Category Archives: Uncategorized

Council Extends Marijuana Growth Ban to Include Indoor Growth

This was a difficult decision that a number of my strongest supporters disagreed with me on.

Back in January of 2014, the City Council banned all outdoor growth of marijuana within the City. I voted for this because some houses were being used as ‘grow houses’ where the entire lot was dedicated to growing. The police and the neighbors made a convincing case that these houses created a public nuisance by bringing criminal elements to the area.

While this ban helped the situation, grow houses moved their operations indoors which allowed the problem to continue. Indeed, complaints from neighbors of grow houses continued. Thus, the Police Department recommended extending the ban to indoor growth as well. The Council unanimously supported the PD’s decision.

I understand that a number of people use medical marijuana for legitimate reasons. I empathize with them. I also know that marijuana use is a real problem in our schools and that many students obtain marijuana illegally from people growing it within Fremont. I talked with representatives from the School Board who supported the indoor growth ban as a way to reduce marijuana use in our schools.

A big factor in my decision was that this new ordinance does not criminalize marijuana growth. If someone is found to be growing, they are required to remove their growing operation.

Where are all of the blog posts?

My apologies to those people that have come here looking for updated blog posts. I have found that far more people go to my Facebook page than come here to read and comment on my blog posts. If you want to read updates on my campaign, post a question, or read comments from others, you can do it all from my campaign Facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Vinnie-Bacon-for-Fremont-City-Council/321492557896

Yes, it’s true that many people don’t have Facebook accounts. These are probably also the people who don’t read blogs either. 🙂

Open Space Initiative Adopted by the Fremont City Council

The City’s willingness to consider any request from a developer no matter how outrageous was well demonstrated by the Kimber Park fiasco.

A developer owns a piece of land which is zoned as open space. The developer wants to build houses on the land and asks for a re-zoning. Why the City even considered this request is unclear – why not just say no, sorry, this is zoned for open space. You can’t develop housing there. Instead, the Council wasted hours and hours of meetings debating whether to grant the request.

The neighbors formed a group called Save Kimber Park. They were so concerned that they spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of volunteer hours gathering signatures for an initiative to make it harder for the city to re-zone open space, the Open Space Initiative.

The neighbors gathered enough votes to force the City Council to make a choice: either adopt the proposed initiative or put it on the ballot in November.

Last night, by a 3-2 vote the City Council decided to adopt the Open Space Initiative, instead of going through the costly and time-consuming process of putting it up to a vote of Fremont residents.

The Council’s decision saves the backers of the initiative from having to go through the campaign process which would have cost them a lot of time and money (in addition to what they have already spent gathering signatures).

A big congratulations goes to the Save Kimber Park people for making this happen. Their work in raising this issue, gathering signatures, etc. is the kind of civic involvement that our City needs more of. While the adoption of the initiative does not fully resolve the issue, this is a big step in the right direction.

But why did we have to go through this? Why didn’t the City Council simply reject the request in the first place? This is yet another example of the City Council bending over backwards to try to accommodate every developer’s scheme to make more profit.

In my opinion, Council should have made it clear from the get go that they would NOT be in favor of changing the zoning to allow for housing on the site. That would have prevented this whole situation from occurring in the first place.