The Planning & Zoning Commission approved a temporary ban on allowing recreational cannabis establishments in town at its meeting, Thursday, July 1.

During a public hearing on an application by the town to amend zoning regulations to ban cannabis establishments, Director of Planning George Benson said the decision by the state to legalize the sale of recreational cannabis, which was signed into law by Governor Ned Lamont on June 22 and went into effect July 1, gave Newtown an insufficient amount of time to consider the ramifications of allowing cannabis establishments in town and decide how they want such establishments to be handled via zoning regulations.

However, the ban was approved with an “understanding that at a future date we can revisit this,” according to Benson.

“The legalization passed two weeks ago,” said Benson. “There was no time for us to go through the bill and evaluate its impact. Towns and cities have only had two weeks to digest this groundbreaking new law.”

Benson said surrounding municipalities such as Danbury and Waterbury had already banned or placed moratoriums on cannabis establishments, so being a larger town between the two cities would make it a desirable candidate for such an establishment if Newtown did not at least temporarily ban them. Additionally, Prospect, Monroe, and Bethel have banned or placed moratoriums on cannabis establishments — and Ridgefield is considering it.

“Two weeks is not enough time to develop public policy,” Benson said. “We want to see how other towns and cities in the state handle it.”

The largest concern, according to Benson, is that someone will come to town with an application before officials decide how to regulate cannabis establishments. If an application were submitted to open a recreational cannabis business before regulations were drafted and approved, any new regulation, by state law, could not be applied to the pre-existing application.

“It would be legislating against an individual, and we can’t do that,” Benson said. “We do not want to be in a position to justify our regulations or have to go to court. There are gray areas, but we do not want to be in a gray area.”

First Selectman Dan Rosenthal stated that he interacts with his counterparts in other communities on a regular basis to “compare notes on how we are managing matters of importance facing our respective towns and cities.”

“In this case, there has been very little time for that and so we are witnessing what I feared, a fragmented approach,” said Rosenthal. “Things are moving quickly and they are all over the place.”

Rosenthal stated that while he had “no issue with the legalization of the possession of cannabis,” that there is “more at stake here as we consider the retail sale.”

“We get one chance to get this right, and trying to do so in the span of two weeks does not make for good policy,” Rosenthal said. “I believe the prudent approach is to prohibit cannabis establishments in Newtown until we better understand the dynamics of the of the new law and how towns and cities across our state are navigating it.”

P&Z Commissioner David Rosen agreed, saying it was “a shame and irresponsible to put this on towns like us to decide so quickly.”

“I don’t understand why they didn’t give us three to four months to consider this [before the law went into effect],” said Rosen. “We work best when we have time to debate and consider. I don’t have a problem with the legalization of the sale of recreational marijuana. I do have a problem on deciding how to handle this without data and without seeing how this effects other towns.”

Collaborating Support

Newtown Health District Director Donna Culbert wrote in favor of the amendment to ban cannabis establishments, as the district’s Board of Health “has not had an opportunity to meet and discuss” the issue.

“My support of the referenced application is not a statement about my thoughts regarding the legalization and possession of cannabis,” wrote Ms. Culbert. “I have concerns about the prevailing perception of marijuana use and specifically with regards for our youth.”

Culbert described Newtown as “a community that is thoughtful in how we proceed in matters that affect all of our residents.”

“Until we better understand how the components of Senate Bill 1201 will impact our community and the state, we should not allow cannabis establishments,” the health official concluded.

Newtown Parent Connection founder Dorrie Carolan spoke in favor of banning cannabis establishments, stating marijuana is a gateway drug, and that she opposes making it easier for youth to acquire it.

“I ask you to protect our youths and put aside the monetary aspect of marijuana,” Carolan said.

In a letter received by The Newtown Bee, State Senator Tony Hwang (R-28) expressed disappointment that the bill in question never came before the state General Assembly’s Public Health Committee.

“The committee with cognizance over matters relating to public health was not able to hold a public hearing, hear and learn from the public or experts with experience on the public health implications of marijuana,” wrote Hwang.

He noted that the approval was “full of irony” as recreational marijuana, a federal Class 1 narcotic, was legalized, while “on the other hand we congratulate ourselves on banning flavored vaping and tobacco because it causes widespread harm to our children and residents.”

Hwang also noted that officials have been speaking against distracted driving and driving under the influence to keep roads safe, but believed the state did not listen to law enforcement’s perspective and opposition to legalizing marijuana from a public safety standpoint.

“The public will be able to readily access this federally illegal substance with no way to test for how ‘under the influence’ they are when driving or at work,” Hwang wrote. “The potency of this drug can vary greatly within a particular lot or product. Also, the problems that this legislation will cause far outpace the investment in this bill’s language to addiction services.”

Weighing Financial Gain

Saying that legalizing marijuana is a “fundamental health policy change that is being done under the pretense of additional revenue and social equity,” Hwang expressed concern that legalizing cannabis will produce a “limited amount of money for Connecticut” while not “fully understanding the societal addiction costs and public safety concerns.”

“I asked on the floor of the Senate and I will ask again now: Is that additional tax revenue worth the societal cost and burden?” asked Hwang.

Rosen asked about a provision in the bill for the 3% tax on cannabis sales being redirected to towns with cannabis establishments. Benson stated that, according to the bill, the funds would not be able to go directly into the town’s general fund but rather must be used for education and substance abuse counseling.

Prior to the vote of approval, P&Z Chair Don Mitchell floated the idea of not banning cannabis establishments, but instead placing a moratorium on them. Benson opposed the idea, stating that time was a crucial factor and that in the amount of time the Legislative Council met again, an application was filed, and a public hearing was set, it could be several months before the moratorium could go into effect.

That window of time could be wide enough for someone to file an application for a special permit to build a cannabis establishment.

“Timing is important,” Benson said. “Waterbury and Danbury, two big cities, have disallowed these establishments. We’re in the middle of them; we’re putting ourselves out there for no reason if [the town doesn’t disallow them now].”

The ban was approved with the expectation that the town would review it again in the future, to set up regulations that would better protect the town should a cannabis establishment seek to locate here.

“We will be monitoring things and will make adjustments,” said Benson. “The commission can bring it back up any time it wants.”

The ban was approved by the commission 6-1, with Rosen, Roy Meadows, Corinne Cox, Dennis Bloom, Andrew Marone and Gregory Rich voting for and Mitchell voting against.

Jim Taylor can be reached at jim@thebee.com.