It’s a good thing Oxford Village didn’t secure a larger space – as was previously suggested by a council member – for its May 20 public hearing on recreational marijuana businesses because only a handful of people showed up to express their views and ask questions.

Though the crowd was sparse inside the council chambers, opinions were mixed on whether to prohibit or allow these types of commercial uses.

Vinnie Wilson, who indicated he used to be a marijuana grower in California, told officials the activity provided him with a job and money. He said it took him from “being completely poor” to “actually being able to start a savings account.”

Joan Reed, who moved to Oxford in 2006 and owns a Victorian home on E. Burdick St., doesn’t want the village to allow any marijuana businesses in the downtown area out of concern for the potential negative impact they could have on the community and the home she’s worked “really hard to make . . . look nice.”

“It would just make me sick if you did,” she said. “I would want to probably move out of here. That’s not the type of community that I moved into.”

Brandon Barber spoke in favor of marijuana businesses.

“When it comes to supply and demand, (marijuana) seems to be always in demand,” he said. “It’s something people can already get and we should take advantage of it.”

Village resident Andy Reed encouraged officials to take a cautious approach and “hold off” for a while on potentially allowing any marijuana businesses.

“Give it six months or a year – see what happens in the surrounding areas,” he said.

Unless there’s some immediate “value” to having such establishments in the village, Reed said, “I really don’t think that it’s something that we should jump on the bandwagon (to allow).”

Although she was attending the meeting as a member of the village council, Kate Logan went up to the lectern and spoke as a resident in favor of permitting marijuana establishments.

“People have been smoking marijuana since the beginning of time,” she said. “It’s just that it hasn’t been legal before. Now, it’s legal. Now, let’s find a place for it because that’s our job.”

The one thing both officials and the public learned at the hearing is that the state’s timetable concerning the regulation and licensing of marijuana businesses has moved up, so the village will have to act sooner rather than later on this issue.

Originally, the state’s Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) had until Dec. 6, 2019 to put a regulatory framework in place and begin accepting applications for recreational marijuana business licenses.

But, Chris Johnson, general counsel for the Michigan Municipal League (MML) and moderator for the village’s hearing, informed everyone that Andrew Brisbo, executive director of the state’s Marijuana Regulatory Agency, is “pretty confident” that “right around June 1,” a first draft of the rules will be ready for publication and he’s “hopeful” to have a system in place to accept license applications “around Sept. 1.”

“Any community that wants to regulate (marijuana businesses to) any degree has to have ordinances in place by the date that (the state will) start accepting applications . . . They’re moving the time frame up significantly, which means you (have) got to be ready,” Johnson said.

He said Brisbo was “very clear” that ordinances must be in place “beforehand.” Communities cannot wait until after a license application has been submitted.

If the village council does “nothing,” Johnson said the state will “automatically” allow “every type of license” in the municipality.

There are currently six types of commercial marijuana establishments defined under state law – grower, safety compliance facility, processor, microbusiness, retailer and secure transporter.

As a special April 16 meeting, the village council voted 3-2 to place an immediate six-month moratorium on all six categories, which means during that time, the municipality is not accepting or processing any applications for these businesses.

But, in light of the state moving things up, village attorney Bob Davis told council, “It may be that the village would have to act on an ordinance scheme (regulating marijuana businesses on) or before September or have a prohibition ordinance in place so that it would be protected from litigation.”

Under state law, communities can either prohibit marijuana businesses entirely or limit the number of licensed establishments they allow within their boundaries. Communities can also develop and enact ordinances that regulate the time, place and manner of operation of such facilities as well as “establish restrictions on public signs” related to them.

It’s not certain at this point whether municipalities can accept some categories of marijuana businesses, but reject others.

According to MML literature on the subject, “The statute is less than clear on whether municipalities can pick and choose which type of establishments they will allow. However, there is an argument for doing so.”

That argument is based on the law allowing municipalities to “provide for the number of marijuana establishments” within its boundaries.

Given the “less than certain and vague language” of the law, the MML believes “final guidance will likely come from the courts or clarifying legislation.”

Johnson said there are a lot of unknowns when it comes to the recreational statute and “quite frankly,” until there’s “actual litigation” which results in a judge saying “this is what this means,” things will remain unclear.

Joan Reed urged village officials to visit a marijuana retail business and “ask yourself what does this bring to the community?” She told them to look at the type of people it attracts.

She said people will travel “a very far distance” to purchase marijuana and “you have no control” over “where they’re coming from and who these people are.”

“I’m not saying that they’re all bad. I’m not saying that they’re all good,” Reed said. “But, you are going to get some people that aren’t going to be desirable (coming) to this community.”

Reed urged officials to “think about (the) children” in the community and how having a marijuana business “will affect them.”

“I wouldn’t walk my grandkids (downtown) if I thought that somebody was smoking pot and they could get a contact buzz. No way,” she said.

In response to Reed, Logan said based on the statistics she’s read concerning alcohol-related deaths, “if we’re really truly worried about the safety of the children, I would rather them be smoking cannabis.”

Logan said she has visited marijuana dispensaries and “I know what it looks like when it’s done right.” She noted she has a friend from high school who owns and operates a successful marijuana store in San Francisco, California and it’s “beautiful inside.” Logan described it as the “IKEA of weed.”

Logan believes the village can regulate marijuana businesses and control their appearance. “There are ways that you can do it right,” she said.

“I would be much more concerned about the appearance of yet another dingy-looking liquor or beer store (downtown) versus a marijuana store,” Logan noted.

In response to that remark, Lynn Dillon, a village resident who lives on W. Burdick St., told council “you can’t even clean up the dingy liquor store.” The village has “no control” over that, so what makes officials think they will be able to oversee marijuana businesses, she said.

Councilwoman Maureen Helmuth expressed her view that marijuana businesses should be permitted somewhere in the village.

“We allow strip clubs. We allow adult bookstores. Every use is in our zoning ordinance,” she said. “If it’s legal, we should allow it. I firmly believe everything has its place and we need to find a place for this.”

Logan pointed out that if people are given businesses where they can buy marijuana that’s regulated and taxed, they “may be less likely” to grow it inside their homes. She said she prefers that because the equipment and conditions needed to grow marijuana increase the risk of fire, black mold and mildew.

Logan is also interested in the additional revenue allowing marijuana businesses could potentially generate for the village government.

“I’m going to look at every opportunity that there is to bring a (new) revenue stream into this community,” she said.

The new law imposes a 10 percent state excise tax on the sale of marijuana by retailers and microbusinesses. But only communities that have these two types of businesses located within their boundaries are eligible to receive a portion of this money collected by the state.

Johnson warned distribution of this revenue will be based on a “very complex formula.”

When it comes to the potential revenue pot, the state gets first dibs, taking whatever it needs to fund the implementation, administration and enforcement of the recreational marijuana law.

Johnson noted that two months ago, Brisbo said the Marijuana Regulatory Agency already has 180 employees.

“A lot of money will be going to fund that,” he said.

After the state takes its share, for at least two years or until 2022, $20 million of the excise tax money will annually go to one or more Food and Drug Administration-approved clinical trials studying the efficacy of using marijuana to medically treat U.S. military veterans and help prevent veteran suicide.

After all that, any unexpended tax revenue would be appropriated in the following manner: 15 percent to municipalities where marijuana retailers and/or microbusinesses are located; 15 percent to counties where marijuana retailers and/or microbusinesses are located; 35 percent to the state School Aid Fund for K-12 education; and 35 percent to the Michigan Transportation Fund for the repair and maintenance of roads and bridges.

Johnson told council it would most likely be a couple years before the village would receive any revenue if it had any retailers or microbusinesses.