Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 3/8/2023
BELCHERTOWN — Attorney Marvin Cable, representing CLCash LLC, met with the Planning Board at its Feb. 28 to discuss the possibility of the company withdrawing its special permit application instead of it being denied.
The Planning Board unanimously approved the withdrawal of the application.
Since Jan. 10, the Planning Board has been meeting with members from CLCash LLC regarding a proposal to receive a special permit to open a non-medical marijuana distribution center at 401 Mill Valley Rd.
At its Feb. 14 meeting, the Planning Board voted 3-2 in favor of issuing the permit, but a special permit requires four of five affirmative votes, meaning the permit was denied.
The Planning Board expressed concerns regarding the level of uncertainty and confusion with the application. The board wanted more specifics and written plans than what were being offered.
Planning Board member Justin Rosienski added, “I think there was a bunch of confusion communicating over the internet and not so much face to face and understanding what we were asking. The Planning Board was confused and CLCash LLC seemed confused. It just wasn’t a clean presentation.”
Cable said, “We were hopping this would be a simpler matter because we have all our ducks in a row, but it seems we were not communicating correctly. I have worked with this group before. They have operations running in Northampton, so they can do it in Belchertown. I think the presentation did not come across very well.”
Cable added he wanted the application to be withdrawn without prejudice because a denial would “land us in two years of a holding pattern which throw thousands of dollars down the drain and the building sitting there vacated.”
According to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, Section 16, if a special permit is denied with prejudice, the same special permit application cannot be approved within two years of the initial denial. An application could be approved within a two-year period if four of the five board members find it contained material changes to the specific aspects that caused the initial proposal to be turned down.
Cable added that if the application was withdrawn, CLCash LLC would submit another one with Cable being more involved in the presentation to offer more clarity.
Planning Board members expressed that they do want to see the building be used to bring revenue to the town after it has been left vacant for the last few years.
Planning Board Chair Dan Beaudette said, “I am inclined to have this application be withdrawn. We have all had conversations on this matter and looking at this building, we think it is a good place that has been sited for what CLCash LLC wants to do. We have had other applicants on that building for similar operations that have not worked out. The building needs a tenant.”
He added, “If they can come up to the standards of the bylaws and get a successful application in, I don’t know why we wouldn’t want them or encourage them to do so.”
The Planning Board continued to discuss that they have no problems with the business being in town, the only issue was that the application was not filled out correctly.
Planning Board member Elizabeth Pols added that the other applicants who have applied for that building were denied for financial problems or not meeting Cannabis Control Commission standards.
She stated that CLCash are already a proven cannabis business that can work in town if they fix their application.
Planning Board member Jim Natle said, “It’s the application itself that is deficient, not the intended use. Even back when we voted we tried to add a bunch of conditions to patch it up, but this is a smarter and better way to go about it.”
Cable agreed that the withdrawal idea worked better because it allows the business to started from scratch on the application and update it.
Pols added, “I am happy to withdraw the application without prejudice and to review it again with a more complete application. I voted against the first time because of the list of conditions we still had. I urge you to review our bylaws and consider of conditions before you resubmit.”
Beaudette added some recommendations for CLCash to help them with their second attempt to be granted a special permit.
“First of all, your representatives should be in closer contact with the town planner. Bringing the information in and having it reviewed and discussed before it is presented to the board,” Beaudette said.
He added, “The other thing is that this is not designed and that is not our typical practice. We are used to looking at a project with a general design and general specifications, so you are ready to get contracts out and put a price tag on it before getting the permits. This process seems backwards. We need to know exactly what you are going to do because we feel uncomfortable handing out the permit without seeing an exact plan.”
Cable said he is appreciative of all the recommendations and will use everything the board brought up to use in the next special permit application and presentation.