Joined: 9:12 PM - Feb 19, 2010

10:24 AM - May 22, 2018 #581

Oh that could be! I see what you mean.  The councilor told me it was about the number of establishments Gloucester would allow so my mind went to the 1 vs 3.  Since it is a public hearing who knows what the commentary will be if any. But if it just to approve that change I think I will go to my other meeting!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 9:12 PM - Feb 19, 2010

11:08 AM - May 22, 2018 #582

@Cathy (Admin) ... I just checked with Councilor Holmgren and you are right...this is to adopt the code related to the upper limit and not the 1 vs 3 discussion yet.  
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 9:12 PM - Feb 19, 2010

1:02 PM - Jun 02, 2018 #583

From Councilor Val Gilman's post...

"Update on Retail Shop Recreational Marijuana ordinances.

Our City Council approved the formula of 20 percent of liquor store licenses last night. The 17 is 3.4 and we rounded down to 3 because it was less than 3.5.

Next the Planning Board referred a zoning recommendation, which council voted to refer, to P and D at the 6/6 Weds meeting at 5:30 at City Hall first floor conference room. This is not a hearing but the public is encouraged to attend. I Chair this Standing Committee, Jen Holmgren is the Vice Chair and Council President Lundberg is the third member.

The Planning Board is recommending that council considers a recommendation where retail recreational marijuana shops be permitted in Extended Business (with Planning Board Special permit), General Industrial and Business Parks. On 6/6 we will review the specific sections of Gloucester that align with these three zoning areas.
This zoning will also eventually go to public hearing and a council vote. Consistent with the majority of cities and towns in MA, our Council voted a bylaw for a zoning moratorium that ends on 12/31/18.

The 2018-18 Order (Gilman/Memhard and OHara), to recommend a ballot question for voters to consider one shop in Gloucester vs. the cap that we voted last night of 3, will be heard toward the end of June or early July at Ordinances and Administration.

Then 2018-18 Order will go to public hearing and a council vote which will determine if it will be put on the ballot for special election per the CCC ordinance.

For now, I will begin sharing documents for your review so you can follow and hopefully participate in the democratic process of sending emails to Councilors voicing your opinions on zoning and how many recreational marijuana shops you prefer for Gloucester.

Please be aware that there is a medicinal marijuana dispensary being built on Great Republic Drive in Blackburn Park.

Below is a recent MA Municipal Association newsletter that updates officials and the public on what is happening throughout MA on this matter of recreational marijuana zoning and retail shops.

Feel free to email me at vgilman@gloucester-ma.gov if you have questions or call me at 9786214682.

Hope this helps update you on the process!"

https://www.mma.org/mma-tracks-local-ac ... arijuana-0
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 8:06 AM - Sep 01, 2012

2:23 PM - Jun 02, 2018 #584

I'll say it again - any plan to restrict the number of locations is so stupid and reactionary ( aka nanny state-ish). If it does somehow, it will be years before they city gets its collective finger out and changes it...to what the people wanted in the first damn place.

Hannah Jumper lives....
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 9:12 PM - Feb 19, 2010

2:38 PM - Jun 02, 2018 #585

I agree, BI, and I have officially stated that position to council and encourage others to do so if they feel strongly about it.

Paul Lundberg    978-282-8871 ;  plundberg@gloucester-ma.gov
Melissa Cox        978-631-9015 ;  mcox@gloucester-ma.gov
Jen Holmgren      978-335-4748 ;  jholmgren@gloucester-ma.gov
James O’Hara     978-979-7533 ;    johara@gloucester-ma.gov
Steven LeBlanc   978-283-3360 ; sleblanc@gloucester-ma.gov
Valerie Gilman      978-283-1993; vgilman@gloucester-ma.gov
Scott Memhard   978-283-1955  ; smemhard@gloucester-ma.gov
Sean Nolan         978-375-8381 ;  snolan@gloucester-ma.gov
Ken Hecht            617-755-9400;  khecht@gloucester-ma.gov
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 8:06 AM - Sep 01, 2012

8:55 AM - Jun 03, 2018 #586

If Hannah says one more time that "Oh, you don't understand - the pot today is soooo much stronger than when we were kids!" - I will scream. I do understand. Everybody with even half a brain understands. Enough ...move on.

Oh - and the cars are faster, we have more TV channels, school kids are actually smarter than we were, and we all have to work longer and harder as families to keep our heads above water. So?

We all do understand. Yes, cannabis can be stronger, it can also be less strong; it is being/will be sold by professionals who know what is what; the stores already out there are akin to good wine stores - different varieties, strengths, effects - medicinal and otherwise. Teenagers who wanted to get cannabis have always been able to do so, yet once it is in the regulated marketplace - like alcohol, those opportunities will diminish, as will the "forbidden fruit" aspect of it all. How many more times do rational people have to point out the the stupid reactionaries that ALCOHOL IS ABSOLUTELY AND UTTERLY MORE TOXIC AND DANGEROUS. Hullo?!?!  And yet we sell it everywhere, we advertise it everywhere, we rationalize it as part of the culture, we have learned so much more about it and how to manage/handle it over the past decades. But we accept that people will die, that people will get ill/damaged, that people will be beaten and abused by drunks. But...."pot"?!?! The "demon weed"?!?! How many spouses and kids have been beaten up by stoned people?  How many cases of cirrhosis of the liver has cannabis caused? Or how about tobacco? How many pot-smokers have lung cancer? (Wrong...don't believe the hype.) How many chapters of PSA (Pot Smokers Anonymous) are there around the nation? How many horrendous accidents caused by stoned (only) drivers? I'm not saying zero...but way, way, way fewer than drunks, or texting fools, or ridiculously-speeding assholes.
It is only illegal because of racist southern lawmakers, in the first place (look it up).  Just ONE of you...share the rationale for the federal classification of cannabis as a Schedule 1 drug. Please? Pfft. You cannot.

So, shut up with your absurd idea of restricting the outlets to just 1 (meanwhile creating a monopoly - how Trumpian of you); shut up with your meddling, fiddling, nanny-statism - and work on addressing and fixing the real problems of this city.

Get with it - or get out of the way.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 4:12 PM - Apr 27, 2011

8:54 PM - Jun 03, 2018 #587

The Exhaustive List Of Everyone Who’s Died Of A Marijuana Overdose

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ma ... e9848d6297
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 11:54 PM - Jun 20, 2007

5:42 AM - Jun 04, 2018 #588

battlingignorance wrote: I'll say it again - any plan to restrict the number of locations is so stupid and reactionary ( aka nanny state-ish). If it does somehow, it will be years before they city gets its collective finger out and changes it...to what the people wanted in the first damn place.

Hannah Jumper lives....
Not all people wanted it! However since this is a democracy we have to live with it as stinky as it is. Anywho.....Since I'm no expert in the topic I do think if there is only one retail outlet here the price may help curb it's appeal (probably not to the serious pothead). And I'm no Hannah Jumper Battle Axe ! 
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 8:06 AM - Sep 01, 2012

9:58 AM - Jun 04, 2018 #589

Dun Fudgin wrote:
battlingignorance wrote: I'll say it again - any plan to restrict the number of locations is so stupid and reactionary ( aka nanny state-ish). If it does somehow, it will be years before they city gets its collective finger out and changes it...to what the people wanted in the first damn place.

Hannah Jumper lives....
Not all people wanted it! However since this is a democracy we have to live with it as stinky as it is. Anywho.....Since I'm no expert in the topic I do think if there is only one retail outlet here the price may help curb it's appeal (probably not to the serious pothead). And I'm no Hannah Jumper Battle Axe !
"Not all people wanted it"?! Really? That's your response?
It's "stinky"?!  Other than quite literally smelling...so does tobacco. Which actually kills people, yet it's legal.
Your logic is absurd...that you welcome a monopoly in order to drive the legal price up? WFT, Dun?! You just cannot be that stupid.

Not all people wanted ANYTHING that has been put before them legally or politically. Don't be a distractive, argumentative dope (pun intended).
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 9:12 PM - Feb 19, 2010

10:05 AM - Jun 04, 2018 #590

Suggesting a monopoly to repress purchase of a legal product is not a great position.  In fact it is so off-the-rails that I believe Dun might be trolling us.  Besides...it wouldn't work...people would still buy it but more would likely take their business out of town.  That would be ignoring the intent of the vote...people want this to be a legal product and treated as such.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 8:06 AM - Sep 01, 2012

10:33 AM - Jun 04, 2018 #591

Karly wrote: Suggesting a monopoly to repress purchase of a legal product is not a great position.  In fact it is so off-the-rails that I believe Dun might be trolling us.  Besides...it wouldn't work...people would still buy it but more would likely take their business out of town.  That would be ignoring the intent of the vote...people want this to be a legal product and treated as such.
If he is/was trolling....to hell with him. But, given, so many previous posts about this from him - I doubt it.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 4:12 PM - Apr 27, 2011

11:40 AM - Jun 04, 2018 #592

If there is only one retail outlet, won't the serious potheads just continue to buy it on the black market?

Also, do I have your permission to name a strain after you? I'm thinking of combining the two skunkiest varieties I can find and calling it Dun Fudgin.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 9:12 PM - Feb 19, 2010

12:38 PM - Jun 04, 2018 #593

gator...I think Dun would want the word "stinky" in that strain name too.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 11:54 PM - Jun 20, 2007

3:15 PM - Jun 04, 2018 #594

battlingignorance wrote:
Dun Fudgin wrote:
battlingignorance wrote: I'll say it again - any plan to restrict the number of locations is so stupid and reactionary ( aka nanny state-ish). If it does somehow, it will be years before they city gets its collective finger out and changes it...to what the people wanted in the first damn place.

Hannah Jumper lives....
Not all people wanted it! However since this is a democracy we have to live with it as stinky as it is. Anywho.....Since I'm no expert in the topic I do think if there is only one retail outlet here the price may help curb it's appeal (probably not to the serious pothead). And I'm no Hannah Jumper Battle Axe !
"Not all people wanted it"?! Really? That's your response?
It's "stinky"?!  Other than quite literally smelling...so does tobacco. Which actually kills people, yet it's legal.
Your logic is absurd...that you welcome a monopoly in order to drive the legal price up? WFT, Dun?! You just cannot be that stupid.

Not all people wanted ANYTHING that has been put before them legally or politically. Don't be a distractive, argumentative dope (pun intended).
Nice pun! 
DF:   "Not all people wanted it" .....That's a hidden mirror statement that can be associated to the last presidential election, I was hoping someone would get it.
BI:     "Other than quite literally smelling...so does tobacco. Which actually kills people, yet it's legal."........In my limited human biology knowledge the lungs filter smoke, over time wouldn't pot smoke harm the lungs?
BI:     "Your logic is absurd...that you welcome a monopoly in order to drive the legal price up? WFT, Dun?! You just cannot be that stupid.".......You really want me to counter your reply? There's so many directions I could go that would leave you on the floor in laughter or agony or maybe both!
But again....Nice pun!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 8:06 AM - Sep 01, 2012

5:23 PM - Jun 04, 2018 #595

Oy gevalt. The majority of voters want legalized cannabis, just as the majority of voters wanted HRC. Where's your "mirror"?!
The lungs ingest many more and difference carcinogens from cigarette tobacco (heavily processed, or otherwise) than from (smoked) cannabis. Unless you have evidence to the contrary (you don't) - nobody has died from smoking cannabis products. Yes, "limited knowledge", indeed.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 9:12 PM - Feb 19, 2010

6:12 PM - Jun 04, 2018 #596

I like that "Oy gevalt."   Must remember to use it!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 4:12 PM - Apr 27, 2011

6:13 PM - Jun 04, 2018 #597

Study: Smoking Marijuana Not Linked with Lung Damage

"Whatever the cause, it seems that those who argue that marijuana is harmful because of its smoke are going to have to find a different line of attack."

http://healthland.time.com/2012/01/10/s ... ng-damage/
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 9:12 PM - Feb 19, 2010

6:19 PM - Jun 04, 2018 #598

That aside, I really hate smoking. Never liked it.  I think a friend and I hid a pack of cigarettes in between the rocks at a Rockport quarry when we were 13 and for all I know it is still there because I didn't want to smoke them. 

If I revisit marijuana after all these decades I would go with an edible of some sort.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 5:30 AM - Aug 13, 2005

9:39 PM - Jun 04, 2018 #599

I don't know if these jobs pay enough to buy a townhouse on E. Main St., but anyone looking for a new career might consider becoming a Budtender, Dispensary Agent, Dispensary Tech, Cannabis Chef or a dozen other MJ related careers:

https://www.hempstaff.com/marijuana-jobs

June 16 Cannabis Training for Dispensary Jobs in Ma will be held in Danvers.  Wait, that class is sold out - next Boston area class in October ...

https://www.hempstaff.com/events/cannab ... sachusetts
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 5:30 AM - Aug 13, 2005

3:20 PM - Jun 05, 2018 #600

http://www.gloucestertimes.com/news/loc ... e3da1.html


"Gloucester is locked into allowing at least one shop because, under the rules spelled out in March by the state’s Cannabis Control Commission, no city or town can block a medical marijuana company that was approved prior to July 1, 2017, from also selling recreational marijuana."

That is incorrect and this misinformation annoyingly keeps getting restated - this is the third story in the GDTimes that has included it.  To be fair to the Times, the incorrect information was put out by City Officials and has been repeated in discussions at meetings.  While I would not support a ban, I think that voters should have correct information in order to make informed decisions.

A municipality can allow medical while banning recreational.  "Ban:  If a municipality enacts a complete prohibition on marijuana establishments for adult use through a general bylaw or ordinance, the Commission will not issue a license so as to authorize the conversion of a registered marijuana dispensary to a marijuana establishment for adult use in that municipality."
Quote
Like
Share