The Dry Creek Valley Citizens Advisory Council decided to continue one of the cannabis farm applications brought before it and voted to recommend another for approval by the Sonoma County Planning Commission.
The council held its regular meeting Feb. 21 at the Healdsburg Fire Department, 601 Healdsburg Ave.
The main difference between the two applications in the council’s decisions was community outreach.
“It makes our decision making much easier when these community discussions happen before the application is brought before us,” Councilmember Jenny Gomez said.
It may be a matter of timing that caused applicant Steven Sommer’s communication issues for his request of a 1-acre farm embedded into his existing vineyard on Dry Creek Road.
Sommer and his representatives said they had only begun talks with the neighbors once his application was seen as complete, not wanting to put the cart before the horse. The application came back reviewed as being complete two weeks prior to the meeting.
One neighbor, the Manning family, had still not been reached out to prior to the meeting.
Teresa Manning, one of the family members, came to share her concerns during the public hearing on the project.
The farm, if permitted, would be closer to surrounding neighbors, especially the Mannings. Council noted that this was the first case brought before it that had still maintained legal setbacks but was not far out in the woods. The farm would be on the other side of a pond that separates the two families.
Manning said she was concerned primarily about crime, odor and water runoff from the potential farm.
“It’s different when it’s next door,” Manning said, citing deals gone wrong in the cannabis industry that led to violent crimes in years past as well as having to deal with a strong odor.
One of Sommer’s investors, a former police officer, said security had been set up to include mandated fencing and cameras, and that guards would be used during the harvest.
Both Sommer’s lot and the first applicant, Thomas Planson, said that the curing and drying of the crop — when cannabis flower becomes more valuable — would be done offsite. This was shown to be a detractor for those wanting to steal cannabis directly from farm sites.
Manning was also concerned of water runoff, which she claimed was muddying the pond.
Sommer’s party said that there would be managing the runoff and that his vineyard had not used pesticides — which could get into the runoff — for 30 years and did not plan to use them for cannabis grows either. Sommer was not planning to use the pond as an irrigation source, but rather a well on the other side of the property.
A related issue that has long stood around the two properties is the water rights to the pond. After litigation decades ago, use of the pond was determined for the Sommers and Mannings, with the Mannings having a prescriptive easement placed on them. Sommer said that he had been in compliance with the litigation since it was decided.
The Sommers now have a month to coordinate a meeting with the Mannings to try and address these issues. Each family was given the option of staying the future agenda item for an additional month for scheduling reasons. The council said it didn’t need a full resolution to pass it, but wanted to see the outreach’s full effort before it decided.
The first applicant, Planson, was lauded for his outreach efforts to his neighbors in regard to his potential farm and accompanying home on Palmer Creek Road in Healdsburg.
“This is a very complete application,” Councilmember Bill Smith said after the presentation was finished.
In his presentation, Planson described how he sent out letters requesting input on his project to surrounding areas and incorporated them into a revised site plan. He then held a pizza party for neighbors to get one more round of feedback and the ensure that the revised plan was something that was the best possible outcome for the area.
Issues he addressed included security, increased traffic on the road, use of pesticides and water consumption. Planson said he will hire a professional security service to guard the farm, especially during harvest time. In addition, a wooden 8-foot fence would circle the property in front of native, fire resistant trees and another chain-link fence would circle the crop itself. Like Sommer’s site, the use permit application includes required easements and cameras.
Traffic would be mitigated by an electric shuttle that could pick employees up and once the farm was able to take on full-time employees, living quarters would be set up for them on site for the season.
He said pesticides would be used as little as possible. Both parties also mentioned that pesticide use was already strictly regulated in the cannabis industry and that their use was be limited regardless of owners’ desires.
Planson also created a rain catchments and had solar panels planned to lessen environmental impact. He also had plans to create an irrigation pond, which would also be accessible to fire response.
He said he plans on flash freezing his crop before shipping it out for processing, and plans on it to be sold to companies that will use it for refined cannabis products.
