Avalon Tables Marijuana Ordinance

AVALON – Avalon Borough Council scheduled the public hearing and potential adoption of its proposed marijuana ordinance for Feb. 27, after procedural difficulties had forced the borough to remove consideration of the ordinance from its first meeting that month.
Once again, the ordinance failed to come up for consideration as council formally tabled it. Assistant Business Administrator James Waldron explained that additional changes needed to be made, which would necessitate starting over with the two-step process required for new municipal laws.
Avalon had been working for weeks to craft an ordinance that would ban the sale of marijuana within the borough.  The move came in response to legislation making its way through the Legislature to legalize the adult recreational use of marijuana, along with a push to expand the program for medical marijuana.
As a growing number of municipalities pass local laws banning the sale of marijuana and the running of cannabis-related businesses, Avalon is seeking to join their ranks, stating that it is “the intent of the Borough of Avalon, as expressed in this Ordinance, to prohibit all such manufacture, cultivation, growing, sale or distribution of marijuana, cannabis, or any product containing Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or their derivatives for medical or recreational purposes.”
At its Feb. 13 meeting, the ordinance was attacked by a group of advocates for medical marijuana use. They claimed that the exception contained in the ordinance to, in no way, “restrict the dispensing of any pharmaceutical medication of other legal substance by a pharmacy” was in actuality no exception to a ban on medical marijuana sales since medical marijuana products cannot be dispensed through a pharmacy in New Jersey.
At the Feb. 27 meeting, council heard from Hugh Giordano, a union representative for United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 152 in Egg Harbor Township. Unlike the advocates for medical marijuana at the earlier meeting, Giordano pressed council to take no action on the bill with regard to both medical and recreational use.
Giordano challenged the ordinance on its stated “factual determinations.”
Giordano argued that the ordinance was in error when it implied that security concerns were so significant that they should be banned in “each of the several zoning districts within the borough.” Pointing to the existing facilities in the state for the dispensing of medical marijuana, he argued that the locations are not only secure but also provide after retirement jobs for ex-law enforcement personnel.
Moving to the borough’s citation of scientific studies that show that both police-reported car crashes and accident-related insurance claims rose in states that legalized marijuana sales, Giordano pointed to what he claimed were competing 2017 studies in the American Journal of Public Health which concluded that road fatalities in states that have legalized marijuana were similar to states that had not done so. He made no mention of the fact that the studies he referenced were limited to a comparison of fatalities.
Lastly, Giordano tried to refute the ordinance claim that there is “no widely accepted roadside test to determine marijuana usage.” Giordano made the claim that such tests are available, yet the testing process in use in areas with legal cannabis use appears to be problematic.
Companies are working to develop a test similar to a breathalyzer but problems remain. A saliva test relied on in many areas of Canada, does measure nanograms of THC in the bloodstream, but difficulties arise from the fact that the metabolism of THC can vary significantly across individuals.
Much as in the case of the medical marijuana advocates two weeks earlier, Giordano’s comments were met with polite silence. So far, no borough resident has sought to refute any aspect of the proposed ordinance.  No one has argued that Avalon would make a comfortable home for a medical marijuana alternative treatment center or for what are called in Massachusetts recreational pot shops.
Giordano tried to argue that marijuana was the answer to a declining demographic with new pot-related jobs.
His argument might have carried weight in some of the communities near Boston following legalization. There, Boston news outlets published guides for avoiding the crush of customers producing traffic jams and long waits as the state’s Cannabis Control Commission slowly opened new dispensaries and pot shops across the state. Near the Boston population hub, the demand was so intense that shops were forced to place limits on individual sales even below the limits already imposed by the state.
One resident whispered, “What do any of his comments have to do with Avalon?”
The ordinance has had a journey to an almost-guaranteed vote to adopt. Because it constructs its ban on marijuana through zoning regulations, the ordinance has required a trip to the Planning Board along with the normal process of introduction, publication, second reading, public hearing, and final vote.
When Waldron said that the ordinance would require some changes, he did not specify the specifics of what would be altered. It does mean, however, that the ordinance will need to reintroduced, republished and a new public hearing will be scheduled. The outcome though is hardly in doubt.
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.