To the editor:
The legalization of the sale and growing of marijuana in Massachusetts has often been treated as a windfall for state and local coffers, but the revenues produced from growing and retail sales operations are quite different in how they affect the bottom line of town coffers. An understanding of this is critical as the town of Sheffield seeks to limit the number of growing operations within town lines. (A bill was overwhelming approved by residents last year limiting such operations to 5, but due to an administrative issue, the proposal needs to come before the community again, and will do so on April 4th.)
We are often reminded that retail marijuana operations can provide up to 20 percent of the revenue from such sales to the state and local government, making such operations appealing to taxpayers. On the flip side, the cultivation of marijuana only allows for 3 percent of the revenues from gross sales to be collected by the towns as a community impact fee, and this is only allowed up to a level which compensates the town for the additional expenses directly related to supporting the growing operations. These fees can, and are being challenged by marijuana growers, in costly lawsuits claiming the towns cannot defend that their 3% fee is being used solely in support of these operations. Additionally, the state is considering legislation that will limit these fees further and may even require outside auditing and other bureaucratic review that could further limit collection of monies to offset expenses taken on by these towns that directly benefit agricultural marijuana operations. I am not sure how that helps the bottom line of the town or gives taxpayers a break.
The town of Sheffield has already passed a bill limiting the number of retail operations to three, but this bill – the one overwhelmingly approved by Sheffield residents that requires a revote due to technicality – is simply aimed at limiting the number of marijuana growing operations to five.
Given that there is little to no financial upside for Sheffield to these operations, and the downsides, which include processing odor, increased traffic, noise, light pollution, and potential security issues are costs that are hard to put a dollar figure on, the limitation of such facilities to five, seems like a reasonable compromise for all
The legalization of marijuana sales and farming in Massachusetts has provided us all with a unique learning curve, and it is important that we understand the complexity of the costs and benefits of each aspect of the law and how it will impact our communities. The meeting on April 4th is a chance for all Sheffield residents to actively share their thoughts and concerns on an issue
I hope to see a number of my Sheffield neighbors there, working to keep our community what we want it to be with a full understanding of the issues at hand.
Catherine Miller
Sheffield
