By Brian Gilliland

GEORGETOWN — A somber mood prevailed over County Council chambers Tuesday, as its members enacted an ordinance governing cannabis establishments.

“I don’t like this law at all, with the legalization, at all,” said Councilman Douglas Hudson. “You can’t convince me (marijuana is) not a gateway drug.”

Council Vice President John Rieley agreed.

“The experience of other states is that people who tend to use cannabis tend to be heavy users and, therefore, spend a lot of money on it,” he said. “The state stores, by economic requirement, are going to be more expensive than the illicit market, and I just don’t see the program being successful.”

What becomes legal becomes moral, Councilman Rieley continued, so people who wouldn’t otherwise use cannabis or cannabinoid products would be more likely to begin using, in his view.

“There is nobody that can convince me (that) intentionally sucking smoke into your lungs is healthy in any form or fashion,” he said, describing one of several methods of administering cannabis.

“While I do not like it — and I don’t know how I’m going to face my children after voting on this, quite frankly — I will vote yes because it does restrict the control and sale to a greater degree than what the state would require.”

Council President Michael Vincent also voiced his distaste for the state law.

“We obviously have the option to do this or do nothing, and if we do nothing, that means the state will control what’s going to happen. I wish to control our own destiny,” he said.

Council members Cynthia Green and Mark Shaeffer voted in favor without comment.

At the same time, Zoe Patchell, executive director of the Delaware Cannabis Advocacy Network, said the restrictions in the ordinance are prohibitive and should be brought in line with similar regulations governing alcohol.

She was joined by a private citizen, Jean Duffy, who said she wonders why marijuana stores should face more scrutiny than liquor stores.

The Sussex law remains basically unchanged from previous drafts, except for one ongoing issue: hours of operation. Previously, the county had attempted to set them; however, the decision was made Tuesday to tie the hours to those defined in state code, which is still being determined.
Besides the scheduling rules in the ordinance, operations must meet three other main conditions, along with guidelines published by various oversight organizations.

Retail is also restricted to C-3 zoning — the heaviest commercial use allowed in the county.

The other regulations are generally concerned with a distance of 3 miles: Retail operations can’t be within 3 miles of each other, 3 miles of certain types of facilities like schools or licensed treatment centers, or 3 miles from borders of prohibiting towns.

County Council appeared satisfied with state rules on growing and testing facilities, and left those unchanged.

County officials have proposed they will begin accepting applications for cannabis industry licenses in September.