PLAINFIELD, NJ — At Monday's Plainfield City Council meeting for the month of June, the governing body was presented with two resolutions involving new cannabis businesses in Plainfield. One involved the approval of a large manufacturing and cultivation facility at 300 Madison Avenue, while the second was for a consumption lounge at 148 E Second Street.
Councilman Robert Graham was the first to speak against the consumption lounge, and its most vocal opponent.
“I'm just a little concerned because I know that we already approved one on Clinton Avenue,” said Graham, in reference to a consumption lounge the council narrowly approved in late 2023. “I don't think we need too many consumption lounges. Is there a community benefit?”
Plainfield Director of Economic Development Zenobia Fields explained that the city would received a good deal of revenue from such an establishment, as well as the creation of jobs for Plainfield residents. All cannabis businesses are required to provide at least one-third of their jobs to people who live in Plainfield.
When asked about what would be consumed there by Councilman Richard Wyatt, Fields explained that customers would only be able to use products purchased at the facility, which would be owned by Plant Base LLC, who already has approval for a cannabis retail business.
Council President Steve Hockaday spoke in favor of the consumption facility, bringing up the difficulty in establishing a marijuana business, and how one of Plainfield's three dispensaries, Royal M, had trouble attracting enough customers.
“I know that these facilities are going to need something to distinguish themselves and to draw in additional business,” said Hockaday, who expressed hope that the approved consumption lounge will be successful.
“I kind of liken the cannabis [consumption] to a bar but for cannabis,” said Hockaday. “In my humble opinion, I believe that the influence of cannabis is less than the influence that those feel when they drink.”
Hockaday confirmed with Director Fields that a consumption lounge would be required to have better ventilation than even a cigar lounge.
During the public comment portion, resident Sebastian Torres disagreed with Hockaday's assertion.
“When we look at marijuana consumption and … compare it to alcohol consumption, and things like that. When we don't have the data to back that up, that becomes a little bit problematic, right?” said Torres, who said there is a social cost to economic decisions.
Despite the council president's plea, the resolution failed with Mr Hockaday as the only “yes” vote.
As for the manufacturing and cultivation facility, Director Fields explained that it is expected to have a gross revenue of $20 million—$10 for manufacturing and $10 for cultivation—which would give the City of Plainfield around $400,000 due to its 2% cut.
The discussion around the cultivation facility mainly focused on an issue that affects all cannabis businesses—the requirement that one-third of employees be Plainfield residents. Councilor Julienne Cherry was the first to ask about enforcement regarding the hiring of Plainfielders.
“How are we ensuring that Plainfield residents are being hired and monitoring like that on an ongoing basis?” asked Cherry.
Director Fields explained that the cannabis business must submit its business plan to the City of Plainfield before opening. She said that the city makes sure that the Plainfield employees are not just hired to fill a quota, but that they are in positions that allow for advancement over time. Fields reported that the city monitors this on a quarterly basis when they collect revenue from the establishment.
“Can you clarify what that means? We monitor them, so are they submitting staff rosters?” said Cherry.
“They're not submitting staff rosters. But they're required to submit annual reports in their audit reports,” answered Fields, who said that the city never sees a roster of employees, but has a conversation about Plainfield employees.
Mrs Cherry asked if Zenobia Fields could amend the ordinance so that the City of Plainfield could start looking at addresses, to which Fields agreed. So did Council President Hockday.
“I think it is a fantastic idea,” said Hockaday. “I'm glad the councilwoman suggested that these cannabis retailers, all classes of cannabis are required to report their earnings to us quarterly and then render a payment of taxes to us of 2%. It's an appropriate time that we extract the information from them to make sure that they are compliant.”
Mayor Adrian Mapp pushed back with privacy concerns over listing employees names and addresses.
“In light of Daniel's law,” said Mapp. “I think it's dangerous for us to have the addresses of employees, especially information that's OPRA-able. And so I would caution this governing body to think hard about that.”
Hockaday suggested that perhaps only one designee could see such a list, to which Mapp agreed.
“Perhaps we could have the cannabis business swear to a statement that will be binding to indicate that there are X number of people who live in Plainfield who are employed by that particular business," said Mapp. “I think that we can come up with some method that would give us the assurance that Plainfield residents are being employed.”
Zenobia Fields suggested requesting an ongoing staffing report from these businesses to resolve the issue. Through further discussion, the council agreed that it would be a good idea to withdraw support from businesses who do not comply with this staffing report requirement.
The resolution approving the cultivation and manufacturing facility passed 6-1, with Terri Briggs-Jones voting “no”.
