SAN DIEGO — Five years after its introduction, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 Wednesday to formally approve a “socially equitable” cannabis policy that will allow expanded commercial operations in unincorporated areas.
The vote amends zoning and regulatory ordinances, certifies an environmental impact report and sets license and permit fees. The policy will take effect in 30 days and cover cultivation, distribution, manufacturing, microbusinesses, retail, temporary events and testing.
Mirroring the board’s Aug. 19 vote to advance the policy, Supervisors Paloma Aguirre, Terra Lawson-Remer and Monica Montgomery Steppe voted in favor, while Supervisors Joel Anderson and Jim Desmond opposed it.
Previously, only five cannabis businesses were allowed to operate in unincorporated areas.
Supervisors recently opted for staff policy recommendations over those from the Planning Commission, including a ban on outdoor cultivation and a 1,000-foot buffer from day care or youth centers, places of worship, public parks and trails, and schools, rather than a 600-foot distance.
During Wednesday’s public comment period, more than a dozen residents made it clear they did not want an expanded program. Several noted the alleged harms of marijuana use, along with possible public safety threats and lower property values resulting from expanded cannabis facilities.
Valley Center resident Eddie Lain said only Anderson and Desmond seemed responsive to community concerns.
“You have a few hundred applicants for the cannabis program, but we have over 500,000 people in the unincorporated parts of San Diego that are not interested in having cannabis growing in their backyard or expanding retail around their schools,” Lain said.
He said the city of Carpinteria has seen numerous complaints about the smell of cannabis among a population of 10,000 or fewer.
“Imagine the number of complaints you will have and the administration in order to address all that, and the costs,” Lain added.
One caller said the board’s vote “is corrupt, cowardly and (a) complete betrayal of public trust.”
The woman said she was addressing the board by phone because “this is how you see us. We’re invisible to you.”
Peggy Walker said the board majority showed that its members find “that drug dealers that don’t live here are more important than residents.”
Stephani Baxter of the Fallbrook Planning Group said placing such a critical item on the consent agenda — rather than holding a full discussion — was an insult. She encouraged the board to reject the policy, adding, “It’s OK to go back to the drawing board.”
In a statement after the vote, Anderson said his amendments to the original policy protecting his communities, including a buffer limit, “were later removed by the board, thus leaving me no choice but to oppose it.”
Anderson told his colleagues that if the board vote was not unanimous, such an item was not suitable for the consent agenda.
Board Vice Chair Montgomery Steppe said the cannabis vote was not treated differently and that all second readings are placed on the consent agenda.
“This item has been discussed for about five years now,” she added.
In 2024, Lawson-Remer said the cannabis industry had grown, “but not in a way that recognizes the many people who were significantly harmed by laws criminalizing cannabis, a product that corporations are now swooping in to make millions from.”
During the Aug. 19 meeting, Aguirre said: “a fair cannabis program must create genuine ownership and economic opportunity, not just symbolic participation.”
She agreed that safety, odor, neighborhood impacts, water use and environmental concerns are real, and said owners will face zoning rules, inspections and enforcement.
Montgomery Steppe said studies show cannabis use is similar across racial lines, but criminalization rates are not.
Black Americans account for roughly 37% of drug arrests, Montgomery Steppe said, adding that the new policy “gives (us) a chance to right those wrongs.”
A longtime opponent of marijuana business expansion, Desmond said Aug. 19 that he did not know whether rural communities should have to pay the price for past discriminatory policies. He added that the new policy allows someone who has broken the law to jump ahead in line for a permit.
In January 2021, former Supervisors Nathan Fletcher and Nora Vargas proposed the cannabis policy as a way to eliminate the black market and address how anti-drug policies affect low-income and minority communities.
Since then, supervisors have approved several related policies, including tax rates in unincorporated areas and a grant to assist five existing facilities.
In April 2023, supervisors voted 3-1 for an ordinance setting tax rates for the legal cannabis industry. In May 2024, they voted 3-2 in favor of a program that advocates say will allow people affected by previous criminalization efforts to participate in the regulated market.
