Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Cannabis topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents push back after presentation on potential cannabis cultivation and processing facility
Summary
A presentation on a possible cannabis cultivation and processing facility prompted multiple residents at the Feb. 19 Southampton Township Committee meeting to voice opposition, citing security, zoning and community concerns; no formal action was taken at the meeting.
SOUTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP, N.J. — A presentation about a possible cannabis cultivation and processing facility for Southampton Township prompted strong opposition from several residents during the committee's public-comment period on Feb. 19.
Chris Baxter presented information about the possibility of locating a cannabis cultivation and processing facility in the township; the presentation was entered into the record (the minutes note an attachment). No ordinance or formal application was before the committee at the meeting.
During public comment residents raised objections and practical concerns. Evie Doherty of 56 Stratford Road said she was "against Cannabis coming to Southampton in any form" and said she would oppose any politician who supports such development. Bill Kelly of 2 Floyd Lane cited a municipal precedent, saying, "Toms River passed an Ordinance allowing no cultivation or distribution of Cannabis," and warned that zoning regulations may not clearly address this type of manufacturing.
Local farmer Roger Kumpel expressed security concerns about storing product, saying recorded minutes reflected his worry that "even though there may be cameras they can still get robbed." Other commenters raised related issues: a resident noted the impending closure of Beneficial Bank in August and urged residents to seek alternatives, and the OEM coordinator said Swift 911 recorded messages are typed then recorded and that the recordings are sometimes difficult to hear.
The committee did not vote or take formal action on the cannabis presentation at this meeting. The presentation and the public comments were recorded in the minutes for future consideration and possible follow-up.
Next steps
The minutes do not specify a follow-up action or timeline for the cannabis proposal; any ordinance or formal application would require subsequent committee consideration or public hearings.
