A potential legal battle looms over New Jersey’s new proposed weed laws
New regulations could potentially put recreational weed in towns that opted out of adult-use cannabis.
When New Jersey legalized recreational marijuana in 2021, the state allowed municipalities to decide if they wanted to participate in the cannabis industry. Nearly two-thirds of the state’s 564 municipalities voted to “opt out” and bar adult-use operations. Dozens of towns later reversed their positions.
But on Jan. 30, New Jersey State Senate President Nicholas Scutari introduced a bill that could give the state the power to override local opt-out decisions in certain cases.
The proposed Bill S4074 would overhaul several aspects of the Cannabis Regulatory Commission (CRC), streamlining the application process, lowering barriers to entry, and imposing stricter deadlines for application decisions. Business advocates have welcomed the reforms for promising greater predictability in the approval process, according to legal experts and industry groups.
Critics argue the proposal would let state officials and cannabis companies bypass local ordinances — allowing medical marijuana dispensaries to sell recreational cannabis without local review.
“This is legislation targeted at one politically connected dispensary, and to force Paramus and our residents to allow a recreational shop is wrong. If the bill passes, we are ready to go to court and fight,” said Paramus Mayor Christopher DiPiazza. The North Jersey town, which opted out of adult-use marijuana, has one of the state’s five medical marijuana–only dispensaries. “Putting the issue of cannabis aside, the fact that Trenton legislatures think they know best and can bypass local zoning laws, approved by municipal elected officials and residents on planning boards, is a slap in the face to all municipalities that serve their hometown constituents across the Garden State.”
State laws overriding local regulations aren’t new, said cannabis attorney and educator Chirali Patel. It’s a principle called preemption — state law can trump local ordinances when they conflict, Patel explained. In Pennsylvania, for example, local governments can’t enact their own gun control measures.
She added that if the dispute goes to court, Paramus might defend its authority under “home rule,” which allows municipalities to manage local issues even when state law typically governs those matters.
The bill, solely sponsored by Scutari, now sits with the Senate Judiciary Committee.
What are the new proposed weed regulations?
Louis N. Magazzu, a cannabis law attorney and former Vineland city solicitor, said the reforms aim to reduce delays in the application process. “If you can’t get an answer on the application process, through commission or municipal review, that increases the expenses for applicants, particularly for the smaller operators,” he said. “The other problem with delays is that they frustrate out-of-state investors who are looking to invest in this industry.”
Under current rules, applicants may wait months — or even years — for a response. Some experts worry that imposing strict time limits could be problematic given the CRC’s staffing constraints. “[Regulations on time limits] is good for licensees, but I do believe that the CRC has staffing constraints,” Patel said. “They’ve been actively hiring investigators, but it takes time to train and have the consistency across the board.”
Dispensary owners in Atlantic City told The Inquirer last year that those long wait times can put potential operators out of business who may sink thousands of dollars in unused space. “Places are paying $10,000 a month on rent and I don’t know how they’re making it,” said Lou Freedman, owner of Legal Distribution, on unused dispensary space due to delays.
Towns may lose power in regulating some local weed businesses
Municipalities currently set licensing requirements and zoning laws to control the number and operations of cannabis businesses. Under S4074, local ordinances would not apply to medical marijuana retailers operating since the effective date of the CREAMM Act, and towns can’t shut down a cannabis licensee that hasn’t received a violation in the past 180 days.
The bill also strips the CRC of the authority to require a municipal review and approval before a medical dispensary obtains a recreational retail license.
Redesignation of products and revised deadlines
Under the proposed law, dispensaries holding both medical and adult-use licenses could redesignate products between the two categories.
The bill would also tighten deadlines. Currently, the CRC has 30 days to act on a first-time application and 90 days for renewals, with possible extensions. Under S4074, the CRC would need to decide within 30 days after asking for extra time — effectively capping reviews at 60 or 120 days.
Changes to entry requirements and additional measures
S4074 would eliminate the need for applicants to submit business plans, management profiles, or liability insurance details. It also removes special consideration for applicants partnering with educational institutions to develop industry curricula. Additionally, the CRC would have greater leeway to extend compliance periods beyond the current 45-day limit.
The bill requires the CRC to establish a centralized and public online portal to catalog any ordinance or regulation on cannabis passed by New Jersey municipalities. Any municipality that passes a regulation or ordinance will be required to update the online portal.
Finally, the proposal would prevent the CRC from denying licenses to family members of current license holders, though spouses of license holders or applicants would remain ineligible.