Vote NO on W

470 activistshave pledged a total of
456 votesof a 2000 vote goal
Campaign has ended
This campaign has ended.

Why we must defeat Measure W

An outdoor grow ban will exacerbate existing problems, create new ones, and move us several steps in reverse in addressing absolutely crucial concerns about crime, quality of life, environmental impacts, and good governance. In fact, a primary reason for the loosening of cannabis laws nationally is overwhelming evidence that prohibition makes crime worse, increases corruption, sustains cartels and drives up consumption.

NO on W is the only wise and logical choice, no matter how you personally feel about marijuana.

Defeating Measure W moves us towards writing a new ordinance. The more decisive the vote, the easier it will be to create a future where small, craft farmers can obtain licenses and move from the shadows to be recognized as the responsible, contributing, tax-paying members of the community that they are. Meanwhile, the clear delineation between upstanding business people and criminals will finally be possible.

Regulation: wiser and healthier than prohibition

County supervisors and the sheriff have instituted a ban based on a cultural-cleansing fantasy that’s blind to both the legitimate needs of real patients and the reality of the history of prohibition. Meanwhile, opponents of Measure W have thoroughly researched myriad aspects of the issues—locally, statewide and in other states—as well as having participated in the writing of the 2015 California cannabis regulations. They’ve concluded that a well-regulated, local, artisanal cannabis industry will:

Keep our community safer. Because prohibition worsens the very problems that it is claimed to address, we must tackle such problems head on, with informed regulations and constructive and widely inclusive dialog. A fair, just and well-administered rule of law is a starting point for the necessary work: it’s the criminal activity and corruption that follow criminalization which unravel the community, rather than the crop itself.

Build the Nevada County economy. Experience shows that cannabis cultivation helped keep the local economy afloat during the great recession and has since been an integral job provider and supporter of local businesses. Nobody buys dirt, shovels, or dinner from Amazon. The state-created regulations that let these small entrepreneurs out of the shadows will foster legitimate jobs, new business opportunities and a new tax base. Meanwhile, Nevada County’s world-class growing conditions, organic- agriculture expertise and technical sophistication provide the perfect incubator for small-scale, artisanal, environment-friendly production and innovative processing, marketing and research.

Protect the Yuba and the planet. Just as zoning ordinances and building codes create standards that the vast majority of landowners follow and respect, so too can county leaders and stakeholders work together to create cannabis cultivation regulations that benefit fish, wildlife and habitats. Luckily, the state is already working on guidelines that the county can adopt. Here, too, the legitimization of the industry can lead to much smoother and faster spreading of environmental best practices. Conversely, banning outdoor cultivation pushes bad actors further into the woods and onto public lands while also promoting indoor cultivation and its outsized electricity use (ten percent of Denver’s electricity is consumed by cannabis growing lights), increased demand for pesticides and questionable neighborhood impacts.


Preserve access to a potent medicine. While it is true that some growers have used “medical” as a pretext for growing cash crops, it is equally true that many cultivators are devoted to providing meticulously grown medicine to true patients who have no other options. These avenues need to be embraced and expanded rather than forced further underground.


Let’s start taking back our county

Rejecting Measure W at the ballot box will send a resounding message to our local officials that we prefer our government and property to be controlled by us rather than the other way around. On recent occasions, at least one county supervisor has confused the issue by variously saying that small outdoor grows are fine but there is no gray area, large grows are the real target but all outdoor grows are illegal, other counties have low compliance but our county will have high compliance, etc. Citizens cannot help but be concerned about county leadership in light of such contradictory statements and such seemingly uninformed, wishful and impulsive decision making.

Please join your fellow Nevada County neighbors in building the foundation for a new direction that’s less divisive, more rationale, more democratic, and more visionary.


More info

  • May 23 was the last day to register to vote in the June 7th primary. You can check your registration status and declared party with the County Clerk-Recorder.
  • Pot ban won’t protect the Yuba, South Yuba River Citizen’s League
  • Coalition to Tax and Regulate, a non-partisan, community-based group promoting sensible policy in collaboration with the California Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (MMRSA), local government, law enforcement, business, citizens and the patients of Nevada County.

FAQ about Measure W

Isn't 12 plants enough?

Measure W allows patients to grow 12 plants indoors, provided they have a non-residential, permitted space in which to do so. The needs for every patient are different, but for most serious conditions, this simply isn't enough. Some patientes smoke, some take concentrates, some juice the leaves, some do all of the above. A couple anecdotes picked at random for internet message boards support this point:

"I vaporize 1-2g/day on avg., but use a lot more daily in raw juiced cannabis. I juice 20-30 large leaves every day from a specific CBD strain, and mix that with fresh juiced fruits/veg. It's worked for both my psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis so well that I'm no longer on ANY prescription pills to treat the disease or kill pain. Its reduced inflammation all over my body like nothing I've EVER taken before, and has literallly given me my life back!"

A healthy indoor plant wouldn't be able to spare 20-30 large leaves more than twice without dying, so this patient would consume at least 12 indoor plants every 24 days. But the shortest indoor growing cycle is 70 days, so if he lived in Nevada County, he'd only be able to grow at most 1/3 of the medicine he needs.

"I have lost 60 LBS. just by eating 1 to 2 grams each night before bed, also my twitching leg syndrome is gone, a bowel disorder I had for 30 years is gone and I sleep like a baby EVERY night and I take NO PILLS!!!! My husband is a diabetic he was testing on 2 pills a day from 180 to 250 (normal glucose reading is 70 to 140) he now tests 65 to 100 and we are about to remove his second and last diabetic pill!!!!! WHY ARE ANY TYPE 2 DIABETICS ON ANY PILLS!!! EDIBLES, EDIBLES,EDIBLES!!! ...BUT... It takes a lot of pot when you eat edibles every day. I use one oz per cup of butter and a cup of butter lasts us about 3 days where as we would never smoke that much at our age..lol...and than if you have more family members you want to be including this in their diets as well so it takes a lot of pot to produce really great butter and oil!!!!"

1oz per 3 days is about 7.5 pounds per year. An average grower could achieve a yield of about one pound per growing cycle using the maximum allowed 1200 watts of light. A maximum of four 10-week cycles per year would yield 4 pounds, or just a little over half of Sharon and her husband's needs.

Misinformation about Measure W: May 31 Letter to the Editor, Yubanet

Why would the Sheriff Mislead Us?

Sheriff Royal is either misinterpreting or manipulating numbers, especially statistics and data about the purported negative impacts of cannabis production in places like Colorado. He's used these numbers to sow fear in the hearts of Nevada County residents, akin to the 1930’s prohibitionists who concocted the infamous Reefer Madness campaign to illegalize the plant.

A: ON THE DRUG WAR:

Much of the data Sheriff Royal is derived from the National Office of Drug Control Policy – an agency that with an annual budget of $26 billion has miserably failed to successfully achieve many of the goals it is tasked with, including such as including eradicating drugs.

Despite 44 years of aggressive policing and incarceration at the cost of a trillion dollars, 21 million Americans are still addicted to alcohol or other drugs. That is a fact, actually derived from the agency itself.

It is ironic that Sheriff Royal uses data from an agency whose very leader, Michael Boticelli, Director of the NODCP, is opposed to the exact same thing Royal is advocating: Prohibition. Boticelli recently stated in an interview that the drug epidemic in America is at its worst ever, because the war on drugs has not worked. The drugs won.

B:ON COLORADO”s REVENUES

In addition to his statements directly contradicting the country’s drug czar, Sheriff Royal has also used Colorado’s post-legalization data to paint a picture that is factually misleading.

Recently on the Paul Emery's KVMR show, Royal stated the legal medical and recreational cannabis industry in Colorado wasn’t the “cash calf” everyone thought it would be. He went on to say the state is barely breaking even between the revenue it collects from licenses and taxes paid by the cannabis industry and the expenditures to run the agency tasked with regulating it.

However, the latest report from the Colorado Department of Revenue states otherwise. Royal seems woefully math challenged, or he's attempting to intentionally mislead his constituents. Either way, behavior not fit for an elected official.

According to the report released in April of 2016, Colorado collected over $103 million in permitting fees and sales taxes from the cannabis industry and spent only about $8.5 million to run its regulatory agency. That leaves plenty of money to spend on schools and education, law enforcement programs, homeless programs and anything else.

C:ON DRIVING WHILE USING:

Sheriff Royal has said that in Colorado, traffic fatalities and accidents have increased as a result of legalizing cannabis. While the numbers do point to an increase, it’s nearly impossible to tell if these crashes were the direct cause of cannabis use.

The issue with these numbers is that it’s currently not possible to test for inebriation. Authorities can test only for the presence of cannabis metabolites, which can stay in the body for days and even weeks after the effects wear off. All that a positive test indicates is that the driver has been exposed to or used cannabis at some point in the past days or even months.

Even the Colorado Department of Public Safety, which studied the impact of legalization in the state, has officially said that it’s impossible to objectively interpret the data they collected.

In its March 2016 report, the agency states that legalization may have resulted in reports of increased use, when it may actually be a function of the decreased stigma and legal consequences regarding use rather than actual changes in consumption patterns. The agency goes further in stating that those reporting to poison control, emergency departments, or hospitals may feel more comfortable discussing their recent use or abuse of marijuana for purposes of treatment, accounting for the increases that Sheriff Royal states are the direct cause of legalization.

C: WHOSE MONEY, WHOSE GREED? WHOSE MISINFORMATION?

Sheriff Royal continues to say publicly that cultivating cannabis is about money and greed. His opponents could claim his crusade against medical cannabis is about bigotry/intolerance and misinformation.

With a budget that takes up ONE THIRD of the revenue the Nevada County collects, Royal can continue to fund his ideological campaign against cannabis instead of devising new strategies to protect us from increasing crime and heavily abused, truly harmful drugs: alcohol, prescription painkillers, methamphetamine and heroin.

I doubt Sheriff Royal will cease and desist from misinterpreting data to further his personal agenda. There are patients who depend on this natural, non corporate-pharmaceutical medicine. Suggesting these people leave their homes in Nevada County because he doesn’t agree with their medical decisions is itself criminal. I believe the Sheriff’s job is not to impose personal beliefs on the will of the people, but to protect and serve the taxpayers of this county.

-David Kupfer

Nevada City, Ca.

 

 

 

 

Measure W will pass unless we act

We’ve been doing the math. It's simple: on June 7th, we need around 22,000 “NO” votes on W for the win. That’s several thousand more votes than the local cannabis ballot initiative from 2014 received.

For us to win, we need those several thousand votes. We need them to come from people who didn't vote in 2014 or from people who voted against Measure S in 2014.*

If not defeated by voters, Measure W would perpetuate a complete ban on outdoor growing in the sunshine. While unregulated cannabis cultivation must come to an end in Nevada County, Measure W is no solution.

Pledge your vote right now and help bring about a new era in NC politics

 

 

 

 

* A NO vote on measure S in 2014 meant that you didn't support liberalizing the growing ordinances.

Please note that the vote goal is subject to change if new data suggests it should.

Actions

I will vote NO on W
I did not vote on Measure S in 2014.
320 pledges
I will vote NO on W
I voted against Measure S in 2014.
53 pledges
I will vote No on W
I voted yes on Measure S in 2014.
83 pledges
Sign me up for the next one
I'm not ready to jump in at this moment, but this seems cool. Let me know about future opportunities to mobilize with a high likelihood of success for things I care about.
14 pledges