It seems we could me missing a great opportunity to address multiple issues: The fees collected from cannabis growers could be put in a fund to pay for municipal solar power. In reference to the Aug. 9 article, “Cannibis Impact Fees: Where Are They?” it seems the view of how a growing facility impacts a community is limited. Indoor cultivation is one of the most energy intensive agricultural activities and some recent analyses suggest that it contributes to 1% of US total emissions!
If we already know that climate changing emissions are affecting every community, then we can reasonably argue that it affects the local community where the facilities are located. Of course, a distinction would have to be made between growing facilities and retailers here. Using the fees from growing facilities to install municipally-owned solar projects seems to be a solution to the problem.
As a former Energy Committee member, I have seen first hand the slow, obstacle-laden process that small towns go through to produce their own energy (in addition, of course, to the lack of finances) . This would be a way for the cannabis industry to compensate for a large carbon footprint and for the towns to be able to power schools, town offices, and other buildings. Maybe it is even possible to use the massive roofs and parking lots of pot factories as solar panel platforms, as arguments often arise about the siting of solar projects.
So instead of “clawing back” the monies already collected, maybe Big Cannabis could make a more positive contribution to the problem created. The fact that Pittsfield paid back three quarters of a million in fees … think of how the city could have reduced their electrical costs for the future and reduced fossil fuel emissions. We are all missing out on some win/win solutions.
Andrew Vernon
Northfield