BRPC Advocates For Local Control In Medical Marijuana

By Andy McKeeveriBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

Chairman Jamie Mullen said the clinics should be a welcomed part of a downtown.

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — Berkshire Regional Planning Officials trust that the state will regulate all of the health concerns regarding medical marijuana but they want to make sure they can control where the facilities are located.

BRPC's Regional Issues Committee will submit comments to the Department of Public Health in an effort to ensure cities and towns have local control of zoning.

They also want clarification on the timing of permitting and if the nonprofit organizations fall into exemptions from zoning and that the facilities are geographically spread out.

The state Department of Public Health is currently in the process of crafting regulations and are expected to release them in May.

Voters approved the use of medical marijuana through clinics or home use last fall. Attorney General Martha Coakley has ruled towns cannot ban clinics but they may impose moratoriums until the state can promulgate regulations.

While there are questions of enforcement, health impacts, inspections and impacts, BRPC has limited its comments to land use.

The committee had mixed views. New Marlborough representative Jamie Mullen looked at the addition of clinics as a benevolent and helpful addition to downtowns by bringing more people there.

"This is medicine and people shouldn't be stigmatized when they are trying to get help," Mullens said on Tuesday when the group met to discuss their comments. "It is like a pharmacy. It isn't something to fear."

However, Lee representative Thomas Wickham fears marijuana will be used in the parking lots or attract a criminal element. Wickham doesn't want them anywhere near schools.

"You don't know what it is going to be like. Morally, I feel it should be 100 feet away from schools," Wickham said.

The various opinions represent how different communities feel about it and the committee said each town should be able to have control for what works for them. But, there are still zoning questions.

One thing is for sure, the towns will not be able to eliminate them completely from zoning. Rene Wood of Sheffield said she had a lengthy conversation with Attorney General Martha Coakley's office and bans will not hold up through an appeal process.



"It is allowed by right. But you can put restrictions on the distance from churches and schools," Wood said.

Even if bans on clinics would withstand appeals, Eleanor Tillinghast, of Mount Washington, said that would only increase the number of hardship permits issued, which are even more difficult to control.

If a clinic is not close proximity a patient can be given a hardship permit which would allow them to either grow their own or have a "caregiver" provide it.

C.J. Hoss, a planner from Pittsfield, said the methadone clinic that recently opened up was exempt from certain regulations because it was classified as an education nonprofit and it serviced disabled citizens. Classifying marijuana clinics present a similar issue. BRPC doesn't know how to classify the clinics or the cultivation centers.
 
The timing of permits creates a problem, too. In the larger city, Hoss wants applicants to receive local permitting before applying for the state certificate. Hoss says the city vets applications and eliminates projects that are known not to be permitable ahead of time.

"I feel more comfortable having it sited first," Hoss said. "We're not trying to zone them out. We're trying to figure out what is reasonable."

Smaller towns with volunteer planning boards also don't want to have to go through the process for multiple proposals just to have the state deny a certificate.

The planners also want to make sure the clinics are spread out across the county so all of the proposals don't flock to one municipality.


Tags: Berkshire Regional Planning Commission,   marijuana,   zoning,   

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

Pittsfield CPA Committee Funds Half of FY24 Requests

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — A few projects are not getting funded by the Community Preservation Committee because of a tight budget.

The projects not making the cut were in the historic preservation and open space and recreation categories and though they were seen as interesting and valuable projects, the urgency was not prevalent enough for this cycle.

"It's a tough year," Chair Danielle Steinmann said.

The panel made its recommendations on Monday after several meetings of presentations from applications. They will advance to the City Council for final approval.  

Two cemetery projects were scored low by the committee and not funded: A $9,500 request from the city for fencing at the West Part Cemetery as outlined in a preservation plan created in 2021 and a $39,500 request from the St. Joseph Cemetery Commission for tombstone restorations.

"I feel personally that they could be pushed back a year," Elizabeth Herland said. "And I think they're both good projects but they don't have the urgency."

It was also decided that George B. Crane Memorial Center's $73,465 application for the creation of a recreational space would not be funded. Herland said the main reason she scored the project low was because it didn't appear to benefit the larger community as much as other projects do.

There was conversation about not funding The Christian Center's $34,100 request for heating system repairs but the committee ended up voting to give it $21,341 when monies were left over.

The total funding request was more than $1.6 million for FY24 and with a budget of $808,547, only about half could be funded. The panel allocated all of the available monies, breaking down into $107,206 for open space and recreation, $276,341 for historic preservation, and $425,000 for community housing.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories