We’ve all heard of the time that the state proposed a bridge to Vashon and, as the story goes, islanders rallied against it, leaving officials running off with their tails between their legs. And most of us remember the proposed mining operation on Maury that islanders fought for years. Islanders did win that one when the mining company sold its property to the county. This is the stuff of Vashon legend. And this month, another story has concluded that is sure to rank among them: The time a marijuana company wanted to manufacture pot-infused candy at the K2 building, some islanders welcomed it while others fought it, and the plan ultimately didn’t pan out. The reason for Bakkhos Holding’s departure from Vashon will likely be retold differently depending on who’s telling it. That’s because there are many factors that have played into this complex story.
In 2010 an in-depth story by The Beachcomber examined how multiple factors led to Glacier’s decision to sell its property on Maury, not least among them being that the economy was down and the price was right. Similarly, the spokesman for the marijuana company, Bakkhos Holding, says leaving Vashon ultimately came down to a business decision. By his account, when the company realized that navigating the county’s rezoning and permitting processes could take at least year, and locations in other counties wouldn’t have such hurdles, the answer was clear. They couldn’t afford to wait and to deal with the uncertainty while their competitors took off.
Would Bakkhos have stuck around and waded through the process had a large contingent of islanders not objected to its plan? It’s hard to know. But the spokesman says it was ultimately the county’s requirement for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that drove their final decision. Bakkhos even asked for an exception, but Joe McDermott, our representative on the King County Council who has supported marijuana business, said there was no way the council would pass legislation to allow them to avoid the permit. A committee didn’t even approve a proposal that would allow medium-sized marijuana business to avoid the CUP.
And there’s more to the story that’s simply unclear, because unlike the Glacier saga, we don’t have solid sources providing us insight. Why did two of Bakkhos’ three original investors pull out? And why is there no evidence that the company submitted documents required by the Liquor Control Board to obtain their marijuana business license, including business plans, financial information and documents proving residency? There could be reasonable explanations for these parts of the story, but we’re certainly left wondering whether internal struggles played a role in their decision. We also wonder why Bakkhos didn’t realize sooner that county processes would be such a hindrance, though we do understand how communication with King County can be difficult and inconsistent.
Only time will tell if Bakkhos has its act together and can make its plan work in a different location. But for now it seems to have come down, like so many things, to a simple business decision.
