MMA re Recreational Marijuana

Post date: Dec 07, 2016 7:25:24 PM

To see if there is an interest in any direct advocacy on this issue. We have had inquiry from resident on this as well. Police Chief passed along that timing issues are of greatest concern (item #1). Planning Board will be discussing on Tuesday evening.

MMA ASKS STATE LEADERS TO FIX FLAWS IN THE NEW COMMERCIAL MARIJUANA LAW

As Written, Question 4 Overrides Local Authority, Offers Too Little Revenue to Offset Regulatory Costs, and Raises Public Safety & Community Development Concerns

Please Call Your Representatives & Senators and Ask Them to Protect Local Control and Community Concerns

With the passage of Question 4, Massachusetts became one of just eight states that have legalized the recreational use of marijuana. Because of our population and our prime location in the center of a compact geographic region, our state will soon become the commercial marijuana industry’s east coast base.

Cities and towns have a responsibility to ensure that the new law is implemented locally in a manner that protects the public interest, including addressing public health and public safety concerns, and ensuring that the roll-out does not negatively impact residents, other businesses, neighborhoods, economic development plans, or other important considerations. As such, municipal officials are scrambling to get information and plan their own policy responses. This will be very difficult in the short term, as there are many unanswered questions and many significant flaws in the new law.

While there are many smaller details that warrant attention, the major problems that must be fixed are:

1. deadlines that are far too short and give state and local officials inadequate time to prepare for and administer the law;

2. the preemption and loss of local control;

3. the unregulated “home grow” provisions that could foster a new black market for marijuana sales; and

4. the inadequate tax revenues written into the statute.

Please click here to read the MMA’s detailed letter to the Governor and state lawmakers outlining the flaws in the new commercial marijuana law.

It is important to recognize that Question 4 prevailed and the issue of whether or not to legalize the recreational use of marijuana has been settled. Yet it is also clear that the new law has several significant drafting flaws that require fixing in order to prevent negative outcomes. Just as the Legislature and Governor acted in 1981 to amend Proposition 2½ to make it workable, it is both appropriate and necessary for state lawmakers to take action to address the shortcomings in Question 4. Doing so is in the public interest.

Please call your Representatives and Senators today to let them know that this issue is important to your community, and ask them to delay implementation of Question 4 until the problems with the new law can be fixed.

If you have any questions about the new commercial marijuana law or the implications for cities and towns, please contact the MMA’s legislative staff (you can ask for MMA Legislative Analyst David Lakeman at 617-426-7272 or dlakeman@mma.org).

Thank You!