Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Consumption Lounge topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Merchantville council split on proposed cannabis consumption lounge amid safety concerns
Summary
Public commenters raised safety concerns and council members split on a proposed cannabis consumption lounge; supporters pointed to a one-year trial and controlled operations while opponents urged caution and limits on hours. A supporting resolution and letter for an application due April 2 will appear on the February agenda.
Merchantville Borough Council debated a proposed cannabis consumption lounge at its Jan. 27 caucus meeting, with public commenters urging caution and council members divided on whether to support the application.
Kerry Menzer, a resident of 201 St James Avenue, told the council she had heard three arguments in favor of the lounge — that it is like alcohol, that approval can be retracted, and that the operator had been a good neighbor — but she said safety should come first and asked whether approving the lounge would make the street less safe. Resident Ed Bohn of 107 St James Avenue told the council, "This is a safety concern; vote no."
Council member Sean Fitzgerald said he supported the lounge and compared it to a bar, saying he expected the business to be cautious. "I feel it is the same as a bar," Fitzgerald said, and noted the lounge shares a driveway with an existing bar. Council member Eric Benjamin said he supported a controlled, one-year trial to see how the operation works. Council member Ray Woods said he would support the lounge with public-safety safeguards, citing examples the applicant provided and asking that police check compliance and that the council review results after one year. "We need to make considerations for public safety for this to work," Woods said.
Council members Anthony Perno and Andrew McLoone said they opposed the lounge. Perno said he was not ready to allow a "bar type operation" in town because enforcement had been inconsistent. McLoone said he voted against the ordinance at introduction, objected to the speed of the timeline, and asked for time and operational limits such as restricted hours, saying he did not want Merchantville to be a "guinea pig." Council member Dan Sperrazza said he supported the one-year trial and the ability to withdraw support if problems arise.
Council agreed to place a resolution on the Feb. council meeting agenda that would allow a letter of support for the operator's application; the deadline for that application was noted as April 2. Council directed that hours of operation be included in the resolution and that Sean Fitzgerald provide those details to the clerk.
The council took no final legislative action on the lounge at the caucus meeting; the matter is scheduled for the February meeting for formal action and any supporting letter tied to the application deadline.
