By BILL BARLOW/Special to the Sentinel
UPPER TOWNSHIP — In a unanimous vote, Township Committee on Monday resolved to introduce an ordinance to keep cannabis shops out of Upper Township, despite reservations voiced by Mayor Rich Palombo.
“I just think there’s a lot there. We should take some time to step back and get public input,” Palombo said.
He pointed out that like the rest of New Jersey, most Upper Township voters said yes to the November referendum to legalize marijuana.
“I keep coming back to the fact that the overwhelming majority of the township supported it. I think we need to hear from them,” he said.
Plus, he added, there is an opportunity for new revenue. Under the package of laws signed by Gov. Phil Murphy on Feb. 22, municipalities have the opportunity to impose a 2 percent tax on cannabis sales and 1 percent on products grown or manufactured in their jurisdiction.
Palombo added that the committee could not introduce an ordinance Monday because one was never written.
Just the same, Committeewoman Kim Hayes pushed for a vote during the meeting, in essence asking that an ordinance be prepared for introduction at the next meeting.
She said the people she knows who voted in favor of legalization are also concerned about the state laws as signed, including the prohibition against people growing their own at home and a provision preventing law enforcement officers from notifying parents about underage possession of alcohol or cannabis on the first offense.
That proved to be a deeply controversial step, one that seems likely to change as a bill moves forward to amend it.
“I think they’re all very disappointed in the law as it stands today,” she said of those she knows who voted for legalization.
“I don’t think the voters voted on putting pot shops in Upper Township,” Committeeman Curtis Corson said.
Because the township does not have a local police department, relying on the State Police, it would be a bad place for a cannabis business, Corson argued, especially if the surrounding towns reject it and it is the only location in the area.
“This is going to be an attractive nuisance. It’s going to bring people into our community who wouldn’t normally be here,” Corson said. “I’ve been to states where it’s legalized and you can’t walk down the street without smelling dope. It’s horrible.”
Palombo said he is leaning against allowing commercial cannabis in the township, but repeatedly said committee members should wait to hear directly from the public.
Under the state law, the township has until August to enact an ordinance, township attorney Dan Young told committee members Monday. Ocean City has already introduced an ordinance, and several other towns are considering the move.
Towns cannot stop people from possessing or using marijuana at home in New Jersey, or even ban home deliveries.
As such, he said, the ordinance would need to go before the township Planning Board, which would evaluate whether the proposal were consistent with the township master plan before it could be formally adopted. Even if the Planning Board recommended against an ordinance, a supermajority of Township Committee could still approve the change, Young said, but the review must take place.
Plans call for committee to introduce the ordinance, which would then go to the Planning Board before returning to committee for a public hearing and final vote. Those interested would be able to comment to the Planning Board and/or at the public hearing, and members discussed holding a special workshop meeting on the issue as well.
Palombo said he voted for the resolution Monday with the understanding that residents would have a chance to state their position.
According to Young, there is no chance of a cannabis dispensary opening in the meantime. The state is still in the process of deciding on the rules for the newly legal industry, including the licensing process.
Palombo suggested a more urgent step may be to ban the public consumption of marijuana and cannabis products in parks, on beaches and other public property.
That recommendation came near the close of the meeting. Cape May has also moved to ban public consumption but has not yet moved on banning shops. Palombo wanted to ensure that vaping and other means of ingesting were included, although it would be difficult to police or even notice if someone ate a cannabis-containing lozenge at a public park.
Plans for other communities weighed into the Upper Township discussion, including questions about what will happen in nearby Middle Township. That community is in discussion with a Massachusetts cannabis firm to build a facility at the site of an abandoned seafood processing plant and has supported allowing medical marijuana sales.
The township has not committed to allowing sales for the adult-use market, but Mayor Tim Donohue has signaled that he is open to having the discussion.
“We are doing our due diligence and want this to be a public conversation,” Donohue said when contacted Tuesday morning.
The discussion is expected to continue at the next township work session, scheduled for April 5.
During the meeting Monday, Upper Township Committeeman John Coggins said there are good reasons residents may have voted for the November referendum, including concerns over the arrest and possible incarceration of users. He added that he does not necessarily believe it’s wrong for an adult who chooses to use marijuana.
“I still don’t feel that having this type of industry within our township is a good idea,” he said.
Palombo said he is also concerned about the possibility of a cannabis business in town, adding that his grandchildren live in the community.
Corson asked about the local tax revenue from cannabis shops.
“That’s money derived from the sale of drugs, correct?” he said.
While New Jersey has joined a growing number of states in allowing marijuana possession and sales, at the federal level it remains listed as among the most dangerous drugs. At least theoretically, any proceeds from drug sales can be seized.
“That is a thorny issue with respect to federal enforcement,” Young said, adding that to his knowledge, the federal government has held back from enforcement of cannabis operations that are legal at the state level.
Still, the discrepancy has meant headaches for the industry. In Colorado, where sales to adults have been legal for years, the multimillion-dollar dispensary business remains a cash business due to banking restrictions, according to a recent article in the Denver Post.
The lengthy Upper Township meeting also included the introduction of a municipal budget with a 1.7-cent increase in the local tax rate per $100 of assessed value, further discussion on Strathmere parking and talk about the Beesleys Point boat slip work. The budget is set for a public hearing and final vote April 26.
From the article it sounds like those who are against cannabis shops are very judgement in their argument “this is going to bring people into our community who wouldn’t normally be here”, “you cant walk down the street without smelling dope”, “I don’t think the voters voted on putting pot shops in UT”, “my grandchildren live in this community”, “this money is derived from drugs”. All this judgement of the moral fiber of people who smoke cannabis…. how about most people said yes in this township. Are your neighbors like these stereotypes that you speak of? Or are they helpful? Have children? Hold full time jobs? Friendly? Mostly likely the answer is yes. People smoke cannabis for a variety of reasons, but the judgement needs to stop. This judgement could prevent a huge influx of tax money coming into the township! There is a good point that we only have state police if we put distribution shops up, is there a possibility to use the taxes from cannabis to fund our own township police? I mean we even have issues with police and ambulances finding the correct house and address when a call is placed bc we don’t have our own force. I think it’s time we look at the future without judgement of our former programming that people that smoke pot are bad, but as what do the people who live here, who pay the taxes themselves, want? Perhaps we could use the money from tax for our own police force, heck maybe even sidewalks, as many of us live in areas that our children are not safe to ride their bikes around because there are no sidewalks. But I digress, my main concern is the decision being made should not be based on judgement of old ideals. This is the future. Let us look forward.