Serving Whitman County since 1877
Serving Whitman County since 1877
The town of Garfield Board of Adjustment voted unanimously 5-0, Monday night to approve a conditional use permit to process marijuana. Growing it at the site had already been deemed allowable under the city’s ag zone provisions.
The vote comes with conditional use restrictions to be determined for the edge-of-town property on South 10th Street owned by Charles Lantzy.
Debra Lantzy, Lantzy’s niece, applied for the permit. She plans a marijuana growing and processing operation there under the state’s new I-502 law.
“I think they were between a rock and a hard spot,” said Mayor Ray McCown. “I don’t think anyone wanted to vote for it, but we’re afraid to vote against it.”
He went on to explain that the central issue has to do with money.
“Because the state put out propoganda that if a town bans this they may not be eligible to share in the tax revenue. I’m not sure if that was just the marijuana tax or liquor too. No one wants to forfeit the tax revenue they get from the liquor board.”
Brian Smith, communications director for the state Liquor Control Board, suggests this concern is unfounded.
“I-502 didn’t allow for that,” he said. “The dispursements don’t go to local government. The selling point was that local governments wouldn’t have to carry out law enforcement on minor marijuana offenses that eat up time and resources.”
So a town that acts to ban or disallow a marijuana applicant is not under threat, Smith suggested.
“Not from us, or from the state,” he said.
As for Lantzy’s approval from Garfield’s Board of Adjustment, her conditional use permit will be tied to certain restrictions to be decided in the coming weeks.
The restrictions include amount of law-enforcement incidents per year deemed allowable at the site, as well as concerns about compost and wastewater by city Superintendent Robby Johnson.
There would be no retail aspect to Lantzy’s proposal.
The meeting
Monday night’s Board of Adjustment meeting at Garfield Community Center began with board chair Tammy Howard laying out the current situation, noting that Debra Lantzy of 109 South 10th Street filed an application on May 27 for a cottage industry in an agriculture one zone to process marijuana.
Howard explained that the current parameters of an ag one designation allows “cropping trees, fruit and berries…” and thus, marijuana would be allowed since it is termed agricultural.
“Does any member of this board have a conflict of interest?” she asked.
Hearing none, she continued, noting that city Building Inspector Dan Gladwill, Fire Chief Chris McCully and Police Chief Jerry Neumann had no concerns. But there was a concern regarding the wastewater treatment plant from Johnson of Public Works.
Howard then noted that Janise Anderson contacted the board to say she is not in favor of this.
“She called this afternoon at 5 p.m.,” Howard said.
Howard then pointed out that what was to be addressed that night was the processor part of Lantzy’s proposed operation.
“Tonight, whatever this board decides will be what happens. We’ve been given this task and it’s a very narrow task,” Howard said.
She opened the floor for public comment.
Greg Kolar, a neighbor to the Lantzy property, spoke about his concern for property values, possible crime increase and the “type of crowd it can bring in.”
Another man noted that this could be a “can of worms,” suggesting the practice might expand.
“I asked a couple local pastors. They say they disagreed with having it in their town,” he said.
Garfield-Palouse Police Officer Joe Merry, sitting amidst the public in uniform, spoke next.
“From a property owner perspective, I’m 100 percent against it,” he said. “I’m really interested in property values, as I plan on selling my property in the next 10 years or so and get to flatter ground. As you all know, I live on the top of the hill.”
He suggested the marijuana operation would attract crime.
“There will be folks of opportunity looking to see if they can knock it off… whether it could be a lawnmower, a Weedeater, a tiller,” he said.
Charles Lantzy, owner the operation site, spoke next.
“I think the property values would go up,” he said. “Opening a can of worms is a grow operation that is illegal. That’s your can of worms.”
“I want to reiterate, it’s illegal to smoke marijuana on my property,” said Debra Lantzy.
She noted an issue about security.
“My cameras have face recognition to 20 feet,” she said.
A man in back, Keith Kimball, spoke next.
“I’m an excellent citizen and I smoke marijuana. I’ve never been around violence with marijuana and I’ve smoked it since high school. I have had to deal with some low-lifes. I would like it to be just normal. There are a lot of good people, really good people that smoke marijuana. I’m a vet, I served my country.”
He continued.
“She’ll be able to make so much money on that property, the value will go up,” Kimball said. “The law in this state has changed. From what I gather, conservatives are all about state’s rights.”
Kimball then suggested marijuana production could be an industry for buildings in downtown Garfield.
An older man in white cut-off sleeves talked next.
“I think we’re missing the point tonight,” he said. “If you look down the road nine miles and have to dig up your son from under a bridge… To me, this is about money… If they want to (grow) marijuana, go ahead, just not in this town.”
“There’s never been an overdose death from marijuana,” Charles Lantzy said.
Board member Eric Hasenoerhl then closed public comment and the board discussed the matter.
Further discussion
Howard noted that she met with City Attorney Stephen Bishop earlier in the day and said that the next step will be “Findings of Fact.”
“So tonight you’re after a general yes or no,” she said to the board.
During continued discussion, it was noted that no plant material would leave Lantzy’s site, it would be composted at the location.
“I think the property value concerns are more because of the trailer and animals next door,” said Howard.
“We’ll have to review the property value issue,” said Hasenoerhl. “There’s no historical knowledge to draw on, other than prohibition.”
“I wish we had a crystal ball in the middle of the table, but we don’t,” said city councilmember Sharon Schnebly, sitting as a non-voting member of the board.
She then asked about any kind of odors coming from the property.
“You’re gonna get more smell from a couple of hogs out there,” said DebraLantzy, before a member of the board cited a nuisance code that covers odors.
Kolar then asked if it’s alright to add another comment.
Given permission, he said that the issue is not “property values but property desirability.”
“I think there’s a whole lot of (potential buyers), that if you’re right next to a marijuana grower, they’re not interested,” he said.
“It might be the opposite too,” said Charles Lantzy.
The board then discussed the difficulty of what crime may be attributable to a marijuana-processing operation.
Debra Lantzy emphasized that the crop will be delivered to the seller.
“The dealer’s not coming to my house,” she said.
“That’s one of the main points of making it legal,” said Charles Lantzy. “Because you can call the cops. Otherwise you can’t.”
The board then talked about what restrictions to put on a conditional use permit, such as how many criminal instances per year would allowed with the police department determining whether a given incident is attributable to the operation or just random.
The concerns of Johnson and the public works department were discussed.
“Debris in the compost pile… or anything harmful to the public,” said Howard. “It would be an automatic reason for the board to convene.”
“Can I make one more statement?” said Kolar. He then read a piece from a newspaper in Fremont, Calif., about problems with illegal growing sites.
Others noted that it is illegal in California. This would be legal.
“It’s good to do it in a small town,” said Kimball. “You can really see everything that’s happening. If something goes sideways, people are looking out for each other for the most part.”
The vote
Hasenoehrl made a motion to approve. It was seconded and carried unanimously.
Board members then pulled out phones and talked about when to set a day and time for a meeting for findings of fact.
“The property values are too hard for us to measure,” said Howard, explaining that the matter was not included in the list of potential restrictions.
The next meeting was set for July 22 at 6:30 p.m. at the community center.
Marijuana growing was not discussed, just processing.
“It’s already allowed, since it’s an agricultural crop,” Howard said.
As for next Tuesday, the chair indicated that next week’s meeting should be enough to decide the restrictions on Lantzy’s conditional use permit.
“I believe we’ll be able to wrap it up that night,” Howard said.
Garth Meyer is a former Whitman County Gazette reporter.
Reader Comments(0)