For as long as anyone can remember, the people of Southern and Northern Humboldt County have collaborated on issues that arise within their tight-knit community. 

“When the County first came up with the rules for cultivation in our area, stakeholders met for countless hours through public meetings to make sure everyone got to have a say in what was passed,” said Dylan of Mattole Valley Sungrown Farms. “As farmers, we wanted our neighbors to accept us, and we argued for regulations to allow us to grow this plant in a way that not only benefited the environment as well as farmers but also the people of the rural communities and towns that we all live in,” 

What developed out of these meetings became known as the Humboldt County Cannabis Ordinance.

In 2021, a man named Steve Luu purchased a piece of land in Kneeland, California. Luu was an engineer at a busy firm in Chicago, Illinois, and came out to the area for work. Luu had always dreamed of having his own homestead one day where he could start and raise a family, and hoped to include cannabis cultivation on his farm. He invested time and money into researching the best location, and after learning that one of his neighbors already had secured a permit to expand to 1 acre of cannabis cultivation, he decided to go ahead with his purchase.

But before Luu could even get a permit to grow cannabis, he was required to have multiple studies done as required by state and local regulations to mitigate any environmental impacts of cannabis cultivation on the land.

“If it were grapes or some other type of produce, no agency would care,” says Luu.  “The development of land for any other agricultural use would not require any of the number of environmental impact studies that are required for cannabis cultivation. You have to meet with the county, and they give you a checklist.” 

There is a biological study, a floristic study (to look for wildflowers native to the area that might be impacted), and a hydrological study to have a well. If there is a Northern Spotted Owl nest nearby, a Protocol Level Owl survey is required. All of this is at the expense of the property owner, in addition to the permitting application fees.

A 1-acre cannabis cultivation plot was proposed in Kneeland by Mr. Luu. Upon applying, several neighbors declared it a “mega-grow” despite the fact that other counties in the state allow true industrial-scale cannabis with project footprints in the tens of acres. Luu dropped the size of his cultivation down to 10,000 square feet and changed his water storage from plastic water tanks to a large rain catchment pond based on neighbor feedback and guidance from the County to secure his permit. It is interesting to note that Luu’s neighbor has an existing permit that allows for 1 acre of cultivation. 

Why did Luu’s permit have to be decreased in size in order to get approved and his neighbor didn’t?

In the archives of a local radio station known as KMUD, recorded audio from town hall meetings includes language that alludes to potential racism, as well as being used to convince residents to support Measure A. 

“All of a sudden the county allows a permit to come in that takes their water or creates a real problem with the neighborhood as far as bringing in some types of folks that aren’t as desirable as they would like,” — Mark Thurmond via KMUD audio archives.

Headed by Mark Thurmond and Betsy Watson, a small group of residents in the Kneeland area pooled financial resources and hired a San Francisco law firm to write a proposal known as Measure A (formerly the Humboldt Cannabis Reform Initiative). 

They solicited signatures for their proposal at farmers' markets and shopping centers. They enticed a majority of people to sign their petition by convincing them that this was good for small farmers and bad for larger corporate farms. Residents who did not want to be named for this article said that they signed the petition and then later asked for a printed copy of what they had signed, only to be told that the paperwork was not available. The proposal was not made available for public review before being finalized.

This is bad for all legalization efforts as a whole. 

“Measure A would make future changes to farms impossible, and compliance so difficult that the legal market would not be viable,” says Natalynne Delapp, Executive Director of the Humboldt County Grower’s Alliance. 

If Measure A passes, it will be much harder to go back and change anything after that. It is written to discourage existing permit holders from modifying their permits in any way. It requires expensive upgrades that smaller farms can’t afford and prohibits farmers from obtaining other permits in the future, such as improving their existing structures. Farmers need to be able to maintain adaptability in order to survive. Instead of working on forward-thinking, all energy is having to be directed towards defeating this.

This issue of citizen ballot initiatives being used to override years of public process is not isolated to Humboldt County. Sonoma County also has a neighborhood group trying to ban cannabis grows altogether by using the same attorneys that designed Measure A.

The farmers of Humboldt County are trying to fight back. 

They have pooled their own resources and hired attorneys of their own. Recently, a judge ruled against them in their decision to allow Measure A to be put to a vote. Regardless of how misleading the initiative is, the judge ruled for it to go before the voters to decide the fate of Humboldt’s legal cannabis farms.
That vote happens on March 5, 2024. If you are able to, please consider donating to support the cause and prevent the demise of small craft farms in Humboldt County.