Chris Che
Boston University Statehouse Program
With Election Day only weeks away, some municipal leaders across Massachusetts are raising concerns about how ballot Question 8 could affect local economies if it passes.
The proposal, which would prohibit retail sale of adult recreational use marijuana in Massachusetts, would also eliminate state and local tax revenue generated by those sales. Personal possession of marijuana as well as medical use of marijuana would remain legal.
In fiscal year 2025, recreational marijuana-related sales taxes raised about $280 million in state revenue and $50 million in local revenue, according to a statement of fiscal consequences by the Massachusetts Executive Office for Administration and Finance published in the state’s official “Information for Voters” guide.
“I think every local estimated receipt is critical because it does reduce the amount of levy capacity that we ultimately end up using,” Brian E. Turbitt, Framingham’s chief financial officer and director of administration and finance, said in an interview. “It is critical and important to every community, not just the city of Framingham, but it’s certainly important to every community.”
According to data from the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission, 13 cannabis licenses issued as “adult-use” or “lab” are currently held by businesses in Framingham. Publicly available data from the Massachusetts Department of Revenue’s Division of Local Services, however, showed that the city reported roughly $650,000 in cannabis-related income, about 2.2% of its total actual receipts in fiscal 2025. According to Turbitt, the money goes into the city’s general fund and is appropriated “across the spectrum.”
The City of Framingham has already seen a reduction in cannabis-related income. According to Turbitt, there was a decline of about $101,000 in cannabis revenue in fiscal 2026, which ended on June 30, compared with fiscal 2025.
“It would either require other reductions in services across the entire organization, or we would have to find other estimated receipts that might have performed better than expectations that we could increase,” said Turbitt. “I mean, every dollar has an impact one way or another, right?”
For smaller municipalities where cannabis-related income makes up an even higher percentage, the loss could represent a larger share of local revenue.
The Town of Franklin reported over $450,000 in income from recreational cannabis sales, which contributed nearly 3% of the town’s total actual receipts in fiscal 2025, according to the publicly available data.
“Most of it kind of offsets a lot of the department staff costs,” Town Administrator Jamie Hellen said in an interview.
While the income also goes into the town’s general fund, the cannabis income could roughly cover annual wages for four municipal employees, such as police officers, firefighters and teachers, Hellen said.
“The town has about a $1 million budget deficit going into FY28, which starts in July 2027. This would basically increase our deficit to $1.4 million,” said Hellen when asked about the financial impact to Franklin if Question 8 passes. “Is that something that we could triage? It’s possible, you know. I just don’t know yet.”
“As we head into the next budget season, it’s certainly not a trend I’d like to see,” he said.
“We have not taken a formal position on the ballot question, but we do have serious concerns about what the revenue impacts would be,” said Adam Chapdelaine, CEO and executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, a trade organization representing municipal officials of 351 cities and towns.
Chapdelaine, who previously served as the town manager for Arlington, said Question 8’s impact has been a topic of discussion at board meetings.
“We could see more cities and towns needing to either raise the local property tax, put override questions on the ballot,” said Chapdelaine, “or conversely, we would also likely see cities and towns cutting services or reducing the services they’re able to provide.”
The Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts, the organization supporting the ballot question, claimed in state’s official guide that “for every $1 gained in tax revenue, taxpayers spend $4.50 to mitigate the effects of legalization from societal expenses including increased healthcare, lost productivity, and crime (like DUIs).”
The Coalition did not provide a source for the claim. The same figure appears to come from a 2018 research study commissioned by the Centennial Institute at Colorado Christian University, referring to that state and not Massachusetts.
The Massachusetts Cannabis Coalition, a group that opposes Question 8, called the measure “backward on public health and safety” in the opposing argument published in the same guide. The group said prohibiting recreational cannabis sales would strip away consumer protections and safety measures, result in a loss of state and local tax revenue and eliminate job opportunities throughout the commonwealth.
According to the CCC, nearly 15,000 people are employed in the Massachusetts cannabis industry as of August. The Massachusetts Cannabis Coalition argued Question 8 would likely eliminate or significantly reduce cannabis jobs in the state.
For Hellen, the recreational cannabis industry also brought more jobs and investment to his town.
While the CCC’s data showed seven licenses issued to businesses in Franklin, Hellen, who was previously the president of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, said only two are cannabis dispensaries, and the rest are manufacturing facilities.
“I would say from an overall economic development standpoint, it’s been a huge success story,” said Hellen. “Not only in the tax revenue we’re getting from those stores for our operating budget, but more importantly, it’s provided a huge amount of tax base for the community.”
“When you have economic development like that, you actually stabilize the tax increases on residents because the business community is picking up a little bit more of a proportion of that,” he said.
