MJ location concerns were avoidable

This morning I -- and a whole roomful of other citizens -- went to a Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) meeting. Most of us were there to talk and listen about proposed marijuana operations in the county.

As I have explained in earlier posts and in my comments at the meeting, I am surprised that the BOCC messed this one up so badly. Commissioner O'Brien (my opponent in this year's election for County Commissioner) is supposed to have been the one paying most attention to this issue, and he has my sympathy for the fix he's gotten the county into.^1,2

---

¹Note added after reading the article in the May 21 Daily Record: I was slightly misquoted in the article. In a FAQ issued on October 31, 2013 (very early in the process), people interested in getting into the marijuana business were reassured that if local officials did not like their proposed location, they could change their location without having to reapply. In other words, there would be a little or no cost to entrepreneurs as they search for an acceptable site, and entrepreneurs were clearly warned that such a search might be necessary.

²I hate to literally put my views on marijuana in a footnote, but here goes: I support the experiment the voters of the State of Washington have chosen to carry out, and I support Kittitas County's involvement it it. This involvement, if done correctly, can bring at least three benefits to the county: jobs; tax revenue from marijuana production, processing, and sales; and an increased property tax base. There are many citizens in this county who oppose marijuana on moral grounds, but I am not one of them.