Cannabis Business Association of Sonoma County, CBASC

CANNABIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATION OFSONOMA COUNTY

Organizations THAT SUPPORT CBASC

ABOUT CBASC

CBASC represents cannabis and hemp member-businesses and professionals across Sonoma County, and together we are leading the charge to make local regulations more supportive of craft cannabis businesses and transforming the County into a world-class cannabis tourism destination. 

We are currently prioritizing supporting the Hemp Ordinance and Cannabis Ordinance revisions as top priorities.

Board of Directors

Eric Pearson - SPARC
Erich Pearson
SPARC
Erin Gore - Garden Society
Erin Gore
Garden Society
Dennis Hunter - CannaCraft
Dennis Hunter
CannaCraft
Alexa Wall - Moonflower Delivery
Alexa Wall
Luma California
Ron Ferraro - Bango Distribution
Ron Ferraro
Elyon Cannabis

PRO BONO Legal Counsel

Joe Rogoway
Rogoway Law Group
Cannabis Attorney Hilary St. Jean at Rogoway Law Group, California.
Hilary St. Jean
Rogoway Law Group
Cannabis Attorney Blair Gue at Rogoway Law Group, California
Blair Gue
Rogoway Law Group

Our board

The Cannabis Business Association of Sonoma County’s volunteer Board of Directors is made up of recognized leaders in the cannabis industry with operations in Sonoma County. From cannabis manufacturing and retail, to cannabis cultivation and distribution, our Board represents the broad diversity of our membership and the cannabis industry operators in Sonoma County.

Board of Directors:

  • Erich Pearson, SPARC
  • Erin Gore, Garden Society
  • Dennis Hunter, Canna Craft
  • Alexa Wall, Moonflower Delivery
  • Ron Ferraro, Elyon Cannabis

Pro Bono Legal Counsel:

  • Rogoway Law Group

Board of Directors

Eric Pearson - SPARC
Erich Pearson
SPARC
Erin Gore - Garden Society
Erin Gore
Garden Society
Ron Ferraro - Bango Distribution
Ron Ferraro
Elyon Cannabis
Alexa Wall - Moonflower Delivery
Alexa Wall
Luma California
Dennis Hunter - CannaCraft
Dennis Hunter
CannaCraft

PRO BONO Legal Counsel

Rogoway Law Group
Joe Rogoway
Joe Rogoway
Managing Partner
Cannabis Attorney Hilary St. Jean at Rogoway Law Group, California.
Hilary St. Jean
Senior Counsel
Cannabis Attorney Blair Gue at Rogoway Law Group, California
Blair Gue
Senior Counsel

Our board

The Cannabis Business Association of Sonoma County’s volunteer Board of Directors is made up of recognized leaders in the cannabis industry with operations in Sonoma County. From cannabis manufacturing and retail, to cannabis cultivation and distribution, our Board represents the broad diversity of our membership and the cannabis industry operators in Sonoma County.

Board of Directors:

  • Erich Pearson, SPARC
  • Erin Gore, Garden Society
  • Dennis Hunter, Canna Craft
  • Alexa Wall, Moonflower Delivery
  • Ron Ferraro, Elyon Cannabis

Pro Bono Legal Counsel:

  • Rogoway Law Group

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO COUNTY CODE

DEFINITIONS 

  • Existing: SCC §20-02-140

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • B&P §26001
  • BCC Reg §5000
  • CDPH §40100
  • CDFA §8000

ANALYSIS

The SCC definitions should be aligned with state law and this can be accomplished with language such as: “The County of Sonoma adopts herein all adult use, medical, and commercial cannabis definitions contained within the regulations promulgated by the Bureau of Cannabis Control (commencing with §5000), California Department of Public Health Manufactured Cannabis Safety Branch (commencing with §40100), California Department of Food and Agriculture (CalCannabis §8000), and those contained within MAUCRSA (commencing at Business and Professions Code §26001 et. seq.).

LICENSE TYPES

  • Strike:SCC §26-88-250(c)(5) (events)
  • Strike: SCC §26-88-250(c)(6)
  • Amend: SCC 26-88-256(g)(13)
  • Add Type 7, N, P, Delivery, Events

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • B&P §26050
  • B&P§26061
  • CDPH §40118
  • BCC §5600-§5604
  • CDFA §8303

ANALYSIS

The County should align with the State and authorize the same license types as are authorized by the state.

By striking and amending the listed SCC provisions, the County will be aligning with the state on issues such as manufacturing, infusion, processing, non-storefront delivery, and special events.

SETBACKS

  • Amend: SCC 26-88-254(f)(6)-(8)
  • Amend: SCC 25-88-256(f)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • B&P 26054(b)
  • BCC §5026(a)

ANALYSIS

The County should apply California sensitive use setbacks to all commercial license types:
“A premises licensed under this division shall not be located within a 600-foot radius of a school providing instruction in kindergarten or any grades 1 through 12, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued”.

This amendment would only apply to sensitive use setbacks and not amend setbacks to neighbors.

TERM OF PERMIT

  • Strike: SCC §26-88-250(e)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • No State Statute or Regulation Controls

ANALYSIS

The County’s permit renewal mandate is duplicative and requires state licensees to undergo a rigorous and expensive process which is unnecessary. State licenses renew annually which provides the requisite regulatory controls currently duplicated by the County. The County should just require the local permittee to furnish proof of state licensure annually or when material changes occur to the licensee.

ON-SITE CONSUMPTION

  • Strike: SCC 25-88-256(g)(9)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • B&P§26200(g)

    “Notwithstanding paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 11362.3 of the Health and Safety Code, a local jurisdiction may allow for the smoking, vaporizing, and ingesting of cannabis or cannabis products on the premises of a retailer or microbusiness licensed under this division if all of the following are met:

    (1) Access to the area where cannabis consumption is allowed is restricted to persons 21 years of age and older.
    (2) Cannabis consumption is not visible from any public place or nonage-restricted area.
    (3) Sale or consumption of alcohol or tobacco is not allowed on the premises.”

ANALYSIS

The County should align with the State and allow for onsite consumption. This is one of the most important elements of the evolving cannabis industry and is essential for cannabis related tourism (discussed further below).

State regulations already ensure that any onsite consumption of cannabis is done in a safe manner equivalent to the safeguards mandated for the onsite consumption of alcohol.

The County should amend the ordinance adopting language mirroring B&P 26200(g).

NO CAPS 

  • Strike: SCC §26-88-256(d)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • B&P §26051
  • BCC§5019: Excessive Concentration Controls at State Level should set caps rather than through local ordinance

ANALYSIS

The County should remove the cap of 9 and instead use land use to regulate retailers. 600 ft. setbacks to sensitive uses and 600ft buffers between retail premises should sufficiently regulate and control the siting of retail facilities.

TOURISM 

  • Strike: SCC §26-88-250(c)(5)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • No State Statute or Regulation Controls

ANALYSIS

This is contrary to State policy which allows for these types of events and on-site consumption at both events and at licensed retailers.

EVENTS

  • Strike: SCC §26-88-250(c)(5)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • BCC §5600-§5604

ANALYSIS

The County should align with State law and allow for special events.

DISASTER RELIEF 

  • Add Provision

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • BCC §5038: Disaster Relief
  • CDFA §8207
  • CDPH §40182

ANALYSIS

The County should align with State law and provide for Disaster Relief.

MULTIPLE PERMITS 

  • Amend: SCC §26-88-254(e)

CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTORY AND REGULATIONS ALIGNMENT

  • No State Statute or Regulation Controls. California does not limit licensing in this way.

ANALYSIS

The County should remove the 1 Acre cap on permit ownership. The state does not impose this limit and a locally imposed limit significantly impairs the County’s cultivators ability to compete in the market.

Strikethrough the following: “provided that the total combined cultivation area within the county does not exceed one (1) acre”

SUPPORT CBASC

Your participation with CBASC helps present a unified and coordinated front and is crucial to our continued success in amending county law and regulations to be positive for cannabis and hemp businesses in Sonoma County.

Add your organization’s name to our list of supporting cannabis and hemp businesses and we will follow up to provide more information on how you can also become a member:

  • Drop files here or
    Accepted file types: jpg, gif, png, pdf, jpeg.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Close Menu