By Susan Bjorling
We moved our family back to our hometown five years ago, in part because we wanted our kids to experience and contribute to the traditions and sense of community we remembered growing up.
People who come to Snohomish for our festivals, shopping, dining, or to attend their kids’ sporting events very often tell us they would love to live in Snohomish. The vibe of inclusiveness and support, along with our sense of gratitude, acknowledging that we have something unique in this small town, shines for visitors and residents alike.
Snohomish has been discussing whether or not to allow marijuana shops in town for three years. You read that correctly, three years. The shop owner, who stands to make a ridiculous amount of money, persists.
Some people on the city council, and some who are currently running for council, are friendly with the owner and are telling citizens that we will be having shops in town, that this is “inevitable” and that we need the revenue. “It’s coming. We just need to find a way to manage it.”
We disagree. Many cities have bans in place: Marysville, Lynnwood, Mill Creek, Leavenworth and others. Those cities could enjoy some benefit from the unspecified amount of revenue (nobody has been able to cite a number) that a shop may bring, but they seem to be managing OK.
Communities are allowed to set standards and expect elected officials to enforce them. Would the revenue generated be offset by the costs associated with a shop, including managing parking/traffic issues and law enforcement? Shops are frequently targeted for break-ins. Lake Stevens and Bellevue are recent examples. How much revenue would a marijuana store have to generate in order to make it worth the potential negatives?
The marijuana shop owner has secured a lease at 202 Avenue D, right on the corner of one of our three busiest intersections. This store would adjoin condominiums on one side and a private residence on the other. Twelve homes on an alley leading to the shop would be affected by traffic and visitors. There are only seven parking spaces for the gas station and pot shop. Overflow parking would likely be on the avenues, further increasing frustrations.
If you’ve ever driven on Second Street on your way to or from work, assume traffic would increase at certain times of the day. Several local real estate agents have noted the negative impact this would have on property values. Nobody wants to live next to a strip club, bikini barista, a casino or a pot shop. There is no filter on Redfin or Zillow that says “I’d like to live adjacent to a federally illegal enterprise.” Just because something is legal, doesn’t mean it’s the right fit.
Interestingly, one mayoral candidate, a current city council member, has accepted campaign donations from marijuana shops. One city council candidate worked as a manager at a marijuana shop. It would not be illogical to assume he is a strong proponent of shops in town. Both have stated, over the objections of residents, that they believe that the Avenue D site is a great location for the shop. I’ve attended many council meetings and a couple of candidate forums and I’m fairly certain I’ve never seen such blatant examples of special-interest politics. It’s quite possible that if these two candidates are elected, we (and our visitors) could see the Avenue D shop become a reality. We believe their group’s end game is to locate shops on First Street or somewhere else in the Historic Business District. Other business owners in town should be paying attention.
Support of one out-of-town businessman and concern for his potential to lose money because he signed a lease, even when he knew the business was banned, clearly shows that making a buck is more important than representing citizens.
When a current council member who is running for mayor was asked about this, he said “Sometimes there are winners and sometimes there are losers. This business owner would stand to lose a lot of money he’s invested in this shop (if it doesn’t open).” Clearly, the citizens who are fighting to retain property values and use/enjoyment of their back yards would be the losers.
Proponents attempt to write off anyone who’s opposed to the placement of shops in town as zealots or say that we’re uninformed or scared of pot. They bring up the alcohol issues we have in town with the distilleries and bars. Alcohol is not what we’re voting on in November. As they keep pointing out how deadly alcohol is, it makes me wonder why they’d want to add another drug to the mix. We don’t need drivers impaired by alcohol or marijuana driving the streets of our very walkable city. This location is three blocks from the high school, where many kids walk to and from school every day. Where is the logic in adding more convenient access to marijuana and, perhaps, increasing the odds of people mixing the two? Nobody is being “injured” or even inconvenienced by not having a marijuana store downtown. People have always been able to get pot, recreational or medical.
The group I’m representing isn’t anti-pot. We think adults can and should make their own choices. In fact, we encourage people to get what they need or want at one of the many marijuana shops lining Highway 9 in either direction. Or, if convenience is the issue, buyers can make a quick trip up Bickford Avenue and support the Bud Hut, just outside of town. I know it’s basic to say, but sometimes people have to drive to get products they like, as evidenced by my (many) trips to Target. We aren’t uninformed or scared. We’re a group of citizens with a keen sense for what brings people back to Snohomish to build their lives with their families, or even just to spend the day with their kids and grandkids, maybe watching a parade, browsing the shops or having dinner. Snohomish has a unique character and historic charm.
We recognize the need to properly encourage manageable growth and improve economic development. We aren’t naive or thinking we’re living in the ’50s in our “Beaver Cleaver” neighborhoods, but we are bright enough to look around us at the cities that have allowed marijuana shops and see that we don’t want or need a business that doesn’t lift up the community it serves.
We feel citizens’ and candidates’ efforts could be better lent to banding together to address the issues of homelessness, heroin and opioid addiction in Snohomish. Proponents of shops say that the revenue would be used to fund drug education and rehab. However, those programs are most effectively administered at the county level. If their claim about where the tax money goes is correct, then the revenue generated by the Bud Hut helps to fund such programs and provide resources.
If you live in Snohomish or have ever enjoyed visiting, please encourage voters to pay attention to the primary election and vote accordingly.
In November, citizens will be asked to participate in an advisory vote on whether or not to allow marijuana shops in town.
No matter how you feel about legalization or use, I think everyone can agree that placing a shop right next to homes is detrimental. The state did not put 1,000-foot buffers in place around areas that children frequent without reason.
The kids living in our city’s homes deserve a buffer.
If you vote to allow a shop in town, keep in mind that we will be relying on the city council members elected to decide where to place it. Imagine if the first business we all see when we exit Highway 9 to Second Street was a marijuana shop. What a great welcome. Nothing says “family” like a weed shop on the corner. Or, it could be next to your house.
If you wouldn’t want one in your neighborhood, don’t put one in ours. Please, vote “no.”
Susan Bjorling lives in Snohomish.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
