Board of Supervisors Meeting | 10.7.2025

by | Oct 10, 2025 | Economic Development, Get Involved, Stay Informed, Trinity Resources, Your Opinion Matters

Sharing Information  |  Encouraging Engagement

This board meeting included one presentation that was postponed,  updates from our CAO and Supervisors. The agenda included two items on the Consent Calendar, one item under County Matters, and two under Closed Session.

The County Matters item was an Appeal Hearing related to how a section of the county code should be interpreted and applied. The focus was on the exception granted for certain property owners involved in commercial cannabis operations within the original opt-out zones. The exception was limited to property owners with a specific Water Board enrollment status.  The board received a substantial amount of public comment regarding this subject.

A. PRESENTATIONS

A.1. Clerk of the Board – Receive an update from U.S. Forest Service representatives regarding matters of interest in Trinity County. No fiscal impact.

  • This presentation was postponed

 

B. PUBLIC COMMENT
  • Tri-Counties Community Action Partnership – nonprofit established in 2017 that serves three counties – Glenn, Colusa, Trinity. Focus on building capacity without duplicating services. Already have one staff member in Trinity County. Looking for office space and personnel in Trinity County. Funding received through various sources.
  • Concerns shared regarding the elections-related consultant that the BOS approved via the Consent Calendar in September. Suggested that this matter be brought back for consideration via County Matters. Shared that the consultant was fired by Shasta County.
  • Additional comments in support of concerns shared by the previous commenter.
  • Additional comments in support of concerns shared by the previous commenter. Shared that the consultant does not support transparency and supported illegal actions. Shared that over 2,000 ballots were submitted without a name.
  • Concerns repeated regarding the process by which the board approved the elimination of payment plans for cannabis-related fines. Believes that a policy decision should be made by the board in a public setting. Feels that payment plans are more supportive of economic development. Also raised concerns about code enforcement being handled by Cannabis Division staff – both from safety and funding perspectives.
  • Request repeated for South County roads to be placed on the agenda for further review and discussion. Additional comments in support of concerns shared regarding the elections-related consultant.

C. REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS

C.1. Report from Department Heads

  • None

C.2. Report from County Administrative Officer

  • Trindel & Prism Board of Directors meetings. Insurance rates continue to increase though it appears that the growth rate may be leveling out. Efforts are underway to address the underlying causes of rate increases and to ensure sustained coverage options.
  • Building Official – the permitting process continues with remaining staff while we recruit for a new Building Official. They are currently reviewing applications.
  • Community Development Director – posting for this position closes on Friday.
  • CalTrans Tree Trimming – this will take place in Weaverville next week.

C.3. Reports from Members of the Board of Supervisors

  • District 1 | Ric Leutwyler
    • East Branch East Weaver Creek Project – participated with project leaders in preparation for implementation of the culvert replacement project.
    • Science on Tap – Wolves, sitings have been reported but no confirmations at this time. Funds are available for reimbursement of some expenditures and/or confirmed losses.
    • Sierra Institute Workshop – brought people together to build upon findings documented during a similar workshop last year.
    • Soroptimist 50th Birthday – attended the celebration where notable accomplishments were highlighted by members and regional leaders. Assembly Member Rogers representative, Heidi McHugh presented a plaque signed by the Assemblymember and Senate ProTem McGuire. I recommend that the BOS issue a proclamation recognizing the Soroptimist’ 50 years of service here in Trinity County.
    • Tourism Funding – worked with fellow Ad Hoc Committee members to finalize the process and application for funding. Information and the application have been shared on the county website and via social media. The Trinity Journal also shared information.
      • At this time, the process does not call for in-person presentations to the Ad Hoc Committee, nor the BOS.
      • The timeline calls for applications to be submitted no later than end-of-day October 15th. Board review of Ad Hoc Committee recommendations is tentatively scheduled for November 4th.
      • The board will have the option to award some, all, or none of the $70,000 set aside in the budget.
  • District 2 | Jill Cox
    • Offered appreciation for other Supervisors who covered for her during her absence.
  • District 3 | Liam Gogan
    • RCRC – attended on behalf of Supervisor Cox.
      • Fiber/Broadband – spoke to Connie Smith regarding obstacles and priorities. Indicated that wording for the original application will be revised and the application reissued.
      • Sierra Nevada Conservancy – met with leadership to discuss projects and preparations in Trinity County.
      • Fire Safety – presentation highlighted the value and benefits of defensible space grants. Noted that changes are coming that could lead individuals to lose fire insurance coverage if defensible space is not managed. The RCD did receive grant funding for free chipping this Fall.
      • Imagination Library – in October, the 1,000th book will be delivered here in Trinity County.
  • District 4 | Heidi Carpenter-Harris
    • North Coast Air Quality Board Meeting – Eureka. Discussed bio-burners.
    • California Resource Conservation –  Discussed concerns related to grant funding for natural resources.
  • District 5 | Julia Brownfield
    • Water District Meetings – received presentations regarding work planned on the dam in Ruth.
    • Road Matters – shared concerns of constituents who wrote to her regarding concerns. Invited other supervisors to visit to see this firsthand. Requested that this matter be placed on a future agenda.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR

D.1. Clerk of the Board – Approve regular meeting minutes for September 16, Budget Hearing meeting minutes for September 23 and special meeting minutes for September 29, 2025. No fiscal impact.

D.2. Clerk of the Board – Authorize the Chairman to sign a letter of support regarding BHCIP Round 2: “True North” Behavioral Health Campus Proposal. No fiscal impact.

    • The board approved all items as presented
E. COUNTY MATTERS

E.1. Community Development – Cannabis – Conduct an appeal hearing to consider upholding, modifying or overturning the Planning Commission’s decision to disapprove Planning Commission Resolution 2025-05 providing an Ambiguity Determination (Appellant: Michele Taylor) (Project Number DEV-25-05). Unknown fiscal impact.

  • Drew Plebanis | Interim Planning Director & Cannabis Division Director
    • This item came about approximately six months ago.
    • The focus was on the need for greater clarity regarding how to interpret and administer specific code
    • The item was presented to the Planning Commission in two meetings. During the first meeting, the PC chose to continue this to the second meeting.
    • 1,032 enrollments with the Water Board
    • 118 parcels within the limitations code section (Community Service Districts in Lewiston, Weaverville, Coffee Creek…) – the original opt-outs
    • The PC determined there was no ambiguity and did not approve the same staff recommendations the board is considering today.
    • Staff’s view of ambiguity
      • Timing – October 3rd adoption, November 3rd took effect
      • The Water Board adopted new policies at about the same time that the original opt-outs were adopted.
      • The Water Board did not define “cultivation site,” but refers to a unique parcel.
      • The Water Board required applicants to identify only one APN
      • Later, the State General Order expanded this so that more than one APN could be registered if the APNs were contiguous.
      • Only the original (more limited 2015 order) is referenced in the language of the code that established/acknowledged the opt-outs.
  • Jim Underwood (for Appellants)
    • For the most part, the appellants support the staff’s recommendation
    • Believes that what was in place at the time is the determining factor, and the original Water Board order required individual APNs to be registered. Only those that were registered were referenced/covered by the county’s ordinance.
    • The appellant’s situation is an example of the challenges that could come with the interpretation of the relevant code, allowing expansion/relocation beyond
  • Public Comment
    • Eagle Creek Ranch – when first obtaining the property, received direction from staff that cultivation could be moved since multiple contiguous parcels would be considered one legal parcel. Have spent a ton of time and money based on this direction/understanding. Restarting cultivation on the original site would require much greater environmental impact, electricity, etc.
    • Comments regarding the petition included in back up material. Noted that those who signed support cannabis operations being allowed to operate. Shared that the BOS already decided that cultivators in opt-outs can transfer licenses and water board enrollments to new owners. Shared that there is only one definition of “legal parcel” in the county code.
    • Eagle Creek Ranch – noted that the decision today will determine the success or failure of their project/plans. Noted that they have been moving forward based on direction from staff. Shared that the staff member handling their application said they had completed all necessary work and that they were recommending approval. This ranch has been in operation for over 160 years. Asks that their business be treated just as if it were a winery. Asked for the BOS to uphold the PC decision, approve their application, and eliminate the 97,000 acre Coffee Creek opt-out.
    • Comments in support of the previous speaker and the PC decision. Noted that he believes that the community does not support the Coffee Creek opt-out.
    • Believes that the PC and BOS often get creative in the interpretation of code and policy for industries and businesses they want to support. Feels that we need to stop changing the rules.
    • Asked why there can’t be more clarity and consistency regarding these matters. Shared that businesses like cellular tower providers can continue doing business without meeting all requirements, but cultivators are held to a much higher standard. Asked the BOS to support cultivators.
    • Comments in support of cultivators and the industry in general. Asked the BOS to see beyond stigmas.
    • Comments regarding staff recommendations. The requirement for the Water Board enrollment was an appeasement to support the introduction of the opt-outs. Noted that applicants were told by staff that cultivation sites could be moved to contiguous parcels. Noted that different size/type licenses were not in place at the time. Called for an updated cannabis policy to be adopted.
    • Tom Balanco referred to the code language in question as “the Balanco Compromise.” This was an exemption from opt-out limitations. Shared that language references the need to register multiple sites If the parcels are not contiguous… implying that there was no need to register multiple parcels if they were contiguous.
    • Comments in support of previous comments and the PC decision. Shared concerns about the types of comments shared in backup material that refer to criminality, stereotypes, etc. Argues that cannabis does not have a negative impact on tourism. Called for an update to the cannabis code/policies.
    • Comments in support of the North Lake cannabis cultivators. Encourage the BOS to support the PC decision.
    • Comments about the county’s poor economy and the need to support all local businesses. Shared concern that a business has to work with the county for five years, only to face ongoing roadblocks.
    • Comments supporting the introduction of an updated cannabis ordinance. Shared concern about a business having to wait five years and now facing challenges. Supports the staff’s recommendation.
    • Comments regarding the timing and process for the Water Board changing guidelines to allow for multiple APNs. Referenced the “legal parcel” definition in the county code. Doesn’t see ambiguity. Asked the BOS to support the PC decision and stop moving the goal posts.
  • Appellant Response to Public Comment
    • Difference to “legal parcel” definition in general and how it applies in the cannabis code.
    • The compromise was based on being enrolled at the time. Enrollment at that time required a specific APN and street address.
    • Feels that the policy would have to be modified to allow for things to move forward in the way applicants would like to.
  • Staff Response
    • Seeking clarity regarding interpretation.
  • Board Questions & Discussion
    • The application that has been referenced during public comment is not what the BOS is deciding upon.
    • The BOS is charged with addressing the staff’s request for clarity, as presented to the PC
    • Supervisor Leutwyler summarized the information he gathered during a visit to the Eagle Creek site and a phone conversation with the appellant.
    • Supervisor Gogan shared his perspective on the (lessor) incoming volume of cultivation.
    • Drew Plebanis clarified that the BOS is being asked to address the interpretation of the code in broad terms, not specific to the application we’ve been discussing.
    • Discussion about bringing sections of code requiring clarity to the PC and BOS.
    • Motion offered to grant the appeal and support staff’s recommendation and the proposed resolution.
      • The board approved this motion (3 to 2)
    • Motion offered to deny the appeal and adopt the legal definition of “legal parcel”  (which includes contiguous parcels) as the guideline for consideration of these matters.
      • This motion failed (1 to 4)
    • Supervisor Carpenter-Harris offered her perspective regarding the ways in which organizations recognize APNs via permits, etc.
    • Supervisor Leutwyler clarified the following details with staff:
      • Water Board enrollments were specifically related to cannabis cultivation permits, which are APN/site-specific.
      • The Cannabis Program EIR states that the impact of odor from cultivation operations is expected to be significant, unavoidable, and can travel up to two miles.
      • The compromise mentioned during public comments (which created the exception) was made in conjunction with establishing the original opt-outs, which otherwise would prohibit commercial cannabis operations within their boundaries.
    • Supervisor Brownfield expressed concern about limiting what people can do on their own properties.
  • The board approved staff recommendations and the proposed resolution as presented 

Prior Closed Session Report

F.1. Government Code Section 54954.5(e) – Public Employee Appointment: County Clerk/Recorder/Assessor/Registrar of Voters. 

    • Direction given to staff.

F.2. Government Code Section 54954.5(e) – Threat to Public Services or Facilities Consultation with: County Counsel and Sheriff.

    • Direction given to staff
F. CLOSED SESSION

Public Comment

  • Requested clarification regarding item F.1. and details regtarding the timing of interviews for the County Clerk, Recorder/Assessor/Registrar of Voters

F.1. Government Code Section 54954.5(e) – Public Employee Appointment: County Clerk Recorder/ Assessor/ Registrar of Voters

F.2. Government Code Section 54954.5(f) – Labor Negotiations County’s Designated Representatives: Suzie Hawkins, Laila Cassis, and Margaret Long Employee Organizations: Deputy Sheriff’s Association

ADJOURN

 

Sharing Information  |  Encouraging Engagement

Please use this form to let me know if you would like to be added to the distribution list for updates. Check the box next to the type of updates you would like to receive.