Committee on Appointments and Briefings - December 9, 2025

The Committee on Appointments and Briefings convened to address a contentious issue regarding New Bedford's cannabis licensing process. Following a recent email from the Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) indicating the city could proceed with a Host Community Agreement (HCA) without a prior Social Equity Policy (SEP), the Administration opened a new application round limited to social equity applicants. However, the Administration stated it would not grant the HCA to House of Diesel immediately despite their pending application, citing the presence of other prospective social equity applicants who were previously unable to apply due to city policy. This decision sparked significant criticism from council members and the applicant, who argued the city created financial harm for House of Diesel by delaying the process and now forcing them into a competitive lottery against newcomers.

Consent Calendar

• Received and tabled a letter of absence from Councillor Choquette regarding an out-of-town business commitment.

Public Comments & Testimony

• House of Diesel Representatives (Shamar James, Tyrone Gomes):
  • Position: Expressed strong opposition to the Administration's plan to open a new competitive round and argued that House of Diesel was set aside and treated unfairly after investing significant time and money based on early assurances. They stated, "it appears that this is targeted... you pissed us off... it just not gonna be you."
  • Arguments: Asserted that the CCC email allowed for a compliant pathway via a Model HCA that the city ignored, forcing them to wait. They argued the new plan forces them to compete against applicants who may not have the same financial capacity to secure locations or security plans. They highlighted that the timeline for a decision under the new six-month window would cause them to miss a Social Equity Trust Fund deadline on Thursday.
  • Context: Stated they submitted an application as a courtesy in 2018, were told it wasn't officially accepted, and were told they were "first in line" only to be told later they must re-apply against new competitors. They expressed that they are renting a location in an Opportunity Zone and have incurred years of expenses without a pathway forward.
• Council Member Gomes:
  • Position: Expressed deep skepticism and anger regarding the Administration's motives, suggesting the area was not intended for redevelopment and that the Administration "drew the map" to exclude House of Diesel. He argued the Administration is trying to "eat them, eat their money" to make them leave so the city can pursue its own waterfront development plans.
  • Arguments: Noted that House of Diesel has been a good steward despite the lack of support, contrasting their treatment with other organizations. He accused the city of moving the goalposts and creating a "checkers game" that favors the Administration's preferences over the applicant's hard work.
• Council Member Jakes:
  • Position: Expressed concern that the Administration's delay and subsequent decision to open the round to others unfairly penalized House of Diesel for work done and issues created by the state agency (CCC).
  • Arguments: Argued that House of Diesel should have "first dibs" and that the Administration dropped the ball in monitoring the state's progress, leading to this situation. He felt it was disrespectful to the applicant to let "other people... benefit for the work that they put in" while the original applicant is forced to "pay" via a lottery.
• Council Member Abrew:
  • Position: Expressed that the current path does not favor House of Diesel and questioned why the Administration did not accept their application sooner given the city's history of accepting others quickly.
  • Arguments: Described the situation as a "checkers game" where the Administration decides who gets the grant, noting that House of Diesel has been sidelined while others were "funneled down the tunnel real quick."
• Council Member Baptiste:
  • Position: Expressed that the current process is "crazy" and that the Administration dropped the ball, causing House of Diesel to lose the benefit of their hard work to new applicants.
  • Arguments: Stated the Mayor should have checked the status of the application and that it is unfair to force House of Diesel into a lottery where they might not win despite their prior efforts.

Discussion Items

• Administration Explanation of Process:
  • Attorney Drakes and Planning Staff explained that while the CCC allowed the city to issue an HCA without a social equity policy, the city policy (subject to CCC approval) mandates that for the next six months, only social equity applicants be accepted.
  • The Administration stated it is inappropriate to grant the HCA to one specific applicant when multiple social equity applicants are present or could emerge in a new round. They emphasized an "open and equitable application" process where all applicants are judged equally.
  • Clarified that while the next HCA granted will go to a social equity applicant, the current round accepts applications from all social equity candidates, and the number of grants is not fixed at one but follows a one-to-one ratio with licenses.
  • Planned to contact all identified social equity candidates to inquire if they wish to apply in this round.
• Council Debate on Fairness and Timeline:
  • Council members questioned why House of Diesel had to re-apply after being told they were in line, given the city's own delays. Council Moran and others asked if the round could be limited to House of Diesel to allow them to secure a grant before the Thursday deadline.
  • The Administration maintained that they cannot guarantee a one-to-one ratio for this specific round without seeing applications, and that a decision timeline extending six months is a risk for the applicant.
  • Councilman Gomes proposed that the only viable solution is for the Mayor to enter into an HCA with House of Diesel immediately to allow them to apply for state funding before the Thursday deadline, effectively bypassing the competitive new round.

Key Outcomes

• Motion Passed: The Council passed a motion made by Councilor Gomes and seconded by Councilor Virgo to draft a letter to the Mayor.
• Directive: The letter requests that the Mayor immediately enter into a Host Community Agreement (HCA) with House of Diesel to allow the organization to pursue state grant funding before the Thursday deadline.
• Vote Tally: The motion passed with a 9-0 vote (Council Avery, Able, Baptist, Verde, Virgo, Carney, Giustan, Gomes, and Moran voted Aye; Council Oliver and Pereira were present but the vote count confirmed 9 in favor).
• Adjournment: The Committee tabled the original motion regarding the new application process and adjourned the meeting at 6:49 p.m.