BRIGHTON — A group of residents has formed a committee with the goal of convincing voters in the city to vote “no” on a recreational marijuana store proposal up for consideration in November.
Voters in the city will decide at the polls Nov. 8 whether to allow at least two adult-use recreational marijuana stores and repeal the city’s ban on marijuana businesses. If approved by voters, a proposed city ordinance that would allow would-be marijuana store operators to apply to open a store would go into effect Dec. 1.
The residents formed a local ballot question committee, Protect Brighton Youth & Community, to oppose the proposal.
“Protect Brighton Youth & Community was formed in response to a ballot proposal coordinated by a group of out-of-town marijuana professionals, to allow commercial marijuana businesses in Brighton,” committee members said in a release.Â
“This initiative is fundamentally opposed to Brighton’s family-friendly, small-town character and would increase youth access to dangerous high-THC marijuana products,” the release continues. “Our grassroots locally based group is committed to defending our city from these outside interests and maintaining the values that have made Brighton a place where ‘Quality is a Way of Life.'”
A group with ties to the marijuana industry, Say Yes to Brighton Committee, promoted the ballot initiative. The group collected 746 petition signatures, surpassing the 204 required valid signatures, from residents to place the issue on the ballot. However, city officials rejected the petitions on technical grounds.
RELATED: Marijuana industry insiders helped put a proposal on the Brighton ballot. Here’s who’s involved
The Say Yes to Brighton Committee then sued the city, its elections department and city Clerk Tara Brown because Brown rejected the petitions because of how the petitions were formatted, according to court documents. Livingston County Chief Circuit Court Judge Michael Hatty issued an order requiring the Council voted approve ballot language. Mayor Kristoffer Tobbe was the only council member to vote against approving the ballot language.
The ballot language says the businesses would be allowed to offer delivery, drive-thru and exterior walkup windows. The establishments would not be allowed within 800 feet of a public or private grade schools or parks larger than 1 acre. It also would allow the city to enact police and zoning regulations related to marijuana businesses.
Opponents say stores would hurt the youth
Two members of the Protect Brighton Youth & Community committee said their main concern is that having local marijuana stores could increase marijuana use among children and teens.
“This is about youth and community, not responsible adult use,” said Susan Gardner, a city council member who is participating in the group.
“We have utmost respect for people’s rights. It’s a freedom in Michigan. Anything our group is trying to achieve isn’t going to take anyone’s rights away,” Gardner said.
She said recreational marijuana is readily available to adult users in Brighton, who can travel to nearby communities that have stores or people can order cannabis products for delivery.
She said having stores in the city would give young people the impression it is OK for them to use marijuana, even though they are underage.
“If they ride their bike and it’s here, it’s going to seem more OK, if it’s next to the ice cream shop or book shop,” she said. “When it’s right here, it’s going to look like to our residents’ children as more accepted, more approved by our community, and I believe a more attractive curiosity.”
Dr. Thomas Litzinger, a psychologist who is a member of the group, treats patients with substance-use disorders and said he believes having stores in the city would negatively impact young people.
“It becomes easier for youth to get their hands on it,” said Litzinger, a member of Key Development Center Inc.’s board of directors.
“I see the everyday effects” on adolescents, he said. “As I talk to patients, the starting age is 12 to 13 years old now. Typically, that adolescent or teenager is getting it from an older sibling or friend of an older sibling.”
He said he believes having stores in the city will make some youth think it is safe or acceptable.
“Well, if it’s legal, it must be OK, but it’s not OK because of the adverse physical and mental health impact it has on individuals,” he said. “It becomes that mental mindset, it’s OK because we have a store downtown, but it’s not okay.
“As a Brighton resident, Brighton has quality of life, that’s kind of our motto. Dispensaries will not improve our quality of life,” he said.
How many stores would actually open, if passed?
The committee is also concerned that the proposed ordinance could lead to more than two stores.
According to the proposed ordinance, no less than two stores would be allowed. It does not put a cap on the total number of stores the city could allow.
City council could enact a moratorium on any more stores or set a maximum number of stores after at least two stores are approved for licenses, conditionally approved for licenses or are operating, according to the proposed ordinance.
But Gardner said she is concerned it would not be that easy, in reality, for the city to limit it to two stores.
“While those words are on paper that the city may adopt an ordinance imposing a moratorium, this would not be without challenges,” she said.
“The moratorium could not be established until the city has issued license approval or at least two are operating. If it passes, and you have six, eight or 10 businesses that qualify, the city does not have the means to choose two,” she said, adding it could open the city up to lawsuits.
“The city could attempt to cap it at two, five or six or whatever they would choose, but in my opinion, it would be litigated,” she said.
She also said the proposed ordinance does not give would-be store operators a deadline for when to apply.
Some city officials expressed concern the proposal could favor certain would-be store operators over others. The concern is over a portion of the ballot proposal that stipulates marijuana stores only would be allowed if the person or entity that would hold the state license has obtained pre-qualification with the state’s Cannabis Regulatory Agency within 30 days after the ballot language is certified to the county clerk, which was Sept. 22. It also stipulates the person or entity to hold the state license must have a recorded interest in the property.
“From a competitive stand point, it favors those who are positioned to act quickly and takes away some of the competitive nature that a free-market economy wants,” Gardner said.
“Once the ordinance takes effect on Dec. 1, and unless the number of licenses is somehow capped, it’s possible that anyone who met the criteria prior to Sept. 22 could subsequently apply and be granted a license,” she said.
She said city officials are aware of about a dozen business that have shown interest, but how many might apply is unknown.
Protect Brighton Youth & Community lists some other concerns in the release, including a lack of buffer zones to Main Street, downtown, playgrounds, day cares, churches, other youth facilities or parks of 1 acre or less.
They are concerned that the 800-foot buffer zones to K-12 schools is “small,” the release states.
They are also concerned about walk-up and drive-up windows and how the proposed ordinance does not establish a limit to hours of operation.
Contact Livingston Daily reporter Jennifer Eberbach at jeberbach@livingstondaily.com.
Be the first to comment