GREENFIELD — In favor of allowing its staff time to gather information pertaining to a change of ownership application, the state Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) voted Thursday to remand the application for final licensing for the proposed outdoor cultivation site on Leyden Road.
“It’s a very complex licensing process,” Randy Facey, co-owner of the marijuana cultivation site at 493 Leyden Road, said following the commission’s public meeting. “We have the facility built and we were supposed to be able to have a crop this year, but they keep kicking our final license can down the road.”
Commissioners met Thursday for their monthly public meeting to discuss license applications for dozens of projects around the state. Included on the agenda was a recommendation for a final license for Greenfield Greenery LLC that proposed the Leyden Road project. The grow facility received a special permit from city officials for its Tier 11 outdoor cultivation site in June 2021.
Director of Licensing Kyle Potvin told commissioners it was the opinion of the staff to recommend the project for its final license. The group was issued a provisional license in February 2021, he said, and has since been deemed fully compliant by investigators.
As a point of clarification for commissioners, he noted that while Shannon O’Brien, chair of the Cannabis Control Commission and an Easthampton native, was included as an owner for the 2021 vote for a provisional license, she is not presently listed as an owner on the licensing documents. O’Brien recused herself from the discussion and vote on Thursday.
Facey said it was unclear to him if the reason for the commission’s hesitation was related in any way to the project’s former association with O’Brien. He said she left the group on Nov. 24, 2021, and since then he and his wife have filed for a change of ownership to add a new owner.
“That (association) should have nothing to do with us getting the license,” Facey commented. “My wife and I are still the owners.”
The status of application for a new owner — which was submitted in May — and its investigation by the Investigations and Enforcement Department is considered confidential, according to General Counsel Christine Baily.
“Under the regulations, we do consider the application process for licensure to be distinct from an application process for change of ownership,” explained Baily. “Under regulations, (CCC) views those as two separate processes.”
Still, commissioners were hesitant to vote in support of a license without “all the information” before them. In particular, they wanted to have a staff recommendation with respect to the change of ownership application before voting on the final license application.
“There’s a complete license before us,” said Commissioner Kimberly Roy. “We just want to make sure we get this right … and be fully transparent.”
Commissioner Ava Callender Concepcion echoed her colleague.
“I think it’s clear this needs more work,” Concepcion said. “We need more information. I’m not in a position right now to move this application along without first remanding it and getting more information.”
Commissioners said while they understood the two processes were separate, their hope was for both a recommendation on the change of ownership application and the final license application to appear on the same, future agenda.
“We’re not asking you to merge two documents,” Roy clarified for the commission’s staff. “We’re asking you to bring them back before us on the same agenda.”
Acknowledging that it is “normal” for change of ownership applications to happen at any point during the licensing process, Roy noted this situation was “unique.”
“This is a unique situation,” she said. “And we’re all very mindful of that.”
Reporter Mary Byrne can be reached at mbyrne@recorder.com or 413-930-4429. Twitter: @MaryEByrne.