Ron Strider
Well-Known Member
More than 100 Massachusetts cities and towns have imposed bans, moratoriums or other limits on marijuana shops since voters legalized the drug for recreational use last year, opening up a new battlefront in the debate over legal weed.
Nearly two dozen communities north of Boston – including Beverly, Peabody and Gloucester – have temporarily banned pot shops from opening after the July 1, 2018 date set by the Legislature. Others, including Lawrence and Merrimac, have approved outright bans on pot sales.
Advocates for legal marijuana call the prohibitions shortsighted. Banning pot sales in too many places will fuel an underground market, they argue, stunting the growth of the cannabis industry while depriving state and local governments of much-needed tax revenue.
"If cannabis isn't sold by regulated and taxed retailers, it will continue to be sold by criminals who don't check IDs and don't care about the safety of their product," said Jim Borghesani, a spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project who helped craft last year's voter-approved pot law.
"The whole intent of the ballot question was to eliminate black market sales. This is totally counterproductive," he said.
Last November, 54 percent of voters in Massachusetts agreed to legalize the use and sale of recreational marijuana.
Under changes the Legislature made to the law in July, elected officials in communities where voters supported the referendum must hold another vote locally before banning or limiting the number of marijuana growing or sales operations.
In communities that opposed Question 4, officials may impose bans or moratoriums without a referendum. In towns, the changes must be approved by town meeting; in cities, they can be made by a vote taken by the city council and signed by a mayor or city manager.
After Dec. 31, 2019, all cities and towns will have to put proposed pot bans to the voters, regardless of how they voted on Question 4.
Pro and con votes
Statewide, 259 cities and towns voted for Question 4, while 91 voted against the measure, according to Secretary of State William Galvin's office.
Locally, voters in Salem, Beverly, Swampscott and Gloucester were among those agreeing to legalize recreational marijuana,
Peabody and Danvers were among those voting against.
Since then about 35 communities have banned retail pot sales, according to the Massachusetts Municipal Association. Another 60 to 70 have imposed moratoriums – some of which will expire at the end of next year – or zoning that limits pot sales, according to pro-marijuana groups.
Exactly how many communities are weighing retail bans, or have passed them, isn't clear. The state doesn't track local votes of town meetings and city councils, and pot advocates and municipal lobbyists are largely relying on news reports to determine where pot shops won't be allowed.
Unlike last year's ballot question, which saw a well-funded campaign in support of legalization, opposition to local bans has been minimal.
Borghesani said the legislative rewrite of the law is allowing "local officials to ban businesses without a convincing mandate from local voters."
"Unfortunately, these decisions are being made by a very small percentage of voters in some towns," he said.
Most bans temporary
Geoff Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, said most cities and towns that have imposed temporary bans are awaiting new regulations from the state's Cannabis Control Commission, and they ultimately may allow pot sales once the regulatory structure is in place.
Beckwith estimates only about 35 communities have imposed outright bans, and most of those lack the commercial base to attract pot shops.
"The commercial marijuana industry will be just fine," he said. "In the end, the vast majority of communities are going to be allowing pot shops."
Local bans don't mean that recreational marijuana isn't legal in those places, only that retail sales are prohibited. The voter-approved law allows adults over 21 to possess up to an ounce of marijuana in public and 10 ounces at home. That part of the law has already taken effect.
Nor do the bans affect the home-grow provision of the law, which allows up to a dozen plants per household.
Beckwith said the two-tiered system set up by the Legislature for communities to ban pot sales was a "political solution to a public policy decision" that eventually will lead to lawsuits.
If a local elected body votes to outlaw retail sales, but a resident who lives there wanted to open a shop, that person could make a legal case for overturning the ban.
"They could very easily go to court and make the argument that the community has been denied due process," he said.
Recent votes on outright bans have been a mixed bag.
In Milford, 56 percent of voters a month ago decided to prevent marijuana businesses from operating in town – despite supporting legalization at the polls last year.
In Marshfield, a narrow margin of voters recently rejected a ban.
In Amesbury, where 59 percent of voters approved Question 4 a year ago, the City Council recently decided to put the question back to voters in a local election next month. Mayor Ken Gray, who opposed legalization, said he'll accept whatever the voters decide on Nov. 7.
"I can see the benefit in revenue, and there's some places in town where we can zone it," he said. "But I also know that people are concerned about it, particularly when it comes to impaired driving."
Tax potential
Retail marijuana sales will be charged a 10.75 percent excise tax on top of the state's 6.25 percent sales tax. Cities and towns would be able to tax sales within their borders up to 3 percent more. Medical marijuana will remain untaxed.
State officials estimate taxes on marijuana will drum up $45 million to $83 million in the first year of sales. In the second year, the state could see $93 million to $172 million.
Pot advocates are pushing for legislation that would prevent cities and towns that ban retail shops from collecting a portion of the tax revenue.
To be sure, not every community is rushing to ban pot shops.
Newburyport Mayor Donna Holaday said city leaders aren't opposed to retail pot shops but want to keep them out of the downtown. The city already has a medical marijuana overlay district in a business park, and Holaday said city leaders are considering confining shops there.
For now, the city is considering a temporary ban while it works out zoning and awaits statewide regulations expected to be finalized by March.
"We're certainly open to having cultivation and retail shops somewhere in the city," she said. "The voters supported it, so we are respecting that."
News Moderator: Ron Strider 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Pot moratoriums spread as locals wrestle with legal weed | Local News | salemnews.com
Author: Christian M. Wade
Contact: Contact Us | Site | salemnews.com
Photo Credit: Flickr
Website: salemnews.com
Nearly two dozen communities north of Boston – including Beverly, Peabody and Gloucester – have temporarily banned pot shops from opening after the July 1, 2018 date set by the Legislature. Others, including Lawrence and Merrimac, have approved outright bans on pot sales.
Advocates for legal marijuana call the prohibitions shortsighted. Banning pot sales in too many places will fuel an underground market, they argue, stunting the growth of the cannabis industry while depriving state and local governments of much-needed tax revenue.
"If cannabis isn't sold by regulated and taxed retailers, it will continue to be sold by criminals who don't check IDs and don't care about the safety of their product," said Jim Borghesani, a spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project who helped craft last year's voter-approved pot law.
"The whole intent of the ballot question was to eliminate black market sales. This is totally counterproductive," he said.
Last November, 54 percent of voters in Massachusetts agreed to legalize the use and sale of recreational marijuana.
Under changes the Legislature made to the law in July, elected officials in communities where voters supported the referendum must hold another vote locally before banning or limiting the number of marijuana growing or sales operations.
In communities that opposed Question 4, officials may impose bans or moratoriums without a referendum. In towns, the changes must be approved by town meeting; in cities, they can be made by a vote taken by the city council and signed by a mayor or city manager.
After Dec. 31, 2019, all cities and towns will have to put proposed pot bans to the voters, regardless of how they voted on Question 4.
Pro and con votes
Statewide, 259 cities and towns voted for Question 4, while 91 voted against the measure, according to Secretary of State William Galvin's office.
Locally, voters in Salem, Beverly, Swampscott and Gloucester were among those agreeing to legalize recreational marijuana,
Peabody and Danvers were among those voting against.
Since then about 35 communities have banned retail pot sales, according to the Massachusetts Municipal Association. Another 60 to 70 have imposed moratoriums – some of which will expire at the end of next year – or zoning that limits pot sales, according to pro-marijuana groups.
Exactly how many communities are weighing retail bans, or have passed them, isn't clear. The state doesn't track local votes of town meetings and city councils, and pot advocates and municipal lobbyists are largely relying on news reports to determine where pot shops won't be allowed.
Unlike last year's ballot question, which saw a well-funded campaign in support of legalization, opposition to local bans has been minimal.
Borghesani said the legislative rewrite of the law is allowing "local officials to ban businesses without a convincing mandate from local voters."
"Unfortunately, these decisions are being made by a very small percentage of voters in some towns," he said.
Most bans temporary
Geoff Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, said most cities and towns that have imposed temporary bans are awaiting new regulations from the state's Cannabis Control Commission, and they ultimately may allow pot sales once the regulatory structure is in place.
Beckwith estimates only about 35 communities have imposed outright bans, and most of those lack the commercial base to attract pot shops.
"The commercial marijuana industry will be just fine," he said. "In the end, the vast majority of communities are going to be allowing pot shops."
Local bans don't mean that recreational marijuana isn't legal in those places, only that retail sales are prohibited. The voter-approved law allows adults over 21 to possess up to an ounce of marijuana in public and 10 ounces at home. That part of the law has already taken effect.
Nor do the bans affect the home-grow provision of the law, which allows up to a dozen plants per household.
Beckwith said the two-tiered system set up by the Legislature for communities to ban pot sales was a "political solution to a public policy decision" that eventually will lead to lawsuits.
If a local elected body votes to outlaw retail sales, but a resident who lives there wanted to open a shop, that person could make a legal case for overturning the ban.
"They could very easily go to court and make the argument that the community has been denied due process," he said.
Recent votes on outright bans have been a mixed bag.
In Milford, 56 percent of voters a month ago decided to prevent marijuana businesses from operating in town – despite supporting legalization at the polls last year.
In Marshfield, a narrow margin of voters recently rejected a ban.
In Amesbury, where 59 percent of voters approved Question 4 a year ago, the City Council recently decided to put the question back to voters in a local election next month. Mayor Ken Gray, who opposed legalization, said he'll accept whatever the voters decide on Nov. 7.
"I can see the benefit in revenue, and there's some places in town where we can zone it," he said. "But I also know that people are concerned about it, particularly when it comes to impaired driving."
Tax potential
Retail marijuana sales will be charged a 10.75 percent excise tax on top of the state's 6.25 percent sales tax. Cities and towns would be able to tax sales within their borders up to 3 percent more. Medical marijuana will remain untaxed.
State officials estimate taxes on marijuana will drum up $45 million to $83 million in the first year of sales. In the second year, the state could see $93 million to $172 million.
Pot advocates are pushing for legislation that would prevent cities and towns that ban retail shops from collecting a portion of the tax revenue.
To be sure, not every community is rushing to ban pot shops.
Newburyport Mayor Donna Holaday said city leaders aren't opposed to retail pot shops but want to keep them out of the downtown. The city already has a medical marijuana overlay district in a business park, and Holaday said city leaders are considering confining shops there.
For now, the city is considering a temporary ban while it works out zoning and awaits statewide regulations expected to be finalized by March.
"We're certainly open to having cultivation and retail shops somewhere in the city," she said. "The voters supported it, so we are respecting that."
News Moderator: Ron Strider 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Pot moratoriums spread as locals wrestle with legal weed | Local News | salemnews.com
Author: Christian M. Wade
Contact: Contact Us | Site | salemnews.com
Photo Credit: Flickr
Website: salemnews.com
