Aug 28th 2025 letter to County on ALTERNATIVE # 2 PREVENTS NUISANCES
August 28, 2025
Letter to County Staff, Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors on Right to Farm, Nuisance Law, and Proper Planning for Commercial Cannabis.
From: Neighborhood Coalition <sonomaneighborhoodcoalition@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2025 9:13 AM
To:Tom.Bahning@sonomacounty.gov;Tim.Freeman@sonomacounty.gov;larry.reed@sonomacounty.gov;Webster.Marquez@sonomacounty.gov; Shaun.McCaffery@sonomacounty.gov;bos@sonomacounty.gov;scott.Orr@sonomacounty.gov; crystal.acker@sonomacounty.gov;tennis.wick@sonomacounty.gov
Subject: ALTERNATIVE # 2 PREVENTS NUISANCES
August 28, 2025
To: Permit Sonoma, Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors
Subject: Right to Farm, Nuisance Law, and Proper Planning for Commercial Cannabis.
1. Cannabis does not constitute “agriculture” and “controlled agriculture” is a specious term – “Right to Farm” does not apply to cannabis.
The Countyis considering updating the cannabis ordinance to redefine cannabis as “controlled agriculture,” a term which lacks any legal recognition, precedent, or general understanding. The County seems to be attempting to utilize this newly minted term to bootstrap cannabis into the domain of “Right to Farm.” Legal support for this end-run is non-existent. (see Shute Mihaly & Weinberger letter.) The State does not classify cannabis as an agricultural crop. Rather it is considered an agricultural product- very different from a crop that is growing in the ground. Cannabis is not covered under the State Right to Farm Law, and local ordinances must abide by state law. We are submitting this letter to underscore to the County the multiple legal defects inherent in this double-barreled plan to be sure the draft policy conforms with the law and to avoid future litigation. Cannabis is not “agriculture” and “controlled agriculture” is not a legally cognizable term therefore “Right to Farm” does not pertain to cannabis under any stretch of the law.
2. Cannabis can be a private and public nuisance under California law.
As the County works to update the Cannabis Ordinance it should adopt policies that guarantee commercial cannabis does not create a nuisance for the public and surrounding neighbors. This is a fundamental premise of good land use planning so long as regulations ensure it is conducted in appropriate locations where it will not “interfere with comfortable enjoyment of life and property” as provided in the California Civil Code Sections 3479 and 3480 which define the general concepts of “nuisance” and “public nuisance.”
The California Civil Code defines the general concept of “nuisance” and “public nuisance,” respectively, in Sections 3479 and 3480 of the Civil Code, as follows:
“Anything which is injurious to health, including, but not limited to, the illegal sale of controlled substances, or is indecent or offensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoymentof life or property, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin,or any public park, square, street, or highway, is a nuisance. [1](emphasis added) and,
“A public nuisance is one which affects at the same time an entire community or neighborhood, or any considerable number of persons, although the extent of the annoyance or damage inflicted upon individuals may be unequal.”
The current Sonoma County Cannabis regulations are found in Sec. 26-88-250 through Sec. 26-88-258 of the Sonoma County Municipal Code and provide general guidelines for all commercial cannabis cultivation. Those regulations recognize that cannabis can become a public nuisance, providing, Section26-88-250(f):
“(f)Health and Safety. Commercial cannabis activity shall not create a public nuisance or adversely affect the health or safety of the nearby residents or businesses by creating dust, light, glare, heat, noise, noxious gasses, odor, smoke, traffic, vibration, unsafe conditions or other impacts, or be hazardous due to the use or storage of materials, processes, products, runoff or wastes.”
The stench of outdoor cannabis cultivation is undisputed. Further, the Neighborhood Coalition has submitted unrefuted scientific evidence to the County from independent public health experts and scientists demonstrating the impact of cannabis odors is not only offensive to the senses, but carries carcinogenic, airborne emissions, not necessarily even detectable by any odor. These facts place outdoor cannabis squarely within California’s definition of a private and public nuisance as well as proving it to be a public health threat.
3. Proper planning to protect the public and prevent outdoor cannabis grows from being a private or public nuisance.
As mandated, the Draft EIR contains mitigation alternatives to prevent the extensive offenses resulting from outdoor cannabis cultivation. Alternative 2 limits cannabis cultivation to fully contained indoor facilities in commercial zones. It is the only alternative that completely prevents outdoor cannabis from being a nuisance. Other alternatives include various complicated setback provisions that are not sufficient to protect residents from cannabis emissions, including the carcinogen Beta-Myrcene. Not only are these provisions impossibly complicated, but they also do not solve the very real problem of cannabis emissions being carried from one area to another due to the unpredictable vagaries of the complex wind and air currents integral to our beautiful county. Alternative 2 is the only option which completely protects the public from the serious nuisance of the noxious assault of outdoor cannabis emissions on the public’s health. Therefore, proper planning for cannabis cultivation mandates it be limited to indoor facilities in commercial zones as provided in Alternative 2.
[1] CA Civil Code 3479 provides a single property owner with the legal power to sue a neighbor forcreating and maintaining a nuisance.
Respectfully submitted,
Neighborhood Coalition
Nancy and Brantly Richardson, Communications Directors
SonomaNeighborhoodCoalition@gmail.com