Happy New Year! With that, the deadline for municipalities to opt out of the NY Marijuana Regulation & Taxation Act (MRTA) has now passed. Here's where things are right now.
First, understand that there are two things that municipalities can choose to opt out of:
- Retail dispensaries
- On-site consumption lounges / cannabis cafes
A local government that has opted out of one or both may opt in at any time, but once they're in, they're in for good. Many municipalities are opting for a "wait and see" approach, but some are going for it.
If they do nothing / fail to affirmatively opt-out by the deadline, they are opted in by default. It looks like a decent number of municipalities did this.
A last minute update that has me excited: Fairport has opted in. All the way in. (Note that this is just the village, Perinton has opted out for now).
Here's where Monroe County municipalities appear to be at, as of the deadline:
| Municipality | Dispensaries | Consumption Sites | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brighton | Yes? (by default) | Yes? (by default) | |
| Brockport | Yes | Yes | |
| Chili | No | No | |
| Churchville | No | No | |
| Clarkson | No | No | |
| East Rochester (town) | Yes? (by default) | Yes? (by default) | |
| East Rochester (village) | Yes? (by default) | Yes? (by default) | |
| Fairport | Yes | Yes | |
| Gates | No | No | |
| Greece | No | No | |
| Hamlin | No | No | |
| Henrietta | Yes | No | |
| Hilton | No | No | |
| Honeoye Falls | Yes? (by default) | Yes? (by default) | |
| Irondequoit | Yes | Yes | |
| Mendon | No | No | |
| Ogden | No | No | |
| Parma | Yes? (by default) | Yes? (by default) | |
| Penfield | Yes | No | |
| Perinton | No | No | |
| Pittsford (town) | No | No | |
| Pittsford (village) | No | No | Referendum to be held in February |
| Riga | No | No | |
| Rochester | Yes | Yes | |
| Rush | Yes? (by default) | Yes? (by default) | |
| Scottsville | No | No | |
| Spencerport | Yes? (by default) | Yes? (by default) | |
| Sweden | No | No | Attempt being made to hold a referendum |
| Webster (town) | No | No | |
| Webster (village) | No | No | |
| Wheatland | Yes | Yes |
I'm not 100% sure about all of the defaults. I tried to confirm via press releases, news, and town board minutes for confirmations, but I may have missed some. Some of these towns have really bad websites!
Some other near-Monroe County spots of interest (not comprehensive, just a few of the largest and nearest towns in neighboring counties):
| County | Municipality | Dispensaries | Consumption Sites |
|---|---|---|---|
| Livingston | Geneseo | No | No |
| Wayne | Macedon | Yes? (by default) | Yes? (by default) |
| Wayne | Palmyra | Yes | Yes |
| Ontario | Canan |
The new stadium in Milan will be built , but only by respecting "three prerequisites" that have already been accepted by the clubs involved. Mayor Beppe Sala had this to say after meeting Alessandro Antonello , CEO of Inter, and the president of Milan, Paolo Scaroni , at Palazzo Marino in the morning .
The three “fundamental conditions to be able to move on to the executive phase of the project” were outlined by the same Hall with a communication on its social channels. The first, he writes, " is that the new stadium will have to substantially respect the lines and volumes contained in the feasibility study that has already been presented to the Administration".
“The second point calls for a reconversion of the area of the current San Siro in order to develop the project for the sport and entertainment district, in a green context (also in this case as per the dossier already presented). Regardless of the timing of construction of the new stadium, the opening ceremony of the 2026 Winter Olympics will take place in the current facility ( San Siro), as a tribute to its glorious history ”, he continued.
"Finally, third and last point, that the concessions of volumetric rights for urban development accessories to the stadium do not derogate from what is permitted by the current PGT" , the law states.
"The two companies - he added - have agreed with these proposals" . This is why the Mayor believes "that the council can proceed quickly to deliberate the public interest".
I was at the ministry of education today, and there were like 90-100 people crammed into a small , and i mean small stairway, after sleazing my way to the top after an hour or so I saw a woman that was holding her baby at the iron bar door, and she was begging the employee to let her son in because he was choking, his face was bring pressed against the door, the employee shouted at her , I shouted at him (not getting my papers any time soon), and left,
when leaving the building I heard her shout from the top MY BABY OH NO MY BABY , I didn't have the strength to look inside, I just hope things worked out fine for her
Edit : To clarify, the woman dint press her son against the iron door, she was being pressed by the sheer amount of people.
As the title says, I want to know what can be done to maximize the amount of services and infrastructure a municipality has while also not necessarily leading to or having to increase the population.
Let's say a municipality wants more services and/or infrastructure, but doesn't want to become a city, what options does it have?
Also, what are some ideas of services / infrastructure that don't require much maintenance or surveillance ?
Edit : What I've learnt from the responses here is that maximizing services while minimizing population growth would either need a tax raise or some kind of ponzi scheme. So it's basically impossible to do this without risking losing people by unsatisfaction, which then would lead to services being cut, which would revert all (somewhat) progress made.
So it kind of doesn't make sense for someone to not want a municipality to grow, because there is no other good alternative if they want a comfortable amount of services.
I was mainly asking this, because people in my municipality generally want it to stay a small and tightly-knit community, while I want it to grow. I thought that a compromise could be possible, but apparently there is no satisfying compromise for either side. I'm not part of the municipal council or anything and I'm not a urban planner; I just like giving ideas of things that could be done to better my municipality.
Fig 1. The proposed railway spur.
G&K Ore products has requested permission to build a rail spur to their processing plant. The railway has been cleared with the railroad company. The proposed plan would include a cargo rail station, a railyard, two (2) rail junctions, and eight (8) railroad crossings. G&K Ore processing will pay for the construction and maintenance of the rail spur.
The proposal has been opened for public review and response before city council votes on it.
