Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows

Community board objects to two proposed Holy Buds dispensaries amid reports of prior illegal sales

Economic Development & Public Safety Committee (Bronx) · November 20, 2025

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee voted to forward letters of objection for two Holy Buds cannabis retail applications after residents and staff reported prior illegal cannabis sales near the proposed sites and because community concerns could not be addressed with applicants absent.

The Economic Development & Public Safety Committee voted to send letters of objection for two proposed cannabis retail applications filed under the Holy Buds name, citing unaddressed community concerns and reports of prior illegal activity at the sites.

Diane and other residents told the committee the sites were formerly illegal smoke shops and that, in one location, people had repeatedly sold cannabis on the sidewalk. One public commenter said the sheriff’s office had informed neighborhood groups that both locations were previously closed for illegal cannabis sales and noted the two proposed sites appear to be within 1,000 feet of each other.

Malcolm, who said he had spoken to a property owner, said one site (Cloudy Cloud) appeared likely to proceed while a second site (referred to as the Evil Ghost location) had repeated violations and would likely not be approved; he cautioned that licensing does not automatically stop illegal street sales and said enforcement would be necessary.

Staff member Chris told the committee he had forwarded an October 49th Precinct email about illegal activity at a White Plains Road address and said he personally had observed illegal sales there on several occasions. Because applicants were not present to answer questions or resolve neighborhood concerns, committee members voted to object and asked staff to send a formal letter on board letterhead to the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) outlining that community concerns had not been addressed.

The motion was recorded as carrying; the transcript does not show a roll‑call tally. The committee asked staff to prepare the objection letter and send it to OCM on community board letterhead.