Social Lounges: A New and Improved Type of Bar
Back in high school, my friends and I had this idea that there should be places where you could go to hang out after you smoked weed and before you went home.
We were young, so our parents either didn’t know about or didn’t
approve of our weekend activities, so we would usually go to a park or a
deserted street to partake. After that, we didn’t really have anywhere to
go so we just loitered for an hour or two. We eventually came up with
our idea that is essentially what was already known in the industry as a
social lounge.
The lines “no smoking” and “strictly for recuperation” in my list seem strange today, given that there more states where adult-use marijuana is either decriminalized, medically approved, or fully legal than it is totally illegal. At the time of our brainstorming session, however, there were still two months until the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment would become law and two years until Colorado would legalize recreational marijuana, so the possibility that it would ever be legal didn’t even cross our minds.
I’ve been to coffeeshops in Amsterdam so I knew lounges of some sort existed, but until I read the Ordinance №7 of the Minority Cannabis Business Association’s (“MCBA”) 2019 Ten Model Municipal Social Equity Ordinances, I had no idea that they were already in existence and/or proposed here in America. I was kind of mad that someone had “stolen” my six-year-old idea (I even approached noted marijuana user Seth Rogen with it by tweeting him in 2014 asking to become a partner in our business venture), but thought it was cool that these proposed lounges would actually permit the use of marijuana on their premises because that wasn’t even a possibility when my friends and I came up with our plan.
Additionally, social lounges sound a lot like better-regulated bars. Tenet D states, “Consumption Lounges must notify patrons that cannabis consumption can impair driving ability, including but not limited to providing information on local car services, public transportation, and ride-share programs.” I don’t think I have ever been to a bar that told me alcohol is dangerous and will be impede my ability to drive, and then gave me the numbers of local taxis or advised I take an Uber home. Further, tenet E says “…Consumption Lounge personnel must educate all customers about products’ potency, absorption time, and effects.” Again, I have never had a bartender tell me how much alcohol is in the drink I just ordered or how it might affect me later on in the night. The Ordinance aims to create spaces in which patrons can be educated about the products they consume, all while doing so in a safe manner.
Until Dasheeda Dawson spoke in class last week, however, I did not realize that allowing marijuana consumption in these lounges is not only a “cool” feature, but integral in promoting equity among all users. I forgot exactly how it came up or how she phrased it, but she mentioned that those living in government-funded housing like Section 8 communities could be evicted if found in possession of marijuana — even if it is legal in their state — so consumption lounges are a great way to enable people to participate without the fear of losing their housing.
The plain text of Ordinance №7 wants to even the playing field for those who are disproportionately punished for marijuana use and “benefit[] the least from the legal marijuana marketplace.” Those people are almost always minorities, so by creating social consumption lounges where people can not only purchase but also consume marijuana products, the cities in which they are opened will be protecting their underprivileged citizens from potential evictions based on existing federal laws. In order to best serve those most harmed by legalization efforts, these lounges should be established in such affected communities. It would make the most sense to construct these lounges directly in affected communities because the Ordinance suggests that “tax revenue generated from the adult-use sales of cannabis could be used to reinvest in communities most harmed by cannabis prohibition…”.
These lounges still pose a problem in trying to create equity, though. Take New York City, for example. It is fairly easy to get around in Manhattan due to an abundance of subway lines, but once you go further out into Brooklyn and Queens, stops are far less frequent. Though still expensive, the cost of living in those boroughs is generally cheaper than Manhattan, and they are home to many low-income housing communities.
I feel like it would be difficult to create complete equity in a city like New York. There are so many different income levels, which is the first and biggest problem. Prices at lounges in Manhattan would likely be more expensive due to their location, making them desirable places to be, which would create long lines, increase demand/popularity, and eventually prices. People from lower-income areas would hardly be willing to travel to Manhattan to pay Manhattan prices, so they would prefer local lounges. However, these local lounges might be cheaper, which might attract people of higher income levels to travel from Manhattan, thereby gentrifying a social program that aims to benefit the community it is in. One way to prevent this might be to limit capacity to those living in those specific communities by having them provide proof of residence (which again, in New York City might be difficult because not everyone has a driver’s license — but I also don’t really know how low-income housing works so they might have ID cards with that specific information on them).
Regardless, one would need a lot of city planners and lawyers and representatives from low-income housing to sit on a board in order to figure out the specifics of how to best serve underrepresented and over-regulated communities in creating social consumption lounges. It can and should be done, and the MCBA created a great framework for proposing the lounges, but they should be implemented in a way that does not further benefit those who are not criminalized at the rates at which black people and POC are.
