New York Senate Bill S07275

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/8/25
• Refer: 4/8/25

Caption

Restricts cannabis storefronts and premises from being located within 500 feet from a school and two hundred feet of a house of worship.

Summary

This bill amends New York’s cannabis law to tighten location restrictions for certain cannabis businesses. It would prohibit cannabis retail storefronts from being located within 500 feet of school grounds and within 200 feet of a house of worship. The bill also expands those protected-distance rules to cover mixed-use buildings by treating entrances, exits, and any area in a mixed-use building that contains or is used as a school or house of worship as part of the protected site. The same expanded definition would apply to adult-use on-site consumption license premises. Under the bill, those applicants could not be approved for premises within 500 feet of school grounds or within 200 feet of a house of worship, with mixed-use building entrances, exits, and occupied areas included in the measurement. The bill takes effect immediately and applies to new licenses issued on or after the effective date.

Impact

The bill would amend sections 72 and 77 of the cannabis law, narrowing where cannabis retail stores and adult-use on-site consumption businesses may operate. It would likely reduce the number of eligible storefront and consumption-site locations in dense urban areas, especially where schools or houses of worship are located in mixed-use buildings. The measure affects cannabis license applicants, existing zoning and siting decisions for regulators, and the State Cannabis Control Board’s licensing review process for future applications.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to reflect a precautionary and restrictive approach to cannabis siting, with no recorded committee debate or votes available in the provided materials. The sponsor’s framing suggests concern about proximity to schools and houses of worship, particularly in mixed-use buildings where entrances and exits can create ambiguity in distance calculations. Because there is no transcript or voting history here, there is no documented opposition or support beyond the bill’s stated protective purpose.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the expanded treatment of mixed-use buildings, since the bill would count entrances, exits, and occupied areas within such buildings as part of the protected school or house-of-worship location. That could make compliance more difficult for applicants in mixed-use neighborhoods and may be viewed as overly restrictive by cannabis businesses and property owners. Supporters would likely argue the change closes loopholes and better protects schools and religious institutions, while opponents may argue it unnecessarily limits available commercial space and complicates licensing in urban settings.