Ludlow has been my “home away from home” for almost 40 years. It is the only town in Vermont at the foot of a ski area blessed by nearby lakes. It has potential to be even better if the citizens and selectmen make the right choices.
Yesterday I read an article about how Woodstock plans to expand their Christmas festival and I credit them with continuing to strive to make their town more attractive to residents and visitors alike.
Today I read in The Vermont Journal that two ladies in Ludlow are leading an “educational” meeting to allow retail cannabis (pot) distribution in Ludlow.
While Woodstock, Vt., is doing its best to create a family-friendly environment, the Ludlow “cannabis educators” appear to be on a mission to have Ludlow become “pot central,” perhaps akin to Woodstock, N.Y. of 1969. It is especially ironic since up until now, Okemo Mountain has been known as one of the most family-friendly ski areas in the East.
Ludlow is now at an important fork in the road. It can continue to strive to be known as a family-friendly town with family activities. Or it can pivot and become known as a “pot-friendly” town and suffer an increase in health, addiction, and criminal problems.
I suggest everyone interested in helping Ludlow make the right decision read “Smokescreen: What The Marijuana Industry Doesn’t Want You To Know” by Dr. Kevin Sabet. Dr. Sabet served as a researcher on drug policy in the Clinton, Bush, and Obama Administrations. Sabet offers compelling evidence that the pot industry is closely aligned with the tobacco industry and intent on putting their profits over public health. The pot industry is following the tobacco industry’s script of denying that the use of their product leads to addiction or to use of more powerful drugs.
The two “educators” are promoting retail cannabis in Ludlow supposedly as a means of growing the local economy. What has not been said is that they would personally financially benefit from retail cannabis.
It is important for everyone to realize is that retail cannabis in Ludlow would not only be detrimental to public health, but it would also reduce the attractiveness of Ludlow to visiting families and the businesses that service them.
This is an important decision point for Ludlow. It is in the best interest of the people of Ludlow to just say “no” retail cannabis.
John W. Eckel