The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors at Tuesday’s meeting supported more requirements and limits for cannabis cultivation, but stopped short of requiring conditional use permits for all projects, as the Planning Commission recommended.
Cannabis cultivation in Santa Barbara County requires a land use permit, which is connected to the property itself, and a business license, which is connected to the operator.
A conditional use permit is a stricter permit than a land use permit and is required for some cultivation projects based on location.
The Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to support several ordinance changes, which will come back for adoption at a future meeting.
Three supervisors supported the motion to ban cannabis cultivation outright within existing developed rural neighborhoods, which Third District Supervisor Joan Hartmann pushed for and Fourth District Supervisor Peter Adam seconded. Second District Supervisor Gregg Hart also supported it, while First District Supervisor Das Williams and Fifth District Supervisor Steve Lavagnino voted no.
“I think we have to allow ourselves as the policymakers that have to make peace in our county to go out and fix some of these things regardless of, you know, whether a couple people are at the end of their process,” Adam said. “You know, I feel bad about that, but I’m not going to allow that to stop me from fixing it for all time. There’s a lot of value if we can reduce the conflict.”
It was another split vote to require CUPs for projects that propose planting cannabis on more than 51 percent of a parcel in the inland zone, with Lavagnino, Hart and Williams supporting it.
The supervisors also voted to require cannabis grows to have a 50-foot setback from the property line, unanimously supported requiring processing and drying cannabis activities to be indoors, and requiring the best available odor control technology on those facilities.
Hartmann made additional motions that failed, including to require odor abatement plans to limit odor at the property line, and to require a conditional use permit for all projects within the Sta. Rita Hills American Viticultural Area.
The county has been continuously amending its regulations in attempts to resolve conflicts caused by the industry, including odor and pesticide application concerns with neighboring agriculture.
Many of the nuisance-related complaints stem from operations that are allowed to grow outside the rules. Cultivators who say they were operating before 2016 can continue growing as “legal nonconforming” while they are in the permit application process.
Multiple supervisors were concerned that requiring CUPs universally would slow down permit processing and cause overwhelming workloads for the county.
“If the nonconforming structure we are in now is the source of the problems, then why are you asking us to perpetuate it for nine months to two years?” Williams said. “I am anxious to get to the point I say, along with you, thumbs up or thumbs down to the operations in Carpinteria.
“The nuisance issue is solvable but not without the ability to enforce our regulations.”
Lavagnino said it would be a mistake to require a CUP for all projects countywide.
“There’s a 643-acre parcel and they want to develop 40 acres, with nobody around them. To put that applicant through a CUP is ridiculous,” he said. “It’s a waste of time. It’s a waste of staff’s time.”
— Noozhawk managing editor Giana Magnoli can be reached at gmagnoli@noozhawk.com. Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.