Question 4: Voters take on pot legalization

Question 4: Voters take on pot legalization Oct 22, 2016 By Mike Lawrence NEW BEDFORD Debates about marijuana regulation have intensified in SouthCoast in recent weeks, with pro-pot rallies on the steps of City Hall, an anti-legalization event in a treatment center and proposals for medical pot facilities across the region. Through it all, advocates of commercial sale and recreational use, local and state lawmakers and law enforcement leaders who have voiced strong local opposition all appear to be holding their breath ahead of the statewide vote on Question 4. If it passes, the city has to consider very seriously how marijuana shops will affect neighborhoods, and do everything in its power to protect those neighborhoods, New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell, an outspoken opponent of legalization, said earlier this month. Bristol County Sheriff Thomas Hodgson added Tuesday at the High Point Treatment Center on Kilburn Street, as part of a "No on 4" event by the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts, that commercial legalization would do absolutely nothing to improve the quality of life in SouthCoast or the state. Jim Borghesani, spokesperson for the Yes on 4 committee, has said that legalization would take commerce away from criminals and put it with licensed, tax-paying businesses. Question 4 asks Massachusetts voters whether to approve legalizing, regulating and taxing commercial marijuana sales, along with allowing recreational use, possession and cultivation of limited amounts of the drug. Legalization would take effect Dec. 15 and retail sales would begin in 2018, with voter approval. Bay State voters approved medicinal marijuana use and sales in 2012, by a margin of 63 to 37 percent, and decided in 2008 to decriminalize possession of less than 1 ounce of pot. That margin was 65 to 35 percent. But broad legalization and commercial sales are different ballgames, no matter where you stand on the issue. Total sales of medicinal and recreational marijuana at licensed Colorado dispensaries topped $996 million in 2015, according to the state s Department of Revenue. Taxes generated from medicinal and recreational sales in Colorado topped $50 million from January through August this year, according to the state. Page 1 of 6

But tax rates for the recreational industry total nearly 28 percent in Colorado, compared to a 12-percent maximum total rate in Massachusetts. That s one reason why Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito, a leading voice in the opposition campaign along with Gov. Charlie Baker, said Question 4 isn t the right vehicle for marijuana legalization. Polito said in New Bedford last week that the ballot measure would give the state and municipalities a very short time to implement regulations, with a low tax rate that would mean the dollars are not available to fully regulate the industry. I don t think the tax revenue would offset the societal costs some of which are quantifiable, and some not, Mitchell added. The Yes on 4 campaign counters that argument, citing the potential for societal benefits from tax revenue generated from an already existing industry. Experts say that taxing marijuana sales will create $100 million in new tax revenue for vital essential services in our communities, the campaign s website states. We can use the money to strengthen our schools smaller classes, more books, and newer technology for our children. We can also spend the money on opiate abuse prevention programs, drug awareness campaigns, or law enforcement. QUESTION Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives on or before May 3, 2016? The proposed law would permit the possession, use, distribution, and cultivation of marijuana in limited amounts by persons age 21 and older and would remove criminal penalties for such activities. It would provide for the regulation of commerce in marijuana, marijuana accessories, and marijuana products and for the taxation of proceeds from sales of these items. The proposed law would authorize persons at least 21 years old to possess up to 1 ounce of marijuana outside of their residences; possess up to 10 ounces of marijuana inside their residences; grow up to six marijuana plants in their residences; give 1 ounce or less of marijuana to a person at least 21 years old without payment; possess, produce or transfer hemp; or make or transfer items related to marijuana use, storage, cultivation, or processing. The measure would create a Cannabis Control Commission of three members appointed by the state treasurer. The commission would generally administer the law governing marijuana use and distribution, promulgate regulations, and be responsible for the licensing of marijuana commercial establishments. The proposed law would also create a Cannabis Advisory Board of 15 members appointed by the governor. The Cannabis Control Commission would adopt regulations governing licensing qualifications; security; record keeping; health and safety standards; packaging and labeling; testing; advertising and displays; required inspections; and such other matters as the commission considers appropriate. The records of the commission would be public records. The proposed law would authorize cities and towns to adopt reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and manner of operating marijuana businesses and to limit the number of marijuana establishments in their communities. A city or town could hold a local vote to determine whether to permit the selling of marijuana and marijuana products for consumption on the premises at commercial establishments. Page 2 of 6

The proceeds of retail sales of marijuana and marijuana products would be subject to the state sales tax and an additional excise tax of 3.75 percent. A city or town could impose a separate tax of up to 2 percent. Revenue received from the additional state excise tax or from license application fees and civil penalties for violations of this law would be deposited in a Marijuana Regulation Fund and would be used subject to appropriation for administration of the proposed law. Marijuana-related activities authorized under this proposed law could not be a basis for adverse orders in child welfare cases absent clear and convincing evidence that such activities had created an unreasonable danger to the safety of a minor child. The proposed law would not affect existing law regarding medical marijuana treatment centers or the operation of motor vehicles while under the influence. It would permit property owners to prohibit the use, sale, or production of marijuana on their premises (with an exception that landlords cannot prohibit consumption by tenants of marijuana by means other than by smoking); and would permit employers to prohibit the consumption of marijuana by employees in the workplace. State and local governments could continue to restrict uses in public buildings or at or near schools. Supplying marijuana to persons under age 21 would be unlawful. The proposed law would take effect on December 15, 2016. SOURCE: SECRETARY OF STATE WILLIAM GALVIN S VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE WHAT IT MEANS A YES VOTE would allow persons 21 and older to possess, use, and transfer marijuana and products containing marijuana concentrate (including edible products) and to cultivate marijuana, all in limited amounts, and would provide for the regulation and taxation of commercial sale of marijuana and marijuana products. A NO VOTE would make no change in the state s current marijuana laws, which include decriminalization of possession of 1 ounce or less, approved in 2008; and regulated sales of medicinal marijuana; approved in 2012. WHO S IN FAVOR? The primary campaign effort in support of legalization is the Yes on 4 committee, which is registered with the Washington, D.C., address of the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), according to the Massachusetts Office of Campaign & Political Finance. The MPP is supporting ballot initiatives for legalization, and for regulation similar to alcohol, in Massachusetts, Maine, Arizona and Nevada, and is part of a coalition of groups coordinating the campaign in California, according to its website, www.mpp.org. The top contributor to the Yes on 4 committee has been the D.C.-based New Approach PAC, which gave nearly $3 million between April and Sept. 27, including $2 million in August. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, at opensecrets.org, New Approach s top contributor during this election cycle has been Good Ventures, a philanthropic foundation co-founded by Dustin Moskovitz, a co-founder of Facebook. Page 3 of 6

Good Ventures has given New Approach $2 million this year, in donations filed by co-founder Cari Tuna. Moskovitz and Tuna are married. Another top New Approach donor, according to the center, is the Van Ameringen Foundation, a New York City-based grant-making entity that supports mental health initiatives, especially those supporting disadvantaged communities. The Yes on 4 committee spent more than $800,000 on the legalization campaign between Sept. 16 and Oct. 1, ending the period with nearly $18,000 on hand, according to state filings. The committee has spent more than $3.6 million on the legalization campaign since January 2015. The Yes on 4 committee also has received a substantial amount of small, in-state contributions from individuals. The committee received more than 20 separate donations totaling $3,275, for example, from Massachusetts individuals between Sept. 16 and Oct. 1, according to the most recent state filings. WHO S OPPOSED? The primary opposition committee is the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts, registered to a Boston post office box and headlined by Gov. Charlie Baker, Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito, Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh, Attorney General Maura Healey and others. The campaign had spent just more than $111,000 as of Oct. 1, but appeared primed for a final push with nearly $500,000 on hand as of that date. The campaign got an even bigger boost earlier this month, with a $1 million donation from Las Vegas casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, a campaign representative confirmed Wednesday. The Boston Globe reported Adelson s contribution Oct. 15. Contributions during the latest reporting period, from Sept. 16 to Oct. 1, totaled more than $182,000 from 35 separate donors. The donations included $1,000 from Daniel Mumbauer, president of the High Point Treatment Center on Kilburn Street in New Bedford. Previous contributors include Beer Distributors of Massachusetts Inc., which gave $25,000 in June; Bruins hockey legend Bobby Orr, who gave $1,000 in June; Wine & Spirit Wholesalers of Massachusetts, which gave $50,000 in September; and the Health Foundation of Central Massachusetts, which gave $100,000 in September. SouthCoast opposition to legalization has come from Mayor Jon Mitchell, Bristol County District Attorney Thomas Quinn, Bristol County Sheriff Thomas Hodgson, New Bedford Police Chief Joe Cordeiro, Fairhaven Police Chief Michael Myers, Dartmouth Police Chief Robert Szala and others. YES VOTE Law enforcement veterans support this initiative because it replaces the current unregulated marijuana market, controlled by drug dealers, with a tightly regulated system controlled by state and local authorities. Passing this measure will allow local law enforcement to shift resources and focus to serious and violent crimes. Page 4 of 6

The initiative includes strict regulations for business licensing, product testing, labeling and packaging, providing many more consumer safeguards than exist now. Marketing to minors is strictly prohibited, as is public use and driving under the influence. Local cities and towns can limit or ban marijuana businesses, and will govern operating hours, locations, and signage. Taxing marijuana will generate an estimated $100 million in annual revenue for state and local governments. SOURCE: SECRETARY OF STATE WILLIAM GALVIN S VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE NO VOTE Vote "NO" because this measure: Allows the sale and marketing of highly-potent marijuana edibles like candy, cookies, gummy bears, and soda that are attractive to young people and can lead to accidental overdose by kids and pets. Allows people to "home grow" thousands of dollars' worth of marijuana, even if neighbors object. Severely restricts the ability of cities and towns to control the number of marijuana retailers entering communities and allows pot shops to locate near preschools and playgrounds. Ignores the deadly opioid epidemic and the impact legalized pot will have on overall drug use. This legalization scheme would force Massachusetts into the commercial marijuana industry when communities across Colorado, the first state to legalize, are trying to get out. SOURCE: SECRETARY OF STATE WILLIAM GALVIN S VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE IMPACTS Recreational marijuana use is legal in Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska. On Nov. 8, four states Maine, California, Arizona and Nevada will decide on legalization along with Massachusetts. Voters in Arkansas, Florida, Montana and North Dakota will cast ballots on medicinal marijuana. If voters approve legalization, a range of issues will face state and municipal leaders, from zoning regulations to tax rates, dispensary locations, signage, quantities and much more. New Bedford City Councilor Joseph P. Lopes spurred the local conversation Sept. 20, when he proposed a citywide ban on public pot use. Just like you cannot consume any alcoholic beverage on the streets, I want to make sure we have something in place so you can t consume marijuana, in the same way, said Lopes, who represents the South End in Ward 6. New Bedford Police Chief Joseph Cordeiro successfully requested an amendment to the ban, adding arrest powers for police. That led to a two-day outpouring of public opposition, and City Council decided two nights later to postpone discussions of the ban and several other marijuana-related issues until after the Nov. 8 vote. Page 5 of 6

Question 4 gives significant control to local municipalities, allowing an additional local tax of up to 2 percent; allowing cities and towns to limit the number of commercial dispensaries to no fewer than 20 percent of the number of liquor store licenses in the municipality; and more. New Bedford s City Council showed support in September for a November 2018 ballot question in the city, on whether to allow the sale of marijuana for consumption at the place of sale essentially, marijuana bars should Question 4 pass. Mitchell said if legalization is approved, we will certainly fight for regulations that allow us to keep retail establishments out of the city entirely. Jim Borghesani, of the Yes on 4 campaign, said cities and towns also could hold special elections on whether to implement such a ban. And should Question 4 pass, the state legislature could seek to amend the law in coming sessions. Generally, when it comes to ballot questions, the legislature tends to respect the will of the voters but the legislature can come in if they wish and amend the law, Borghesani said. It s tough to predict what the legislature might do. Earlier this month, the mayor disputed the argument that commercial legalization would curb black market marijuana sales, should Question 4 pass. It ll decrease the in-state black market, but it will allow others to grow marijuana here and supply a black market in other states, Mitchell said. And it will, inevitably, lead to more consumption of marijuana. Page 6 of 6