To the editor:
Tetrahydra Agtek is seeking a special permit to create a recreational marijuana establishment in Becket. It is a tier 11, the largest that Massachusetts allows—100,000 square feet on 5.6 acres of indoor and outdoor grow. The proposal is for a 50,400 square foot greenhouse and 27,000 outdoor grow.
The company made its first pitch last January and then withdrew its application the following month. They then refiled in June and it went to a contentious Planning Board meeting in late August.
The opposition is not to a pot farm but to the location next to a residential community and to the historic Becket quarry, an active education site where tours are held for groups of school children, including class tours for children at the Becket Elementary School. Last year between Memorial Day and Labor Day, there were more than 14,000 visitors of all ages who came to the Becket Quarry.
The objections to the farm from more than 100 letters the Planning Board has received are based upon significant research and the science related to the plants and odors, the intrusion to a significant amount of property that is classified as wetlands, and a natural area inhabited by a countless number of birds, animals and fish species.
This will not be a “quiet” greenhouse; it will have generators, industrial exhaust fans and lighting 24/7.
If the owners are required to employ a percentage of Becket residents, this will represent only a few employees, hardly an impact to Becket’s local employment.
Other than real estate taxes, the money will NOT benefit the taxpayers. It is held by the town to offset any negative results of the pot farm, such as extra policing, damage to the surrounding property, etc. The administrative burden makes it difficult for towns to document their “offset” costs.
The opposition is due to having a negative impact on the quality of life and property values on all its neighbors as pot farms have had in neighboring communities.
The last Becket Planning Board meeting required a continuance to February 9 due to changes being made to the site plan that was submitted on December 29.
I am hoping we will soon see an impact and environment study, important discrepancies resolved within Becket’s own bylaws and a large turnout from the public at the next Planning Board meeting via Zoom on February 9th.
Laurie Friedman
Becket
