"Is pot safe when pregnant? Study seeks answer, draws critics" by Lindsey Tanner Associated Press, August 7, 2019
CHICAGO — Pregnancy started out rough for Leslie Siu. Morning sickness and migraines had her reeling and barely able to function at a demanding New York marketing job, so, like rising numbers of US mothers-to-be, she turned to marijuana.
‘‘l was finally able to get out from under my work desk,’’ said Siu, who later started her own pot company and says her daughter, now 4, is thriving.
There’s no proof that cannabis can relieve morning sickness, and mainstream medicine advises against use in pregnancy because of studies suggesting it might cause premature birth, low birthweight, and infant brain deficits, but the National Institute on Drug Abuse is pressing for more solid evidence. Many of those studies were in animals or complicated by marijuana users’ other habits and lifestyles.
‘‘I don’t want us to cry wolf,’’ said Dr. Nora Volkow, the agency’s director. ‘‘We have to do these studies in a way that can identify risks.’’
While I appreciate the concern, I do wonder where they are when it comes to the potions in the air, land, and water. Never a breath of the asthma problem or a concern regarding the 37 concoctions the kids have to be vaccinated. I get it and all, and it probably is not a good idea for a pregnant woman -- or anyone -- to ingest hot smoke into their lungs; however, who am I to gainsay them? What works for one may not work for another. If it alleviates their pain, I'm all for it. Why should people needlessly suffer?
With nearly $200,000 from her agency, University of Washington scientists in Seattle are seeking clearer answers in a new study investigating potential effects on infants’ brains, but some opponents of recreational marijuana who think the science is settled have complained to the university and the federal government, calling it bogus research that endorses drug use and needlessly endangers fetuses.
Oh, it's a mere pittance for a study, and I bet that is the pro-life crowd.
It's complicated, I agree, and believe I would advise against it, but.... who am I too judge?
‘‘There are so many reasons NOT to study drugs — particularly fear of causing birth defects, but the results would be no studies of the drugs’ efficacy during pregnancy, or the risks to the fetus,’’ said Dr. John Lantos, director of pediatric bioethics at Children’s Mercy hospital in Kansas City, Mo. ‘‘It’s risky to do studies of potentially risky drugs, but it’s risky not to do studies.’’
So it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, got it.
That was were my print copy put it out, but the web version kept smoking:
The criticism underscores the challenges of investigating how drugs of any kind affect pregnant women and their offspring. Among the most tragic examples is thalidomide, a drug developed in Germany in the 1950s as a sedative. It was later widely promoted and prescribed to treat morning sickness, mostly in Western Europe and Canada, despite a lack of research in pregnant women. It soon became linked with severe birth defects and was removed from most markets by the early 1960s.
I'm going to take a shot here and prescribe you metoclopramide, and it should all be taken with a grain of salt when the pre$$ screams antivaxx conspiracy theorist at us.
The US Food and Drug Administration never approved thalidomide for morning sickness because of safety concerns. The agency has approved a synthetic version of THC, the part of marijuana that causes a high, for AIDS-related appetite loss and a similar drug for nausea caused by cancer drugs but has not approved it for morning sickness.
There you go. The medical marijuana component, whatever you think of it, and in the midst of a massive move towards organic and growing your own, the synthetic pharmaceutical is being pushed instead.
Scientist Natalia Kleinhans is leading the University of Washington’s study, aiming to recruit 35 pregnant marijuana users and 35 pregnant women who didn’t use pot. The pot users are asked to buy from licensed dealers and photograph it so researchers can calculate the THC and CBD, another compound that doesn’t cause a high. Participants are paid $300 but can quit using anytime and remain in the study.
Medical and recreational marijuana are legal in Washington state, and Kleinhans says women who use it for morning sickness are different from pregnant pot users in years past, who often did other drugs, smoked, or drank. ‘‘They’re making a choice that people might not agree with, but it’s not out of desperation. It’s an informed choice,’’ said Kleinhans, a brain imaging specialist who studies the brain and behavior.
What I remember from Inside Job was how the brain reacts the same to money as it does cocaine. Greed, like a certain kind of supremacism, is unspoken when it comes to addiction.
Study opponents contend that researchers are recruiting marijuana addicts, that payment encourages participants to keep using, that women aren’t being adequately informed of risks, and that babies will be harmed by being tested. Researchers say that MRI brain scans are safe and that infants will be tested while sleeping so won’t need potentially risky sedatives.
While more than 30 states have legalized marijuana for medical and/or recreational use, opponents also note that the federal government still considers pot an illegal drug — a stance that scientists say has hampered research.
A chill enters the room, as the chemical company and corporate representative (aka the federal government) enters the room.
Dr. Pat Marmion, an OB-GYN in southern Washington, says he helped coordinate efforts to file complaints with the university and the US Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the National Institutes of Health. The department declined comment. ‘‘We should be encouraging women who are pregnant to not use marijuana instead of incentivizing them to continue,’’ Marmion said.
I agree they probably shouldn't use, but people will anyway so maybe the research can serve a useful purpose.
Under US law, research that involves humans must be approved by review boards to make sure participants’ rights and safety are protected.
After Tuskegee, the Penatgon releases stuff into the sewers, etc, etc, over the years.
Related: Mass. to spray insecticide over 22 communities at high risk from mosquito-borne virus
They are spraying over vast areas for a problem that is minuscule.
WTF is really going on?
Karen Moe, director of the university’s human subjects division, said authorities there investigated the critics’ concerns and concluded that most were unfounded, but she said they agreed to provide a handout on possible risks from marijuana use in pregnancy, not just links to similar information online, and also reworded recruitment materials to clarify that participants could quit using marijuana and still receive full payment. ‘‘From our standpoint the situation is essentially resolved and the study is good to go,’’ Moe said.
Dr. Mishka Terplan, a member of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ addiction expert group, said that for years, the thalidomide scare ‘‘shut down all research of medications in pregnancy.’’ Not enough is known even about medications commonly prescribed for morning sickness, he said.
‘‘We shouldn’t assume that because we classify something as illegal that it is shameful,’’ Terplan said. ‘‘And that because something is legal and prescribed, it’s helpful.’’
But that's the way it is because government must sanction your action in a free nation of choice.
--more--"
If you need to use the bathroom:
"Mirror, mirror on the bathroom wall, who has the greatest toilet seats of them all? As it turns out, it could be the restrooms at the Natick Mall. The shopping center is one of 10 finalists in the America’s Best Restroom competition, an annual contest hosted by Cincinnati-based Cintas Corporation that pits potties from across the country against each other in search of the king of the thrones. “The reality is that restrooms matter to the public,” the contest’s website states. “How a business maintains its facilities is a reflection of a business’ commitment to customer service. Cintas is on a mission to locate America’s porcelain pioneers who are taking dramatic steps to create unforgettable facilities.”
(sniff, sniff)
What is that stink?
See: Fall River mayor draws heat over granting marijuana approvals to girlfriend’s brother
Also drawing fire, 'er, heat:
"Boston ZBA chair blasts City Council for ‘posturing’ in fight over marijuana buffer rule" by Dan Adams Globe Staff, August 8, 2019
Lately, Christine Araujo, chairwoman of the Boston Zoning Board of Appeal, has been contemplating the meaning of existence — not so much in the philosophical sense, but as it pertains to marijuana businesses.
That’s because, under a city rule meant to prevent clusters of pot stores, each new cannabis establishment must be located at least a half-mile away from an “existing” one, and last week, a long-simmering dispute over when, exactly, a business comes into existence boiled over into an unheard-of public confrontation between Araujo’s board and the city council, which is refusing to confirm seven appointees by Mayor Martin J. Walsh to the ZBA until they declare their stances on the marijuana buffer rule.
Now, Araujo is warning that a short-handed ZBA — whose 10-person roster includes two inactive, retired members and five “holdovers” whose terms have technically expired — could soon be forced to start deferring hearings on proposals for everything from patios to skyscrapers.
Araujo accused the council of “posturing” and said that without a consistent quorum of at least five members, practically all new development in Boston will grind to a halt. In addition to wasting the time of project proponents and neighbors who come to comment on their proposals, Araujo noted, deferred hearings must be re-advertised, costing taxpayers money.
“I’m not into playing games,” she said in an interview. “My intention is to make sure that every applicant gets a fair hearing before a full board. I don’t understand why [the buffer rule fight] has to be linked to re-confirmation.”
The disagreement has its roots in a February decision by the Walsh administration to award coveted host community agreements — the contracts every recreational pot operator must sign with its municipality before it can win a state license — to two proposed marijuana stores near Maverick Square in East Boston.
When a Globe reporter pointed out that the locations appeared to be just four-tenths of a mile apart, a Walsh spokeswoman initially insisted they were separated by precisely 3,168 feet, far more than the 2,640 feet in a half-mile, but by the time the two businesses appeared in March before the ZBA to seek a routine zoning variance required of all marijuana facilities, officials had conceded that the two properties were actually within a half-mile of one another.
Oh, the agenda-pushing advocacy journalist is the trouble maker and instigator of this all!
The first business on the agenda, Berkshire Roots Inc., received its approval. The second, East Boston Bloom LLC, hastily requested a deferral after ZBA members expressed confusion about the buffer rule and appeared poised to deny the company a variance. (It is now scheduled to appear before the appeal board in September.)
Caught in an apparent measuring error, the Walsh administration then adopted a legal argument proffered by East Boston Bloom’s attorneys: that the buffer rule didn’t even matter, since neither company had received permission from the city’s Inspectional Services Department to open. That, they now insist, is corporate conception — the moment a marijuana company officially, legally comes into “existence.”
Before the March hearing, however, there was broad agreement that the half-mile rule would be enforced during the process of negotiating host community agreements, with administration officials picking which pot business could proceed in any given area before proceeding to the ZBA for a rubber stamp. In fact, the Walsh administration previously told the Globe that was how the system worked, and even shot down several proposals for being too close to others, but under the new interpretation, it suddenly appeared that multiple pot businesses within a half-mile of one another could be approved — and then race to become the first to open their doors and begin “existing,” thereby forcing any others nearby to return to the ZBA and seek an exception to the half-mile buffer. The about-face enraged applicants and activists.
City Council president Michelle Wu and other councilors say Walsh’s interpretation is nonsensical. Since no recreational marijuana facilities have opened, they argued, defining “existing” as meaning only stores that have opened would effectively nullify the rule. Along with critics from the marijuana industry and advocacy community, they question why the administration abruptly changed its view of the seemingly simple rule, calling the process unfair and inconsistent for both residents and businesses.
“It was a simple yes or no question, and the council owes it to our constituents to receive answers,” Wu said. “Prior to this embarrassment happening live at the ZBA hearing, there had been no hint that anyone in the city was thinking about it this way.”
The way Wu sees it, marijuana businesses already “exist” by the time they appear before the ZBA.
“They’ve filed the paperwork and paid thousands of dollars to get a site,” she said. “They’re already functioning as a business.”
Araujo disagrees.
“They should have put it very clearly and said any ‘proposed’ business instead of ‘existing,’ if that was their intent,” she countered. “We need to go by the black-and-white text in the statute. I’m honestly not trying to contort anything or play semantics.”
Araujo said the delay has left the ZBA in a perilous position, since members cannot always make the board’s weekly meetings and sometimes need to recuse themselves from voting on a project.
However, Wu placed blame mostly at Walsh’s feet, saying his administration “never should have signed host community agreements that were in violation of the zoning code” in the first place.
The fight comes as the city council is debating a proposal by Councilor Kim Janey to completely restructure Boston’s marijuana approval process by creating an independent board to evaluate applications and prioritizing the approval of businesses owned by locals and those affected by the war on drugs.
The fight over the buffer rule has alarmed both marijuana entrepreneurs and development insiders.
“I’ve never seen — going back almost 50 years — a situation where a group of people got held up like this,” said development attorney and former city councilor Larry DiCara. “This is one of those ones where I’d suggest everybody get together in a room and work it out, because in the long run, having a board of appeal without a quorum is real big problem.”
--more--"
Sorry for spacing out. Not feeling well. You know, upset stomach, like that. Kinda hungry.
As the marijuana industry grows in Boston, the city council has butted heads with the Zoning Board of Appeal over a “buffering” law requiring two marijuana shops to be at least a half-mile away from each other. (Michael Swensen for The Boston Globe)
I thought it was a casserole.
"Three Mass. women arrested for trying to cross US-Canada border with legally purchased marijuana" by Felicia Gans Globe Staff, August 8, 2019
In a stark reminder that marijuana is still legally risky in some parts of the United States, three Massachusetts women were arrested in upstate New York this week for allegedly trying to smuggle marijuana they had legally purchased in Canada into the United States.
Oh, yeah, they went nationwide with it.
Hate to say it, but maybe we should follow their lead.
If nothing else, it would eliminate this.
The women were arrested Monday morning while driving across the border from Canada at the Lewiston Queenston Bridge Port of Entry in Lewiston, N.Y., near Niagara Falls.
That's interesting because decades ago the drinking age was raised from 18 to 21 and I had to go to Vermont to buy. Got in a car wreck one time going to get it. Had I been able to go around the corner....
Authorities say the women — Briha K. Younger, 25 ; Jenae R. Johnson, 28 ; and Micaela G. Ratcliffe, 28, all of Boston — told a Customs and Border Protection officer that there were no marijuana products, narcotics, or contraband in the car, but Ratcliffe “had a record for a prior incident involving travel with marijuana,” according to a statement from US Attorney James P. Kennedy Jr., so the women were referred for a second inspection.
I'm wondering about the skin color and racial profiling here from the border people.
An officer who searched the vehicle reportedly found “commercial packaged marijuana and marijuana products in multiple bags” as well as multiple joints in Younger’s purse. The investigation “suggested [the marijuana] had been lawfully purchased at marijuana dispensaries in Canada.”
“The possession of marijuana and its importation into the United States remain federal crimes,” Kennedy, who represents the western district of New York, said in a statement. “The fact that it may have been lawfully purchased in Canada does not change that.”
According to the complaint, Younger told authorities they had traveled to Toronto on Friday to attend a festival, and they went to several dispensaries while they were in Canada. All three women admitted to shopping at the dispensaries, and Johnson said she had the receipts from their purchases.
Ratcliffe and Johnson each said they use marijuana to help them sleep, and Ratcliffe said she also uses it for migraines, according to the complaint.
All three women were arrested at the scene, and appeared in court Tuesday, where they were released with conditions. They each face three charges: smuggling of goods into the United States, importation of a controlled substance, and possession of a controlled substance.
The charges could carry a sentence of up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
Fonda Dawn Kubiak, a public defender who represented all three women at their initial hearings and will represent Younger moving forward, said her goal is to ensure the women don’t get federal felony convictions on their records, which could wreak havoc on their lives.
“These cases are unfortunately otherwise law-abiding citizens getting caught in the dichotomy between legalized marijuana in certain states and countries, and overall US policy that strictly prosecutes possession of marijuana,” she said.
I have said it before, and I'll say it again: were the Congre$$ and Prezident really smart, they would clear out this smoke and slap a $5 national fee on top of all recreational purchase where legal. It would generate a pot full (pun intended, ha ha) of money and the states that want to restrict it or keep it illegal wouldn't be forced to, either.
Kubiak warned that travelers need to be aware that even carrying small amounts of personal-use, legally obtained marijuana across the border can have “serious detrimental consequences.”
Meanwhile, the terrorist slips through behind you.
Kennedy said his office will continue to prosecute people who try bringing marijuana over the border into New York, particularly because of the dangers associated with driving under the influence of marijuana.
Yeah, except they can't tell if you are high or not, which is self-explanatory and self-evident regarding the problem.
Meanwhile, we have a pre$$ that promotes legal alcohol and basic minimizes the drunk-driving problem because of the advertising dollar.
“If this office, together with our federal partners, can help to save the lives of innocent potential future victims by curbing the flow of marijuana into our community and/or by letting the public know of the significant legal consequences that flow from being charged with a violation of federal law, then we will not hesitate to act,” Kennedy said.
He also reminded the public that marijuana possession, use, and distribution is against federal law, regardless of its status in Canada and US states that have legalized it.
I am ready to secede and go join Canada where they can no longer follow.
Thankfully, $e$$ions is gone after the complaining but I'm not to sure about the new guy now. It looks like a pretty black and white issue, but I'm $tarting to $ee why these things take time.
--more--"
Related:
Experts see a federal crackdown on marijuana as unlikely
Lied to again, and it looks like the rewriting of the referendum and opening of the pot shops was a bad idea. So much for coming out of the shadows and getting the state, cities, and towns some desperately needed tax revenues.
But what about fraud?
"Prosecutors: A 25-year-old man promised big returns for investors in his ‘angel fund’ but spent the money on himself" by Travis Andersen Globe Staff, August 8, 2019
Tanmaya Kabra bills himself on Twitter as the founder of LaunchByte.io, the “first non-traditional Angel group based out of NY and Boston.”
In October 2016, he tweeted that “When people ask what I do, I say whatever it takes,” but Kabra went too far, federal prosecutors say.
The 25-year-old Babson College alum allegedly constructed a Ponzi scheme, bilking investors who thought they were helping to finance startups. Hoping for big returns, the investors unknowingly bankrolled Kabra’s lavish lifestyle, including a pricey powerboat and payments for his debts, prosecutors have alleged.
Now Kabra, who was arrested Sunday at Logan International Airport as he and his girlfriend were preparing to board a flight to London, faces charges of wire and bank fraud. His lawyer didn’t immediately return an e-mail seeking comment.
An affidavit filed in the case by FBI Special Agent Kevin M. Sheahan lays out the allegations against Kabra. He “holds himself out as a successful serial entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and angel investor in startup companies,” Sheahan wrote, but the truth was murkier.....
The truth is never murky, for it is the truth, and beyond the $moke$creen we find the serial entrepreneur was a “US Citizen who emigrated from India with his parents when he was approximately eighteen (18) months old. He resided briefly in Singapore between the ages of thirteen (13) and eighteen (18) when his parents relocated there, but has otherwise resided in the United States for the majority of his life.”
--more--"
"Massachusetts marijuana regulators hit Curaleaf with record $250,000 fine" by Dan Adams Globe Staff, August 8, 2019
Massachusetts marijuana regulators on Thursday slapped one of the country’s biggest marijuana companies with a record-high fine, saying it broke state rules by completing a merger without permission.
It's like they want to push them out.
Yeah, welcome Ma$$achu$etts, extortion capital of the world.
Curaleaf Massachusetts Inc. will pay the Cannabis Control Commission $250,000 over charges that it failed to obtain approval for a merger involving its Wakefield-based parent company, Curaleaf Inc., in October. The fine, which lets Curaleaf avoid a suspension or revocation of its licenses, is the largest to date issued by the agency and followed unanimous votes by the five commissioners in favor of the settlement and approving the merger.
It's a $hakedown so don't get nervous or paranoid.
Curaleaf had submitted a request for the transaction to be approved — but only in February, months after the deal had already closed. Regulators said the firm’s Massachusetts subsidiary also failed to disclose Curaleaf as the majority owner of its licenses following an April 2018 conversion from a nonprofit entity to a for-profit one.
“I think it’s an appropriate resolution,” commission chairman Steve Hoffman told reporters. “They’ve admitted they were mistaken in . . . not applying for [permission] when they should have.”
Hoffman said the settlement would let both sides avoid the “long, litigious” process of trying to suspend or revoke Curaleaf’s licenses and said he was satisfied “that our regulations are going to be adhered to going forward.”
Commission investigators said Thursday that they had concluded Curaleaf’s failure to seek permission was a “good faith” mistake based on a “misinterpretation” of the regulations.
Officials for Curaleaf — which is pursuing recreational permits in Oxford, Ware, and Provincetown, plus dozens of licenses across 11 other states — noted that the merger did not endanger public safety nor result in changes to the team overseeing the company’s Massachusetts operations. Instead, they said, it was a move by its parent company to merge with a Canadian firm and go public on the Canadian Securities Exchange.
“We have been proudly serving the Massachusetts community for almost 24 months and look forward to working with the Commission to secure approval of our [recreational] licenses,” the company said in a statement.
Curaleaf representatives also said that at the time of the merger in October, the commission had yet to establish a formal process or publish a form that firms could use to request approval of changes in ownership.
That doesn't matter; they make things up on the fly and by fiat here and call it democracy.
Commissioner Shaleen Title objected to that explanation, arguing that the absence of a form did not obviate the agency’s regulations requiring approval before a marijuana license can change hands.
“If there’s no form available, that doesn’t make getting permission optional,” she said.
They didn't even have the forms they required made out yet!
After they took all this time setting everything up, too.
The large fine comes as the commission is working to tighten its rules and step up enforcement around who controls marijuana licenses in Massachusetts. Under state law, no entity can own or control more than three licenses of any type, but the Boston Globe Spotlight Team reported earlier this year that several large firms had been seeking to skirt those rules by signing onerous management contracts and loan agreements with seemingly independent license applicants.
Curaleaf has also announced its intention to acquire Alternative Therapies Group, which has a hybrid medical-recreational store in Salem and provisional licenses to open two more in northeastern Massachusetts. The Globe reported in April that the company was considering structuring that deal using intermediaries, such that its control of licenses in excess of the state cap would be disguised. The company has insisted the final version of the acquisition will comply with state rules.
Also on Thursday, the commission issued a $50,000 fine to M3 Ventures Inc., which operates dispensaries in Plymouth and Mashpee under the “Triple M” brand. The sanction came after the firm allegedly lied to investigators about its use of banned pesticides. The firm said it was pleased with the resolution.
They don't care that those things are all over the food, and we all have to eat. You don't have to smoke pot.
“While M3 Ventures thought we were appropriately using natural pesticides, based on the information available from the [state Department of Public Health] at the time, we have taken full responsibilities for our actions,” the firm said, adding that it has worked with regulators “to voluntarily take the corrective measures to ensure compliance now and in the future.”
Many Massachusetts marijuana operators believe the state’s pesticides rules are unfairly strict, and could result in crop failures.
THAT is how they are going to nip this thing in the bud!
If so, it's time to import from other states rather than requiring all pot sold to be grown in-state. Then the indu$try will mu$hroom!
--more--"
A pedestrian walks past Curaleaf store in New York.(Jeenah Moon/Bloomberg)
What you notice if you are not stoned is the Space for Rent signs in the windows. The store is closed and empty!
Related:
Looks fully stocked!
"Chesto Means Business: Cumberland Farms files ballot question to lift cap on liquor licenses" by Jon Chesto Globe Staff, August 8, 2019
Remember the Booze Ballot Battle of 2006? Well, we might soon see a new war break out over the right to sell alcohol in Massachusetts.
Cumberland Farms filed a ballot question with the state attorney general’s office on Wednesday that would lift the state restrictions on the number of alcohol licenses a food retailer can have. The move surprised just about everyone who thought the issue was settled for now.
The convenience store chain argues that it’s time to modernize the state’s archaic liquor laws, while package stores are gearing up for a fierce fight to defend their turf.
Yeah, it's okay if you make alcohol widely available.
I will say this: I never lost coordination or memory when smoking pot.
The packies won the first round 13 years ago, beating back supermarket chains that wanted to lift the caps and persuading voters to keep a three-store-maximum in place, but it was a bruising battle: The $12 million-plus spent by both sides represented the most expensive ballot war in state history at the time.
No one who was involved wanted to go through that again — except for maybe the media outlets that guzzled down all that advertising money like a college freshman at a kegger. So when the supermarket industry raised the prospect of another ballot question in 2011, the package stores and their allies in the alcohol distribution industry quickly reached a truce. That compromise was quickly whisked through the Legislature and baked into state law.
The metaphor he uses is inappropriate. College drinking is nothing to be made light of, and is he baked when he implies that legi$looters are somehow some great craft$man?
The number of alcohol sales licenses per retailer would go up, gradually rising from three to nine in January 2020. Both sides agreed to not push any further changes, at least until after the final increase took effect next year, and because the deadline to request certification for the 2020 ballot was Wednesday, both sides thought they had avoided a Booze Ballot Battle II until at least 2022, but the convenience store industry apparently wasn’t part of that 2011 deal.
And the roads will be less safe.
For Cumby’s, a win at the ballot box could be like striking gold. The Westborough-based chain, which recently reached a deal to be sold to the Britain-based EG Group, has more than 200 stores in this state. Only seven of those can sell alcohol today. Matt Durand, the chain’s government affairs manager, says he expects that number to increase to nine next year, as allowed by the 2011 compromise.
So now I will have to deal with drunks when I go get my paper and coffee?
Maybe I will have to $tart $kipping the trip.
Durand says the ballot question can be traced back to his time on a liquor laws task force overseen by state Treasurer Deb Goldberg. Among that group’s recommendations: allowing local authorities to decide how many licenses should be issued to food stores in their communities.
The Cumby’s proposal would lift the caps on traditional off-premise sales licenses over time, until they are eliminated entirely in 2024. Meanwhile, it would establish a new kind of “food store” license for beer and wine, to be doled out at the municipal level. There would be no cap for those, but Durand notes that town officials could also decide that they don’t want to issue any. The ballot question would also establish more rules for age verification at the checkout counter.
Durand says he is open to a compromise, one that could be reached and blessed by the Legislature before the issue goes to the ballot next year. He doesn’t think anyone would want another bloody campaign, as in 2006, although his company is prepared to go all the way if necessary.
Overnight, this big surprise rearranged the Massachusetts Package Stores Association’s legislative agenda, becoming Priority No. 1. Rob Mellion, the group’s executive director, says he quickly dusted off the 2011 agreement to review it. Yes, the Cumby’s measure would bring more choice for consumers, but Mellion predicts it would destabilize the marketplace, as bigger players use their buying power to muscle out mom-and-pops in the package store industry. His group is preparing for a fight.
More people can head over to Total Wine, who can in turn run more full-page advertisements in the printed Globe.
Other players aren’t yet sure what they’ll do. Bill Kelley, head of the Beer Distributors of Massachusetts, says his group will probably decide how to proceed in the next several weeks; the wholesalers helped bankroll the successful opposition in 2006. New England’s main convenience store trade group also hasn’t taken a position yet, nor has the Massachusetts Food Association.
Neither has the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, but its president, Jon Hurst, knows one thing: Just gathering enough signatures to get on the ballot — more than 90,000, in two phases — could cost a cool half-million.
Winning at the polls? That will be a far more expensive proposition, as anyone who survived the first Booze Ballot Battle will tell you.
--more--"
Tough choice, huh?
