Journal & Topics Media Group

Village Board Discusses Recreational ‘Pot’ Shops


Cannabis Plants Aglow

Mount Prospect Village Board members fired away questions about the potential implications of opening a recreational cannabis shop in the village at the Tuesday night (Sept. 24) committee of the whole meeting. The two-hour-long meeting ended without a clear consensus; no one openly stated their stance on the subject. Juracek and committee members did agree to hold another discussion, tentatively in two weeks, at the Joint Village Board and Planning & Zoning Commission Workshop on Oct. 8. 

Mayor Arlene Juracek noted that the village didn’t receive much communication from the community about the topic, despite its controversy.

She said the discussion was not going to be about medical dispensaries or individual consumption, but instead, will the village allow dispensaries, which zoning would apply, use of cannabis on site, enforcing DUIs and keeping it out of minors’ hands.

She said that the village was “not feeling rushed” and “we’re not making up our minds tonight.”

Village attorney Lance Malina summarized what the village could and could not do legally. Malina said the village could allow or prohibit sales or cultivation of recreational cannabis by dispensaries in the village by opting out or using zoning. For example, the village can restrict location by zoning district, by hours of operation, proximity to public spaces where children are present, limit the total number of dispensaries and limit or prohibit growth in residential districts.

What about the money hungry entrepreneurs looking to come to Illinois and get rich by opening up a recreational marijuana shop? Juracek said that it won’t happen unless they become a dispensary, referring to the expensive dispensary license and then the additional costs to obtain licenses and open up shop. Just to apply for the license costs $5,000. This money is non-refundable; even if the application is rejected. 

Malina’s presentation stated state taxes on cannabis purchases will be at the following: 10 percent tax for cannabis flowers or products with less than 35 percent THC; 20 percent tax for cannabis infused products (“edibles”) and a 25 percent tax for cannabis products with more than 35 percent THC. 

Eight percent of state taxes will be allocated to municipalities via the Local Government Distributive Fund (LGDF). The money will go to crime prevention programs, law enforcement training and drug interdiction efforts.

As for taxes on the local level, the village can impose an additional tax, “The Village Tax,” on cannabis up to three percent. It cannot exceed that to maintain a price that is under black market cannabis sales.

Taxation is about the best way to control cannabis because roadside testing for drivers being impaired by cannabis hasn’t been validated yet. Police Chief John Koziol warned of an increase in use while driving, noting research he found which suggested that 69 percent of Colorado drivers and cannabis users admitted to driving under the influence of cannabis within the last year. Koziol added that 27 percent of the same drivers admitted to driving under the influence of cannabis daily. 

Trustee Michael Zadel asked if urine could be sampled to test if someone was potentially driving under the influence of cannabis. Koziol said that urine can be used to determine if there is cannabis in one’s system but it wouldn’t indicate if the person was actively under the influence. Koziol said the only way to test for active cannabis influence is with a blood withdrawal exam; an invasive test which many medical health professionals do not want to do. He said the department uses a private company who staffs 24/7 phlebotomists; however, it costs the village $400 per phlebotomist visit.

Koziol found an Oct. 2018 study by the Colorado Department of Public Safety that stated the number of DUIs decreased 15 percent from 2014 to 2017 but the number of percentage of Colorado State Patrol (CSP) citations for cannabis-only impairment stayed steady at 7 percent.

He went on to say that acquiring additional officers at this time does not seem necessary as the department has an in-house trainer and have two certified drug recognition experts (DRE) in their department (see other article on DRE officers).

Trustee Richard Rogers told Koziol that he wishes him a “lot of luck.”

Director of Community Development Bill Cooney presented the village where would a recreational marijuana shop be located, if approved. “The zoning component of this is a little bit more direct, it all comes down to local policy decision of how we want to regulate it. If the board gets to the point to decide to allow the sale of cannabis in the community,” Cooney said.

Conditional use would allow the village more leverage if there were violations. Cooney said staff looked at the village and determined the best place to put it: the business district or the I-1 district (limited industrial district). 

Staff looked at parking for placement in the business districts. The dispensary would need parking and a lot of it, at least, initially. Based on that, staff determined the downtown area would be an inappropriate place for a dispensary. In areas such as larger shopping malls with a plethora of parking spaces, a dispensary might be better suited for the location.

As for the I-1 district, “If it’s the desire of the board to keep these dispensaries, ‘out of mind, out of sight,’ I-1 districts are a little more off the beaten path, if you will. That’s another consideration that the board can take into account,” Cooney said.

New Age Care, 2015 E. Euclid Ave., is a medical cannabis dispensary in Mount Prospect located on the edge of the city’s limits. According to Malina and Cooney, if there was another dispensary built there, it could not be less than 1,500 feet from New Age Care’s property line, according to state law.

“I really think it starts with the conditional use versus permitted use and how much control the board wants to have over that. The reality is short term because of the state law, and the types of dispensaries and where they can go. The likelihood is that we would have one, maybe two dispensaries, potentially, in the community. One associating with the existing medical marijuana facility,” Cooney said.

Cooney said staff has worked on a draft of an ordinance, should the village approve sales.

“One of the board members asked about the foot distance that ties to the liquor code and shows where we’ve applied those. Same restrictions, 100-feet from a school, church or hospital, where they can go,” Cooney said. “Majority of the commercial districts would allow the dispensary to be located within the 100-feet. As Mr. Malina said, we can make that number any distance we wanted to and start eliminating where they could go within the community.”

In the state law, it says that recreational cannabis cannot be smoked in the park, but as for the sale near a park, it doesn’t say anything. Trustee William Grossi argued that the sale of liquor and cannabis should be further than 100 feet, maybe the board should even make it 1,000 feet away, from parks and other places where children and minors congregate. 

“I don’t see the logic there at all,” Juracek said, “One, a park could get a liquor license… but consumption in a park, I’m not sure what that has to do with purchasing a product 100 feet away from a park.”

Grossi suggested that purchasing cannabis 100 feet away from a park was dangerous for “the kids who will be in the park because then they’ll [the buyer] go across the street or next door, wherever the park is, and use it.”

“I think conflating this with the alcohol regulations there is a little problematic,” Juracek said.

Juracek reminded the committee and trustees that there are not going to be a large quantity of dispensaries; current dispensaries are heavily secure and products are traced from seed to purchase. 

Furthermore, the village wouldn’t have outside farms or marijuana fields; if the village had people who wished to grow, it would be an indoor growing facility with grow lights.  

“If people in the community have strong feelings about it (recreational sale of cannabis), let us know,” Trustee Zadel said. 

Village Manager Michael Cassady told the Journal that the Oct. 8 date is tentative, but it’s their goal to have an additional cannabis discussion then. Check back for more updates.

Support local news by subscribing to the Journal & Topics in print or online.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.