Board of Aldermen on Monday approved new zoning regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries, Wicked Local reports. Alderman Lenny Gentile was the lone opposing vote:
Gentile said these people are portraying the law as a way to ease pain, but he intimated that they were taking advantage of the law as a way to make money.
“he intimated that they were taking advantage of the law as a way to make money.”
He’s talking about non profit orgs — just like a church, college or a cancer research facility. Since when do we question to motives of non-profits?
Make no mistake about it, this is an anti medical marijuana regulation. It’s a slap in the face to voters who overwhelmingly passed a ballot initiative, with the intent of providing medical patients safe, easy, and legal access to marijuana. This zoning regulation defies all common sense, placing more significant restrictions on medical marijuana dispensaries than liquor stores, and treating them entirely differently from pharmacies that dispense other prescription medications.
The moratorium on medical marijuana should never have made it out of committee. The full board should have rejected it. And the Mayor should have intervened. Once passed, the moratorium opened the door for this type of restrictive zoning regulation, which undermines the right of medical patients to obtain treatment prescribed by their doctor. Gentile may have shown himself to be the most ignorant of the aldermen, but he’s not the only one to blame here. It’s a new low for the Newton Board of Aldermen.
Mike can you outline what you think the appropriate ordinance should have allowed and not allowed?
@Mike I may be wrong, but I don’t think you’re talking about the same item that this thread is addressing. The BOA just passed the zoning regulation that enables and guides the existence of RMDs in Newton. The moratorium is no longer needed since the zoning regulations are in place. RMDs are now able to locate in Newton.
I think promptly passing the zoning regulation is smoothing the way for the dispensaries. With no zoning regulation in place, the chances would be much higher of having a protracted fight with neighbors once a proposed location is eventually announced.
In my opinion, no new zoning was necessary on a local level. A medical marijuana dispensary should have fallen under the existing local zoning criteria that currently regulates the placement of pharmacies. I opposed the moratorium because it enabled the Board of Aldermen to further restrict dispensaries beyond existing zoning regulations, and State guidelines that established universal setbacks from residential zones and schools. Those setbacks already severely limited the available real estate options for a dispensary applicant in Newton. Further local restrictions create additional barriers to entry, and make it less likely Newton will receive one of the licenses designated for Middlesex County.
I’d appreciate anyone explaining to me the logic behind restricting the location of a medical marijuana dispensary, more stringently than a pharmacy or liquor store.
Mike: We both know that some folks have irrational fears but I’m surprised you don’t see this as a step forward. A baby step for sure. But forward. So there won’t be a dispensary in Newton Centre but there can now be one within 10-12 minutes or so from there. Isn’t that something to celebrate?
I normally don’t agree with Greg Reibman but when he’s right, he’s right.
I normally don’t agree with Josh Norman but when he agrees with me, I do!
I would like to see a dispensary located IN Newton. The moratorium and subsequent zoning ordinance did nothing to advance that cause. To the contrary, the ordinance makes it more difficult and less likely that a dispensary will be located within the city limits. So how is that a “step forward”?
Enacting zoning that specifically targets dispensaries, perpetuates the stigma associated with illegal marijuana, and may dissuade new patients from seeking its benefits. Many of the patients who would benefit the most, have medical conditions that affect mobility. So a dispensary that’s located a 10-12 minute drive from Newton, may be too far for some patients.
Again, I’m trying to find some logic associated with the Board’s action that treats dispensaries differently than pharmacies. I believe it’s been driven principally by aldermen who are fundamentally opposed to medical marijuana [albeit in a more covert way than Alderman Gentile]. According to the Tab, “Aldermen Lisle Baker and Vicki Danberg have introduced an agenda item to discuss further restrictions next year…”
I’m not indicting all 21 aldermen who voted for this ordinance. I know for a fact that a number of them understand and appreciate that marijuana can offer comfort to patients struggling with many different illnesses. I just think they’ve been inadvertently co-opted by others with differing objectives.
Sorry Mike but I’m not following you. There are two approved finalists in Newton. How are you sure one or both of them won’t prevail?
Striar’s right. The zoning should have fallen in line with pharmacies and liquor stores. This extra nonsense is just to add to red tape and further shrink the opportunity that dispensaries will be here at all.
Gentile is a dinosaur and an embarrassment. (I know, two separate things)
Mike & Greg, Perhaps this is what you are getting at. I read a brief article on the Patch today saying that a dispensary would not be permitted in a village center. So on one hand (Greg) we could have a dispensary in Newton but on the other (Mike) in some out of the way location. Now I am very Highlands centric so would naturally think that a good location for a dispensary would be on Lincoln St instead of another salon with good access to the T, cross city bus routes and generally available parking.
@Groot: Dispensaries aren’t a walk in business so they don’t need to be in a store front in a Village Center. A better option in the Highlands would be one of the many office/industrial buildings that exist behind the stores/restaurants along the Needham Street corridor.
Mike, I currently chair the Land Use Committee, which reviews special permit applications, and share your concerns about burdensome restrictions on RMDs. Which is why I closely followed the workings of the Zoning and Planning Committee in drafting the ordinance. For the most part, I think we have a good, workable zoning ordinance that improves the chances that Newton will have a Registered Marijuana Dispensary.
The restrictions at the state level are already pretty comprehensive, and will limit the availability of RMDs in our area because only 5 licenses are allowed in each county, and Middlesex county (which includes Newton, Cambridge, Somerville, Framingham, Lowell) is by far the largest county both geographically and by population (Middlesex County has a larger population than every other New England state except CT). The state is also requiring applicants to pony up over $30,000 and prove they have $500,000 in liquid capital. And the state gets to decide in which communities applicants can open an RMD (Newton has two possible applicants).
The zoning ordinance that was approved by the board mostly follows the state law and regulations as well as the intent, which is to locate RMDs in areas that are accessible to the highway, and away from schools and other places where children congregate. In Newton, there are a lot of areas located in business districts where an RMD could get a special permit, including Needham Street. This planning memo has a map of potential locations throughout the city.
I don’t think RMDs require the further restrictions that have been proposed by Ald. Baker and Ald. Danberg (these are health rather than zoning regulations), but Jerry Reilly is probably right that the special permit process will actually make it easier to avoid or overcome neighborhood opposition since the areas where a special permit can be obtained are commercial, close to highways, and away from schools, day cares and residences where there might be some resistance. The special permit criteria more or less follow the state law and regulations so applicants are not going to be disadvantaged by attempting to locate in Newton.
I already said my piece at the board meeting, but it boils down to my belief that the benefits vastly outweigh the risks. There is far more danger to the public from theft and diversion of oxycontin or other drugs from pharmacies than diversion of medical marijuana from RMDs. As far as I know, no one has ever died from an overdose of medical marijuana and the relief it will provide to patients being treated for cancer and other medical conditions is incalculable. And of course RMDs will make profits, but not nearly as much as Big Pharma does from the sale of legal drugs.
I hope this allays some of your concerns, Mike, because I know your heart is in the right place.
I understand Mike’s point although I don’t think the outcome from the board is a travesty. By adding additional zoning regulations the board has stigmatized the dispensaries, which practically amounts to a value judgment. Ultimately I’m not sure it matters because I don’t think it’ll affect whether either of the two applicants is able to locate a RMD in Newton. But it shows a fearful way of thinking on the part of the board.
@Greg– I don’t know whether one of the two applicants in Newton will be awarded a dispensary. But I do know that every action taken by the City to date, has diminished that possibility.
@Ted– You have been extraordinarily supportive of medical marijuana dispensaries. I know you have a full appreciation of the need, and a complete understanding of the process. But I have to challenge one of the points you made above. You said, “…I think we have a good, workable zoning ordinance that improves the chances that Newton will have a Registered Marijuana Dispensary.” If you’re suggesting a “good” ordinance is preferable to a bad ordinance, then I might agree with you. But the fact is that this ordinance does nothing to “improve” the odds of Newton getting a dispensary. The moratorium that enabled the ordinance put Newton applicants at a disadvantage, because they could not finalize their applications in a timely manner with the State. And the ordinance itself further reduced [beyond State mandated setbacks] an already small number of suitable properties for this use within the city.
Mike, I actually agree with most of what you are saying. But I have been doing the aldermen gig long enough to know that the 25% of people in Newton who voted against RMDs would probably not want one in their city (let alone in their neighborhood), and they may be the very same people who will show up at public hearings or phone and email their aldermen to complain. Even the folks who voted for it may not want one right next door to them or even where a pharmacy or liquor store could go.
Previously, we did not have an ordinance that specifically allowed RMDs in any district. Now we do. Of course, an applicant might argue that one of the other existing uses applies, but that could be challenged in the ZBA or in court. At least the current ordinance gives us a hook to hang our hats on if the applicant meets the special permit criteria that makes it a successful court challenge a little less likely.
Ted– I want to make sure I’m interpreting the ordinance correctly. Does this ordinance require a Special Permit for all dispensaries even in allowed zones? If that’s the case, I need to modify my previous response to Greg, wherein I stated a lack of certainty regarding the prospects of the Newton applicants receiving a license. If a Special Permit is required, I believe the odds of a dispensary being located in Newton are approximately 0%. A Special Permit would mean that the State would have to issue a license to an applicant who may then be rejected for a Special Permit. It would be far less risky for the State to award licenses to those applicants whose use is by-right. Am I misunderstanding something here?
Mike, you are reading it correctly, although I am not sure your conclusion about prospects for locating in Newton are correct. Personally, I agree that a permit could be issued administratively rather than by special permit. My colleagues did not. But the fact that the special permit criteria mostly follow the state law and regulations gives me confidence that the zoning ordinance will not prevent a qualified applicant from locating in Newton.
Ted– As always, you’ve been very generous with your time, indulging me on this issue. I know you are a strong supporter of medical marijuana, and I genuinely appreciate that. We’ll have to wait and see if one of the Newton applicants is awarded a license, and where that opportunity leads. In my opinion however, the Special Permit requirement just about kills any chance that a dispensary will ultimately be located in Newton.
I’m seeing a very similar pattern to what’s taken place in California since they passed medical marijuana years ago. Forces within the government and law enforcement who oppose marijuana reform, have fought a continuous battle to shut down dispensaries. I think that’s what’s happening in Massachusetts, and it’s exactly what just happened in Newton. Again, not an indictment of all 21 aldermen who voted in favor of this ordinance. Just an observation that I believe the process has been co-opted by those who oppose marijuana reform.