|
Return
|
| |
Regular-General Government # 30.
|
| Board of Supervisors |
County Administrator |
|
|
|
| Subject |
| Hold a public hearing and adopt an ordinance extending the temporary moratorium on industrial hemp cultivation within the unincorporated areas of Yolo County and adding a limited exemption for indoor cultivation for nursery stock, transplants, research, or seed breeding. (No general fund impact) (4/5 vote required) (Nunes/Will) |
| Recommended Action |
| Hold a public hearing and adopt an ordinance extending the temporary moratorium on industrial hemp cultivation within the unincorporated areas of Yolo County and adding a limited exemption for indoor cultivation for nursery stock, transplants, research, or seed breeding. |
| Strategic Plan Goal(s) |
| Flourishing Agriculture |
| Reason for Recommended Action/Background |
Background
On January 15, 2019, the Board adopted a 45-day moratorium on the cultivation of industrial hemp in the unincorporated areas of Yolo County (see Attachment A). Government Code section 65858 allows the 45-day moratorium to be extended for a period of 10 months and 15 days, which the Board did on February 26, 2019 (see Attachment B), which means that the moratorium will expire on January 15, 2020. Government Code section 65858 allows one additional extension for up to one (1) additional year, changing the expiration of the moratorium to January 14, 2021.
Without an extension of the moratorium or further Board action, the moratorium will expire and the County will have no regulations in place regarding the cultivation of industrial hemp. Staff recommends extending the moratorium the final year, to expire on January 14, 2021, to provide time for staff to conduct additional analysis regarding the impacts associated growing and cultivating and growing industrial hemp, and for the County to better assess the evolving hemp environment.
Moratorium Ordinance Exemptions
The Board provided direction to staff at the October 22 meeting to include an exemption for certain indoor hemp cultivation activities. The exemption is included in Section 4.B of the attached ordinance (Attachment C), and its key provisions include:
- An exemption for "the indoor cultivation of hemp in a structure dedicated solely to the cultivation of hemp for purposes of nursery stock, transplants, research, or seed breeding."
- A requirement for effective pollen control methods to minimize pollen escape and offsite migration.
- Express authority for the Agricultural Commissioner to review compliance with the exemption and, if a violation occurs, to abate the violation or refer it to another agency or department for appropriate action.
The following definitions are among those that apply to the exemption (see the ordinance for additional definitions):
- Nursery stock is defined by reference to Food and Agricultural Code Section 5005, which includes "any plant for planting, propagation, or ornamentation."
- "'Seed breeder' means an individual or public or private institution or organization that is registered with the Yolo County Agricultural commissioner to develop seed cultivars intended for sale or research."
- “Nursery stock” shall have the meaning outlines in the Food and Agricultural Code section 5005;
- “Transplant” is a cultivated hemp plant grown from seed or cutting in soil or individual containers for less than 8 weeks that does not exceed a height of eight (8) inches.
Please see the ordinance for all exemption language and minor updates to the recitals.
Staff Efforts
To develop an ordinance that is comprehensive and aware of the current industrial hemp landscape, staff is coordinating a hemp workgroup including County staff, law enforcement, local Cannabis and Hemp growers/cultivators, and UC Davis. This workgroup is currently being scheduled and will discuss the following factors and any other relevant factors to assist in developing a County ordinance.
Cross-Pollination
Cross-pollination presents uncertainty when seeking to regulate hemp because there are several standards and reports with varying conclusions. The October 22 staff report included a discussion regarding varying standards and research. The workgroup will work to determine an appropriate solution toward cross-pollination that coexists with existing marijuana growing and cultivation.
Odor Impacts
The second consideration is related to odors present when growing and harvesting hemp, which can sometimes be indistinguishable from the odor produced by cannabis. Understandably, there is a concern that the production of hemp could increase odor complaints. Cannabis is required to mitigate odor (per the draft Cannabis Land Use Ordinance) and the County currently has no odor mitigation/control standards adopted for hemp. Therefore enforcement staff may not be able to effectively respond to complaints about odor and the public may become confused about the regulations pertaining to cannabis, confusing hemp odors for cannabis odors. It should be noted that the same policies used for cannabis may mitigate this issue with hemp.
Hemp for Human Consumption vs. Hemp for Industrial Purposes
Technology for testing hemp crops for THC levels in the field is currently unavailable and there is no practical way for regulatory staff to differentiate between a hemp crop that is grown for industrial purposes and a hemp crop that may be grown for human consumption until the point in the crop's processing where testing can be reliably introduced. Should different regulatory standards be introduced for hemp than those adopted for cannabis, staff may be left with no way to distinguish between the two crops for regulatory purposes.
Criminal Activity
Given the difficulty in distinguishing hemp from cannabis, staff has expressed concern that hemp cultivated for industrial purposes may be targeted for the same types of crimes as cannabis (thefts, robbery, etc.). Solano County recently enacted an urgency interim ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on the cultivation or processing of industrial hemp within the unincorporated areas of Solano County because of thefts of plants, a shooting, and robberies, and similar criminal activities have occurred in Fresno, Kings, and Kern County. |
| Collaborations (including Board advisory groups and external partner agencies) |
| County Administrator, County Counsel, Agriculture Department |
|
|
|
|
|