Public speakers urge board to reconsider draft cannabis EIR, cite emissions, health and water risks

Public speakers at the San Diego County Board of Supervisors' land use session urged the board to reconsider a draft Environmental Impact Report that would allow up to 25 new cannabis businesses in unincorporated county areas, citing energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and public-health risks.

The draft EIR for the county's cannabis program was cited repeatedly by callers and in-person speakers as the basis for close review. Madison, a caller identified only by first name, told the board, "It is essential that we fully consider the environmental impact, specifically in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, before considering allowing such a rapid expansion." She said indoor cultivation is energy intensive and cited a figure that cannabis cultivation in California "is estimated to use up to 2% of the state's total electricity." (Madison spoke during the non-agenda public comment period.)

Why it matters: the EIR process determines whether the county must adopt mitigation measures, identify significant and unavoidable impacts, or consider alternatives before allowing a program expansion. Multiple speakers pointed to public-health and environmental harms the report flagged and asked the county to slow or limit new permits.

Speakers pressed several specific concerns raised in the draft EIR and related research. Becky Rapp said a recurring concern at public meetings is proximity between retail outlets and nursing homes and noted that "75% of nursing homes are federally funded and pot is still federally illegal," adding that marketing to nursing-home residents could violate federal rules. Kathleen Lippitt said the EIR consultant Ascent identified "significant and unavoidable" impacts including traffic, hydrology and groundwater, air quality, construction noise and aesthetics, and urged the board not to expand the commercial footprint further.

Public-health arguments also surfaced. Terri Anne Skelly, who said she works in public health and is active in a county planning group, urged stronger enforcement and recommended the county not issue new tobacco or marijuana business permits in unincorporated areas, saying such businesses disproportionately harm historically underserved populations. Megan Stewart referenced a large study she said was supported by the National Institutes of Health and published in the Journal of the American Heart Association; Stewart summarized the findings as showing increased cardiovascular risks associated with regular marijuana use and asked the board to consider those risks in public-health planning.

Several speakers also warned about traffic and road-safety implications if new retail or lounge uses were permitted in backcountry areas with narrow, winding roads. Anne Riddle, who identified herself as a county planning-group member, said her group was "shocked" by the idea of additional storefronts and cautioned that lounges where people smoke or vape would increase the danger on poorly lit rural roads.

What the board said/do: the remarks were part of non-agenda public communication and the land use session's public-comment record; no formal action was taken on the EIR at this meeting. County staff and the board did not adopt or reject the draft EIR during the session. The record shows virtual public meetings and a public-review period remain part of the EIR process.

Context and next steps: speakers noted two virtual meetings had already been held and another was scheduled for this evening; the draft EIR and associated technical reports are available as part of the public record online. The board may consider the EIR and any related ordinances or regulations at a future hearing; speakers asked the board to use the EIR findings to limit new permits and require stronger mitigation.

Ending: Residents urging the board to slow or restrict expansion said they hoped the county would prioritize environmental sustainability, elder safety and equitable enforcement as the EIR process continues.