If you are expecting ranting or raving today, you are probably going to be disappointed. Well maybe.
Last night's public hearing on the proposed moratorium was interesting in many ways. Most interesting, three declared residents of Fairhaven, possibly a fourth. Three members of the press. Seven members of the eight planning board members. Seven or eight, not sure, of the group proposing the facility.
Why would that be interesting? Maybe it is just to me. I didn't expect necessarily a jammed packed room. I did expect more of a spattering of public opinion. Perhaps most of the 66% of the voters in town casting ballots on the issue assumed they had expressed their opinion.
The most perplexing issue for me, it still is after the hearing, is why wait till now? I will respectfully disagree with the reasoning behind that the explanation behind that one. Sorry but after a decade and a half of having a plate piled high shoved in my face year in and year out, I don't buy into the "my plate was too full argument".
By holding a public hearing, closing it and taking a vote, unless there is a town meeting before April 22, 2014, the moratorium will not be voted on in May. Unless of course between now and May we have another publication of a notice of hearing, and another public hearing, or as noted there is a special held prior thereto.
You will hear the planning Board did not impose a moratorium, only town meeting can do that. Absolutely correct. What the planning did do was impose an inability of any interested party from going forward with the state and saying we have a green light.
You will hear the planning Board did not impose a moratorium, only town meeting can do that. Absolutely correct. What the planning did do was impose an inability of any interested party from going forward with the state and saying we have a green light.
So, what was the point in taking a vote last night, other than an attempt to stop a dispensary from coming into town? Well from I gathered more time to study where to put it.
The majority of the board, yes even those voting for the recommendation to temporarily kill the project, know full well their hands are severely tied as to what can go into any eventual by-law. Essentially the board can do two things. Set back and location.
The majority of the board, yes even those voting for the recommendation to temporarily kill the project, know full well their hands are severely tied as to what can go into any eventual by-law. Essentially the board can do two things. Set back and location.
Location. It is all about location. Seriously it is. In an admittedly personal opinion outside of the industrial zone being proposed, where else would you vote to realistically put them? No one wants them in a residential zone. Easy beans. The consensus is certain industrial zones are too small. Fine, off the list. Business districts, agricultural, seemingly not acceptable. Tell me what is left. How much of a debate is needed, to realistically determine that specific issue?
Do I agree with the 4 to 3 vote to present a moratorium on medicinal marijuana facilities, absolutely not. It is not because I am a flow blown fanatic on medicinal marijuana. If the ballot question had failed, truth be told, I wouldn't be harping on the topic on bit.
I had my say. I was able to sit in the back, gnaw on my straw, shake my head and even managed to keep from jumping up a half a dozen times.
The best I am willing to get agitated about today on this topic probably is the equivalent of some disjointed ramblings. Mainly because I am following the read it once, twice three times rule and I know going full out will never pass a third read.
What I got from last night besides indigestion, is simply more confusion. I am actually dazed and confused.
I am actually going to stop there on this topic. I really am. Maybe. At least for today. Maybe. Who am I kidding.
I hope the Selectmen follow through with a solid vote in support. I hope the Board of Health does the same. The police chief it appears has no objections. The Town Planner felt the moratorium wasn't needed. Either did three of seven members of the planning board.
Take all the time you need to be strategists about where to allow such use. I will still offer my dollar against your dime as to where the zoning reg. will allow it.
Whether last night's vote is enough in the eyes of the state to kill the issuance of the state permit, who knows.
I am really going to end it here on this. There were a few statements I am ever so tempted to key in on. Just too much I want to say about them that, believe it or not, I do know better than to say. One I really bit my tongue on last night was any consideration of a ban. With 66% of the people in this town voting for the enabling ballot question, seriously?
I must have tunnel vision on this one, I really, really must, because I just don't get it.
Maybe there wasn't a crowd of residents last night because they are hibernating from the issue until May. It's another possibility they had their say with their vote. But you'd think that people would remain interested in an issue past an election. It's not enough that something was voted for, but what happens after that? It's been in the news, so there'll be no excuses for not knowing.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I know I said enough, and saying more may be of no benefit, but it truly did gnaw at me of even remote talk about a ban. Argue all you want about the ignorance of the voter, but I for one am so tired about the outcome of ballot votes being ignored or attempted to be ignored, and even put on the back burner. We are dealing with the law of the commonwealth at this point. Not just the initiatives but the law passed by the legislature and the approved regulations. Believe it or not, it is that point that kind of fuels my engine on this issue. Don't want to deal with the problems of ballot questions or have to live by the results, well get a question on the ballot to do away with ballot questions. The will of the people is apparently only valid when it meets the will of the decision makers.
ReplyDeleteI am sad to say that this wasn't a surprise to me. I would have been surprised if they granted the petitioners the go ahead. It is obvious to me that there is still some misconceptions on this health care issue. I will admit that I have not watched the meeting, only been reviewing snippets of written articles from local sources, but to think the time and effort by the petitioners to have accounted for most of a communities concerns with their presentation, especially where they intend to house their business shows me that they are a group that is serious and thoughtful, regardless of what their product being generated. If it passes State and Local authorities, where does it make any sense to handcuff a group trying to establish a home for their operation. This stinks of it's my bat and ball and the game is over. Honestly what a shame.
ReplyDeleteIt passed with 2/3 in favor of legalization. Why weren't the supporters at last night's meeting to express where to put the dispensary. MAYBE the 2/3 majority PREFERS to grow it themselves, so they actually support the moratorium.
DeleteI was surprised to hear about the outcome of the vote last night. More for the reason that I didn't think they would support the moratorium.
Is your logic that 2/3 of the voters actually want to use or grow medical marijuana? I'm sorry, but that premise is ludicrous.
DeleteI don't know about you, but I voted for the ballot question because I think it's about time people in need had access to medicines they should have. This Reefer Madness syndrome some people have is a bit outdated.
Why my local planning board believes its more important to flex their muscles than listen to the will of voters, I have no idea. I cannot think of one reason either that a moratorium would help any zoning issue. I think it's pretty clear to me, it's akin to exclusionary zoning without actually having by laws. By having a moratorium, it simply causes any interested parties to look elsewhere, giving our Town a pass.
I'd love to know who voted for further exploration in relation to zoning so I can vote against them next time they are up for election.
-A. Jones
I'm not suggesting that 2/3 want to grow or use marijuana- medical or otherwise. I think a lesser amount of people do.
DeleteBut in addition to the unexpected outcome of the vote last night, was the unexpected amount of people who voted 'for' the medical use, that didn't want to say where in town it ought to be distributed.
I didn't vote for the legal use for a few reasons. But if I had, I certainly would have had an opinion as to where the dispensary was located.
ReplyDeleteIt seems (to me) the biggest opposition in town was about personal cultivation licenses, the doors to which have just been opened by this moratorium. Does the board understand what they've done?
~What have they been smoking?~
I just don't understand why there is a problem or concern as to where this "legal" business will be located...other than a lack of understanding by those opposed. As with any other business it will need to be in a place that is both convenient and has handicap parking. There appears to be some misconception among a few folks that this will be a magnet for recreational users...I find this 'highly' doubtful. Many of the people that will be served have very serious conditions or illnesses and this is their only panacea. Let's accept the vote of the people and move on.
ReplyDelete-Jay Simmons
I"ll say it again NIMBY.. that is the only illogical reason the planning board,health board ,selectman,police or any other person would still be trying to prevent this from happening...As we know ballot votes like lowering the income tax for one were simply ignored by the state politicians..If the end results dont line their pockets they can come up with some sort of stall tactic to skirt the issues ..
ReplyDeleteI still dont get it either,maybe the opposition can clear up the reasons why we dont need a marijuana clinic in town. We are waiting with baited breath for the final answer..Just like JEOPARDY...
ReplyDeleteLast night an elected board didn't want to place this business somewhere. Why not? People can say all they want that this is just an ordinary "legal" business but it's obviously not being treated the same as other legal businesses.
ReplyDeleteIt's good that the police are fine with the whole matter because they're the ones who will have to deal with any unwanted consequences. It's too bad they didn't speak in favor of having a dispensary.
I know who I'm not voting for again. These elected officials are supposed to represent us, but they obviously did not in this case.
ReplyDelete