►
From YouTube: Boston Cannabis Board Voting Hearing 2-16-2022
Description
Boston Cannabis Board Voting Hearing 2-16-2022
A
B
Good
afternoon,
this
is
a
hearing
before
the
boston
cannabis
board.
Today
is
february
16
2022..
Today's
hearing
is
being
conducted
pursuant
to
certain
temporary
amendments
to
the
open
meeting
law.
That
is
what
allows
us
to
meet.
Virtually
this
hearing
is
being
recorded
and
will
be
posted
to
the
city
of
boston's
website.
Before
I
review
some
procedural
matters,
I
will
introduce
chairwoman
kathleen
joyce.
D
B
B
The
first
item
we
have
is
core
empowerment,
llc.
The
license
premise
is
401
sinistry,
jamaica,
plain:
the
license
type
is
a
recreational
cannabis
dispensary
license,
and
this
is
an
amendment
to
remove
condition
number
seven
on
the
license
which
states
the
company
agrees
to
the
presentations
it
made
to
the
community
regarding
a
shared
valet
zone.
A
pickup
drop-off
zone
and
police
details
the
abbas,
the
applicant
also
requested
to
amend
the
operating
hours
from
monday
through
sunday
11
a.m
to
8
p.m.
To
monday,
through
sunday,
10
a.m
to
10
p.m.
B
All
right,
commissioner,
lambos.
D
Yes,
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
these
two
changes
that
were
requested
in
this
application.
B
Next
items,
two
three
and
four
all
related,
so
I'll
read
all
three
items
into
the
record.
Together.
The
applicant
is
herbers
c3
dorchester
llc.
The
licensed
premise
is
43
freeport
street
dorchester.
The
next
one
is
math
citizens
for
social
equity
llc.
The
license
premise
is
561
dudley
street
roxbury
and
the
third
one
is
mass
citizens
for
social
equity,
llc
39.95
to
39.97
washington,
street
roslindale.
All
three
are
recreational
cannabis,
dispensary
licenses
and
they're
all
three
requested
to
add
the
dba
high
profile
bypass
chairman
joyce.
D
B
E
D
B
E
B
Next,
we
have
high
street
cannabis
group
llc
the
proposed
license
premises,
200
high
street
downtown
the
license
type
is
a
recreational
cannabis
dispensary
license.
The
proposed
hours
are
9
a.m
to
9
00
pm
seven
days
a
week.
This
is
an
equity
applicant.
The
initial
application
was
filed
june
15
2021,
the
date
of
filing
with
inspection
services
were
june,
10
2021
and
the
community
meeting
was
november
10
2021.
D
Thank
you
jasmine.
This
is
very
exciting
to
see
another
equity
applicant
looking
to
open
up
downtown.
It's
something.
I've
always
had
my
eye
on
since
the
start
of
this
cannabis
board.
They
scored
very
high
in
every
category.
D
For
me,
I
just
want
to
note
that
they
one
of
the
subcategories
in
location,
is
the
distance
from
a
licensed
retail
marijuana
establishment,
and
that
is
the
one
category,
the
one
subcategory
that
they
did
not
receive
a
five
out
of
five
as
far
as
location.
I
just
want
to
speak
to
that
for
a
minute.
I
realize
there
is
a
buffer
zone
issue.
There
are
two
other
places
within
the
buffer
zone
that
we
have
previously
approved.
D
Putting
on
my
licensing
hat
for
a
moment,
I
want
to
state
for
the
record
that
I
don't
take
competition
into
consideration.
When
I
look
at
these
as
we're
the
signing
authority,
I
do
look
at
the
the
entire
application
the
type
of
support
they've.
Had
I
give
consideration
to
the
fact
that
this
is
an
equity
applicant
with
an
established
record
to
me
this
is
distinct
than
clustering
or
fi
or
creating
a
green
mile.
D
E
Chairwoman,
joyce
was
very
thorough.
I
do
not
have
any
additional
comments,
except
that
I
agree.
A
Thanks
jasmine
yeah,
commissioner
joyce
was
very
thorough.
I
will,
however,
say
that
I
think
it's
interesting.
You
know
where
I
will
run
into
this
issue
because
of
I
think
there
will
be
clustering
in
other
areas
in
other
parts
of
the
city,
including
downtown,
but
I
do
think
that
we
should
be
mindful
of
these
are
three
equity
applicants
we
have.
We
had,
I
think,
roster
roots
ferdinand
and
now
high
street.
B
F
B
A
Oh
okay,
so
I
think
we
have
these
three,
so
two
of
them
are
equity.
E
A
And
I
wonder
you
know
I
I
did
unlike
commissioner
joyce,
I
did
kind
of
think
about
the
competition,
but
then
I
also
thought:
okay,
you
have
three
coffee
shops
in
the
same,
sometimes
blocks
from
each
other
or
you
know
other
places,
so
it
will
be
a
little
bit
more
competitive
and
if
we're
thinking
about
equity
applicants
and
we're
clustering,
do
we
put
them
at
odds
with
each
other
to
the
point
where
it
gets
a
little
bit
more
saturated?
A
Does
it
take
away
business
from
them,
so
I
think
likes
yeah.
So
that's
the
only
comment
I
would
make
for
the
record.
B
Okay,
commissioner,
holmes.
C
Well,
I
agree
with
the
chairwoman,
I
think,
there's
quite
enough
foot
traffic
in
that
area
to
sustain
to
sustain
the
three
businesses.
So
that's
that's
my
only
comment.
I
I
I
realize.
C
F
Thank
you,
so
I
have
to
disagree
a
a
bit
I
in
terms
of
the
application
and
the
applicant
100,
I
felt
you
know
strong
applicant,
really
loved
everyone
that
was
part
of
the
team.
You
know,
commitment
to
diversity
and
so
forth
was
strong.
I
do
have
concerns
about
the
amount
of
applicants
that
we
are
putting
forward
within
the
buffer
zone
that
are
then
getting
denied
at
the
at
the
zoning
board,
and
I
think
that
you
know
I
feel
like
this.
You
know.
F
Obviously
I
don't
know
what
that
what
their
decision
would
be
on
this,
but
I,
but
you
know,
having
seen
one
just
last
week
almost
last
week
or
two
weeks
ago,
get
rejected
that
we
put
forward
very
strongly,
as
you
know,
meeting
all
the
requirements
of
being
within
the
buffer
zone.
I
don't
know
that
this,
this
location
is
the
best
I
do.
I
do
understand
that
downtown
can
be
pretty
busy.
F
This
is
kind
of
a
different
part
of
you
know:
it's
not
necessarily
downtown
the
more
of
the
the
wharf
district
and-
and
so
I
just
you
know,
and
given
just
there's
a
just
a
slow
re-entry
of
people
back
at
the
office.
I
don't
know
that
it
sustains
supports
a
foot.
I
don't
know
that
the
that
the
foot
chocolate
supports
the
need
for
three
within
such
a
short
distance.
It's
like
a
stone,
a
stone's
throw
away.
So
so
I
just
you
know
those
are.
Those
are
my
concerns.
F
If
this
were
you
know
in
the
seaport
or
a
little
bit
over,
perhaps
there
would
be
a
greater
need.
I
just
with
two
opening
and
still
not
you
know
the
the
density
that
that
exists.
Pre-Covered
and
also
my
concern
that
the
the
zoning
board
you
know
has
been
particularly
diligent
in
in
not
improving,
and
I
don't
know
how
much
of
that
is.
F
That's
what
I
mean
yeah
yeah.
I
agree.
I
agree,
commissioner,
I've
been
watching
them
and
I
I
thought
diligent
was
the
wrong
word
more
like
not
considering
you
know
our
our
own
subject:
knowledge
on
on
the
matter
of
density
and
buffer
zone.
So
so
I
I
you
know
for
those
reasons
I
I
just
at
this
time
it
I
wouldn't
feel
comfortable
supporting
the
establishment
at
this
location.
Again
love
the
advocate.
B
D
D
An
education
component-
and
I
know
my
staff-
is
working
directly
with
some
of
their
staff.
Yeah
see
how
we
can
improve
our
processes,
but
every
decision
of
this
board
gets
supported
by
a
written
decision
to
the
zba
right
and
they
are
always
welcome
to
to
listening
on
any
of
our
hearings,
because
I
think
all
all
of
our
commissioners
take
a
lot
of
time
and
take
our
role
very
seriously.
Yeah.
F
Yeah,
no,
and-
and
thank
you
for
that,
commissioner,
because
I
I
I
I
do
understand
that
and
even
a
part
that
was,
I
guess,
should
have
been
more
of
a
side
note
in
general.
But
apart
from
that
at
this
point
in
time,
I
don't
see
it
as
a
as
as
a
as
a
good
site,
given
the
other
two
locations
and
the
slow
economic
recovery
after
postcode,
okay.
Well,
when
we
go.
D
These
things
take
time
still
have
to
get
on
this
ebay
agenda.
We
could
have
an
application
next
week.
That's.
C
D
Play
and
someone
might
feel
differently,
but
with
that,
I'm
going
to
make
a
motion
to
grant
this
license
conditional
upon
the
zba
clearing
the
buffer
zone.
E
B
B
Motion
carries
by
the
way.
Next
we
have,
the
applicant
is
cna
stores.
The
proposed
license
from
is
yosemite
vaughn
hillary
street
dorchester.
A
licensed
type,
has
a
recreational
cannabis
dispensary
license.
The
proposed
hours
of
operation
are
9,
am
to
9
pm
7
days
a
week.
This
is
a
non-equity
applicant.
The
initial
application
was
filed
october,
4th
2021,
the
filing
with
inspection
services
was
october,
28
2020
and
the
community
meeting
was
held
november,
30th
2021
and
there
is
a
buffer
zone
conflict
with
another
cannabis
establishment.
B
Chairwoman
joyce.
Do
you
have
any
comments.
D
Very
few
comments,
I
think,
was
a
very
strong
application.
I
think
this
is
the
first
application
we
had,
that
is
veteran
veteran
owned,
and
I
liked
I
liked
the
entire
application
and
the
proposal
I
did
too,
commissioner.
E
Yeah
I
was,
I
was
really
impressed
by
just
the
support
that
they
got.
I
I
really
do
think
a
veteran
owned
shop
just
having
that
be
the
first
one
was
a
strong
proposal
would
very
much
like
to
support
that,
and
I
thought
it
was
a
strong
overall
scoring
on
my
scoresheet
commissioner
smith.
C
Holmes,
I
mirror
the
sentiments
of
my
fellow
commissioners
very
strong
application
again.
I
I
also
was
impressed
that
it's
veteran
owned
and
some
of
the
services
that
they
were
willing
to
provide.
So,
yes,
I
100
support.
F
I
agree
with
my
fellow
commissioners
on
this
one.
I
support
it
chairman.
D
Is
there
a
motion,
I
make
a
motion
to
grant
grant
this
applicant
a
license
at
this
location.
B
And
last
we
have
berkshire
roots
inc,
the
license
premises,
251-253
meridian
street
east
boston.
The
license
type
is
a
co-located
medical,
recreational,
cannabis
dispensary.
This
is
a
non-equity
applicant.
The
initial
application
was
filed
september
14
2021,
the
filing
with
inspectional
services
was
july,
6
2018,
the
community
meeting
was
held
september,
30th
2021,
and
they
are
also
requesting
to
amend
their
hours
operation
from
monday
through
saturday
9
a.m,
to
7
p.m.
Sunday,
11
a.m,
to
6
p.m.
To
monday,
through
saturday
of
10,
am
to
9
pm
and
sunday
10
a.m
to
7
p.m.
Chairman
joyce.
E
Oh,
I'm
sorry,
chairman
joyce,
I
actually
have
a
concern
on
this
one.
I
usually
agree
with
you,
so
I'm
confused,
but
I
do
think
that
I
was
you
know
the
the
public
meetings
that
had
a
lot.
I
know
that
they
withdrew
their
delivery
request
and
then
they
had
public
meetings
that
had
all
three
of
those
changes.
C
E
Actually
do
think
they
need
to
go
back
to
the
community
and
just
I'm
not
I
I
mean
I'm
not
completely
wedded
to
that,
but
I
did
think
it
was
confusing
for
some
and
was
noted
in
the
public
comments.
Particularly
I
mean
there
was
written
and
verbal
that
said
to
that
like
having
pulling
out
one
of
the
requests,
and
then
I
don't
know
I
just
felt
like
it
was
a
little
confusing,
so
they
scored
low
on
that
part
of
it
on
the
on
the
public
park,
the
public
support
park.
E
It
was,
you
know
I
liked
that
they
had
good
diversity
and
a
good
track
record,
so
I
don't
have
sort
of
issues
on
how
they're
operating
and
I
liked
that
they
were
able
to
share
their
percentages
of
employees
and
all
that
so
that
that's
good.
I
like
that
track
record,
but
I
am
concerned
about
the
number
of
things
that
they
wanted
to
change
and
then
their
meeting
was
confusing
to
some.
So
I
don't
know
if
it's
conditional
or
not,
but
those
are
my
comments
right
now
so.
C
No,
I
don't
have
any
issues.
I
am
listening
to
what
my
fellow
commissioner
is
saying
and
I
didn't
understand
I
I
didn't
get
that
because
I
I
mean
the
I
know.
I'm
gonna
say
this
lady's
name
wrong,
so
I'm
just
gonna
say
her
first
name
miss
andrea,
the
lady
that
talked
about
she
was
their
director
butter
and
she
had
a
lot
of
support
for
them.
So
I
I
I
hear
my
fellow
commissioners
concerns-
and
maybe
I
didn't
pay
enough
attention
to
that,
because
I.
C
F
No
no
further
comments.
I
didn't
have
any
issues
with
either
yeah
general.
D
E
Wouldn't
have
goodness
I
don't,
I
don't
have
a
recommendation.
I'm
sorry
I
just
had
just
was
reviewing
my
notes
and
looking
back
at
some
of
the
public
comment
and
knowing
that
they
had
three
things
up
in
the
public
meeting
and
then
they
withdrew
something
and
they
noted
that
people
didn't
have
a
problem
with
some
of
the
others.
But
I
think
that
there
was
some.
D
B
B
Happened,
they
applied
for
all
three,
the
medical
hours
and
delivery
delivery
and
the
hours
got
the
pushback.
Not
the
medical
seemed
to
be
fine
with
the
majority
of
people
and
then
I
guess
they
just
decided
not
to
go
forward
with
the
delivery.
So
they
didn't.
E
B
E
I
guess
I'm
fine.
With
I
mean,
maybe
we
can
separate
them
out
because
I'm
totally
fine
with
the
medical,
adding
the
medical
piece,
I
do
think
the
hours
there
was
enough
public
comments
that
decreased
that
score,
that
made
it
quite
low
and
so
wondered.
E
If
there's
I
don't
know,
does
anybody
have
a
recommendation.
D
I
was
going
to
say
we
could,
if
you
feel
strongly
about
that,
we
could
approve
the
medical.
We
wouldn't
require
them
to
come
back
on
a
public
hearing.
We
would
add
if
they
go,
should
they
go
back
and
have
a
meeting
with
the
we'll
figure
out
exactly
who
should
be
at
that
meeting?
We
could
put
them
on
old
and
new
business
for
next
month,
but
if
we
find
out
that
it
there,
there
was
just
100
support.
We
could
about
to
administratively
approve
the
change
in
hours.
D
Business-Wise,
so
I
guess
great,
I
agree
with
you
too.
I
don't.
D
E
Stop
the
process,
but
I
also
just
wanna,
make
sure
that
the
public
process
was
clear
and
that
they
weren't
confused
about
too
many
things
and
then
taking
out.
You
know
that
kind
of
thing,
so
I
do
believe.
D
D
A
D
D
I
I
just
don't
know
if
I
want
to
ask
them
to
go,
have
another
public
meeting
I
mean
that
is
difficult.
We
can
look
up
what
the
community
group
is
or
the
support
on
the
hours.
I
guess.
B
D
B
D
E
Feel
good
about
at
least
making
sure
that
the
hours
were
very
clear.
The
change
of
hours
wasn't
connected
to
the
delivery
that
the
comments
were
specific
to
the
change
of
hours.
That's
all
I'm
I!
I
would
feel
comfortable
with
doing
the
administrative
hearing,
and
I
mean
whatever
you
recommended
as
long
as
they
go
back
to
at
least
be
clear
with
some
of
the
public
comment
that
we
received
that
seem
tied
together.