dveselenak@heritage.com
The village has sought to approve an ordinance for several months. An ordinance recommended by the village planning commission was sent to the council in April.
But with more confusion, and the ruling from the court of appeals that dispensaries be banned altogether, the village council is still without an ordinance.
“We don’t want to be on the tip of the arrow when it comes to people that want to sue for particular reasons,” Village Manager Jeff Wallace said. “You get the right person … and they move here and do that, there’s a lot of money out there they’ll take their law case on.”
Wallace said he would rather see the village proceed with caution, as opposed to becoming a statewide news story involving a lawsuit. Federal law still criminalizes the possession of marijuana.
“I don’t think Manchester needs to be the point that’s driving law that’s determined by the state attorney general through the courts,” he said.
Privacy issues became a major talking point Monday night, with debate over whether or not caregivers and medical marijuana cardholders should have their identities revealed through a public hearing process.
A public hearing would be required to set up a home-based business under conditional use in the village. Under a permitted use, something Wallace suggested as alternative, no public hearing would be needed.
“Under permitted use, they’d still have to come into the village, they’d have to go through everything that’s in that ordinance … they’d still have to go through that process legally,” he said. “But it would be done through an application, and through the village office.”
Village President Pat Vailliencourt questioned why a home-based business involving marijuana would not require a public notice to surrounding neighbors the same way a business such at the new family recreation center on Main Street would. Continued...
1 2 Next
No comments:
Post a Comment