Marijuana and money seem to be the two topics that spark interest in Lincoln County. Monday’s County Commission meeting was no exception, as Commissioners approached both hot topics, beginning with the medical marijuana issue. The question before the Commissioners is whether or not establishments and facilities for providing the cannabis would be prohibited by a resolution, or if a moratorium would be more beneficial so they could make no decision and visit the subject later.

A few county residents went on public record during the meeting showing their support for allowing establishments within the county to provide the medical marijuana for Lincoln County cardholders. Either for friends or personal use, or economically speaking, they stood explaining why the commissioners should consider a moratorium instead of a ban, some expressing that the decision that affects a number of county residents shouldn’t be left in the hands of “just five board members,” as was portrayed by Russell Tracy of Caselton. Tracy added that the proposed ordinances have not been made available online and the general public is not being made aware of what commissioners are voting on. The courthouse’s website, lincolncountynv.org has had forms in the past, however has not had the updated propositions entered.

The Department of Health and Human Services provides numbers in monthly reports on their website. The last reports given were from the end of May, 2014, and show Nevada has 5,859 current card holders of the medication in the state. To meet the demand of patients, there have been 278 active caregiver cards distributed throughout the state. 

Clark County and Washoe County hold the highest number of cardholders, at 4,196 and 680, respectively.

The remainder of the entire state is compiled in one lump sum of 983 cardholders in rural areas that find ways of obtaining their medication. Yet the agenda item was only to discuss opening the possibility of ruling on the subject once more. The Commission Board unanimously ruled to visit the subject at the next Commission meeting in order to rule on the prohibition ordinance versus the moratorium.