By Guy Page
Voters in 41 communities considering voting ‘yes’ on retail cannabis at Town Meeting Tuesday March 1 might want to learn whether their community already has a ‘local option’ tax. Otherwise, almost all of the tax revenue will flow directly to the State, according to a report by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns (VLCT).
41 Vermont communities will put the Retail Cannabis Question to Town/City meeting voters on Tuesday, March 1. State law allows licensing of retail marijuana stores only after local voters have opted to permit retail marijuana stores in their town or city.
According to VLCT, only communities with existing ‘local option’ taxation will be able to reap the expected tax benefits from retail marijuana stores.
The Vermont League of Cities and Towns 2022 Vermont Town Meeting Day Preview states these 41 communities are considering whether to allow retail cannabis operations: Barre City, Bolton, Castleton, Chester, Derby, Eden, Essex Town, Fair Haven, Fayston, Ferrisburgh, Grand Isle, Hardwick, Hartford, Leicester Town, Manchester, Marlboro, Middlesex, Milton, Moretown, Mount. Holly, New Haven, Norton, Pittsford, Poultney, Proctor, Putney, Richford, Rockingham, Rutland City, Rutland Town, Sheldon, Springfield, St. Albans Town, Stockbridge, Stratton, Vernon, Waitsfield, Wallingford, Wilmington, Wolcott, and Woodstock.
These municipalities already have approved retail marijuana: Alburgh, Barton, Berlin, Bennington, Brandon, Brattleboro, Brownington, Burke, Burlington, Danby, Danville, Duxbury, East Burke, Jamaica, Johnson, Londonderry, Middlebury, Montgomery, Montpelier, Morristown, Pawlet, Peacham, Pownal, Randolph, St. Johnsbury, Salisbury, South Hero, Strafford, Sutton, Vergennes, Waterbury, Windsor, and Winooski.
The House of Representatives has moved forward a bill, H.701, that would cap municipal cannabis regulatory fees at $100, while capping state fees at $100,000. Fewer than 20 towns – those with VLCT 2022 Vermont Town Meeting Day existing option taxes in place – are set to share in the tens of millions of dollars in annual tax revenue retail cannabis is expected to generate, VLCT said.
Categories: Local government
Don’t Bogart that news item.
Please explain what are you saying?
Hopefully this will give more opportinities for business in these towns.
The Vermont legislature has passed a law advocating that people inhale smoke into their lungs from a burning marijuana plant……..A practice that has several possible negative consequences according to the National Institute of Health to include:
Affects brain development
Hurts the lungs/Breathing problems
May hurt your heart
Connections to cancer are unclear
Result in new babies being born under weight
Impair thinking, memory and learning functions
Temporary hallucinations and paranoia
And more
https://nida.nih.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana
With what we know about the deadly dangers of cigarette smoke, how in the world does the Vermont legislature pass laws advocating marijuana smoking?…….We know that the legislature is listening to marijuana industry advocates and its self interests………But with the potential dangers outlined by science, what are our legislators thinking? Can they be held personally libel when bad things begin happening to Vermonters and especially young marijuana smokers?
Where are the adults in Montpelier?
Thank you Peter!
Adding to your list of health issues, what about Marijuana impaired driving, parenting and working. Do we have Rules/Laws/Boundaries for these issues?
How about a school-bus driver, teacher, day care provider? Can they be as Stoned as they choose and all is well?
Is this why the Progressives/Marxists are so irresponsible and totally CRAZY? They are Potheads?
VOTE NO!
This is another really bad idea for many reasons. Read Alex Berenson’s Book, “Tell Your Children, The truth about Marijuana, Mental Illness and Violence.”
If the 41 towns care about their communities and the health of all their citizens especially the kids, they will VOTE NO as correctly called for by vtbeliever……
The Vietmont Professional Crackheads at the State House WANT all these to pass because : The outrageous tax revenue that will run to Montpelier only to be wasted by those in the State House.
You want weed ?? Grow you own….You’re allowed to have plants on your home site if you’re of age. You want weed in winter? Grow it in your cellar. That stuff will grow “like a weed” from what I’ve heard. Of course , I know of one senator that was burning the spliff MANY years in Vermont before it was legal. Right, tourette syndrome boy??
The benefits or pros of legal marijuana out weigh the cons of it. Nobody goes to jail for tobacco, why should they for cannabis? There is also benefits for the type you don’t smoke. This a resource that needs to be harnessed and harvested for the good of all. Vote yes on legal Cannabis in your community.
Retail reefer 50 years too late for this recovering hop head, who, at least, realized that the Greatful Dead were “highly” overrated just like their Green Mountain wannabes, what’s their names? Anyway, reefer was a gateway drug for some but not all. It just made me stupid and liberal.
It was medicinal for me but I overused it decades ago.
If the “system” hadn’t ignored the very real medicinal benefits of cannabis an equiotable compromise might already have been reached
What are the possible consequences to those ignoring Federal Laws on Marijuana?
Both the possession and distribution of Marijuana are illegal under Federal Laws on Marijuana, specifically, the Controlled Substances Act.
Federal Law lists Marijuana as a Schedule 1 Drug. It is illegal to use, possess, grow and sell Marijuana. There is no exception for the medical or so-called “recreational” use of Marijuana in Federal Law.
Many property owners and landlords who acknowledge the possible consequences of Federal Enforcement under Federal Law, rightly prohibit the use and growth of Marijuana on their properties. Those ignoring these Laws and their consequences, risk the forfeiture of their properties, fines, a record, jail, etc.
The current occupier of the White House has clearly shown himself to be lawless and immoral, so it’s highly unlikely he will enforce these Federal Laws.
What will happen if a person who believes Marijuana is harmful becomes President and he/she directs the Justice Department to enforce the existing Laws?
Tax income from marijuana and tax income from prostitution. You can explain til the cows come home and you will still boil it down to MONEY. Whorendus people in Montpelier.
So who won the battle? The hippies of the 1960s always wanted marijuana legal, but actually the “establishment” won too in the long run, they get their tax “fix”. Well I guess it’s a tie; hippies 1 establishment 1. If it will be still lawful to grow your own after this, maybe the hippies still have the edge. We will have to stay tuned.
The 1960’s eroded our values to the point of self gratification beyond any feeling… It will take a rude awakening to bring us out of this fantasy.
Where were you people 2 years ago when there needed to be championing this throughout our state. The dynamics in Montpelier makes it impossible to talk reasonably and expect changes.
There’s an added layer – bow to the power play makers. Bright eyed newcomers will never see any bill of theirs surface and do anything under the dome unless you pay your dues to the puppeteers – the ones who are making socialistic agendas roll out.
Folks it’s time to STAND UP for FREEDOMS – no more silent majority. SPEAK UP and be heard and seen or we’ll see them steam roll us under our chairs we silently sit on.