Edison Town Council unanimously rejects marijuana zone expansion

EDISON, N.J., March 14 (ZFJ) — Edison councilmen unanimously rejected an ordinance that would have expanded the zones in which cannabis establishments would be permitted at their regular meeting on Wednesday, Feb. 28.

The ordinance was first introduced at the Feb. 15 combined council meeting, where all councilmen except Richard Brescher and Ajay Patil voted in support of it. It went up for final adoption on Feb. 28.

Map of the general area where cannabis establishments are currently permitted (in green) and zone expansions proposed by O.2211-2024 (in purple). This map does not account for exempt areas—that is, anywhere zoned for residential use, within 1000’ of residential zones, or otherwise restricted by state law. ZFJ/Akira Rorschach

TABLING ATTEMPT

The Feb. 28 meeting began with Council President Nishith Patel making a motion to table O.2211-2024, which would’ve taken it off that night’s agenda and referred it to a subcommittee for further review. He was immediately disrupted by audience members in the packed council chambers shouting “NO!”

The municipal clerk then attempted to take a vote. Councilman Richard Brescher voted no to tabling. Joe Coyle then voted yes, prompting the audience to shout angrily for 20 minutes, delaying Council Vice President Margot Harris’ vote until the police addressed the crowd and restored order.

A police officer addresses the audience to maintain order after the vote on the motion to table O.2211-2024 was disrupted by angry residents in the council chambers on Feb. 28, 2024. EDISON TV/Livestream

Once the roll call continued, all of the remaining councilmen (Harris, Patil, John H. Poyner, Asaf Shmuel, Patel) voted no, keeping the ordinance on the night’s agenda. The audience applauded after each vote.

COUNCIL MEMBERS’ COMMENT

After a five minute recess, Patel amended the procedure to allow the council to speak before public comment. Coyle announced that he’d vote to reject the ordinance.

Patil said that he has always been against introducing cannabis establishments near residential areas and schools, noting that multiple dispensaries are available in neighboring towns. He also said that he believes South Edison, which is where all of the proposed new areas are, has been underrepresented on this issue.

“This is dead wrong. We can’t put this into the neighborhoods where we have the dense population, whether good or bad,” said Patil.

Harris said that the ordinance was communicated poorly and that it needed to be discussed further. She said that the council will be forming a cannabis subcommittee, to which the audience shouted “no” to.

Poyner expressed that he disagreed with the view that cannabis would negatively harm the community but that, as an elected official, he hears the concerns and agrees that the ordinance should be reintroduced in a more “open and informed” way.

The Edison Township Council meets in their Feb. 28 regular council meeting in the council chambers. EDISON TV/Livestream

Brescher said that he’s heard many, many residents object to cannabis in neighborhoods.

“I spoke to hundreds of our residents, and hundreds of them did not want this in their neighborhoods. There were three or four—we might have one here tonight—there were a couple, but a majority of the residents didn’t want it, and that was one of the reasons why when this was first proposed to be put on the agenda I voted no.”

He said that he feared that the cannabis establishments would eventually move to the North Side if they were first approved in the South Side. Brescher also said that he believed estimated tax revenues have been overstated because opening more of these businesses would split total tax revenues among the other ones in Middlesex County.

“Money does matter,” Brescher said. “But does it matter when we change the quality of life in our community? Does it matter when you lose property value in your community?”

Patel announced that he’d reject the ordinance, saying that its language and the proposed locations needed to be reevaluated. He understands that residents are against dispensaries but asserted that “there needs to be money coming in” and still believes “other businesses in cannabis” are possible.

“I don’t believe in demonizing cannabis,” he said, invoking his experience as a pharmacist to discuss its medical applications treating pain and anxiety. “I believe there is a need, and as a town, we can serve that need. We don’t necessarily have to have dispensaries.”

“Like many of the council members here said, that there are other towns that can have dispensaries, fine, but we can grow, we have dilapidated warehouses that are sitting empty that are not producing taxes for us residents…”

“…I will be voting no on the cannabis ordinance, but I am open to another cannabis ordinance that does not necessarily open up dispensaries, but it does do business in other sectors with cannabis if it helps the residents. We have legalized cannabis with 60% of the vote, so the town’s residents have spoken, and I agree with the concerns, but I think there is a practical compromise that can be made here.”

Harris spoke to clarify that she intended to reject the ordinance.

Patil additionally thanked the people who made an online petition that, at the time of the council meeting, had achieved over 5,000 signatures.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Edison Board of Education President Biral Patel and former BOE President and member Jerry Shi criticized the council for not seeking the school district’s stance on the ordinance. The BOE passed a resolution taking a position against the ordinance at its meeting on Feb. 27.

In response to one of Shi’s questions, the township attorney clarified that reintroducing the ordinance would mean it’d have to go through the process of introducing a whole new ordinance.

“When you actually reintroduce or whatever you guys try to do, get the stakeholder feedback,” Shi concluded.

Residents formed a line to speak at the dais. In almost two hours of public comment, they generally expressed opposition to any dispensaries in Edison, voicing concerns that they’d harm the children and saying that there are alternative ways to raise revenue. Two residents spoke in support of the ordinance, with one discussing his medical use of marijuana.

“When you said 57%, 67% of people voted for cannabis, no, they didn’t vote for cannabis,” said former Councilwoman Joyce Ship-Freeman at the dais. “They voted for the decriminalization of cannabis.”

FINAL ADOPTION VOTE

Once public comment closed, all of the councilmen (Brescher, Coyle, Harris, Patil, Poyner, Shmuel, Patel) voted to reject the cannabis ordinance.

References

• Edison TV - Council Regular Meeting of February 28, 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSk1VhgIctA