Lakeville selectmen hold public forum on adult-use marijuana zoning, host agreements and local tax options

The Town of Lakeville Board of Selectmen held a public forum April 4 to gather resident feedback on how the town should regulate adult-use (recreational) marijuana through local zoning, host community agreements and local-option taxes, with board members saying they aim to place proposed bylaws before the June town meeting.

Town counsel Katie Loughman explained the division of authority under Massachusetts law: the Cannabis Control Commission will license commercial marijuana establishments at the state level, but municipalities must certify local zoning and play three roles in the licensing pathway — a community outreach hearing required of applicants, negotiation of a host community agreement (HCA) that can include a community impact fee, and local zoning that controls time, place and manner for the uses. Loughman noted HCAs can include community impact payments capped at 3% of gross sales and that municipalities must certify that proposed locations comply with local zoning before a state license can be issued.

The forum focused on where different adult-use license types (cultivation, product manufacturing, independent testing laboratories, retail sales and transporters) should be allowed in Lakeville and whether the town should limit the number of retail outlets. Selectmen said the board has been discussing limiting retail to two operations and exploring an overlay district that would pick specific properties where retail could be allowed. Loughman and selectmen emphasized that, under the state act, towns must explicitly prohibit adult-use if they want it banned; otherwise adult-use can be treated as an allowed use under existing retail zoning unless the town amends its bylaws to call out marijuana specifically.

Applicants and property owners who attended described business plans and traffic projections. John Brady, a partner in Nature's Remedy, said the enterprises he and others are developing expect recreational sales could reach roughly $10 million annually in Lakeville and suggested that a combined local-option tax and mitigation payments could reach roughly $600,000 a year at a 6% combined rate (as discussed in the forum). Alex Mason, who identified himself as a representative of Tricom Health (appearing in the record as Trichomes/Tricom), projected 35–45 cars per hour to support similar sales numbers; other presenters contrasted medical-patient traffic estimates of about 12 patients per hour and suggested recreational traffic could be two to four times higher.

Several residents and planning-board members raised concerns about traffic impacts if retail dispensaries locate in the industrial park on or near Route 79 and Route 44, possible effects on nearby businesses, and whether retail belongs in an industrial area. Property owner Tom Ferrento said he controls a large share of the industrial park and urged the town to move forward, arguing the town will receive tax revenue and jobs if facilities are permitted. Planning Board member Barbara Mankovsky and others asked for model comparisons — for example, studying a Colorado town with demographics similar to Lakeville — to better estimate local impacts.

Selectmen and counsel discussed timing and procedures. Because the state now requires a negotiated host community agreement before an applicant completes a state license application, Loughman said towns have more flexibility than earlier drafts of the law suggested; Lakeville staff and selectmen indicated an intention to prepare zoning language and possible HCAs for the June town meeting. They also said the HCA is typically negotiated for a multi-year term (five years was discussed during the forum) and that a facility licensed and operating before any later prohibition would be a preexisting nonconforming use that could remain in operation under existing rights.

Residents asked how a townwide voter rejection of recreational sales (as some neighboring towns have done by ballot) affects local policy. Counsel said a prohibition can be enacted as a zoning bylaw amendment; different procedural rules apply depending on whether a community previously adopted the November 2016 ballot question (Ballot Question 4) procedure. The selectmen said they would not negotiate HCAs for adult use if a bylaw permitting adult use fails at town meeting.

Speakers also discussed taxable revenue streams and how they can be used. Loughman and selectmen explained the difference between mitigation payments (documented, purpose-related community impact fees up to 3% of gross sales) and a local-option sales tax (a local option that applies to retail sales), which residents were told could be used more broadly than only to offset documented mitigation costs. Several commenters urged caution about overstating revenue and suggested using sample data from other states and towns to inform assumptions.

No formal motion or vote was taken at the forum; selectmen framed the meeting as part of the statutory public-engagement and drafting process and invited further comment as they prepare proposed zoning and HCA language for potential debate at the June town meeting.

The selectmen said draft bylaws and HCA templates are being developed with KP Law and other consultants; residents and boards including the Planning Board, Zoning Board of Appeals and Board of Health will have future hearings as part of the ordinary zoning and permitting process.

Residents and applicants were urged to submit comments and attend upcoming meetings so the town can refine draft bylaws before the June warrant. The town counsel and staff offered to provide sample bylaws other communities have used and to continue public forums as drafts are prepared.