Although announcing in advance they had intentions of voting to withdraw the cannabis ordinance, the Mayor and Council nonetheless listened to residents and out-of-towners in an approximately 90 minute long public hearing speaking both for and against having a distribution center in the borough.
In the end, the vote to withdraw the proposed ordinance before a scheduled public hearing was approved unanimously, and the idea put forth it will appear again at some time in the future with changes.
With a standing room crowd only and a heavy agenda that kept the council at the table in open meeting until a minute before midnight, including a half hour long executive session midway through the meeting, the governing body agreed that the state’s latest possible changes in regulation on cannabis, with a period for comment open until Sept. 30, is one reason why they agreed to table their ordinance last night.
Council members also conceded they had not included any recommendations made by the Planning Board when they were given the opportunity to read, review and comment after the proposed ordinance was introduced the first time in June and final action was delayed because of that failure to get board comments.
If it intends to continue to pursue an ordinance permitting cannabis, the governing body will now have to draw up a new ordinance forward it to the Planning Board for its recommendations and statement that it is in keeping with the borough’s Master Plan, wait for the planners to discus it at their meeting, then bring it back to council for an introduction, another newspaper advertisement and a public hearing and final action most likely at the meeting the following month. Conceivably, this would put any action on approval of cannabis off until after the Nov. 10 election.
With impassioned reasons both for and against the code brought up by a retired teacher, church leader, former on-line newspaper publisher, businessmen and out-of-towners aided by their use of cannabis, there were both loud moments of discussion and light-hearted moments, along with numerous comments on both sides of the issue bringing applause from the crowd.
The comment drawing the most laughter came when one advocate, after hearing comments on the availability of liquor stores in spite of alcohol causing problems commented that in his experience, “when somebody who drinks gets drunk, he generally gets into fights; when someone who spokes pot has too much, he generally starts a band.”
Another resident pointed out the decision should be made on simple basics, including “will this business be helpful to the town, to health and to the business district, or not?
Another resident from Leonardo said he has used marijuana for 25 years, is responsible, has a family and a job. “The stigma has to go away,” he told the council.
An Eatontown resident speaking on ZOOM, said if there’s room for a brewery in the borough, there’s certainly room for a small marijuana shop.
In addition to the overflowing crowd in borough hall, there were 29 people on ZOOM, three of whom spoke during the public session. And when it was all over, the vast majority left the meeting, the order of business for the rest of the meeting was somewhat modified to enable professionals to meet with council in executive session on other matters, and when the regular meeting resumed a half hour later, only a handful of residents remained to hear and see action on the rest of the agenda.
