Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Cannabis Tbid Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters press Trinity County on cannabis opt-outs, TBID process, ICE concerns and county governance
Summary
Public commenters raised multiple concerns at the Trinity County Board meeting, including disputes over cannabis licensing and opt-out maps, criticisms of the proposed TBID, calls for an outside investigation into county handling of funds, and questions about federal agents requesting probation records.
Multiple members of the public used the meeting's public comment period to raise complaints and requests for action on several topics: cannabis licensing and opt-out ordinances, the proposed Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID), alleged misuse of cannabis equity funds, presence of federal agents in the county, and concerns about county administration and staffing.
Terrence Mines of Junction City told the board he believes the county has been improperly charging cannabis licensing fees and that cannabis-equity funds were used against the interests of cannabis operators. "You can't charge us anymore. It's gonna cost the county millions of dollars, in having to give us back our money," Mines said, and added he would be sending a letter from his attorney asking for an outside investigation. He asked the board to request an independent probe and suggested the FBI as an avenue for investigation.
Public commenter John Hodges criticized a supervisor's approach to the TBID, saying the TBID paperwork requires lodging-industry representation and arguing the proposed district's money is meant for physical improvements rather than advertising. He told supervisors he had questions about who the TBID organizers contacted and asked that the board "look into this," saying he has documentation and video of prior meetings.
John Comerzi raised a separate concern about seeing what he described as an unmarked suburban and federal agents in the county and asked what guidance the county gives when federal agents request probation records. The transcript records the question but does not include a staff response to that specific scenario during the public comment period.
Adrian Keyes and other commenters asked that the planning commission and staff revisit the opt-out ordinance mapping, arguing the current opt-outs (moved from an urgency ordinance into permanent rules) are creating uncertainty and noted the planning commission has returned to the same issues after multiple hearings without resolution. Keyes requested that staff and the planning commission remap parcels and reassess the single finding used to justify opt-outs (to avoid cultivation near population centers).
Several commenters also urged stronger community-development staffing and clearer implementation plans for the county's housing and planning work during the ensuing public hearing on the housing element.
These public comments were requests and allegations from residents and did not result in immediate board actions during the public comment period; supervisors and staff acknowledged the comments and, in several instances, said the issues would be looked into or routed to the appropriate department for follow-up.
