Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Town awaits state guidance on cannabis zoning; local industrial districts could limit sites to a handful of properties
Summary
Board members said the town has requested guidance from the state Office of Cannabis Management whether zoning-district restrictions are permissible; zoning administrator Jeff Newman warned that Clinton’s two industrial zones together cover only a few properties, potentially leaving only one property eligible.
During public discussion and old-business comments the Town of Clinton said it is waiting for guidance from the state Office of Cannabis Management on whether zoning restrictions can be based on zoning districts rather than proximity buffers.
Resident Paul Thomas asked whether the draft regulation’s buffer-zone language — for example prohibiting a dispensary "on the same road" as a church or school or within 500 feet of such a building — would effectively ban dispensaries from entire roads where such institutions sit. The board replied that the town attorney had sent a draft to the state and they are waiting for a response.
Jeff Newman, the town zoning administrator, clarified that Clinton has only two industrial zones: one is a single property and the other comprises two properties. He said that if the town relies on zoning district limitations, in practice that could allow cannabis retail on only three properties — and effectively only one property (Hibernia) would be a realistic option.
Why it matters: how the town frames zoning restrictions will determine how many sites are legally permissible for retail cannabis and whether the state will consider zoning-by-district overly restrictive. Board members noted the challenge of balancing state mandates with local conditions.
