Avalon Opposes Legalized Recreational Marijuana

AVALON – Gov. Phil Murphy’s campaign was based on a policy framework that included investments in infrastructure, better funding for schools, lowering the cost of a college education, launching a fight against addiction, building a green economy, and putting the state’s finances back on track.
In that agenda for change, Murphy also said that he was prepared to sign a bill that legalizes recreational marijuana. The tax on marijuana sales is estimated to be worth $300 million to a state that would need new revenue to fund its governor’s goals.
Murphy does not discount the attraction that the revenue stream holds for the state, but he argues that legalization of marijuana is an issue of social justice first and revenue second.
Some municipalities in the state, including several in Cape May County as well as the freeholders who passed a resolution in opposition Feb. 13, do not agree.
For some, the concept of legalizing marijuana in the midst of a raging opioid crisis does not make sense.
At its Feb. 7 work session, the Avalon Borough Council considered a letter from Cape Assist and the Cape May County Community Health Coalition. Both are non-profit organizations dedicated to substance abuse prevention and treatment.
In the letter, Cape Assist and the Health Coalition advise municipalities to take steps to prepare for marijuana legalization.
A bill in the state Senate (S830) sponsored by Sen. Nicholas Scutari would legalize small amounts of marijuana for recreational use by persons 21 years and older.
As those organizations state, “Marijuana use in youth and problem marijuana use in adults can potentially have serious implications for health, safety, and welfare of the county and its residents.”
What they propose, and what a series of municipalities across the state have already begun drafting, are ordinances that place limits on retail marijuana establishments, restrict or ban growing marijuana, restrictions on signs and advertising, municipal property and workplace policies that prohibit consumption by employees, and possession or consumption by others in public buildings.
The letter also warned about public safety issues, urging communities to prepare for a spike in impaired driving and to bolster social host laws establishing potential liability for those who provide marijuana to minors who then injure themselves or others in accidents.
Cape Assist and the Health Coalition point to experience with alcohol and to communities that have legalized recreational marijuana.
They note that medical journal articles have alerted the medical community to the fact that “the number of pediatric marijuana cases increased more than five fold from 2009 to 2015 in Colorado” due to unintended exposure to marijuana edibles.
The warning rang true to members of the Avalon Borough Council. “We have to stay two steps ahead of a stupid decision,” said Nancy Hudanich. “The governor is looking at a revenue stream and not what is good for our constituents,” she added.
Charles Covington agreed that this is a safety issue “the council must stay out in front of.”
Council agreed that it would adopt a resolution at its next meeting expressing Avalon’s opposition to any move to legalize marijuana. They took that step without any clear confidence that the movement to legalize pot can be easily stopped.
The real effort, Hudanich argued, must go into preparing to enact ordinances that will limit the impact of any state law to the extent that a municipality has the flexibility to do so.
Cape Assist and the Heath Coalition provided sample ordinances that would delay anyone seeking to open a marijuana establishment while local governments explore the flexibilities they have under any potential law.
Another sample ordinance showed communities how to create “significant distance between marijuana shops and youth-serving institutions.”
Another sample aimed at restricting or banning mobile units or festival stands that would sell marijuana at community events.
The Colorado Municipal League estimates that over 150 municipalities in Colorado, out of a total of 272, do not allow marijuana sales.
No one knows what shape a potential state law on legalizing marijuana might take in New Jersey. It is also likely that any action is not imminent given opposition in the Legislature, yet the social justice arguments, with the corollary or preventing drug gangs from profiting on marijuana, attracts some supporters and the potential revenue stream attracts others.
For the New Jersey League of Municipalities, “It appears more likely than not that such legislation will advance” to the governor’s desk. This assessment came in a Jan. 19 update for mayors and municipal officials, a communication that announced the formation of a task force on this issue.
The task force will consider four areas of concern for municipalities: land use and zoning, public safety and law enforcement, public health, and budget and financial impact.
The one thing that is clear is that any action by the state on marijuana legalization is likely to see a reaction in many municipalities that believe such a move is ill-conceived.
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.