Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.

Springfield City Council votes against marijuana cultivator on Page Boulevard

Date: 6/2/2022

SPRINGFIELD – A marijuana cultivator seeking a special permit to operate on 299 Page Blvd. failed to garner approval from the City Council during their May 23 meeting.

The item was continued several times over prior meetings before the council submitted their final vote. Previously, Smith and Wesson utilized the space as a site for their Shooting Sports Center before selling the area in 2019.

In February, City Councilor At-Large Justin Hurst highlighted a violation the applicant featured despite receiving a Host Community Agreement (HCA) from the city. Hurst explained the project did not meet the 250-foot buffer zone that is required between adult use marijuana establishments and residential zones.

“In the previous round, when a marijuana applicant was in violation of the buffer requirements the application was not even scored.

Serious red flags are raised when the administration is willing to violate our own zoning laws to ensure that an applicant who is not qualified receives a Host Community Agreement,” said Hurst in his February press release.

Before the council voted, City Solicitor John Payne discussed zoning changes the project endured since receiving its HCA. Payne said the changes were “not a major issue” for the project. He also stressed that failing to approve the project could lead to legal action.

“Should we fail to allow this to proceed...based on this particular issue, we will face a liability and quite frankly, I think it will be somewhat difficult to defend,” said Payne.

Ward 3 City Councilor Melvin Edwards asked for councilors to consider the possible litigation that “hangs over this vote tonight.”
“I ask respectfully that [the councilors] consider the opinion of the past solicitor [Edward Pikula] and the present solicitor…Both solicitors have stated that the changes under dispute were appropriate and legal,” said Edwards.

Ultimately, the council voted 5-4 in favor of the special permit, but the request was denied as it did not receive two thirds approval from the council.