image description
Pittsfield is seeking to change its cannabis ordinances to bring them in line with new regulations from the Cannabis Control Commission including that host community agreements must be 'reasonable' and applicable to other businesses.

Pittsfield Looks to Amending Cannabis Regulations

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — After the state Cannabis Control Commission made changes to permitting, the city has proposed a new ordinance to address equity requirements and allow the mayor to set policy regarding host community agreements.

The Community Development Board on Tuesday voted to become the petitioner for the document, moving it forward to the City Council.

"What we're trying to do here is take this language regarding a cap out of the zoning. The state and the Cannabis Commission have recently adopted new legislation and regulations regarding a number of items and one of those items includes host community agreements, it also includes equity plans to be produced by the municipality," Community Development & Housing Program Manager Nate Joyner explained.

"So as part of our response to the new regulations will be adopting a new ordinance that we will be putting forward to the City Council in the near future that will kind of formalize the city's authority regarding host community agreements and meeting the statutory requirements for equity plans."

This eliminates the 35 retail cannabis store cap and gives the mayor the authority to determine the number of establishments allowed.  

"To kind of tidy things up we're going to take this particular language out of the zoning ordinance so that it's not so set in stone and it doesn't conflict with whatever policies come out in the future," Joyner added.

The existing zoning requirements were established in 2017 and, last year, the CCC approved changes to the state's adult and medical use regulations including policies that implement the agency's oversight of host community agreements, new equity requirements, and suitability reform.



Starting no later than March, HCAs must be "reasonable," meaning that conditions can be required under local regulations, necessary for public health, and imposed on non-cannabis businesses. The new regulations also address impact fees, stipulating that the host community cannot collect them if the license is held for more than nine years.

"The way the process works now is one of these entities in order to get a license from the state to operate needs to have a host community agreement in place and the way that's set up is that's kind of the sole discretion of the mayor's office. They get to set the policy on who gets a host community agreement and basically, they're empowered to set policy," said Joyner.

"So what we're just trying to do with this new ordinance we'd be putting forward is again, formalizing that to identify the mayor has the authority to negotiate the number of host community agreements that they would like to enter."

He clarified that this zoning language is specific to retail uses.  

The city currently has around six dispensaries, dramatically below the cap. Last year, the Zoning Board of Appeals approved a special permit for a dispensary in the Allendale Shopping Center at 5 Cheshire Road, which a former councilor unsuccessfully tried to appeal.

Twenty-five percent of cannabis revenue goes into Pittsfield's public works stabilization account that was created in 2019, 25 percent goes to the stabilization fund, and 50 percent goes to the general fund.  Halfway through fiscal year 2024, the city collected about $256,000 of the $700,000 general fund estimate.


Tags: cannabis,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Is the Select Board Listening to Dalton Voters?

Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

A reasonable expectation by the people of a community is that their Select Board rises above personal preference and represents the collective interests of the community. On Tuesday night [Nov. 12], what occurred is reason for concern that might not be true in Dalton.

This all began when a Select Board member submitted his resignation effective Oct. 1 to the Town Clerk. Wishing to fill the vacated Select Board seat, in good faith I followed the state law, prepared a petition, and collected the required 200-plus signatures of which the Town Clerk certified 223. The Town Manager, who already had a copy of the Select Board member's resignation, was notified of the certified petitions the following day. All required steps had been completed.

Or had they? At the Oct. 9 Select Board meeting when Board members discussed the submitted petition, there was no mention about how they were informed of the petition or that they had not seen the resignation letter. Then a month later at the Nov. 12 Select Board meeting we learn that providing the resignation letter and certified petitions to the Town Manager was insufficient. However, by informing the Town Manager back in October the Select Board had been informed. Thus, the contentions raised at the Nov. 12 meeting by John Boyle seem like a thinly veiled attempt to delay a decision until the end of January deadline to have a special election has passed.

If this is happening with the Special Election, can we realistically hope that the present Board will listen to the call by residents to halt the rapid increases in spending and our taxes that have been occurring the last few years and pass a level-funded budget for next year, or to not harness the taxpayers in town with the majority of the cost for a new police station? I am sure these issues are of concern to many in town. However, to make a change many people need to speak up.

Please reach out to a Select Board member and let them know you are concerned and want the Special Election issue addressed and finalized at their Nov. 25 meeting.

Robert E.W. Collins
Dalton, Mass.

 

 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories