photolona / Shutterstock.com Municipalities Face Deadline on Whether to Permit Recreational Cannabis Operations
The NJ State League of Municipalities has issued guidance regarding municipal ordinances, and it has provided a "sample opt-out ordinance" that municipalities may adopt by August 21.
June 14, 2021 at 10:00 AM
6 minute read
Amidst the confusion of New Jersey's much anticipated regulated adult-use cannabis marketplace, are the regulations that govern a municipality's right to determine whether or not to permit the operation of cannabis businesses within their borders.
Under the Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Marketplace Modernization Act (CREAMMA), a municipality may prohibit or allow the operation of one or more of the six classes of cannabis licenses within its bounds. However, a municipality that denies operations may not prohibit the delivery of cannabis items and related supplies by a licensed delivery service to customers located in the municipality. A municipality choosing to exclude cannabis establishments must do so by enacting an ordinance under the authority provided by CREAMMA. CREAMMA provides municipalities 180 days from its enactment, or until August 21, 2021, to adopt an ordinance prohibiting cannabis operations. Any municipality that does not adopt such an ordinance within this timeframe may not elect to do so for a five-year period thereafter, at which point the 180-day window reopens. Certain municipalities had adopted ordinances prohibiting cannabis establishments prior to February 22, 2021. Pursuant to CREAMMA, these ordinances are null and void, and those municipalities must adopt new ordinances to comply with CREAMMA.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1How the Court of Public Opinion Should Factor Into Litigation Strategy
- 2Debevoise Lures Another SDNY Alum, Adding Criminal Division Chief
- 3Cooley Promotes NY Office Leader to Global Litigation Department Chair
- 4What Happens When Lateral Partners’ Guaranteed Compensation Ends?
- 5Tuesday Newspaper
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
