JERSEY CITY, N.J. — Dr. Alyza Brevard-Rodriguez, a twice-disabled Navy combat veteran, cannabis entrepreneur, professor, and founder of The Other Side Dispensary, filed a tort claim notice against the City of Jersey City as a precursor to potential class action litigation regarding the city’s cannabis licensing process, municipal oversight, and alleged harm to local cannabis operators.
“Cannabis was supposed to be a path toward restoration, economic mobility, and community reinvestment,” Brevard-Rodriguez said. “Instead, many of us were placed into a system that extracted from us while failing to provide the structure, consistency, or fairness necessary for survival. I am leading this fight because leadership does not end when the mission gets hard.”
The tort claim notice begins a statutory review period during which the parties may pursue resolution, settlement discussions, or mediation. If the matter is not resolved by the end of August, Brevard-Rodriguez and other impacted operators intend to move forward with a formal lawsuit, including potential class-action claims, seeking monetary damages and broader accountability for what they allege was a flawed and politically influenced municipal process.
“This is about what happens when a state creates an equity-centered cannabis program, but municipalities are given enough control to delay, distort, or derail the very people the law was supposed to support,” Brevard-Rodriguez said. “I served this country for 10 years, invested my savings, liquidated assets, and believed in the promise of this industry. What happened in Jersey City should concern every equity operator in New Jersey.”
The Other Side Dispensary was once recognized as one of Jersey City’s most diverse cannabis applicants and aligned with New Jersey’s stated equity goals for the emerging adult-use market.
However, according to Brevard-Rodriguez, the promise of equity was undermined by Jersey City’s implementation of its cannabis licensing framework. Brevard-Rodriguez alleges the city abused its limited authority under the “home rule” provision of CREAMMA in New Jersey’s cannabis market, particularly where local governments have significant influence over licensing approvals, endorsements, zoning, and operational timelines. She claims Jersey City’s process caused serious financial harm to multiple entrepreneurs, including operators who invested significant capital in reliance on municipal approvals and state-level equity objectives.
The dispute could have broader implications for how local governments participate in state cannabis programs, particularly where equity applicants, disabled veterans, minority-owned businesses, and small operators are involved.
