The Springfield City Council just reshaped how cannabis tax dollars are spent — and the debate got personal.
One alderperson laid out a major overhaul to the city’s cannabis-funded business and housing grants: bigger awards for local startups and homeowners, new eligibility rules, and even help replacing lead pipes in neighborhoods that weren’t covered before.
In response to a question from a council member about whether the whole city should be included, another alderperson warned that cannabis money was never meant for everyone equally and insisted the grant map stay focused on areas hit hardest by past crime and drug policies.
Then residents stepped up:
- One speaker blasted the growing deficit, rising police pensions and pay, and questioned whether cannabis revenues and city grants are really reaching people harmed by the war on drugs — or flowing back to the same power players.
- Another praised a council member’s recent remarks but then called out what they saw as a double standard: strict decorum rules for the public, while alderpersons can use harsh language toward each other without consequences.
If you care where cannabis revenue actually goes, and how council members treat both residents and each other, this one is worth a watch.
