Public Comment from April 6, 2022 Work Session Marijuana / Cannabis Regulations Ordinance Revision Web page: ...

Public Comment from April 6, 2022 Work Session

Marijuana / Cannabis Regulations Ordinance Revision Web page:
https://ouraycountyco.gov/415/Marijuana-Ordinance-Revisions

From: Jane Errion
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2022 2:54 PM
To: Lynn Padgett ; Jake Niece ; Ben
Tisdel 
Subject: LLA remarks at Work Session 3/22/22

Greetings,

I am writing today in response to a few of your remarks made at last Tuesday's Work
Session. I will leave it up to you whether or not to include this email in the next Work
Session Agenda packet.

Thank you Lynn! Lynn is the only one listening to those of us wanting either no more
active licences awarded, or only awarded if the location is a considerable distance from
existing residential homes. None of you have yet to acknowledge the real estate industry
data regarding the distance required to avoid devaluing residential property; 1/2 mile.

Thank you Jake and Lynn! Finally you are stating the core issues that have yet to be
discussed, let alone decided upon. Our impatience is because we have been studying this
issue for 3.5 years and have an immense amount of knowledge about the history of
cultivation in the County. Our concerns are genuine.

To Lynn: Your remark that most of the votes to approve Amendment 64 came from the
north end of the County is totally irrelevant. People voted to smoke pot legally and to
grow a small amount of mj for their own use. You know very well that residents were
NOT offered the chance to vote on inviting commercial cultivation operations to begin in
the unincorporated areas of the County. You and Don Batchelder are responsible for
approving revisions to the ordinance in December 2015 to do so. I have read all the
Minutes from the public hearings held prior to your vote. Only ten people, most
interested in starting a grow operation, attended those hearings. Ben was also in
attendance. Residents only voted on whether or not to apply the 5% excise tax on mj
grown commercially and sold outside of the County.

To Ben: You may glare at me and criticize the content of my public comments all you
want. Your remarks only serve to re-energize my resolve to resist more commercial
cultivation operations ANYWHERE NEAR existing residential homes. I personally
believe this industry is changing the character of this County in a permanent and
detrimental way. I understand that you do not believe so. But, your advocacy for the
cultivation industry is out of balance with your responsibility to protect your constituents.

Recently, you had the audacity to state that my neighbors on Melody Lane make
complaints about MS Support in order to intentionally cause harm to their business.
Seriously? They have more to do in their lives than spend valuable time complaining to
you. They complain because their property values have been impacted. They complain
because odor continues.They complain because Singing Hills subdivision and Melody
Lane were designed to end in a cul de sac and were so when they bought their property.
The property where MS Support is located was known to be landlocked and was to gain

access via a new road entered from the east or southwest. They are not part of the Singing
Hills subdivision. Their presence has ruined the neighborhood. We all know that you do
not care one iota for the residents near MS Support.

You believe that Mark Castrodale and his authority over the cultivation operations has
been implemented in an excellent manner? His lack of knowledge and lack of
professionalism regarding how to notify the Bar C applicant of a denial of his application
resulted in the threat of a lawsuit. Not excellent performance.

The lack of photos ordered by the LLA for the last MS Support hearing was his poor
ability to take a few pictures to share. He made no attempt to retake them when he
discovered he could not retrieve them. He made no attempt to ask the IT experts for help
to do so. Not excellent performance.

Mark continually writes and amends the applications on behalf of the applicants. Not his
job. Not excellent performance.

Mark told MS Support no public notices were needed for the April 2021 public hearing.
Lack of knowledge of our own Ordinance regulations. Only corrected based upon a query
by me. Not excellent performance.

Mark told Daniel Castillo not to comply with screening requirements, stating he thought
it an unnecessary expense since the major modification request at the time was to make
the chain link boundary fence the required screening. Not his authority to waive the
screening. Not excellent performance.

No one in the Land Use Office has the expertise or knowledge to judge proper
wastewater discharge methodology. So, the requirement is ignored. Not excellent
performance.

Mark consistently cites the state noise limits instead of the County Noise Ordinance. Not
excellent performance.

THANK YOU JAKE for making sure this is clarified and corrected in the current
revision process.

There is absolutely no evidence that anyone in the Land Use Office has any expertise or
knowledge that makes them qualified to vet, review, or offer opinions relevant to judging
the appropriateness of applications for new cultivation licenses.

Mark and his staff are qualified to be Building Inspectors! Mark has been a County
employee for 15 years, yet he claims defining our community character to be totally
subjective. Maybe if he lived here he would have a different opinion. Not excellent
performance.

Mark spent over an hour of time in the initial Work Session of the current revision
process, trying to get the right document on the screen. He has very little working
knowledge of Microsoft Word. Leo has been teaching him basic functions as we go. Not
excellent performance.

Now Mark wants authority to waive the requirement to have a caretaker present on
facility sites 24/7. Is that because the facility on Sage has no residence? No 24/7
caretaker? If that is to be an option, the Sheriff's Office should have that authority. That's
who will be called to respond to a problem, not Mark. Not excellent performance.

Mark wants authority to approve a change in ownership or transfer of a license. That's
your decision and approval to make. Not excellent performance.

So, Ben, I have facts. You have opinions. Your intent, whatever it was, by passing out the
map of Colorado indicating where cultivation or other aspects of mj are located is totally
irrelevant. We care about what happens in Ouray County, where we invested in property
and expect to live a rural lifestyle sans commercial cultivation facilities. No one wants to
be close enough for commercial cultivation to impact property values or to smell odor.

It's dangerous to make old women mad. If you think you can intimidate me in any way,
think again. I'll be sitting in the front row at the next Work Session...glare away.

Best Regards,
Jane M. Errion

P.S. Jake, you are saved from my ire because you speak very little. When you do speak,
except for your remark about skunks, you add valuable opinions. We know you are also
an advocate of awarding more cultivation licenses. Just make sure that if more are
approved, there is 1/2 mile between a facility and residential homes, or the ire you will
receive will be from residents in your district.

Lynn, please stay vigilant on behalf of all residents in the unincorporated area of the
County. We understand that you are the only one taking our concerns seriously. We
appreciate your efforts on our behalf.

From: Jane Errion
Date: Mar 30, 2022 4:32 PM
Subject: Date correction in email sent 03/27/22
To: Lynn Padgett ,Jake Niece ,Ben Tisdel

Cc:

Greetings BOCC,

In reviewing the eight previous versions of the Marijuana Ordinance this week, I realize I incorrectly
identified the date when the first ordinance approving commercial cultivation in Ouray County was
approved. It was a December meeting, but 2014, not 2015.

The second "Whereas" in that document notes"... the Board of County Commissioners has had work
sessions to discuss the possibility of allowing additional cultivation and retail sales in the County and has
heard from the Town Council of the Town of Ridgway in support of such facilities, as well as from
members of the public who support the expansion of facilities within Ouray County;"

How ironic...the Town of Ridgway later refused to allow commercial cultivation within its boundaries due
to lack of water from the municipal supply.

The members of the public commenting during the first reading of the ordinance consisted of 5 people,
David Niccum and Chris Sanchez of Acme Healing Center (who were unable to operate a successful
grow), Craig Jackman, (who had the intent to rent his property to anyone with a desire to enter the retail
or cultivation business), Tim Manzagol, owner of Shining Mountain Herbs, desiring to switch from herbs to
growing pot (who later sold to the current owners who live in Aspen) and Laura Thomas, Voyager Youth
Program Director, the only one expressing concern; wanting signage and childproof packaging related to
retail sales.

 At the second reading, three people were present and are noted with comments in the Minutes dated
12/9/14; Craig Jackman, David Niccum, and Chris Sanchez. When the second reading was continued,
comments were made by Tim Manzagol and his wife Sheila. The Minutes mention emails from Tim
Manzagol, Michael Green, and Margaret Henderson. Those emails were not included in the Minutes; they
appear to be archived and accessible only by contacting Michelle Nauer or Hannah Hollenbeck.

What a pathetic showing by the public. Perhaps no one understood the long term consequences of
approving commercial cultivation in the unincorporated zones of the County. Perhaps the BOCC did a
very poor job of advertising what they were considering.

At any rate, there was hardly rousing support for a decision made by two of the three Commissioners.

Seven years and three months later, do any of you have the courage to cap licenses at the current level
of four active licenses?

Does not appear so...what a pathetic history and pathway forward.

What really galls me is that there was never one sentence added to the publication, "What you need to
know before building or moving to Ouray County." I am not taking time to look up the exact title. No
mention in any other publication, unless a potential buyer searches all the county ordinances. If there had
been even one sentence warning me about the possibility of a commercial grow operation being licensed
near me, I would never have purchased property here. There is still no warning about this situation
available to people seeking to move here.

Please wise up and listen to your constituents. No one wants to live near a commercial cultivation
operation.

Best Regards,
Jane M. Errion

From: Jennifer Cheeseman
Sent: Monday, April 4, 2022 1:46 PM
To: hhollenbeck@ouraycountyco.gov
Subject: Marijuana ordinances

Hi Hannah,

I have revised my communication for the BOCC to be more specifically related to
the ordinance as I do believe these comments are important for that matter as
well and would like this to be included for the April 6th meeting this week. You
can still place my previous letter in with the license hearing information as
planned.

Board of County Commissioners,

Thank you for your continued work on revising the marijuana ordinances for
the County. I know that as residents of the county as well, you care deeply
about the quality of life and the property values for all of Ouray
County. The decisions you are making on these ordinances are extremely
important and will affect your neighbors greatly. I can not stress enough
that marijuana growing facilities do not fit well in communities where
families are living. Therefore the 1 mile distance minimum from residential
areas is absolutely necessary in this ordinance. Please do not consider
approving anything without this provision and respect for residential
property owners in Ouray county.

As direct neighbors to potential cultivation facilities, we would be directly
and detrimentally affected by a grow facility and our investment would lose
significant value. We have already lost potential buyers of our property:

      In 2019 a family was ready to give an offer and then while visiting the
       home, smelled the growing marijuana on the Bar C Ranch from
       previous owners and withdrew their interest.
      Once again, in the last few months of 2021/2022; potential buyers
       have discovered that there was even an application that was filed in
       the last year for a neighboring facility and, therefore, they will not
       consider purchasing our property. In these 2 instances, the realtors
       have said that these buyers are extremely interested and may come

back with offers once the new ordinances are out and there is no
       option for our neighbor to have a facility.
      Once again this week, another interested buyer has opted
       to wait to see how this ordinance comes out and also
       confirm no permits are given for neighboring facility
       before making an offer.
      This is 4 known potential buyers we have lost over this
       issue. Not to mention those who will not even reach out to
       realtors because of it.

In addition to the limits a grow facility would put on even being able to sell
our home, even if it was able to be sold, it would be at a significant discount
to its value. Our investment would greatly suffer. Quality of life issues are
also a real concern for us as well as future owners. The following are just
some of the negative impacts we experienced with the previous owners/
neighbors growing marijuana products:

      The smell was unbearable, could not be outside or open windows
       during the time of bloom
      The previous owners would open the “gate” on Cutler Creek for their
       water “rights” which flows directly behind our property. They opened
       the gate too far and flooded our driveway several times and almost
       flooded the house. They also consistently used a much greater
       amount of water than they were allotted.
      The light pollution from the 24 hour grow lights affected our bedrooms
       and ability to star gaze in the beautiful Ouray valley
      The noise and commotion from the staff included 4 wheelers driving
       around at all hours of the night, shooting guns, loose dogs bothering
       and intimidating our children, crowds if people gathering and living in
       the woods out of site of the road, but in sight of our home.
      The sheriff had to be called and address disturbance issues on a
       regular basis by many neighbors

Hopefully you can see how impactful your decisions on this ordinance are
for us personally as well as to other direct neighbors, the entire Ponderosa
Village, all the neighbors across Hwy 550 and including the KOA which
brings so many visitors to the area.

The new ordinances should be considerate and protective of residential
owner’s investments and quality of life in Ouray County. Including at

minimum a 1 mile distance requirement from a residential property. This
would make neighboring potential cultivation facilities unfit for approval
which is an extremely important decision for all residents who live within 1
mile of sites and would be devastated by it on many levels.

Thank you for representing the residents who love all that Ouray County
has to offer for peaceful living,

Michael and Jennifer Cheeseman

102 Cutler Creek Dr