STAMFORD — A lawsuit filed against the Stamford Zoning Board is looking to crack down on Connecticut’s nascent cannabis industry.
Besides targeting regulations unique to the city, the suit – which calls the state’s Social Equity Council a “scheme” – could have broad state-wide implications with its challenge to the law legalizing the possession and commercial sale of cannabis in Connecticut, saying it violates the federal Controlled Substances Act.
The Stamford Neighborhoods Coalition, a group of residents that organizes against what it sees as overdevelopment, has sued the city board over its July 10 decision to adopt new zoning regulations affecting recreational cannabis facilities and smoke shops. The regulations created a framework for local land use boards to evaluate zoning applications for cannabis businesses of all types. It also limited the number of dispensaries and smoke shops that officials can approve.
The complaint, written by the coalition’s attorney David Herz, was filed Aug. 9 in state Superior Court in Stamford. It aims to invalidate Stamford’s new regulations and cease the operation of all cannabis businesses across the state, among other actions. The lawsuit is signed by about a dozen Stamford residents, some of whom are affiliated with the neighborhood group.
Drawing upon unsubstantiated claims that link cannabis to criminality, the lawsuit claims — without evidence — that placing “cannabis facilities anywhere in Stamford necessarily increases criminal activity in Stamford, putting children at greater risk.”
It also challenges the constitutionality of the state’s 2021 law. The federal Controlled Substances Act classifies marijuana as a “Schedule I” substance, but according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, most states have deviated from “across-the-board prohibition” of cannabis in recent decades and softened regulations.
The coalition’s lawsuit also claims that the state’s Social Equity Council — which attempts to guide the industry’s growth to be inclusive of communities disproportionately harmed by the war on drugs — is a “scheme” that violates the state constitution’s equal protection clause.
Lastly, it argues that the expired terms of members of the city’s Zoning Board and Planning Board render the boards’ decisions “null and void.” The lawsuit asks judges to halt the work of the Zoning Board and Planning Board altogether.
As of November, 199 of the city’s 251 appointed board and commission positions were expired, according to an analysis by The Stamford Advocate. Those familiar with the appointments process have said recruitment and bureaucracy all make turnover among appointees a challenge.
Barry Michelson, a member of the Stamford Neighborhoods Coalition, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
City officials said the new regulations were urgent to limit the proliferation of smoke shops, which were previously an as-of-right use. In April, three Stamford smoke shops were raided by police for selling products containing illegal levels of THC. THC is the psychoactive ingredient in cannabis.
In a statement, Zoning Board Chair David Stein said he was “surprised and disappointed that the (coalition) would try to invalidate these measures when many Stamford residents support stricter regulation of smoke shops.”
The regulations now limit Stamford to one recreational cannabis retailer for every 25,000 residents. They also prohibit smoke shops and dispensaries from operating within 3,000 feet of any other such store, or within 1,000 feet of a “public or non-public school.”
Currently, Stamford has two hybrid cannabis dispensaries: Curaleaf Stamford on East Main Street and Fine Fettle on Research Drive.
Previously, the city did not have any guidelines regulating recreational cannabis. Under state law, in lieu of formal guidelines, municipalities must apply the “most similar use” to cannabis zoning applications. In Stamford, officials said that was medical marijuana.
Before passing the guidelines, the Zoning Board in June rejected an application for a third dispensary on High Ridge Road — a main artery connecting suburban parts of Stamford with the city’s more densely populated downtown. The denied company, Sweetspot, sued the board in July, alleging that they acted “illegally” and “arbitrarily” in denying the proposal.
“The … decision to deny the application is contrary to the regulations and the laws of the state regarding zoning applications seeking approval to operate hybrid cannabis retailers,” the complaint said. It added that the vote was “not based on the regulations as they currently exist.”
Sweetspot co-founder Jason Webski did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Another dispensary application from Nautilus Botanicals, a Bridgeport-based company, was filed June 23 — several weeks before the Zoning Board passed the new regulations. The company is looking to operate a hybrid retailer at 1110 East Main St. on the city’s East Side, about one mile east of Curaleaf.
The Planning Board was slated to discuss the proposal Tuesday night, but the item was delayed until the board’s Sept. 12 meeting.
