Agenda Item

7.3 22-193 Consideration of Cannabis Tax Reform Options

   Oppose     Neutral     Support    
2500 of 2500 characters remaining
  • Default_avatar
    Chuck Lamb over 2 years ago

    When will the County stop making tax concessions to the cannabis industry? As a long time business owner there were times when our operation was financially challenged. It would have been great if the State and the Feds gave us some tax relief but of course they wouldn't nor did we ask as we realized taxes and fees are "the cost of doing business". The cannabis industry should have known the costs from the beginning which would have helped them make a decision to go forward or not. Would the County offer similar concessions to other industries when requested? Please vote no for tax reform.

  • Default_avatar
    Pamela Kicenski over 2 years ago

    Higher taxes on alcohol, tobacco and cannabis are put in place for a reason. Proponents of proposition 64 in 2016 promised the higher taxes for drug research, treatment, enforcement, health and safety, youth programs, and environmental damage all caused by Cannabis. Cutting the taxes is cutting the reasons it passed in the first place. The grows have security and that attracts criminals who want the schedule 1 drug. These are not farms that we want to take our children or grandchildren on field trips. It is not in the best interest of our Lake County Community to extend special support to just one “industry “ . Commercial Cannabis Cultivation should be treated as all other businesses in our County as a free enterprise and not receive special subsidies. That is not in the interest of public good and fair to positive businesses in our beautiful County. A simple reduction of taxes to stabilize the cannabis market is not the answer. It is much more complicated.

  • 2103328773197815
    Bobby Dutcher over 2 years ago

    As the 2022 growing season is quickly approaching, tax relief is essential right now. Two large cultivators have already left Lake County, and more are undecided whether or not to operate this year. The State taxes are obviously much more of a burden that County taxes, but anything we can do to keep the legal industry in operation should be done. Losing more licensed, tax paying farmers just means an increase in illegal farms to fill the supply vacuum.

  • Default_avatar
    Rico Martinez over 2 years ago

    The presence of Agenda Item 5.9 22-142 should be enough to determine not to approve the tax reform. If you are concerned about crime, why make it easier/cheaper for anyone to run a cannabis farm? It is quite obvious, the presence of illegal cannabis operations. It is also quite obvious that grow operations attract criminals. It would not be out of line to presume that some of the legally operating cannabis farms have broken the law, either by cutting corners, stealing water or by illegally expanding beyond what was granted and using excess water, which I might add is not an abundant resource. By maintaining the higher tax, you are also ensuring that not just anyone is popping up a farm in Lake County. Decreasing the tax opens the doors to any potential cannabis farm. Keeping the tax as is ensures that the owners understand the risks of the business & will most likely maintain greater responsibility. These are not hobby shops. They are mind altering drugs. Set the bar and keep it as is.

  • Default_avatar
    Michael Rodriguez over 2 years ago

    Please see attached correspondence in support of cannabis tax reform.

  • Default_avatar
    Holly Harris over 2 years ago

    There is currently a 20:1 cap on property acreage to allowable canopy, but no caps on cultivation. If this change were enacted today, it could encourage rampant growth which has not been factored into the use permits or cannabis cultivation applications.

    Reducing the cultivation tax by 50% and 25% also needs to be looked at closely to ascertain the effect on county services. As the State's tax can represent the primary tax burden, it may be best to watch the State's actions before limiting the County's.

    We have no issues with extending the current tax bill but were informed by the Tax Collector's office that the county has no mechanism for collecting delinquent cannabis taxes.

    We request the Board postpone decisions on Items 1 & 3 until after the CDD completes the upcoming Cannabis Ordinance changes & has held public workshops in April. This would allow the County time to work out any conflicting issues, allow the public to make comments and consider options in a meaningful fashion.