By Michelle Murdock, Contributing Writer
Region – Massachusetts voters will be facing a ballot question this about whether the recreational use of marijuana should be legalized. The push for legalization is being driven by the Yes on Four Campaign, a group advocating in support of a 2016 ballot initiative to end marijuana prohibition in Massachusetts. In order to best prepare for this possibility, the Massachusetts State Senate formed a Special Committee on Marijuana last year to take a look at the public policy implications.
“We want to replace the failed policy of prohibition with a regulated system that would put dealers out of business, reduce access to young people, and generate tax revenue for the commonwealth,” said Jim Borghesani, communications director for the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol (CRMLA). “There is a thriving marijuana market in Massachusetts today which law enforcement is powerless to control. Youth access is guaranteed because dealers don’t ask for IDs. The only way to change this system is to create a regulatory structure that would replace gangs and cartels with legitimate businesses that pay taxes and sell only to adults. A vote against our measure is a vote to keep the drug dealers and gangs in business.”
“As Vice Chair of the Special Committee, and as a former law enforcement officer, one of my primary concerns continues to be the potential safety issues associated with legalizing recreational use – particularly for vulnerable populations,” said Sen. Michael O. Moore, (D-Millbury) in an editorial reflecting on his legislative expedition to Colorado. Moore and seven state senators travelled to Colorado in January to meet with state and local officials, public health experts, business owners and other stakeholders about the pros, cons and overall impacts of Colorado’s growing marijuana industry.
In a phone interview, Moore said that drugs hold no boundaries and cited the current opiate crisis and the addiction rates, OUIs and fatalities associated with alcohol. “I don’t think this is a good policy issue for Massachusetts.”
Local law enforcement are not in favor of the measure. Shrewsbury Police Chief James Hester said a major concern to officials is that recreational marijuana would increase operating under the influence (OUI) motor vehicle crashes as well as added cost burdens to local departments.
“Police Departments do not have an adequate number of officers trained as drug recognition experts to determine impairment,” he noted. “This could be a significant undertaking and cost to train our officers.”
Marlborough Police Chief Mark Leonard agreed.
“A significant law enforcement/public safety concern regarding the legalization of recreational marijuana is the fact that OUI drugs from THC impairment will certainly increase, which means OUI drug-fatalities and injury crashes will increase,” Leonard said. “Massachusetts has no implied consent law for OUI Drugs; no permissible inference standard for OUI Drugs; no per se law for OUI Drugs; and the Massachusetts Standard Field Sobriety Test training police officers currently have is not adequate to address OUI Drug concerns sufficiently.
Westborough Police Chief Alan Gordon said the impact on young people and families in general would be detrimental.
“As a Police Chief, I do not support the legalization of marijuana. The increase in motor vehicle crashes and the negative impact it will have on the youth of our community are foremost in our thoughts. Even though minors would be restricted from possessing the marijuana, we have to look at the product being made available to adolescents through sources that provide them with alcohol,” Westborough Police Chief Alan Gordon said. “As we have seen in Colorado, it has had a detrimental effect on the quality of life for many families. I have always viewed marijuana as a gateway drug. I myself will be voting against this ballot question in November.”
What the initiative does
As detailed on Ballotpedia.org, the initiative does the following:
• Adult possession — It allows adults 21 years of age and older to possess up to one ounce of marijuana outside of their residences and up to 10 ounces of marijuana in an enclosed, locked space within their residences, which mimics the current in-residence allowance established by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health for medical marijuana patients. Possession of more than one ounce but less than two ounces of marijuana outside of a residence will be punishable by a civil fine. Possession of more than two ounces outside of a residence will be punishable by existing penalties.
• Limited home growing — It allows adults 21 years of age and older to grow up to six marijuana plants in an enclosed, locked space within their residences and possess the marijuana produced by those plants in the location where it was grown. No more than 12 total marijuana plants can be grown in a single residence. Property owners and landlords will have the right to prohibit marijuana from being grown on their property.
• Regulation and oversight — It creates a tightly controlled system of licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation facilities, product manufacturing facilities, and testing facilities, and it establishes the Cannabis Control Commission (similar to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission) to implement and enforce regulations governing the cultivation, sale, and testing of marijuana. The commission will include a law enforcement unit that will be responsible for enforcing regulations, conducting compliance checks, and investigating violations.
• Local control — Cities and towns will have the authority to impose limits on where and when marijuana businesses are allowed to operate.
• Taxes marijuana sales — It will enact a 3.75 percent state excise tax on retail marijuana sales (in addition to the 6.25 percent state sales tax), which will be used to fund the implementation and enforcement of regulations. Any additional marijuana tax revenue will be re-deposited into the General Fund. It will also allow localities to impose an additional tax of up to 2 percent on retail marijuana sales. Medical marijuana sales will not be subject to these additional state and local taxes.
What the initiative does not do
• Public use — It does not allow marijuana to be used in public. Using marijuana on the street, in parks, or any other public place will remain illegal.
• Driving under the influence — It does not change existing laws regarding driving under the influence of marijuana. Driving while impaired by marijuana will remain entirely illegal.
• Unlicensed activities — It does not allow unlicensed individuals to sell any amount of marijuana or produce marijuana extracts using butane or other potentially hazardous products.
• Employment policies — It does not affect employers’ current marijuana policies or their ability to establish workplace restrictions on marijuana consumption by employees.
• Medical marijuana rights — It does not enact a tax on the sale of medical marijuana or affect the rights granted to patients under the state’s voter-approved medical marijuana law.
According to Moore, the passage of the ballot initiative would raise many serious economic, regulatory, public health and safety issues. Opponents also claim that the tax revenue from recreational marijuana sales in Colorado, often cited as one of the main benefits to legalizing use, fell short of projected revenues.
“Officials there had estimated $100 million in new tax revenue, but the results yielded only $53 million,” said Moore.
“Any claim that tax revenues fell short of projections are absurd,” countered Borghesani, citing a budget briefing of the Colorado General Assembly Joint Budget Committee that Borghesani said showed that the Colorado Department of Revenue projected $128 million in taxes in 2015 and received $135 million.
“At some point societies have to look at policies that work and those that don’t,” said Borghesani. “Prohibiting marijuana has created a dangerous marketplace which exposes people to much more dangerous drugs. Our opponents regularly trot out arguments that are based on 1930s reefer madness hysteria, not on legitimate, contemporary facts and studies.”
“Since 2012, Massachusetts residents have witnessed the disastrous implementation of our own medical marijuana system,” wrote Moore in his reflection on his legislative expedition to Colorado. “It is clear to me after this trip that legalizing recreational use would require an even greater commitment of resources on behalf of public officials across the commonwealth. Legalization is still a polarizing issue in Colorado, and the impacts – both positive and negative – have yet to be fully realized. While the legalization of recreational marijuana is ultimately a question to voters to decide this fall, I know that my colleagues and I are better prepared to confront the issues that would arise here in Massachusetts.”
The full text of the initiative entitled The Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act as filed can be viewed on the official website of the Attorney General of Massachusetts.