Photo by Andreas Fuhrmann // Buy this photo
James Benno works on a document for his lawyer Friday in his Redding home while his daughter, Jessica, 22, takes care of her son, Gunner Tejeda. James Benno is being evicted from the home because of pressure from his landlord after the city issued code violations stemming from Benno's outdoor medical marijuana grow this past season. Benno, a single dad, lives in the house with his daughter, son-in-law, two grandchildren and two sons.
A Redding medical marijuana patient says the city is forcing his eviction from his longtime home because he didn't follow the city's medical marijuana cultivation ordinance.
But city officials insist their actions are nothing personal and they're only trying to make sure the property adheres to the city's zoning codes.
"They're going after me by going through my landlord," said James Benno, 46.
Redding officials notified him that his marijuana garden on Riviera Drive was violating city ordinances in September — just weeks before harvest time.
Benno, who received a five-day eviction notice Friday, maintains he's being targeted because he has been an outspoken critic of the city's marijuana cultivation ordinance. He's chief executive director of Nor-Cal NORML, the local chapter of a statewide nonprofit organization seeking to reform California's marijuana laws.
"I've broken no laws but I'm being forced from my home," Benno said.
City officials said they aren't targeting Benno but they do want him and the property owner to comply with city laws.
"Our main objective is to get the property into compliance," said City Attorney Rick Duvernay.
Benno had 36 plants, ranging from 9- to 14-feet tall and covering 960 square feet of his yard. They were enclosed within a 6-foot-tall chain-link fence topped with three strands of barbed wire.
Benno was growing for himself and five other people who have doctors' recommendations for medicinal cannabis, he said.
A city code enforcement officer was sent to Benno's home Sept. 1 following a complaint, said Bill Nagel, Redding's interim development services director. The identity of the person who made the complaint is kept confidential to protect from retaliation, he said.
A compliance order issued after the inspection said Benno needed to reduce the square footage of his cultivation plot to 300 square feet, move the plot so the plants were at least 10 feet from the backyard property lines and 30 feet from the nearest neighbor. He also needed to reduce the height of his plants so they were no taller than 8 feet high or not visible from the street.
The order also was sent to the property owner, Robert Ballard, who didn't return a phone call Friday seeking comment.
They were given until Sept. 16 to comply, but Benno said in September he wouldn't move or trim the plants.
He's been compliant with the order since Nov. 4 after harvesting the plants in October, he said.
"There hasn't been a plant in the ground since then," Benno said.
Redding wouldn't order a property owner to evict a tenant over a zoning code violation, Nagel said.
"Any eviction action is between the tenant and the landlord," he said. "It would be OK with us if Mr. Benno stayed. Our only concern is if there was a violation and if there are going to be any violations in the future."
The matter was set to come before the city's Administrative Hearings Board Wednesday, though Debra Wright, Redding's code enforcement supervisor, will ask the board to move the hearing to its January meeting, according to a staff report.
"It's being continued pending the outcome of this issue between the tenant and the landlord," Duvernay said.
The city is waiting to see if Benno moves out, which would leave little risk of future violations at the property, Duvernay said.
"If he does not move out, the risk of future violation is quite high, since he blatantly refuses to follow the code, and we might need to pursue the compliance order to completion to prevent the violation from recurring next summer," he said.
Benno, who said he's lived at the house for 11 years, isn't angry with his landlord.
"It's not his fault," Benno said. "His heart is not in this."
He said his garden complied with state law but the city's ordinance violates the law.
Duvernay disagreed.
"He does not recognize the validity of our zoning ordinance," Duvernay said Friday.
He said the recent Pack v. Long Beach case, which the city used in-part as a basis for its recently passed ban on dispensaries, didn't affect Redding's ability to regulate growing marijuana using zoning codes.
"At least to this point no court has said a city can't have zoning regulations," Duvernay said.
Comments » 285
December 10, 2011 12:19 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Just_an_observer
writes: 8
If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. This is part of the problem.
Help us to improve the quality of comments. Earn rewards for contributing ’insightful’ comments.
December 10, 2011 12:37 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post ThisIsAmerica
He needs to buy a home and not rent one, and then the problems with his landlord would go away.
Although we've always been known as the low price home leader, houses are more affordable now then ever.
Go and look to buy a house today! Your troubles will go away!
December 10, 2011 12:47 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post ThisIsAmerica
You know, you read this story and two sons, daughter, daughter in law plus grandchildren makes a tremendous amount of people dependent upon this man.
December 10, 2011 1:57 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post boogeyman
Rules are rules.
The fact that he hasn't had a plant in the ground since Nov 4 really doesn't mean diddly squat.
If he wants to pursue being a care grower it is probably in everyone's best interest that he relocates to a rural address.
December 10, 2011 2:46 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Mick
in response to ThisIsAmerica:
You know, you read this story and two sons, daughter, daughter in law plus grandchildren makes a tremendous amount of people dependent upon this man.
>>> Why do you think he has 36 plants ranging from 9'-14' tall? That brings in some serious cash with the right ways of getting rid of it while the rest of us work for an honest living and pay taxes.
December 10, 2011 3:17 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Vote_Insightful
in response to ThisIsAmerica:
He needs to buy a home and not rent one, and then the problems with his landlord would go away.
Although we've always been known as the low price home leader, houses are more affordable now then ever.
Go and look to buy a house today! Your troubles will go away!
He's a patient, so he cannot afford a home. :)
December 10, 2011 3:31 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post astral55
writes: 5
Can't the city code enforcement kick you out of your own home even if your the owner?for violating the rules of the city?? some folks just got to big for their own britches thinking it was the Wild Wild West
December 10, 2011 4:16 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post MagicPots
in response to boogeyman:
Rules are rules.
The fact that he hasn't had a plant in the ground since Nov 4 really doesn't mean diddly squat.
If he wants to pursue being a care grower it is probably in everyone's best interest that he relocates to a rural address.Rules are in Prop 215 and SB420. Those clearly allow him the ability to grow and care for others with the cannabis.
Since you said it, the county board is planning on making the growing of marijuana MORE difficult in rural areas than it is in the city. Is that in everyone's best interest?
Visit Norcalsafeaccess.org to learn more about the situation, or to donate for future legal and political battles!
December 10, 2011 4:23 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Thomas_Jefferson
Stupid Idealistic People. Should I post your addresses on here for all to see. Yes you that make decisions that don't effect you. But If you think that no one knows were you live, your wrong.
December 10, 2011 4:37 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Tammohawk
"At least to this point no court has said a city can't have zoning regulations," Duvernay said.
No, Duvernay they haven't. But they have said that anything that restricts Prop. 215 is unconstitutional. Read the Kelly decision from Jan. 2010.
This man has a right to grow for other people who are either too ill to do so themselves or live where they cannot. The city's restrictions are what is out of line here. They need to read the Peron decision. Somebody needs to educate these folks. And fast!
December 10, 2011 5:02 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Califgirl53
Scrooge is saying with glee, Bah Humbug! The agencies who are forcing this eviction are heartless _______(fill in blank) to evict this family at the holiday season. If punishment is their game why not some sort of fine that they will have to pay for an infinite amount of years? At least that way they could stay in their home.
December 10, 2011 5:04 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Smapdi
in response to Thomas_Jefferson:
Stupid Idealistic People. Should I post your addresses on here for all to see. Yes you that make decisions that don't effect you. But If you think that no one knows were you live, your wrong.
Not sure Thomas Jefferson would make veiled threats on the internet.
December 10, 2011 5:04 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Thomas_Jefferson
We are Nabors people, cant we all just get along?
December 10, 2011 5:07 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post not2bright
Another example of 215 abuse. This is supposed to be a person's home, not a location for a mini cartel. Legal, or not legal, where's the common sense and respect for his neighbors?
December 10, 2011 5:15 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post silenceisnotgolden
City of Redding officials seem to be making a habit of using property owners to evict families from their homes who are not in compliance with the city's unconstitutional agenda. Landlords are threatened with daily fines for "allowing" people who can't pay their REU bills to remain in their homes, and now this.
What a cowardly act on the part of city officials to force landlords to do their dirty work for them, in both of these situations. What a shame that there isn't one single elected representative of the people (city council member) who will stand up to this thuggery.
December 10, 2011 6:03 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post thumper6977
writes: 3
Off topic BUT....
FULL ECLIPSE OF THE MOON RIGHT NOW!
December 10, 2011 6:17 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post lakeguy
Good for the city, these growers and collectives will have you believe they are here for medical reasons to help people in great need, when they are just hear to make a dollar. They don't want a real job so they prey on sick people with partially legal marijuana
December 10, 2011 6:18 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post citizenactivist
But city officials insist their actions are nothing personal and they're only trying to make sure the property adheres to the city's zoning codes.
******************
Need to remember that line when it's time to
remove all these city jerks from offices and
fire them over all the law suits soon to follow.These "codes" and their enforcement make most
backyards UN-useable with all the set-back
requirements, and the city knows it.
December 10, 2011 6:20 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Prancer3
Thanks thumper...have to go have a look....
omg it is cool! I've never seen one before. I tried to take a picture, but it is all black. And it is colder than a you know what out there. Have a good day thumper.
December 10, 2011 6:26 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post sound_of_reason
We notified Duvernay and the City Council that SB 420's limitations on number of plants was thrown out by the California Supreme Court. It seems in every aspect of these talks, we have not been listened to at all. It just means more money the City of Redding is going to lose in court.
No representation on the City Council will soon turn into majority representation on the City Council, because we are going to make all City Council seats available in the 2012 election, and then we will throw out these unconstitutional rights violating politicians!
Supervisors are up next. If we are going to advertise to come sign recall petitions, and come register to vote over the radio, we might as well have all the recall petitions there for them to sign at once.
Turning medical patients into the new group to discriminate against just because they have found something that helps them better than main stream pharmaceuticals is criminal, immoral, and unconstitutional! STOP IT NOW!
Corporate America, if you insist on a war against the people's rights, your downfall is inevitable, and no doubt you are going to take capitalism to it's grave as well.
December 10, 2011 6:29 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post thumper6977
in response to Prancer3:
Thanks thumper...have to go have a look....
omg it is cool! I've never seen one before. I tried to take a picture, but it is all black. And it is colder than a you know what out there. Have a good day thumper.
Your welcome. My camera is not good enough. Have a good morning!
December 10, 2011 6:41 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Pot_Hater2
Why can't this pothead follow the laws set for "ALL" potheads...
All this is potheads growing for potheads so potheads can get stoned.MERRY CHRISTMAS...
December 10, 2011 6:52 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Dionysus
For all of you 'follow the rules' crowd, I'm sure the bureaucrats will pat you on the head and tell you what good little children you are.
Don't try to think for your little selves, let the City make up the rules for you to follow. They only have your best interests are heart, right?
"There, there...little ones. Pay your fees, do as we say (not as we do), grovel at our feet, and shut up. Love and kisses, your City Council."
December 10, 2011 6:55 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post brad96001
I think there is more to this story than whats in print. Press, Pot and City. Full moon. What was the complaining partys complaint? No there is not enough information here to even guess. So enjoy your day and Merry Christmas!
December 10, 2011 7:01 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post BlacknGold
Benno had 36 plants, ranging from 9- to 14-feet tall and covering 960 square feet of his yard. They were enclosed within a 6-foot-tall chain-link fence topped with three strands of barbed wire.
Benno was growing for himself and five other people who have doctors' recommendations for medicinal cannabis, he said.
YEAH RIGHT!!! Sure it was....another abuser...
December 10, 2011 7:10 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post JustBob
If I build an attractive garden shed too close to my property line and a neighbor complains, I must either move the shed or face a code violation notice.
If I plant a stinky garden of MMJ near my property line and surround it with an ugly chain link fence and barbed wire in violation of the city code, it is somehow a violation of the Constitution when I get the code violation notice?
GIVE ME A BREAK!
December 10, 2011 7:12 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post my2sense
in response to not2bright:
Another example of 215 abuse. This is supposed to be a person's home, not a location for a mini cartel. Legal, or not legal, where's the common sense and respect for his neighbors?
Read the regs again... then tell me who the abusers are...
December 10, 2011 7:19 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post mssbryant#268141 writes: 2
in response to boogeyman:
Rules are rules.
The fact that he hasn't had a plant in the ground since Nov 4 really doesn't mean diddly squat.
If he wants to pursue being a care grower it is probably in everyone's best interest that he relocates to a rural address.What you say doesnt fly...
Move to the county, where Tuesday they will say that you can grow in 150 sq ft... Just how many patients can you then grow for...None but yourself.
December 10, 2011 7:20 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post sound_of_reason
"City officials said they aren't targeting Benno but they do want him and the property owner to comply with city laws."
-----
City laws already found unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court. The City of Redding is going to lose big on this one. And having his landlord evict him is probably damages worth millions!
December 10, 2011 7:21 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post SayItLikeItIs
in response to Red_Shark:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
This farming should be done, but it should be done legally. Churn Creek bottom would be a great place. Maybe Hawes can do the farming on mass scale. Armed guards can surround it to protect the farmer from losing his crop to the junkies and thieves.
Or, maybe the gov will pay farmers not to farm it like they do with other crops???
December 10, 2011 7:22 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post mssbryant#268141 writes: 9
in response to Mick:
>>> Why do you think he has 36 plants ranging from 9'-14' tall? That brings in some serious cash with the right ways of getting rid of it while the rest of us work for an honest living and pay taxes.
Assume Away.. I know several of the patients Mr. Benno was growing for...It was alll shared and will be consumed by those patients.
I get so sick of people espousing "facts" that are fictional..
December 10, 2011 7:27 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post my2sense
in response to Red_Shark:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Because that would affect Mick's income
December 10, 2011 7:28 a.m. Reply to this post sound_of_reason
in response to boogeyman:
Rules are rules.
The fact that he hasn't had a plant in the ground since Nov 4 really doesn't mean diddly squat.
If he wants to pursue being a care grower it is probably in everyone's best interest that he relocates to a rural address.(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 10, 2011 7:35 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post mssbryant#268141 writes: 3
in response to SayItLikeItIs:
This farming should be done, but it should be done legally. Churn Creek bottom would be a great place. Maybe Hawes can do the farming on mass scale. Armed guards can surround it to protect the farmer from losing his crop to the junkies and thieves.
Or, maybe the gov will pay farmers not to farm it like they do with other crops???Ha Ha Ha...CHURN CRK BOTTOM YOU SAY???
I Own a farm in the heart of it.. You know the one everyone is always trying to 'save'....
The New ordinance being considered, will NOT ALLOW me or any patient to cultivate it there....NO LEGAL RESIDENCE>>>>>
So dont tell Me to grow it in Churn Crk bottom...they already fixed that.
DEFACTO BAN ON CULTIVATING COLLECTIVELY...
WHEN YOU CANT GROW IT ON THE INFAMOUS FARMS IN CHURN CRK BOTTOM...YOU ARENT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GROW IT ANYWHERE..
EXCEPT IN ALLL THE BACKYARDS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I guess thats what will have to happen then.
Sounds like another pretzel logic decision that I usually only attribute to people who are addicted to Meth..
This ordinance does not represent the patients and deserves to be thrown out. Start over, do it right this time.
December 10, 2011 7:35 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post my2sense
in response to JustBob:
If I build an attractive garden shed too close to my property line and a neighbor complains, I must either move the shed or face a code violation notice.
If I plant a stinky garden of MMJ near my property line and surround it with an ugly chain link fence and barbed wire in violation of the city code, it is somehow a violation of the Constitution when I get the code violation notice?
GIVE ME A BREAK!
If you build an attractive shed too close to your property line and a neighbor complains, They will allow you to address it and come into compliance.
If you plant a stinky garden of MMJ near your property line and surround it with an ugly chain link fence and barbed wire in violation of the city code. They will do what they can to assure you lose the crop and your home...
It's all about the power
December 10, 2011 7:38 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Transfer_Master
I don't use this medicine, but I completely support it, if it is used specifically for medical reasons. Anyone should have safe access, from growing their own or from a collective. The city of redding is opening themselves up for some serious lawsuits. I hope they wake up soon before it is too late.
December 10, 2011 7:41 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post nitro73
I would like to know if his daughter claims her fathers income on her ebt account. I think anyone that lives in the same residence has to report their income. I might be wrong, but if there is fraud there I would like to know
December 10, 2011 7:45 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post AnonymousArmadilloAgain
in response to Thomas_Jefferson:
We are Nabors people, cant we all just get along?
Jim Nabors?
December 10, 2011 7:49 a.m. Reply to this post JimBigley
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 10, 2011 7:49 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post dacndoc
Finally...!!!! The oridance card has been played as it should be. The problem is that only half the card is being played... This guy is using residential property to produce a commercially viable crop. THAT, IN ITSELF, IS A VIOLATION OF THE ZONING LAWS!!!! If he wants to grow, go to an industrial or commecial zoned property. Simple!
December 10, 2011 7:49 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post SlimShady
Poor marijuana growers, poor, poor marijuana growers.
December 10, 2011 7:56 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post JimBigley
in response to nitro73:
I would like to know if his daughter claims her fathers income on her ebt account. I think anyone that lives in the same residence has to report their income. I might be wrong, but if there is fraud there I would like to know
You seriuosly need to mind your own business.
At 18 you qualify for a cash aid case and at 22 your individual food stamp case regardless of whether or not you live with your parents.Once again you make the assumption just becaues someone grows cannabis that means they are selling it.
Remember it's not what you think you know but what you can actually prove in a court of law .
I bet you would like to know which means you are a busy body............
December 10, 2011 7:56 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post pbminor
The COR is run by a bunch of despicable chicken s****! How evil of them to cause a family to be evicted for this, after living in the home for more than a decade. Threatening landlords so the city can bypass any attempts at an appeal is morally wrong in so many ways.
They went to Benno and asked him to comply when it was far too late in the season to comply. Has he agreed to comply for next season? Or does it not matter because the city has already made it's decision to evict him?
People of Redding, REGISTER TO VOTE! Please, all of you who KNOW how wrong this is, register to vote. You can pick up a voter registration form at the county elections office, library, or U.S. Post Office. You can even complete the form online. Here's the link: https://www.sos.ca.gov/nvrc/fedform/
---------
On a different note, 36 plants? That big? For six people? No wonder Benno is being watched. I can pretty much guarantee he has mega poundage in excess. Are those sales being reported? I hope Mr. Benno has his seller's permit from the Board of Equalization. Even if he's selling his excess only in bulk to be resold, he still needs a seller's permit.
December 10, 2011 8:04 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post mssbryant#268141 writes: 4
in response to nitro73:
I would like to know if his daughter claims her fathers income on her ebt account. I think anyone that lives in the same residence has to report their income. I might be wrong, but if there is fraud there I would like to know
Start posting under your real name and maybe your imput would matter. I dont put much stock in cowards that hide.
Income? Its his medicine, its not his income. I believe he is a disabled Vet, Im not concerned about his grandchilds food stamp card, so petty of you. Merry Christmas scrooge.For just one day, all the chicken sh*t posts from the anonymous haters should have to be done with their real names just so we know.
I post with my name, why dont you have to? Its so easy to talk sh*t under the cloak of anonymity...takes courage to voice your opinion openly.
Better not post openly or honestly or you and your business will be boycotted for your interference with my rights.. Boycotted during the season..Yes, Rightfully so too.Wonder what the Sheriff uses as a screenname for his posts....You know he is posting. I know Nutmeofficer had to change his screenname after assaulting the lady at the council meeting.. I guess he thinks he is still protected by his anonymity..he's NOT. I can still tell who you are.
Mr. Bosenko You work for the citizens of Shasta County and are sworn to uphold the laws of this state. You are NOT a federal employee and the supreme court has already laid down the law to you. Its not your job, STOP violating our rights just to get Federal $$. Its whoring at its worse. The Feds wont be voting in the next election. I will tho.
December 10, 2011 8:05 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post Thomas_Jefferson
I'm not making a threat. I'm making futile effort to make them feel as singled out as I do.
December 10, 2011 8:05 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post emeroldtriangle
Not his home so it's his own fault. His plants were too big and out in the public. This is what you get when you flaunt your goods that mainstream society doesn't accept. Sounds like he had a garden worth around 100k in a rental. Even as an advocate something sounds fishy about that. Sorry you chose to brag and advertise about your massive grow. Sorry you chose to open your mouth and draw the attention of outsiders. LESSON LEARNED, CHALK IT UP TO THE GAME.
December 10, 2011 8:05 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post JohnDixon
The most frightening part of this article is that Mr. Duvernay is the advocate for the COR. Seems like every time he states a position of law the citizens of Redding have to open their wallet and pay for the error.
December 10, 2011 8:07 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post dacndoc
in response to JimBigley:
You seriuosly need to mind your own business.
At 18 you qualify for a cash aid case and at 22 your individual food stamp case regardless of whether or not you live with your parents.Once again you make the assumption just becaues someone grows cannabis that means they are selling it.
Remember it's not what you think you know but what you can actually prove in a court of law .
I bet you would like to know which means you are a busy body............
And there you have nailed it!! Cash at 18 and food stamps at 22 even if living with your parents? Does anyone not see what's wrong with this picture? This pro MMJ guy knows EXACTLY how and what to do to play the system. And, Jim, since you bring up the provability in court... what about the Fed laws? Do you think you pro MMJ welfare supported people would win in Fed Court? I didin't think so......
December 10, 2011 8:08 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post not2bright
in response to my2sense:
If you build an attractive shed too close to your property line and a neighbor complains, They will allow you to address it and come into compliance.
If you plant a stinky garden of MMJ near your property line and surround it with an ugly chain link fence and barbed wire in violation of the city code. They will do what they can to assure you lose the crop and your home...
It's all about the power
entirely "NOT TRUE"! I recall someone, several years ago, who built a gazebo for his hot tub. It did not comply, so he had to remove it. Believe the city is "picking" on mmj growers all you want if it makes you feel good. I asked Santa to bring you a box of tissues...
December 10, 2011 8:08 a.m. Suggest removal Reply to this post mssbryant#268141 writes: 1
in response to dacndoc:
Finally...!!!! The oridance card has been played as it should be. The problem is that only half the card is being played... This guy is using residential property to produce a commercially viable crop. THAT, IN ITSELF, IS A VIOLATION OF THE ZONING LAWS!!!! If he wants to grow, go to an industrial or commecial zoned property. Simple!
good thing you didnt say agricultural property as I already covered that.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Sunday 18 December 2011
Code complaint leads to eviction notice; Redding pot cultivator says city forces ouster » Redding Record Searchlight
via redding.com
