West Side Town Council rejects recreational pot

June 8, 2018 | Jordan Houston
jordan@thereminder.com

Mayor William Reichelt stood before the Town Council on June 4 to explain why he supports the legalization of recreational marijuana. The town voted against it in an 8 – 1 vote.Reminder Publications screen grab of Town of West Springfield’s Facebook live video.

WEST SPRINGFIELD – Recreational marijuana will not be legal in West Springfield, despite strong support from the mayor.

Although adult-use marijuana was legalized in Massachusetts in 2016, West Side placed a temporary moratorium on retail sales through December. On June 4, the Town Council voted in favor of banning recreational marijuana – ending a town-wide debate over the pros and cons of the adult-use of the drug. While recreational facilities will be prohibited, the two medical facilities slated to open later this year will not be affected.

Residents had up to five minutes to state their opinions on the matter during the Council’s public hearing.

Mayor William Reichelt, who has been a strong supporter of adult-use marijuana, made his case to extend the Council’s decision to a later date.

“While I didn’t support it before, it’s here and I think it’s at least due a conversation. To say it’s not going to be here in West Springfield just because we banned it is short-sighted,” he said. “I understand it’s a very controversial and heated debate, but we as leaders need to listen and see what the experts say. We still have seven months to take a hard look. It’s not a legalization conversation anymore, it’s a regulations conversation, a tax conversation and a testing conversation – I think we should just have the conversation.”

In May, the mayor petitioned the Town Council to amend the Zoning Ordinance law to allow the adult-use of marijuana, citing possible financial benefits. The municipality would stand to collect a 3 percent local sales tax from commercial pot facilities within West Side, and profit from any additional revenue generated from host community agreements he argued.

His proposed zoning amendments included: limiting the number of retail operations; segregating the use to industrial zones; and placing buffers around residential uses as well as parks, play grounds and schools. He also called for the strict regulation of signage, odor and hours of operation, and the prohibition of on-site consumption. The proposal was created using similar ordinances from surrounding communities, and treats marijuana as a legal product to be sold and regulated like alcohol or tobacco.

West Side resident Faith Sullivan, a psychotherapist in the area, also supported the mayor’s position. She argued recreational marijuana would benefit many of her patients.

“As a therapist, I’ve seen many patients who have told me how difficult it is to treat their diseases – people come to me because they’re looking for ways to cope with a loss of functioning power, chronic pain or severe anxiety,” she said. “With the legalization of medical marijuana in the state, they thought they had a recourse to that. The problem is, because insurance does not cover it, they really are at a disadvantage because they don’t have the disposable income to go through the medical marijuana process.”

While a few other residents were in favor of the legalization of recreational marijuana, a majority  of the crowd seemed to oppose.

Richard Murray, a lifelong resident of West?Side, told the Council recreational marijuana would  add to the existing problems the town already faces.

“We have alcohol and it’s a severe problem. We’re going to have a gambling casino in Springfield  very soon. We don’t need another problem,” he said. “It’s going to be available in Holyoke, big deal. You can always do it some day down the road, but once you say we’re going to have retail marijuana, you can never go back – look at prohibition. We don’t need the money that bad.”

Murray’s response was met with applause from people in the room.

Larchwood Street resident Claire Carocci added to Murray’s sentiments, claiming the legalization of marijuana would further harm the image of West Springfield.

"I know we're not an upscale Longmeadow, but I don't want to see us get any lower," she said.

When it came time for the council members to discuss their positions, the motion’s end result became clear.

Councilor Sean T. Powers was the only member to agree with Reichelt, favoring his suggestion to further research the pros and cons of the debate.

“I believe it’s our duty to approach this from a logical standpoint and remember that we need to be in front of this eight-ball – not behind it,” he said. “The projected revenue from this untapped economy can be from a million to  $250,000. To have this vote without a study session and further input from residents, I feel is incorrect. We do have a moratorium, I’m not sure why we are pushing this.”

However, District 4 Councilor Daniel M. O’Brien, a former West Springfield police captain, said the public has made it very clear they do not want retail sales of the drug in West Side.

He compared the sale of recreational marijuana to the sale of alcohol and tobacco, arguing the town should profit from those sales instead.

“Alcohol is legal and the drinking age is 21, do you believe underage drinking doesn’t exist? The statements here make it seem like only adults will be able to get retail pot,” he said. “Why don’t you charge alcohol sales an additional 3 percent and use it for the schools? It’s the same argument. This will affect children in a negative and long-lasting way. They’ll be sent mixed messages and suffer consequences.”

Implementing a recreational ban generally requires a community-wide vote in cities and towns that voted in favor of the November 2016 state ballot question. Because West Springfield voted against the legalization of recreational marijuana, with 6,339 opposing, the Town Council has the power to impose a ban without polling residents.

The West Springfield Town Council closed the discussion with an 8 – 1 vote in favor of a ban, with Councilman Powers serving as the singular vote against it.

Share this: