Score: +4
(5/27/1)
Trinity County Grand Jury
• 2014-2015
Final Report of the Trinity County Grand Jury*
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 25 findings
F1
The GJ finds that there is no oversight entity specifically involved to provide a plan for MJ controls and develop ordinances to limit adverse environmental effects.
F2
The GJ finds that there is no specific Trinity County permit for medical MJ cultivation which might encourage compliance with SB 420 Cultivation Guidelines and County Code 8.55 (June 2012) that limit MJ grows to no more than eight plants (or 400 square feet) for parcels 10 acres or greater.
F3
There is no "aggregate grow" allowance which would permit MJ gardens to have excessive plants beyond the numbers specified in Ordinance 315-797.
F4
Trinity County Ordinance 315-797 is enforced primarily following a complaint received by the Planning Department - it is a "complaint-driven" enforcement, not an "awareness-driven" enforcement.
F5
Environmental effects resulting from MJ grows are rarely monitored. Only MJ sites that have actual permits or permit applications for related activities are visited. (Violations for use of Recreational Vehicles, water impacts, buildings, sewage, dumping, roads, etc. are noticed randomly as County inspectors visit the sites).
F6
There is no monitoring on groundwater effects or depletion as the result of a large increase in wells for MJ cultivation within any area. The CA State Regulations rule water resources within all CA counties. No "sensitive aquafers" are identified within Trinity County which might limit the proliferation of water wells
F7
The impacts to wildlife from pesticide use in the vicinity of MJ grows are not monitored.
F8
There is no "camping ordinance" (as of this writing in April 2015) to control the occasional public nuisance resulting from transients (including transient laborers sometimes called "trimmigrants") who often work in the MJ industry. In some areas, a "Fishing Access Ordinance" is the only regulation which authorizes County officials to move campers out of public areas.
F9
There is no County ordinance to control clearing the vegetation from parcels of land for large MJ cultivations - the only regulations are from CALFIRE for timber-related operations.
F10
Tracking of code violations from Notice of Violation through resolution is inadequate, allowing violations to remain unresolved in the complexity of the statutory process.
F11
Visitors to Trinity County have experienced undesirable impacts to the natural resource environment, threatening encounters with defensive growers, and a lower quality downtown environment which may be exacerbated by the participants in the cannabis industry.
F12
Students in Trinity County schools experience negative MJ-related effects in both decreased academic motivation and in participation in an illegal economic industry.
F13
The MJ industry derives large sums of money from sales and distribution, yet the County receives very little benefit from the profits involved due to inadequate fines and collections.
F14
The size and scope of controlling MJ cultivations is beyond the capacity of County law and code enforcement. Trinity County is a large geographic area that is expensive to administer due to the time and distance between code enforcement personnel and MJ grow sites.
F15
Enforcing Trinity County Ordinances and providing MJ-related law enforcement is entirely dependent on the staffing and funding available to inspect, monitor, correct non-compliance, and (if necessary) prosecute violators. Inadequate funding and staffing has resulted in inadequate enforcement. Staffing available to do this work is relatively low and the trend is a decreasing budget and workforce.
F16
County personnel may face dangerous situations upon visiting illegal MJ grows. Guns, dogs, "booby traps", and defensive people are intimidating obstacles for a "safe" inspection compliance visit.
F17
The Trinity County community is generally unaware of the restrictions which limit MJ grows to parcels of property which include single family residences and that a maximum number of 8 plants is permitted on the largest parcels (parcels of 10 acres or greater).
F18
An ordinance violation involving grows with excessive numbers of plants that is encountered by County personnel is rarely reported and therefore not abated.
F19
There is a large portion of the local citizenry who are "pro-marijuana" which tends to influence the BOS and inhibit the effective enforcement of existing laws and County ordinances. Many people in our rural county do not like government interference with their chosen activities.
F20
The general public has "given up complaining" about MJ grows in non-compliance of Ordinance 315-797 because the statutory procedure to correct the violation is very lengthy and cumbersome.
F21
Adjacent Northern California counties have recently banned outdoor MJ grows, increasing the likelihood that Trinity County will become a preferred destination for outdoor MJ growers.
F22
Members of the BOS are actively working with the MJ industry in anticipation of laws changing to benefit MJ cultivation, sales, and distribution which may eventually benefit the economy of TC residents.
F23
The civil fine for having excessive MJ plants on a privately owned parcel is $100/day with a maximum penalty of 90 days. This fine is seldom collected and has not proven to be a deterrent to growing excessive numbers of plants.
F24
MJ Code enforcement fines that are collected do not benefit the program to finance subsequent code enforcement.
F25
Abatement orders are rarely used even though these may provide a swifter resolution to a problem than to use a search warrant or other "due process" techniques. Many illegal MJ grows are easily noticed, yet most are allowed to continue without abatement and are harvested at the end of the growing season.
Recommendations 25
-
R1The GJ recommends that the County form an interagency task force (including State, Federal, and local citizens) to provide a plan for MJ controls and develop ordinances to limit adverse environmental effects. [July 2015]
-
R2The GJ recommends that the County prepare for changes in MJ laws which may allow for issuance of a permit specific to MJ cultivation. It would not be appropriate to issue a permit at this time (Mendocino County tried this and it met with much resistance since Federal laws currently classify MJ as an illegal drug). [by the Task Force, September 2016]
-
R3The GJ recommends that the County continue with Ordinance 315-797 and not adopt the aggregate grow ordinance as approved by the Planning Commission on July 12, 2012. Trinity County is a rural community where virtually anyone can find a plot or caregiver to grow the needed MJ. Allowing aggregate grows may lead to further proliferation of large MJ cultivations for black market profits. [No action needed]
-
R4The GJ recommends that the County enforce Ordinance 315-797. Secure the necessary funding & staffing (using staff available as identified in Table 1) as soon as possible. Non-compliance with the Ordinance may be a "civil" offense; MJ cultivation involving hundreds or thousands of plants may be a "criminal" offense. In either case, offenses that are "tolerated" are a detriment to the County environment and a law-abiding society. [July 2015]
-
R5The GJ recommends that the County establish a formal registration system of growers identifying legal owners, APN of parcel, and evidence of Proposition 215 and SB 420 compliance. Environmental effects would be monitored by County Environmental Health and necessary mitigation measures to prevent adverse impacts would be implemented. [July 2015]
-
R6The GJ recommends that the County proactively work with CA State water regulators to evaluate the sensitivity of Trinity County water resources. The importance of eliminating adverse impacts to groundwater, rivers, streams, anadromous fisheries, and lakes cannot be overstated. [Ongoing, beginning July 2015]
-
R7The GJ recommends that the County develop a reporting system to notify the US Fish and Wildlife Service and CA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife of the locations of known MJ cultivation sites so that monitoring of non-target poisonings to wildlife can be initiated. County employees would provide this information while retaining anonymity. [August 2015]
-
R8The GJ recommends that the County draft and adopt an ordinance which specifies all areas where camping is not allowed. The ordinance would include enforcement and penalty guidelines. [August 2015]
-
R9The GJ recommends that the County adopt a grading and land management ordinance so that unacceptable impacts to soil water resources can be avoided. Coordinate the development of the ordinance with CALFIRE, Soil Conservation Service, and State Water Quality Control Board. [September 2015]
-
R10The GJ recommends that the County review existing computer software programs and/or develop a software program to track all phases of code violations. The intent is to resolve violations swiftly. (There were 72 violations of Ordinance 315-797 cited from 2012 to 2014; to date, none have been resolved). [July 2015] €
-
R11The GJ recommends that the County develop a "complaint system" whereby local citizens and County visitors can easily report areas of undesirable impacts and/or unpleasant encounters. Follow-up by the appropriate County personnel would be needed to resolve these matters. (A Complaint Form titled "Trinity County Grand Jury Complaint Form B" has been developed and is included in the
-
R12The GJ recommends that the County increase its involvement in MJ education in Trinity County schools. Emphasis needs to be placed on the illegal status of MJ, the County Ordinances applicable to MJ, environmental effects, and non-target impacts to wildlife. Involvement from the "Task Force" from Recommendation R1 would be appropriate. [August 2015]
-
R13The GJ recommends that the County prepare for changes in MJ laws which may allow for counties to collect taxes (as Colorado does) from legal MJ activities. [October 2016]
-
R14The GJ recommends that the County aggressively pursue all avenues of federal and state assistance to provide resources to control illegal MJ grows. The "problems" associated with the illegal MJ industry affect areas beyond the boundaries of Trinity County, so federal and state intervention is warranted. [July 2015]
-
R15The GJ recommends that the County increase its emphasis on providing its citizenry with a law abiding environment by ensuring adequate staffing and funding is available for MJ-related ordinance and law enforcement. County staff at all levels needs to be trained and involved in reporting ordinance violations and illegal activities. [August 2015]
-
R16The GJ recommends that the County pursue all available avenues (including Recommendations R14 and R27) to abate known illegal grows and provide law enforcement assistance in inspection compliance in areas where illegal grows are likely. There is no increased danger to County personnel upon visiting "legal" MJ grow sites. [July 2015]
-
R17The GJ recommends that the County become actively involved with public education involving Ordinance 315-797 and laws pertinent to MJ cultivation. Informational meetings, town hall presentations, forming partnerships with appropriate agencies, and providing informative articles to the Trinity Journal would help in gaining community support for growing MJ in compliance with existing ordinances and laws. [July 2015]
-
R18The GJ recommends that the County provide training to its personnel regarding job responsibilities involved with reporting illegal activities (not exclusive to MJ). County personnel need to be involved in providing ordinance compliance while not compromising their ability to be productive in accomplishing their assigned job duties. [August 2015]
-
R19The GJ recommends that the County remain focused on enforcing the existing local, state, and federal laws. The County should not give preference to individuals who choose to cultivate MJ in violation of existing laws which have been legally adopted by the government. [Immediately and Ongoing] €
-
R20The GJ recommends that the County assign a Hearing Officer within the District Attorney's office to specifically render decisions on Ordinance violations on a timely basis. Part of the reason the general public may have "given up" is the lack of information regarding the illegality of MJ grows (refer to Recommendation R17). [July 2015]
-
R21The GJ recommends that the County act swiftly on Recommendation R4 so that Trinity County does not become the sanctuary of illegal MJ cultivation. Review other Counties' regulations and meet with County Counsel to consider adoption of an Ordinance similar to the counties that have banned outdoor MJ grows. [July 2015]
-
R22The GJ recommends that County Counsel be involved with the decisions of BOS members to participate in public meetings involving MJ industry plans which are not in compliance with existing local, state, and federal laws. The GJ recommends the members of the BOS actively working with the MJ industry to report their involvement openly in a BOS meeting. [Immediately and Ongoing]
-
R23The GJ recommends that the County increase the civil fine so that it is "meaningful" in order to deter the activities in non-compliance with Ordinance 315-797. For example, Nevada County's civil fine for excessive plants is $1000/day. [July 2015]
-
R24The GJ recommends that the County BOS work with County Counsel to determine what, if any, opportunities exist to use collected fines for subsequent MJ code enforcement. [August 2015]
-
R25The GJ recommends that the County adopt an ordinance to allow the Sheriff to take immediate abatement action on any MJ which is cultivated, possessed, or distributed in violation of County ordinance or state law. This action is currently in force in Nevada County under Ordinance No. 2349 (Abatement actions on pages 13-15) resulting in abatements being accomplished in as little as 10 days after a Notice of Violation is issued. [August 2015] ٠
Conclusions 1
-
CL1A review of the Operations Plan indicates that delivery of veteran services in Trinity County has become more complex with the addition of two partnerships in 2013/14; RVOPC and VJOS. In addition, the aging veteran population coupled with the impact of PL 113-146 will require the VSO to become more involved in veterans healthcare needs and concerns going forward. Implementation and maturation of VETPRO and transition to electronic filing of claims (D2D) requires additional training and higher level of computer and software skills. These need to be reflected in Knowledge, Skills, and Experience requirements in the Veteran Service Officer Position Description and Performance Standards. Trinity County should anticipate more involvement from CALVET, such as implementation of CALVET Best Practices and a performance assessment of the current Veteran Service Officer. Based on workload data mentioned previously in the section on staffing, a half time Veteran Service Officer is quite sufficient to provide the full range of services required, providing outreach on a limited basis and manage the county and CALVET administrative work load. ATTACHMENT 1 . . . PUBLIC LAW (PL) 113-146 the Veterans Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 Roll-Out Issues in Trinity County BY Patrick Meagher Trinity County Veterans Service Officer Trinity County California PL 113-146, the Veterans Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 as passed by the House and the Senate and signed into law by the President is presenting problems for Trinity County veteran's exercise of choice as follows: The law as written authorizes the Secretary to determine how the 40 mile geographical challenges will be applied. It appears that the decisions made by the Secretary to re-define the 40 mile criteria will limit the number of veterans that will be eligible for Choice Cards as explained below. (All underlining and bold print are the authors) THE TRAVEL SITUATION FOR TRINITY COUNTY ENROLLEES Trinity County is on the eastern side of the coastal mountain range of northern California. Trinity County VAHC System enrollees (448 as of 6/14/2014)) must drive two-lane mountain roads with numerous switchbacks, and over Buckhorn Pass (elevation 3200 feet) to get to Redding. For Hayfork enrollee's, (driving distance 63.95 miles to VA clinic Redding) they have an additional two lane multiple switchback road (highway 3) and 3700 foot Hayfork Summit to drive over just to get to highway 299 and Buckhorn in order to drive to the VANCHC Clinic in Redding CA. Driving distance for Weaverville enrollee's is 46.95 miles and from Trinity Center is 81.32 miles. I point out that both highway 299 and 3 are "geographical challenges" (in the words PL 113-146) and a "significant travel hardship" (in the words of the VA Fact Sheet cited below) for enrollee's especially in the winter.
Agency Responses 1
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
No Responses Found 9
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District
Transit Authority
Trinity County
County
Trinity County Assessor
Elected County Office
Trinity County Auditor-Controller
Elected County Office
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office
Trinity County District Attorney
Elected County Office
Trinity County Sheriff
Elected County Office
Trinity County Treasurer-Tax Collector
Elected County Office
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.