre of cannabis indoor and outdoor at his Petaluma Hills Farmhas taken Magruder about two and a half years.
“There’s a lot of environmental studies, land use studies, setback requirements, you have to create a (California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA) document,” Magruder said.
In order to get a permit, environmental and land use studies are required by the county which can include geological and biological assessments and other tests, according to Alexa Rae Wall, owner of Moonflower Delivery in San Rafael. Wall’s seperate cannabis cultivation business, Luma California based in Penngrove, recently hit the two year mark in trying to get a conditional use permit to grow cannabis in Sonoma County.
Proving a proposed cannabis grow would not violate CEQA “is where people are getting stuck,” Wall said. “People are just waiting in line to get their environmental information processed.”
The expected impact of the grow is also sent to state agencies like the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the relevant state level cannabis agencies for review. The county Board of Zoning Adjustments then votes on the permit, but that wasn’t the end of the process for Magruder.
Last week the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 against an appeal by some of Magruder’s neighbors against the project, allowing it to go forward.
Given the experience of Magruder and others, Wall said, “We’re assuming every project will get appealed.”
There is not consensus on why the program moves at the pace it does.
Maggie Fleming is the communications manager for the Permit and Resource Management Department of Sonoma County. Asked why it takes the time it does for conditional use permits to get approved, she said, “A large part of it is the public process,” including hearings and appeals like those experienced by Magruder and Wall.
Magruder’s operation “got appealed and went to the Board of Supervisors,” Fleming said. “That adds a lot of time to applications.”
In a follow-up email, Fleming wrote, “the timeline varies depending on the completeness of the applicant’s application, as well as whether the project goes before public hearing(s).” She added that “permitting cannabis is new to the county and all our referral agencies, and therefore it has taken time to review and get consensus on conditions and the process. The County remains committed to providing a legal pathway forward for cannabis operators, which we feel is essential in reducing and eliminating the illicit market.”
Joe Rogoway, a Santa Rosa-based cannabis law attorney, was blunter in his assessment.
“In the county of Sonoma the program has just been riddled with problems,” Rogoway said of the conditional use application process for cannabis farmers. “It’s a terrible program that has not been competently administered.”
Wall said why the process is so slow is “the million dollar question.” She added that the conditional use permit process in Sonoma County is rarely used and said, “To have a process the county rarely does and now they suddenly have hundreds of these permits to go through, they’re just not effective in issuing them in a timely manner.”