Village of Manlius residents speak on cannabis legislation

VILLAGE OF MANLIUS – During the Aug. 10 Village of Manlius Board of Trustees meeting, multiple village residents expressed their disappointment regarding the board’s July 13 decision to opt-out of allowing adult-use cannabis retail dispensaries and/or on-site consumption licenses without allowing the public to vote on the issue.
Under New York State’s Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act (MRTA), which was signed into law on March 31, 2021, cities, towns and villages — but not counties — may decide whether or not they will allow establishments within their jurisdictions to sell cannabis products and/or permit on-site cannabis consumption. They cannot, however, prohibit possession or use, generally.
To “opt out,” a municipality must adopt a local law subject to permissive referendum on or before Dec. 31, 2021.
If a municipality opts out, it can always opt back in, but if it does not opt out by the end of the year, there is no provision for opting out at a later date.
On July 13, the Manlius village board held a public hearing on a proposed local law opting out of both dispensaries and consumption sites. After receiving no public input, the board voted to adopt a resolution approving the opt-out law.
The opt-out law was adopted subject to permissive referendum, meaning that any resident who is opposed to the law may start a petition within 30 days of the board’s vote. If a certain percentage of the village’s eligible voters sign the petition, they must allow the public to vote yes or no on the law. Villages are the only municipalities that can voluntarily put the decision to a public ballot vote. To do so, the village would first have to opt out and then make the public vote part of that local law.
The Village of Manlius decided against putting its decision to a public vote.
At the time of the Aug. 10 board meeting, any residents who opposed the board’s decision had two days left to submit a petition and force the issue to go to a ballot vote.
Village Attorney Ted Spencer announced that, to the best of his knowledge, no petitions had been received. He also stated that, pursuant to the village law, a notice was published in the local paper to inform residents that the opt-out law was adopted, that it is subject to permissive referendum, and that “the clock is running.”
During the public comment period, three residents said they felt that the village did not sufficiently advertise the public hearing or the local law adoption and the petition window.
“There was nothing on the village website; there was nothing on the village social media pages,” said village resident Nicholas Agrippino. “Every article that has come out Syracuse.com and localsyr.com indicated that the villages of Fayetteville, Manlius and Minoa were all planning on putting it up to an automatic vote . . . There was no notice to the public [that the Village of Manlius was not actually doing that] until the July 26 date when Syracuse.com put out an article . . . You may have posted the public hearing in the paper, but how many people showed up to that public hearing? . . . On an issue this big, I think you could go a little bit further, in my opinion.”
Mayor Paul Whorrall clarified that the village never said it was planning to put its opt-out law to a public vote and that the newspapers Agrippino cited were incorrect in their initial reporting. He also stated that the village did all it was legally required to do in terms of announcing both the public hearing and the adoption of the local law. “I thought that was enough,” Whorrall said.
Administrator/Clerk-Treasurer Martha Dygert also noted that all of village board’s monthly meetings are open to the public.
Agrippino then reiterated his opinion that village residents were unaware that a petition would be required for the opt-out law to go to the public vote.
“By the time [I read about it on Syracuse.com], it was July 26 and two weeks had gone by [since] you guys had voted, so half of that 30-day time period to get those signatures was gone,” he said. “I reached out on Friday mid-day to the board of elections to get the list for the signature process, and I haven’t even gotten that back. Now we are two days before the 30 day deadline.”
Trustee Janice Abdo-Rott later asked Agrippino if he read the article in the Eagle Bulletin that reported on the July 13 meeting, including the public hearing, the adoption of the opt-out law subject to permissive referendum, and the petition timeline.
Agrippino responded that he did not read the article and that “not everyone reads the paper,” and asked the board why the village decided not to put the law out for public vote. “This is probably one of the biggest decisions that a village is going to be able to make with a ballot box in any of our lifetimes,” he said.
The mayor said the village made its decision under the guidance of its attorney and the attorneys from the New York Conference of Mayors.
“One of uncertainties here is that the state needs to generate rules and regulations for how this is all going to unwind and let each municipality know how much control they would have over the operations if they opted-in or got voted in,” said Spencer. “That’s still all in limbo.”
Agrippino concluded his comments by stating that he recognizes there are a lot of pros and cons associated with allowing dispensaries and on-site consumption sites, and that he would be happy for people to discuss them, but that he does not believe the village and its residents are currently at that stage. “The stage we are at right now is [letting] the village residents decide and [educating] the village residents at a well-advertised public hearing, where people are actually going to show up and learn about it, because there is a lot of confusion around this law,” he said. “The residents need to be aware of that before they vote, but don’t take that vote away from them.”
Earlier in the discussion, Trustee Hank Chapman consulted Spencer regarding possible paths forward for the village.
“If there are a significant number of village residents [who] come to us and demand that we reconsider our decision, we have that option to do that, [correct]?” Chapman asked.
Spencer responded that he believed it would be possible, and that he would check to make sure. He also noted that any public vote that could potentially take place would require a special election.
Later in the meeting, Dygert informed the board that the village recently hired a new employee, who started the previous day. According to Dygert, her duties include posting to the village website and “going above and beyond” the legal requirements to ensure that the public is well informed.
Dygert then addressed Agrippino directly.
“I knew there was a need for more posting and more advertising to the community, so I got the board to agree to hire another full-time person with a background in municipal, who would be able to make sure all the updates make it to our website,” Dygert said. “We are a very small staff, unlike the town, [which] has about 15 people doing the jobs that 2.5 or three people are doing here. So, I apologize if you weren’t notified, but the good news is that any decision a board makes can always be changed later as some more information comes in. I wanted you to be aware that we already recognized that hole in our operations and we’ve corrected it.”