Measure A attracts broad range of opposition

I'm proud to live in a county that's home to hundreds of small, legal cannabis farmers, rather than the few largescale operations that dominate other regions of California. And I'm voting no on Measure A because, if passed, it's clear to me that large-scale farms outside the county, alongside the illicit market, will be the only winners.

Humboldt's existing cannabis rules were developed based on dozens of public meetings with small farmers, environmental groups, tribes, and regulators seeking to reach common-ground solutions. By contrast, Measure A was written by an out-of-county law firm with no opportunity for public review by locals before it was finalized. The result is a poorly written ordinance that has garnered opposition from every segment of our community, from law enforcement and city councils to environmentalists and small farmers.

Having read Measure A's 38 pages, it's clear to me why the measure is opposed by such a diverse coalition. Nearly all of the dozens of poorly written restrictions in the measure apply to all Humboldt cultivators, regardless of size. And many of these restrictions — such as the measure's broad definition of cultivation “expansion,” which would heavily restrict any increase in on-farm structures — would be downright punitive.

We should listen to our local small farmers who have universally opposed this measure. Effective regulation depends on rewarding good behavior, and disincentivizing bad behavior; and when our small, regenerative farmers are the ones opposed, it's clear that something's not right. Please join me in voting no.