Print Reading Mode Back to Calendar Return
  Time Set   9.       
Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 02/13/2020  

Information
SUBJECT
Public hearing regarding a proposed ordinance banning industrial hemp processing, manufacturing, and sales, and restricting or banning industrial hemp storage in the unincorporated area of the County. The ordinance will be a new Chapter 14 in Title 10 of the County Code of Ordinances. The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.
SUMMARY
FILE # XXXX-XXXX: TBD
APPLICANT:
TBD
OWNER:
TBD
LOCATION: TBD

GENERAL PLAN: TBD

ZONING: TBD

SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT: TBD
SOILS: TBD

FLOOD ZONE: TBD

FIRE SEVERITY ZONE: TBD
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: TBD
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1.  Receive a staff presentation and hold a public hearing on the proposed ordinance (Attachment A); and
2.  Provide feedback on the ordinance and recommend its approval to the Board of Supervisors.  
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDED ACTIONS/BACKGROUND
The purpose of this item is to develop a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on a proposed ordinance restricting the processing, manufacturing, sale, and storage of industrial hemp in Yolo County.  The Board requested Planning Commission feedback on the proposed ordinance during a meeting on December 17, 2019.

BACKGROUND

The 2018 Farm Bill removed hemp from Schedule 1 of the federal Controlled Substances Act, effective January 1, 2019.  Hemp is no longer federally regulated as a controlled substance and there is increasing interest in hemp cultivation and related activities, such as seed production.  Industrial hemp is a form of cannabis that, under state law, must contain no more than 0.3 percent delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) on a dry weight basis.  This chemical difference is the principal means of distinguishing between industrial hemp and cannabis cultivated for medical and recreational purposes, and hemp is similar in appearance and odor to cannabis.

As the Planning Commission may be aware, the County currently has a moratorium on the cultivation of industrial hemp.  The moratorium will expire on January 14, 2021.  It includes limited exemptions for the cultivation of nursery stock, transplants, research or seed  breeding, provided such activities are conducted indoors (including in greenhouses) and meet other requirements (e.g., security, pollen control).  The Agricultural Commissioner has general oversight of exempt cultivation activities.  The current moratorium ordinance (as modified by the Board on November 19, 2019) is included as Attachment B.  The ordinance does not regulate the non-cultivation activities—i.e., processing, manufacturing, storage and sales—that are the subject of the new ordinance included for consideration with this staff report.

The Board has directed County staff to consider and recommend a regulatory approach to industrial hemp cultivation that balances several factors, including potential economic opportunities for local growers, cross-pollination risks (with both cannabis and hemp), demands upon law enforcement, concerns about ineffective crop THC-level sampling, and nuisance odors.  A working group that includes local growers, hemp experts from UC Davis, law enforcement, the Agricultural Commissioner and other stakeholder is currently reviewing these issues with staff to assist in formulating a regulatory approach for Board consideration prior to expiration of the cultivation moratorium in early 2021.

THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE

As noted, the existing moratorium ordinance applies only to hemp cultivation.  County staff regularly receive inquiries concerning non-cultivation activities involving industrial hemp.  These inquiries range from questions about storing hemp prior to its distribution, processing harvested hemp (cutting, trimming, drying, and related activities), and manufacturing hemp-related products such as cigarettes with hemp cultivated outside of California.  State and federal regulation of these activities is not fully developed, though legislation regulating some aspects of hemp product manufacturing and sales is currently pending in the Legislature (see AB 228, Attachment C).  As even a cursory review of AB 228 shows, the marketing and sale of hemp products presents an array of consumer safety issues that require a uniform statewide approach.

As indicated above, on December 17, 2019 the Board directed staff to develop an ordinance banning all such activities.  The Board also included hemp storage within the range of activities to be included in the ordinance, though it recognized the potential need to evaluate storage further (including but not limited to including a “grandfather” clause for existing hemp storage occurring in Yolo County).  In providing this direction, the Board acknowledged the possibility of revisiting the ban upon the adoption of a state regulatory framework covering such activities.

The attached ordinance responds to the Board’s direction.  The ordinance includes a straightforward ban on processing and manufacturing activities, as well as a ban on the commercial sale of industrial hemp products to consumers.  The ordinance takes a more nuanced approach to storage, banning storage at facilities not current used for the hemp storage as of the effective date of the ordinance.  In order to take advantage of the limited exemption for continued storage at facilities already in such use, the facility owner or lessee has to register with the Agricultural Commissioner prior to the effective date of the ordinance and provide certified laboratory results demonstrating the commodity is industrial hemp rather than cannabis.  Finally, the ordinance also contains enforcement provisions that (like the cultivation moratorium ordinance) incorporate the abatement process set forth in the County’s cannabis licensing ordinance.  Restrictions in the ordinance are not applicable to currently exempt cultivation activities, but only to the extent they can demonstrate that manufacturing, processing, sales and storage are incidental to their authorized cultivation activities.

County staff will present the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors on February 25, 2020.  As part of that presentation, staff will include any feedback from the Planning Commission.  That feedback is requested following the conclusion of the public hearing on this item.
COLLABORATIONS
County Administrator, Agricultural Commissioner, and Cannabis Task Force.
APPEALS
Not applicable.  This matter is not before the Planning Commission for final action.
Attachments
Att. A. Proposed Ordinance
Att. B. Cultivation Moratorium Ordinance (as amended 11-19-2019)
Att. C. Assembly Bill 228

Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Phil Pogledich Phil Pogledich 02/06/2020 02:31 PM
County Counsel Phil Pogledich 02/06/2020 02:31 PM
Stephanie Cormier Evelyn Tamayo-Arias 02/06/2020 02:34 PM
Eric May Eric May 02/06/2020 02:40 PM
Leslie Lindbo Leslie Lindbo 02/06/2020 03:40 PM
Form Started By: Phil Pogledich Started On: 01/30/2020 10:50 AM
Final Approval Date: 02/06/2020

    

Level double AA conformance,
                W3C WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0

AgendaQuick ©2005 - 2024 Destiny Software Inc. All Rights Reserved.