Let’s reframe the discussion as a banquet and not a battle

I am greatly encouraged by the discussion currently taking place on the editorial pages of our local newspaper about issues related to cannabis.

While there may still be great distance between opposing points of view, I feel that ever so slowly, we are all moving towards the center. I hope we can continue this process, and find the common ground where respectful conversation can replace adversity and animosity.

Sheriff Greg Hagwood brought a very unique perspective to local cannabis issues.More than anyone, he has seen all sides of the matter, and especially the ones involving conflict.His comment that “… the belligerence of some has resulted in the loss of trust and credibility for all” is a fair and a critical observation of the recent past that helped create the current hostility. As we move away from the era of prohibition and black markets, his recommendation for everyone to exhibit good behavior is wise counsel.

As I represent a pro-business perspective for cannabis, and especially health beneficial applications for cannabis, I want to apologize to everyone in Plumas county for the aggressive and less than friendly approach of some local cannabis growers. Clearly, there is as much fear on the pro cannabis side as there is on the anti-commercial cannabis side.

But this is not surprising given how cannabis growers in Plumas county have, until recently, had to hide their operations from public view, and keep a very low overall profile .Having been forced to adopt such reclusive habits over the years (decades) has not helped local cannabis growers develop good business practices, or positive social skills.Please “give them a break” as they too make this historic transition to legal cannabis activity.

At the same time, I can empathize with persons who view cannabis negatively, and the profound effect this historic transition must be having on their view of our county, and our society. Change is difficult for everyone, and some more than others. I support the concept that we make every effort to address the concerns of local commercial cannabis skeptics before moving forward towards any type of commercial cannabis activity in Plumas county.

Patrick Luscri, who has written two recent Where I Stand commentaries, stated that “we are in a real battle here.” Framing this controversy as a “battle” immediately sets up an adversarial situation where those involved must wear their armor, sharpen their weapons, and hide behind their fortresses. People only take up “battle positions” when they are afraid of someone doing them great harm. But assuming a “battle perspective” makes it inevitable that matters will dissolve into the “nasty fight” which Mr. Luscri claims he wants to avoid. I sincerely request that Mr. Luscri tone down his rhetoric, and assume a more open position towards persons whose viewpoint is different from his own.


The question before us now is, Who will be the courageous ones to walk away from fear, and to embrace compassion?Who will first lay down their weapons, remove their armor, and step out of their fortress to greet the opposition as friends and neighbors. Who will open their minds to really hear the concerns of those with opposite viewpoints, and who will consider every possible means to find common ground for peaceful resolution of this local cannabis dispute.

Instead of viewing this matter as a battle, may I suggest that we frame this matter as a banquet … where people of many dietary practices will be attending, including vegetarians, meat lovers, fruitarians, vegans, fast food lovers, etc. Despite our different tastes and opinions, we can co-operate to prepare a feast for everyone, and where no one is left out.

Finding a solution to local commercial and medical cannabis issues where no one is left out is my goal for the work I am doing through Plumas Cannabis Connections. Any transition of a magnitude such as what we are now experiencing requires a lot of healing work to be done, and for everyone in Plumas county. Making this transition in a peaceful and positive manner will require great compassion on the part of everyone. I will do my best, and encourage anyone, and everyone to join me.

50 thoughts on “Let’s reframe the discussion as a banquet and not a battle

  • I find it very disturbing to see this already cropping up in our small town of Chester.

      • Ah, here here comes the bleating of those green Sheep.

        • Plumas county voted for legalization though. Anyhoo, How does it feel to be a minority, Rick?

          • Plumas County has NOT voted to allow commercial cultivation.

            How does it feel to be so confused Tax payer/voter?

          • Rick has it right.

            We voted to be allowed to posses a bag of weed and the right to cultivate six plants if so inclined. We haven’t voted to allow commercial cultivation.

            Tax payer/voter is spewing that same old worn out apples and oranges argument the growers are so fond of.

          • Actually the author above brought up commercial cultivation. Taxpayer/voter just runs off on another of his weird tangents. Got it?

            Sure, lots of people ’round here voted to change the law to permit carrying a ounce and to grow six plants. Heck, I voted for prop. 64 so it hardly puts me in the minority.

            But… I will not vote for commercial cultivation as that is an entirely different critter. And I for one are fed up with the snippy growers promising us the world. Like Sheriff Hagwood said a few weeks back, and the author above mentions.. You people are your own worst enemy.

      • Really?
        We now have a Weed store in a small town of 2000 that is one of the first sights a visitor sees entering Chester.

  • Tax payer/voter
    Ya had your chance kid, hit the showers.

  • I also voted for prop. 64 and was open to commercial cultivation thinking the county really could use the money.

    But reading recent data from the state Bureau of Cannabis Control and the California Growers Assoc., both give a licensing/compliance rate of California’s Marijuana growers at just north of 1%. So please, tell me the difference between cartels grows and regulated cultivation again?

    It’s becoming very clear. Proposition 64 is failing badly at anything that might resemble reasonable regulation and the tax revenue our county might hope to expect ain’t gonna happen either.

    Anybody can now tell you commercial cultivation in plumas county is a total lose-lose proposition and they are right. All we’ll ever see are the big…

    • The ad hominem attacks from the majority of commenters here are tiresome and unproductive. You are my neighbors; I respect you, even if I don’t agree with your opinions.
      Ginger T. you are the only one here from the anti-commercial side of the debate to bring info based discussion to this conversation, thank you.
      When you consider how few counties are allowing commercial growing you can see why there aren’t more licenses issued. However, in the first quarter of 2018, 34.5% percent of all licenses in the US have been issued to California alone, that’s more than Colorado and Oregon combined. I agree that there is a long way to go, but the combined cannabis tax revenue of those states is $332,368,473, this is not insignificant.

  • headaches.

    • Sorry Ginger T., didn’t mean to cut off the continuation of your comment(“headaches”).

  • Rick, once again, thanks for confirming that you don’t believe in free market capitalism. Are you liberal nanny?

    • Would be nice to have some level of a rational conversation Tax payer/voter.

  • A liberal nanny?
    Good lord that’s a first. Like as was said before, hit the showers!!!

    • Yes, liberal nanny Rick, tell us more about how you’d like to see this new emerging industry regulated and taxed from existence.

  • Growing dope is free market capitalism? Sure, I suppose if it complies with all federal, state and local laws. if it doesn’t then it falls into the realm of a criminal enterprise. Right?

    • Yes, liberal nanny Rick, tell us more about how you’d like to see this new emerging industry regulated and taxed from existence.

    • Yes, that would have been the point of legalization, right?

  • That was the point of legalization silly. California politicians smelled money. Your money. It is already almost completely unregulated and so heavily taxed the majority of growers cannot afford to comply so yeah, legal cultivation IS being taxed from existence.

    There Tax payer/voter, I fixed it for you.

  • Ken’s focus on how we treat each other during this debate is right on. Vilifying or insulting people who don’t believe the way we do degrades community. All Plumas residents have a right to work towards the future they want, and promote what they want. There is a lot of common ground for us to share. Good article. Thanks for the positivity!

    • ^Well said.

  • As Rodney King once said, “Can’t we all just get along?”

    I think I’m hearing the sound of hurt feelers.

    But look, these people with their big Bay Area “investment” bucks who want to fundamentally change the county we live in. Soon, we’ll be voting and it will settle the issue once and for all. In the meantime why not get vocal? It’s our lifestyle they’re talking about changing, so screaming out loud about your feelings is A-okay. I’ll admit it. I’ve grown to where I flat love hearing the whining, wailing and gnashing of their teeth.

    I’ve got faith in the system and in our Sheriff’s Department which promises to keep people in compliance. All so good eh?

  • That’s spot on Tiff!

    It might not be their feelings getting hurt but the obvious is the more they can stifle public discourse the stronger their position is.

    I’m with you Tiffany. Lets scream our lungs out!

    • Bravo!!

      Self-righteousness feeds on itself. Two of the most precious rights Americans possess are the right to express themselves freely and the right to practice their religion as they see fit. Both are enshrined in the First Amendment.

  • No one is saying don’t express yourself, who said that? Please do, obviously there are going to be strong feelings that shows you’re paying attention. This is an important issue with far reaching impacts, either way we go. I’ve lived here all my life, I plan to die here, and in the end whichever way we go, I intend to maintain a positive relationship with my community. Personally showing respect for my neighbors is important to me. I’m trying to provide information that supports my opinions, not make people feel bad about themselves. Honestly when you insult people, they stop listening, it makes you look bad, and it undermines the credibility of any valid points you may have made. I don’t listen to people who insult me, do you?

  • So keep insulting members of your community if you want to bolster the pro-commercial argument. If you want to change minds come back with some facts.

    • Huh? Who insulted anybody? Just ain’t supporting your side in any manner, shape or form and I’ll be vocal about it.
      Couldn’t care less where you want to die. I see a thin skin problem. Get over it.

  • Kudos again Tiffany. Why should we play by their rules?? They do not care about us, you can clearly sense their greed in their comments when they make up their facts as they go along. Obviously the growers only want to win and I see no reason to play nice anymore. I’m with you Tiffany they can suck eggs.

    • I’m not a grower, and neither is Greg Kinne (not that he can’t speak for himself), in fact last time I heard he was supporting the Ralph Koehne no commercial grow ordinance. You guys are barking up the wrong tree.

  • Okay sounds good, you guys should go with that, keep it up it’s working.

  • “It’s working?” Didn’t hear anybody rip on Greg Kinne anyway so why do you bring that up? Just to whine?

    Sounds like folks aren’t going to be quiet about this much longer, seem to be getting really fed up with the Green Plumas people and their screw over the people of Plumas schemes.

    But, that’s just the way it goes in freedom loving America. We will all get our chance to vote. See you there.

    • After I said “well said”, to Greg’s comment, what followed were several negative comments, were you complaining about me saying “well said” to Greg’s comment, in which case you would be complaining about my support for Greg’s position or Greg’s comment itself?
      Either way my overall point is I want to discuss the subject, not the person i.e. ad-hominem. Do you guys want to discuss cannabis legalization, and/or the subject of this article?

  • Oh HeartofPlumas. Still the mouthpiece for the growers playing good cop/bad cop aren’t you.

    Many of us recall a woman named Tess that used to post here on this topic. Obviously Tess knew her stuff, a former large scale grower from Humboldt? HeartofPlumas got into the habit of twisting her words and misquoting her until someone called him on it and Heartof Plumas back pedaled fast and apologized. Folks hat’s the kind of people he is. I had a husband like that once and a divorce fixed that fast. Remember.. Always consider your source.

    • I apologized to Tess because I called her out for being a grower in public, not because someone called me on it. I felt that it was rude of me to call her out publicly, it wasn’t necessary in order to make my point, which was that a large contingent of folks who oppose legalization, do so because they are growers who don’t want to pay taxes or adhere to regulations. My point being that by opposing legalization, you help out growers who don’t want to contribute to society, who would rather operate above the law.
      You guys are extremely reactive; my original point about not insulting people wasn’t just for the anti commercial commenters here. I wanted to discuss the subject, I still do, do you?

      • My memory of the incident with Tess exactly matches Ginger T’s. But whatever.

        You miss the point that right now, in California 99% of the growers are NOT adhering to regulations or paying taxes. They are almost all outlaw. I also completely miss your point that in opposing legalization that we somehow help out growers. Open you eyes, nearly all California growers are in operation outside of the framework of proposition 64 right now and their numbers are rapidly rising.

        How can voicing an anti cultivation opinion possibly make those legal/illegal numbers worse? The truth is it can’t and I don’t know what could.

        In my mind the only recourse is to be vocal against it and feel it’s pro-grow opinions like yours that actually make…

        • it worse

          • I agree with you about the 99% of growers not adhering to regulations, this is a problem.
            I’ve had a deep affinity for cannabis for a very long time. In my early life I spent a huge amount of time in Humbolt and Mendocino counties because of my love for the plant, growers there were my heroes. It wasn’t long before I came to realize that I had been naive in thinking that all of people who were growing the plant I loved, were doing so because they cared about the plant like I did. I was told never to stop and hike in the forests there for my own safety, I met growers who didn’t even enjoy consuming cannabis they did it simply for the profit, I met growers who were using money made off growing to buy hard drugs to sell.

  • Alright I remember that. Tess called him a Weasel and we never heard from her again. To bad, she was a former second generation grower from Mendocino and a virtual encyclopedia on cultivation issues.

    With that being said I would like to remind everyone that the first amendment and freedom of speech is one of the things that makes America so great. While I do not agree on the tactics used I will stand by HeartofPlumas in his right to say whatever he wants.

    Kind regards to all,

    • For some reason I couldn’t reply to my comment above to continue what I was saying, so I put it here (sorry Rick).
      I was disillusioned by many in the illegal cannabis industry. I came to the conclusion that the illegal status of cannabis, at that time, increased the risk involved, which in-turn increased the profit margins, making cannabis an attractive target for unsavory people who didn’t actually care about cannabis, or the environment and their profits were used to support things that I vehemently oppose. The vast majority of these problems, IMO, were a product of prohibition, as was the case with alcohol prohibition. People will always buy cannabis, that won’t change, I advocate for an ethical alternative to cartels. Thanks

  • On that note I think special thanks are due to Feather River Publishing for providing this forum for people to express their views. Who ever it is that moderates these forums must have infinite patience. Bless you.

  • Happy days are long over in Mendocino County. Long gone are the mom and pop growers with 40 plants behind the barn to help pay the mortgage. Some may recall Tess’s story. She moved here from Mendocino after a dear friend was murdered-nearly decapitated by his hired transient bud trimmers. I have a friend connected to Laytonville Fire Department and know for fact the crime did indeed happen.

    Now according to CA. Department of Justice statistics, based on population, Mendocino county now has more violent crime than LA. Well friends, it isn’t the tourists or Ab divers causing all the crime in Mendo. it’s marijuana. But now some want to bring all that joy here to Plumas. Just another reason for me to loudly say no.

    • Mendocino county does have a higher violent crime rate than LA, but so does plumas county, doof, lmao. Have you forgotten about some the horrid crimes we’ve experienced here in plumas county?

  • Humbolt county has a lower rate than LA, plumas and Mendocino. So much for that argument, try again sweetheart.

Comments are closed.