The print title of your article “Getting Cannabis Genie Back in Bottle” is misleading. Though the Planning Commission had been asked by the Board of Supervisors to reexamine the permitting of cultivation of cannabis on Ag-1 parcels in the inland portions of Santa Barbara County, this prohibition was rejected by a 3 to 2 vote which was disappointing as there were about 200 letters from county residents asking for this reconsideration.
There was a second vote when the planning commissioners recommended
that conditional use permits (CUP) be required for all cannabis cultivation
applications in the inland portions of the county. That vote passed 3 to 2
because the commissioners felt that approval of land use permits needs to be
site specific. Requiring a CUP requires more investigation on neighborhood
compatibility, among other things, versus just handing out a permit ministerially
with no public hearing. There was a lot of discussion among the commissioners
that cannabis neighbors needed to be notified about cannabis operations in
their neighborhood. So when the article states, “The two dissenting
commissioners objected not because the new rules were too strenuous but rather
because they preferred an outright prohibition,” that is not correct. There
were two separate votes.
There was another vote on whether to send a recommendation to
the Board that CUPs should also be required the Coastal Zone, not just the
inland portions of the county. The commissioners stressed there should be
consistency throughout the county.