BROADCASTS.com

b"November 1 , 2022 \\u2014 Cannabis growers are frustrated with the latest delay in processing the paperwork they need to renew their annual county permits, which they fear could lead to missing deadlines for full state licensure. Many growers continue to operate under provisional licenses or even embossed receipts, as they work to come into compliance with state and county regulations.\\n\\nThe majority of growers in the county, 590 out of 863, have been \\u201cdeprioritized,\\u201d meaning their materials will not be reviewed until they \\u201csatisfy the conditions needed to reprioritize their applications,\\u201d according to the Mendocino Cannabis Department. \\n\\nAt last week\\u2019s public Cannabis Department meeting, Director Kristin Nevedal said she had sent out the notices to people who are either delinquent on tax payments or who do not have a valid state license on record with the county. She said her department has made multiple attempts to get a record of the state licenses since the Department of Cannabis Control stopped sending updates to local jurisdictions. Multiple requests and exhaustive searches have not yielded the information they needed about the licenses. Staff has searched and cross-checked what information they do have through portals and databases. \\n\\n\\u201cWe have no way, just like the public has no way, to type an address or an APN (Assessor Parcel Number) into the state license search, and find a license,\\u201d she explained.\\n\\nMendocino Cannabis Alliance Executive Director Michael Katz said there was a simpler way to get the information.\\n\\n\\u201cIt sounded like there was a lot of time spent into this process, looking for the state license information, and that despite multiple outreaches and multiple efforts, that there was no way for the department to get this information, which is really curious,\\u201d he said. \\u201cBecause I just forwarded to you and the cannabis program an email from the DCC (Department of Cannabis Control) that was received on October 26 within three hours of being asked for, that included a list of all licensees in the state by county, APN number, address information. And so if this is a piece of information that can be gathered within three hours by anyone emailing the DCC, I\\u2019m wondering why the cannabis department isn\\u2019t able to access that information. As far as streamlining goes, how come the easiest path has not been identified, and all of this time, effort and energy went into this very complicated process that has really now challenged further the applicants and the department?\\u201d\\n\\nBrandy Moulton restated the question, which Nevedal answered succinctly.\\n\\n\\u201cSaying that you couldn\\u2019t get it from the DCC, it feels kind of like a copout,\\u201d Moulton opined. \\u201cThe PRA (Public Records Act request) can be simply one sentence long. I\\u2019d be happy to draft that for you. It could even include active, expired and pending licenses. I do know the MCA (Mendocino Cannabis Alliance) pulled this list years ago when the fires were happening years back to get cultivators access to their properties, so it\\u2019s not new. So given your comments about staff time and the difficulties you guys are facing, does the department intend to request that info now to alleviate the burden on staff, and if not, why?\\u201d\\n\\n\\u201cThe department does not currently have a plan to PRA the DCC for license material because we hadn\\u2019t considered it until today,\\u201d Nevedal replied. \\n\\nMany of the recipients of the notice do have licenses. Katz said more than half of them also have receipts for taxes paid. Nevedal maintained that the lack of a license was often only one reason applications were not currently under review, and that sending out notices was the most efficient way to obtain the materials she needs.\\n\\n\\u201cNo license on file, meaning that we had nothing to search, triggered a deprioritization notice,\\u201d she reiterated. \\u201cAnd, again, most folks have multiple things going on: taxes, and licensing questions. We ran this as one program. Breaking it into two programs, here\\u2019s all of our license questions, we\\u2019re asking all these people license questions, and then going back to a second list of license questions for taxes alone, would have created twice as much communication with applicants from the department as coupling these pieces together into one notice process. It also would have meant licenses coming in in separate emails, and then a whole separate stream of tax documents coming in separate emails. Because again, I know a few of you are just having license issues or just having tax issues. But the vast majority of deprioritization notices went to folks who have both tax delinquencies and license issues. And there's no way to streamline the program by breaking it into two separate requests.\\u201d\\n\\nJude Thilman, president of the Mendocino Cannabis Alliance, said applicants were taken by surprise. The Alliance also sent out a survey, which netted 34 responses. All but two of the respondents reported that they have state licenses, most of them provisional.\\n\\n\\u201cI\\u2019m very happy to hear your honest response to Brandy\\u2019s question, that you hadn\\u2019t considered PRA\\u2019s before,\\u201d said Thilman. \\u201cThis is great. Now this is a tool that can really expedite.\\u201d She relayed a question from her membership, asking, \\u201cIf people have been told to not send any updated information until a planner contacts them, how do they make sure that they are allowed to submit updated information, including their current license? In other words, they didn\\u2019t know about this, so how are they going to know about it if they have to wait for a planner to call?\\u201d She added that 98% of the respondents to the MCA survey reported that they do have active state licenses, \\u201cSo it was just some verification that this was an inaccurate deprioritization action,\\u201d she concluded.\\n\\n\\u201cThat\\u2019s exciting news, that 98% of your members are licensed,\\u201d Nevedal replied. \\u201cWe look forward to receiving their materials.\\u201d"