Anyone looking to open a medical marijuana facility in Oxford is out of luck.

Last week, the Oxford Township Board voted 7-0 to “not approve an ordinance” that would allow such facilities to locate here under a new state law that legalized them.

This decision comes a month after the Oxford Village Council’s vote to prohibit them as well.

In September, Gov. Rick Snyder signed the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act (Public Act 281 of 2016), which authorized the licensing and regulation of five types of medical marijuana facilities – growers, processors, secure transporters, provisioning centers (commonly call dispensaries) and safety compliance facilities (testing labs).

The new law took effect Dec. 20, 2016 but under it, no one can apply for a license until Dec. 15, 2017.

This 360-day delay gives the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) time to establish a licensing system and allows for the creation of a five-member Medical Marihuana Licensing Board appointed by the governor.

It also gives municipalities time to decide what actions they wish to take, or not take, in response to the new law.

According to the Michigan Townships Association, “If townships do not want medical marijuana facilities within their community, no action is required and no facilities can be licensed by the state and located there. A facility can only locate in a jurisdiction if that local government adopts an ordinance permitting them to do so.”

There was hardly any discussion among the township board members prior to their decision, so this reporter asked a couple why they voted against these facilities.

“I see more drawback than benefit to it,” explained Clerk Curtis Wright, who believes such facilities would have a negative impact on the township’s image and could lead to other problems such as minors having increased access to the drug, which is still illegal for recreational use.

“I just don’t see it being a positive for the township.”

Wright said while it’s true the prevailing attitude towards marijuana these days is “it’s not that big of a deal,” it must also be remembered that it’s still “a mind-altering drug.”

“It’s got it’s place in society now. It’s more prevalent than it’s ever been,” he said. “But it’s going to erode our society little by little. Sometimes we don’t realize it.”

Treasurer Joe Ferrari voted against it because “it’s still too new” and “there’s a lot of things still up in the air” with regard to how the regulations are going to be enforced.

“I don’t want to be a pilot (program),” he said. “Let somebody else do that. Let them work out any of the difficulties.”

“We’re all hoping it works out well, but until you actually see these (facilities) in action, (you don’t know),” Ferrari noted.

Ferrari is “afraid” allowing medical marijuana facilities would put “a lot of extra stress” on the Oakland County Sheriff’s substation in terms of manpower and finances.

“I don’t want to spend a ton of police monies patroling these places,” he said.

The new state law authorizes municipalities to charge an annual fee of up to $5,000 on licensed facilities to help offset administrative and enforcement costs.

There were two folks in the audience that night who favored adopting an ordinance allowing medical marijuana facilities.

One of the them was Oxford resident John Fedricks, who favors stricter government regulation of medical marijuana.

He doesn’t like the current system, created under the voter-approved Michigan Medical Marihuana Act of 2008, whereby qualified patients receive their marijuana from registered caregivers, who can cultivate up to 12 plants per patient and serve a maximum of five patients.

According to LARA, as of Sept. 30, 2016, there are 218,556 patients and 38,107 caregivers in the state. In Oakland County, there are 24,416 patients and 3,963 caregivers.

To Fedricks, there’s a complete lack of accountability when it comes to caregivers. He said the state has “no way . . . to trace where this marijuana is going” and “no control over” what happens to seeds, plants and excess crops. “People grow more plants than they should,” Fedricks told the board. “They sell it to people they shouldn’t. Some of them sell it to kids. That’s pretty much what we need to stop.”

Fedricks would rather have licensed growing facilities because he doesn’t like the idea of people cultivating marijuana in their homes and around kids. “It just makes a bad atmosphere,” he said.

He pointed out the electrical equipment used by caregivers in their growing operations, which are currently not subject to inspection, can pose a potential fire hazard and the marijuana they produce isn’t tested so it could potentially contain harmful substances such as pesticides and fungicides.

“I would think that any kind of control over it would be better than no control at all,” Fedricks told the board.

Fedricks believes increased regulation will ultimately help make the medical marijuana business a little more “reputable” and eventually, the patient-caregiver system will be phased out by the state once officials see all the revenue that can be generated by licensed facilities.

He also believes the township would be “missing the boat” by not reaping the economic benefits of allowing licensed facilities. Those benefits include new investment, job creation and tax revenue, he said.

Public Act 281 also imposes a 3 percent excise tax on the retail sale of medical marijuana by licensed provisioning centers. This tax revenue will be collected by the state, which, in turn, will return 60 percent to municipalities and counties. Of that, 25 percent goes to municipalities in which facilities are located.

Oxford resident Jaclyn Fedricks also spoke in favor of allowing licensed facilities. “I feel like caregiving is on its way out,” she said. “It’s all going to be controlled in a commercial atmosphere.”

She firmly believes medical marijuana needs to be regulated, which includes requiring product testing.

“I wouldn’t want my children to grow up and smoke something out of somebody’s basement,” said Jaclyn Fedricks. “If they’re going to smoke, they’re going to smoke. I hope they don’t. I don’t. But if they (do), I want (it) to be something that’s tested.”