Montana CI-118, Allow for a Legal Age for Marijuana Amendment (2020)

Montana CI-118
Election date November 3, 2020
Topic Marijuana
Status a Approved
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin Citizens
List of Montana measuresMontana LR-130Montana C-46Montana C-47Montana CI-118Montana I-190Submit

The Montana CI-118, the Allow for a Legal Age for Marijuana Amendment, was on the ballot in Montana as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 3, 2020. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported amending the Montana Constitution to allow for the legislature or a citizen initiative to establish a minimum legal age for the possession, use, and purchase of marijuana, similar to the regulation of alcohol in the state constitution.

A "no" vote opposed amending the Montana Constitution to allow for the legislature or a citizen initiative to establish minimum legal ages for the possession, use, and purchase of marijuana.

New Approach Montana, the initiative's sponsor, also filed an initiated state statute targeting the 2020 ballot that legalized, regulated, and taxed recreational marijuana.

Election results

Montana CI-118
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		340,847	57.84%
No		248,442	42.16%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What changes did CI-118 make to the Montana Constitution regarding marijuana?

See also: Text of measure

Montana CI-118 amended Section 14, Article 2 of the Montana Constitution to allow the legislature or a citizen initiative to establish the legal age of purchasing, consuming, or possessing marijuana, as the legislature did with alcohol. At the time of the election, purchasing, consuming, or possessing marijuana was against state law. The legalization of marijuana for medicinal use was approved by voters in 2004.

Has Montana voted on legalization measures before?

See also: Background on Montana I-190

Medical marijuana was approved by Montana voters in 2004 with the approval of I-148, a citizen-initiative approved with 61.81% of the vote. In 2011, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 423, which repealed I-148 and established a new medical marijuana program that banned medical marijuana advertisements, limited dispensaries to three users, and required state review of doctors who prescribe marijuana to more than 25 patients per year. In 2012, advocates of medical marijuana attempted to repeal the bill, but were unsuccessful at the ballot box. In 2016, voters approved Montana Medical Marijuana Initiative, I-182, which repealed SB 243's requirements that medical marijuana providers have no more than three patients, allowed physicians to prescribe marijuana for patients diagnosed with chronic pain or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and repealed law enforcement's power to conduct unannounced inspections of medical marijuana facilities.

Who was behind the campaigns surrounding the ballot initiative?

See also: Support and Opposition

New Approach Montana led the campaign in support of CI-118 and I-190. The campaign reported receiving $7.4 million in cash and in-kind contributions. Its top two highest contributors were the North Fund ($4.9 million) and New Approach PAC ($1.9 million).

Ballotpedia identified one committee registered in opposition to the initiative—Wrong for Montana. The committee reported $323,170.00 in contributions.

Text of measure

Ballot language

The ballot language for this measure was as follows:

“

CONSTITUTIONAL INITIATIVE NO. 118 A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION Under the Montana Constitution, a person 18 years of age or older is an adult, except that the legislature or the people by initiative may establish the legal age of purchasing, consuming, or possessing alcoholic beverages. CI-118 amends the Montana Constitution to allow the legislature or the people by initiative to establish the legal age for purchasing, consuming, or possessing marijuana. []YES on Constitutional Initiative CI-118 [] NO on Constitutional Initiative CI-118

”

Constitutional changes

The measure amended Section 14, Article 2 of the Montana Constitution. The following underlined text was added:

A person 18 years of age or older is an adult for all purposes, except that the legislature or the people by initiative may establish the legal age for purchasing, consuming, or possessing alcoholic beverages and marijuana.

Full text

The full text of the initiative can be read here.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2020

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The initiative proponents, with review by state officials, wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 12, and the FRE is 25. The word count for the ballot title is 70, and the estimated reading time is 18 seconds.

Support

New Approach Montana led the campaign in support of CI-118. The group was originally called Coalition 406 but was renamed to New Approach Montana after partnering with the Marijuana Policy Project, a national nonprofit that lobbies for and supports efforts to decriminalize and legalize marijuana.

Supporters

Officials

• Montana Lieutenant Governor and Candidate for Governor Mike Cooney (D)
• State Senator Dave Lewis (R)

Former Officials

• Former Montana state senator Ken Toole

Organizations

• Marijuana Policy Project
• New Approach PAC
• Public Lands Coalition
• Sixteen Thirty Fund

Arguments

• Pepper Petersen, a spokesperson for New Approach Montana: "Our research has always shown that a majority of Montanans support legalization, and now voters will have the opportunity to enact that policy, which will create jobs and generate new revenue for our state. It also means that law enforcement will stop wasting time and resources arresting adults for personal marijuana possession, and instead focus on real crime."
• Dave Lewis (R), former Montana state senator: "COVID has done a number to the state’s projected tax revenue for 2020 and 2021, it’s been devastating. Adding nearly $50 million dollars a year to the state budget with legal adult use marijuana isn’t just a bonus. This projected revenue has already become vital to the future budget of this state, and veterans services like all other services need tax revenues to continue."
• Ken Toole, former Montana state senator (D) and founder of the Montana Human Rights Network: "From 2008 until now there have been more marijuana arrests in Montana than for any other illegal drug. In fact, there have been more marijuana arrests than arrests for all opiates and methamphetamine combined. ... It is time to take a realistic approach to the fact that people use marijuana, and by comparison it is much more benign that other drugs, including alcohol. Doing so will not only save money in the criminal justice system, it will also generate tax revenue to support needed public services."
• Public Lands Coalition: "Following in the footsteps of eleven other states, Montana voters have the opportunity to legalize recreational marijuana for people over the age of 21 by passing both CI-118 and I-190. The Montana effort to legalize marijuana differs from other states, though. Roughly 50 percent of the revenue generated from recreational marijuana sales would support state public lands by funding efforts like Habitat Montana. These funds are critical in order to maintain abundant wildlife populations and ensure our outdoor economy continues to thrive."

Official arguments

Hillary P. Carls, Dave Lewis, and Jon Motl submitted the following arguments to the Montana Voter Information Pamphlet in support of the measure:

“

Constitutional Initiative 118 (CI-118) will allow Montana to establish a 21 year age restriction for access to marijuana in the same manner as Montana establishes a 21 year age restriction for access to alcohol. CI-118 is necessary because Montana voters will also vote on Initiative 190 (I-190). I-190 creates a system to legalize, control, regulate, and tax marijuana and restricts the purchasing, consuming or possessing of marijuana to people age 21 or older. CI-118, if enacted, will provide constitutional authority for Montana to establish an age limit of 21 thereby ensuring that the age restriction set forth in I-190 is upheld and enforced. Montana law sets the age of 21 as the legal age for purchasing, consuming or possessing alcohol. The Montana Constitution states that a person 18 years or older is an adult for all purposes, except that there may be a different legal age established for consuming alcohol. CI-118 will add only two words 'and marijuana' to the existing text of Article II, Section 14 so that age restrictions may be placed on marijuana as they are for alcohol. If CI118 is enacted, Article II, Section 14 would read: A person 18 years of age or older is an adult for all purposes, except that the legislature or the people by initiative may establish the legal age for purchasing, consuming, or possessing alcoholic beverages and marijuana. CI-118, if approved, would allow the purchase, consumption and possession of marijuana to be restricted to persons 21 years of age or older, the same age restriction that is currently applied in Montana to alcohol. Simply put, an 18-year-old in Montana is afforded full adult rights by our constitution, except for alcohol consumption where he or she must wait until age 21. This same exception would apply to marijuana consumption if CI-118 is approved by Montana voters. CI-118 is a common-sense public policy reform that should be approved by Montana voters.

”

Opposition

Wrong for Montana led the campaign in opposition to Montana I-190 and CI-118.

Opponents

Officials

• U.S. Representative and Candidate for Governor Greg Gianforte (R)

Organizations

• Montana Contractors Association
• Montana State Chamber of Commerce

Arguments

• Steve Zabawa, treasurer of the Wrong for Montana campaign: "All you have to do is go to Colorado for a test site. They’ve been up and running now for eight years, and if you look at the traffic accidents, you look at the emergency room, you look at the vagrants, you look at the activity in the black market as well as the regular market down there, it has just exploded."
• Richard Miltenberger, chairman of the Montana State Chamber of Commerce: "Montana's most challenging problem for business growth is the ability to attract and retain great workers. This is a workforce development issue in our minds. If you look at what's happened in Colorado and other states, it is more difficult to recruit workers who can come in and get the job done, show up on time, and get a CDL license if they need that and then be productive members of the workforce when you have recreational marijuana at play."
• Catholic Bishop Austin A. Vetter of Helena and Bishop Michael W. Warfel of Great Falls-Billings: "While proponents of legalization see enhanced revenues for the state through a new taxable marijuana industry, we are more concerned with consequences ranging from increased teenage use, harmful effects on developing brains, addiction, increased impairment-related transportation accidents and deaths, and other potential public health and safety issues."

Official arguments

Tammy Lacey, Eric Gilbertson, Montana State Senator David Howard (R), Ben Forsyth, and Steve Zabawa submitted the following arguments to the Montana Voter Information Pamphlet in opposition to the measure:

“

Marijuana is a dangerous drug. Marijuana and heroin are 'Schedule1' drugs, while cocaine and crystal meth are 'Schedule2' drugs. 'Schedule1' drugs are defined as drugs with no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse (https://www.dea.gov/drug-scheduling). Legalization of marijuana in Montana is illegal under federal law, Title 21, Section 811 of the United States Code (U.S.C.). If this dangerous 'Schedule1' drug is legalized it will have numerous damaging effects on Montana’s citizens, economy, public safety, and overall welfare, with the most devastating being the impact on Montana’s children. Legalizing marijuana will send a message to Montana's youth that drug use is acceptable; that it’s fine to break federal law. Acceptable use will lead to increased use. Montana cannot afford these consequences. THE YOUTHFUL BRAIN AND BODY Research proves that during the youthful years (ages 14-25), the human brain is vulnerable because it’s under construction. During neurodevelopment, the youthful brain is very sensitive to damage from drugs. Researchers stress that the impact on the adolescent or young adult brain isn’t benign. In fact, studies have shown that marijuana changes their brains and negatively affects their health and well-being, including school performance, educational attainment, friendships, and future employment and income. Marijuana also causes respiratory issues, increased chance of mouth, throat and lung cancer, and the development of Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome (characterized by cycles of severe nausea, vomiting, and dehydration that may require emergency medical attention). YOUTHS IN SCHOOL Narratives from teachers indicate more youth who appear 'high' in Montana’s schools since the legalization of medical marijuana. Unlike alcohol, the 'high' student doesn’t present as disruptive, but instead as unmotivated and unengaged. Also unlike alcohol, there’s no immediate test like a breathalyzer to determine use. Teachers and other students can only suspect. Schools are then criticized as 'knowing that students are using and not doing anything about it.' Legalizing marijuana will worsen this scenario. YOUTH ACCESS 51% of Montana’s 2019 twelfth graders reported using marijuana on the Youth Risk Behavior Survey. 51% had illegal access to marijuana. The legalization of marijuana will increase access. Marijuana dispensaries in our communities will make marijuana more available to youth. Law enforcement entities already struggle to limit youth access to alcohol dispensaries (bars, stores, restaurants, homes, etc.). As marijuana has a more negative impact on a teenager’s cognitive development than alcohol, Montanans should expect law enforcement efforts in limiting non-adults to marijuana to be robust. This will cost resources. YOUTH AS FUTURE CUSTOMERS Adolescents and young adults represent future customers to the marijuana industry. As we’ve seen with tobacco, advertising and marketing of kid-like products will likely be a strategy to entice young adults to use their products. PROTECT OUR YOUTH Montanans value and cherish our children. Youth already face a world full of challenges and obstacles far beyond those of older generations. Adding additional vulnerabilities propagated by recreational marijuana exacerbates those challenges. Our personal and collective resources are too limited and valuable to pad the pockets of this new and detrimental marijuana enterprise.

”

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Montana ballot measures

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through June 30, 2021.

Ballotpedia has identified one committee—New Approach Montana—registered in support of CI-118 and I-190. It had received nearly $7.5 million in cash and in-kind contributions. Ballotpedia identified one committee—Wrong for Montana—in opposition to CI-118 and I-190. The committee reported $323,170.00 in contributions.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$6,976,676.22	$499,824.85	$7,476,501.07	$6,867,836.93	$7,367,661.78
Oppose	$323,170.00	$0.00	$323,170.00	$314,234.58	$314,234.58
Total	$7,299,846.22	$499,824.85	$7,799,671.07	$7,182,071.51	$7,681,896.36

Support

The following chart contains contributions and expenditures made to the committee supporting CI-118.

Committees in support of CI-118
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
New Approach Montana	$6,976,676.22	$499,824.85	$7,476,501.07	$6,867,836.93	$7,367,661.78
Total	$6,976,676.22	$499,824.85	$7,476,501.07	$6,867,836.93	$7,367,661.78

Top donors

The following chart lists the top donors in support of CI-118:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
North Fund	$4,824,675.00	$130,000.00	$4,954,675.00
New Approach PAC	$1,904,325.26	$49,017.04	$1,953,342.30
Marijuana Policy Project	$33,000.00	$68,970.20	$101,970.20
Fund for a Better Future	$100,000.00	$0.00	$100,000.00
Service Employees International Union	$100,000.00	$0.00	$100,000.00
Sixteen Thirty Fund	$0.00	$22,176.00	$22,176.00

Opposition

The following chart contains contributions and expenditures made to the committee opposing CI-118.

Committees in support of CI-118
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Wrong for Montana	$323,170.00	$0.00	$323,170.00	$314,234.58	$314,234.58
Total	$323,170.00	$0.00	$323,170.00	$314,234.58	$314,234.58

Top donors

The following chart lists the top donors in opposition to CI-118:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Glacier Bancorp	$120,000.00	$0.00	$120,000.00
SAM ACTION	$86,250.00	$0.00	$86,250.00
Montana Family Foundation, MFF	$30,000.00	$0.00	$30,000.00
Montana Contractors Association, Inc., MCA	$25,000.00	$0.00	$25,000.00
Health Care Service Corporation	$10,000.00	$0.00	$10,000.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Polls

See also: Ballotpedia's approach to covering polls and 2020 ballot measure polls

Ballotpedia identified two polls that asked respondents how they would vote on marijuana legalization. Montana State University conducted a poll of 1,787 registered Montana voters from September 14 to October 2, 2020. The poll found that 10% of voters were undecided on the issue. The University of Montana conducted a poll of 498 randomly selected voters from February 12-22, 2020. This poll did not report the percentage of voters that were undecided. The results are below.

Montana I-190, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2020)
Poll	Yes- approve	No- reject	Margin of error	Sample size
Montana State University Poll 9/14/2020-10/2/2020	49%	39%	+/-3.90	1,787
University of Montana Big Sky Poll 2/12/2020-2/22/2020	54%	37%	+/-4.39	498
AVERAGES	51.5%	38%	+/-4.15	1,142.5
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Background

Marijuana-related ballot measures
• 2020 marijuana ballot measures
• Marijuana on the ballot
• Local marijuana on the ballot
• History of marijuana ballot measures and laws
• Marijuana laws in the U.S.

Montana marijuana-related ballot measures

Initiative 148, Medical Marijuana Allowance

Medical marijuana was approved by Montana voters in 2004 with the approval of Initiative 148, a citizen-initiative approved with 61.81% of the vote. In 2011, the Montana State Legislature attempted to repeal the initiative with the passage of House Bill 161, but Governor Brian Schweitzer (D) vetoed the legislation.

Weeks later, the Montana Legislature approved Senate Bill 423 (SB 423), which amended I-148. In a 78-to-17 vote, the legislation was passed in the Montana House of Representatives on April 28, 2011. On the same day, the Montana Senate approved the bill in a 35-to-15 vote. SB 423 became law without the governor's signature on May 13, 2011. The law was designed to ban marijuana advertisements, prohibit marijuana dispensaries from having more than three registered patients, ban providers from charging patients except to recover fees, and review doctors who prescribe marijuana to more than 25 patients per year.

In March 2011, one month before the passage of SB 423, there were 29,948 medical marijuana patients and 4,848 providers in the state. By June 2011, the number of patients fell to less than 9,000 and the number of providers decreased to less than 400. In July 2020, there were 240 licensed medical marijuana providers.

Initiative Referendum 124, Medical Marijuana Veto Referendum

Opponents of SB 423 put the bill on the ballot through a veto referendum campaign in 2012. On the ballot as Initiative Referendum 124, 57 percent of voters chose to uphold the legislature's SB 423.

Initiative 182, Medical Marijuana Initiative

In 2016, Montana voters approved Initiative 182 with 57.87% of the vote. The initiative repealed SB 243's requirements that medical marijuana providers have no more than three patients, allowed physicians to prescribe marijuana for patients diagnosed with chronic pain or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and repealed law enforcement's power to conduct unannounced inspections of medical marijuana facilities.

Legalization in the U.S.

See also: History of marijuana ballot measures and laws and History of marijuana ballot measures and laws

California Proposition 19, which would have legalized marijuana, appeared on the ballot in 2010. It was defeated, with 53.5 percent of voters casting "no" votes. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder commented on Proposition 19, saying President Barack Obama's (D) administration would "vigorously enforce the (Controlled Substances Act) against those individuals and organizations that possess, manufacture or distribute marijuana for recreational use, even if such activities are permitted under state law."

In 2012, legalized recreational marijuana advocates saw their first statewide victories in Colorado and Washington. Two years later, voters in Oregon, Alaska, and Washington, D.C. approved marijuana legalization. Regarding how the federal government would respond, President Obama stated, "We've got bigger fish to fry. It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it's legal."

In 2015, voters in Ohio defeated Issue 3, which was designed to legalize the sale and use of marijuana and authorize 10 facilities with exclusive commercial rights to grow marijuana.

Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada all had marijuana legalization initiatives on their 2016 general election ballots. The initiatives passed in all of the states but Arizona, where voters rejected the measure 51.3 to 48.7 percent.

Michigan became the first state in the Midwest to legalize marijuana after voters approved Proposal 1 in 2018. North Dakota Measure 3, which was also on the ballot in 2018, would have legalized marijuana but was defeated.

As of 2019, two states—Illinois and Vermont—had legalized the recreational use of marijuana through the legislative process and governor's signature.

The following map depicts the legal status of recreational marijuana in different states:

State political context of legalization ballot measures

The following table provides information on the political context of the states that had voted on legalization measures as of 2022.

Click "Show" to expand the table.

Political factors and marijuana ballot measures, 2012-2022
State	Measure	Year	Status	Presidential, 2008-2020	State partisan control at time of vote
Colorado	Amendment 64	2012	a	Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Divided
Washington	Initiative 502	2012	a	Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Democratic
Alaska	Measure 2	2014	a	Republican (McCain-Romney-Trump-Trump)	Republican
Oregon	Measure 91	2014	a	Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Democratic
Ohio	Issue 3	2015	d	Pivot (Obama-Obama-Trump-Trump)	Republican
Arizona	Proposition 205	2016	d	Pivot (McCain-Romney-Trump-Biden)	Republican
California	Proposition 64	2016	a	Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Democratic
Maine	Question 1	2016	a	Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Divided
Massachusetts	Question 4	2016	a	Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Divided
Nevada	Question 2	2016	a	Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Republican
Michigan	Proposal 1	2018	a	Pivot (Obama-Obama-Trump-Biden)	Republican
North Dakota	Measure 3	2018	d	Republican (McCain-Romney-Trump-Trump)	Republican
Arizona	Proposition 207	2020	a	Pivot (McCain-Romney-Trump-Biden)	Republican
Montana	Initiative 190	2020	a	Republican (McCain-Romney-Trump-Trump)	Divided
New Jersey	Amendment	2020	a	Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Democratic
South Dakota	Amendment A	2020	a/ot	Republican (McCain-Romney-Trump-Trump)	Republican
Maryland	Marijuana Legalization Amendment	2022	On the ballot	Democrat (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden)	Divided

Comparison of legalization ballot measures

The following table compares a selection of provisions, including possession limits, local control, taxes, and revenue dedications, of ballot initiatives that were designed to legalize marijuana.

Click "Show" to expand the table.

Comparison of marijuana ballot measure provisions, 2012-2022
Measure	Possession limits	Homegrown plants	Local control	State taxes	Revenue
Ballot measures that were on the ballot in 2022
Marijuana Legalization Amendment (2022)	• Not specified	• Not specified	• Not specified	• Not specified	• Not specified
Ballot measures that were approved
Arizona Proposition 207 (2020)	• 1 ounce of marijuana • 5 grams (0.18 ounces) of marijuana concentrate	• Grow up to 6 marijuana plants	• Municipalities allowed to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	• 16% excise sales tax	• community college districts • police and fire departments and fire districts • highways • new criminal justice fund (restorative programs, mentoring, and behavioral health)
Montana I-190 (2020)	• 1 ounce of marijuana	• Individuals could grow up to four marijuana plants and four seedling in a private residence in a locked space	• A local government is not allowed to completely ban marijuana cultivators, testing facilities, wholesalers, or retail stores from operating in its limits; cannot prohibit the transportation of marijuana on public roads in its jurisdiction by those who are licensed to do so; allowed to pass ordinances to regulate an adult-use provider or adult-use marijuana-infused products that operate in its jurisdiction	• 20% sales tax	• After the tax revenue is used by the Department of Revenue to cover costs associated with implementing the initiative, 10.5% of the remaining revenue would be appropriated to the state's general fund, and the remainder would be appropriated to conservation programs, substance abuse treatment, veterans’ services, healthcare costs, and localities where marijuana is sold
New Jersey Amendment (2020)	• Not specified	• Not specified	• Not specified	• Subject to state sales tax • Prohibits additional state sales taxes on marijuana	• Not specified
Michigan Proposal 1 (2018)	• 2.5 ounces of marijuana • 0.5 ounces of marijuana concentrate	•Grow up to 12 marijuana plants	•Municipalities allowed to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	•10% excise sales tax	•local governments •K-12 education •road and bridge maintenance
California Proposition 64 (2016)	• 1 ounce of marijuana • 0.3 ounces of marijuana concentrate	•Grow up to 6 marijuana plants	•Municipalities allowed to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	•15% excise sales tax •$9.25/ounce cultivation tax for flowers •$2.75/ounce cultivation tax for leaves	•youth drug education, prevention, and treatment •prevent and fix environmental damage from illegal marijuana producers •marijuana DUI prevention and negative health effects programs
Nevada Question 2 (2016)	• 1 ounce of marijuana • 0.125 ounces of marijuana concentrate	•Grow up to 6 marijuana plants	•Permits local ballot measures pertaining to zoning and land use for marijuana establishments	•15% excise sales	•K-12 education
Maine Question 1 (2016)	• 2.5 ounces of marijuana and/or marijuana concentrate	• Grow up to 6 marijuana plants	• Municipalities allowed to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	• 10% excise sales tax •The legislature added a $20.94/ounce cultivation tax on flowers and mature plants; $5.88/ounce cultivation tax on marijuana trim; $1.50 tax per immature plant; $0.30 tax per immature plant	•General Fund (legislature added public health programs and law enforcement programs)
Massachusetts Question 4 (2016)	• 10 ounces of marijuana in one's home • 1 ounce of marijuana in public • 0.2 ounces of marijuana concentrate	• Grow up to 6 marijuana plants	• Municipalities allowed to limit number of establishments and restrict the time, place, and manner of their operation • Permits local ballot measures to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	• 3.75% excise sales tax (legislature increased to 10.75%)	• General Fund
Alaska Measure 2 (2014)	• 1 ounce of marijuana	• Grow up to 6 marijuana plants	• Municipalities allowed to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	• $50/ounce cultivation tax	• General Fund
Oregon Measure 91 (2014)	• 8 ounces of marijuana in one's home • 1 ounce of marijuana in public • 1 ounce of marijuana concentrate	• Grow up to 4 marijuana plants	• Permits local ballot measures to ban or limit marijuana establishments	• 17% excise sales tax (legislature added the excise sales tax) • $35/ounce producer tax for flowers • $10/ounce producer tax for leaves	• K-12 education • drug prevention and treatment • state police • local law enforcement
Colorado Amendment 64 (2012)	• 1 ounce of marijuana • 1 ounce of marijuana concentrate	• Grow up to 6 marijuana plants	• Municipalities allowed to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	•Required the state legislature to enact taxes •In 2013, the legislature's Proposition AA enacted a 15% excise tax on unprocessed retail marijuana and 10% (increased to 15% in 2017) sales tax on retail sales	• K-12 public education • Proposition AA added allocations for local governments, healthcare, substance abuse prevention and treatment, and law enforcement
Washington Initiative 502 (2012)	• 1 ounce of marijuana • 0.25 ounce of marijuana concentrate	• Illegal	• Municipalities allowed to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	•25% excise sales tax (legislature increased the tax to 37%)	• research • drug prevention, public health education • healthcare • dropout prevention, intervention • General Fund
Ballot measures that were defeated or overturned
South Dakota Constitutional Amendment A (2020)	• 1 ounce of marijuana	• Individuals who live in a jurisdiction with no licensed retail stores could grow up to three marijuana plants in a private residence in a locked space, though not more than six marijuana plants could be kept in one residence at a time	•A local government allowed to ban marijuana cultivators, testing facilities, wholesalers, or retail stores from operating in its limits; cannot prohibit the transportation of marijuana on public roads in its jurisdiction by those who are licensed to do so	• 15% sales tax	• After the tax revenue is used by the Revenue Department to cover costs associated with implementing the amendment, 50% of the remaining revenue would be appropriated to fund state public schools and 50% would be deposited in the state's general fund
North Dakota Measure 3 (2018)	• Not specified	• Not specified	• Not specified	• Not specified	• Not specified
Arizona Proposition 205 (2016)	• 1 ounce of marijuana • 5 grams (0.18 ounces) of marijuana concentrate	• Grow up to 6 marijuana plants	• Municipalities allowed to ban or limit marijuana establishments within their boundaries	• 15% excise sales tax	• school districts and charter schools • state department of health • local governments
Ohio Issue 3 (2015)	• 1 ounce of marijuana and/or equivalent concentrate	• Grow up to 4 marijuana plants with a license	• Municipalities prohibited from banning the development or operation of marijuana establishments	• 15% tax on gross revenue of growth, cultivation, extraction, and manufacure facilities • 5% tax on gross revenue of retail marijuana stores	• research and development • local governments • mental health and addiction and treatment services

Marijuana laws ballot measuresin 2020

See also: 2020 marijuana legalization and marijuana-related ballot measures

State ballot measures

The following is a list of marijuana-related statewide ballot measures that were on the ballot in 2020:

Ballot Measure:	Outcome:
Mississippi Initiative 65 and Alternative 65A: Medical Marijuana Amendment	ot
New Jersey Public Question 1: Marijuana Legalization Amendment	a
Arizona Proposition 207: Marijuana Legalization Initiative	a
South Dakota Initiated Measure 26: Medical Marijuana Initiative	a
South Dakota Constitutional Amendment A: Marijuana Legalization Initiative	a/ot
Montana I-190: Marijuana Legalization Initiative	a

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Montana

In Montana, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated constitutional amendment for the ballot is equal to 10 percent of the votes cast for governor in the most recent gubernatorial election. Moreover, signature collection must be distributed such that petitions include signatures equal to 10 percent of the votes cast for governor in each of two-fifths (40) of the state's 100 legislative districts in the last gubernatorial election. Petitioners have a maximum of one year to collect signatures and get them verified by county elections officials.

The requirements to get an initiated constitutional amendment certified for the 2020 ballot:

• Signatures: 50,936 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline to submit signatures to county clerks was June 19, 2020. The deadline to submit signatures to the secretary of state was July 17, 2020.

County election officials check each signature to make sure the name corresponds to the name of a registered voter. Then they use a 5 percent random sampling method to check the authenticity of the signatures. Signature petitions are then sent to the secretary of state, which certifies the measure for the ballot if enough valid signatures were submitted.

Stages of this initiative

• A preliminary version of this initiative was filed on January 13, 2020.
• On May 1, 2020, the initiative was cleared for signature gathering.
• On May 7, 2020, the campaign announced that it would be carrying out a traditional signature gathering campaign with added precautions, such as having circulators wear masks and using single-use pens. Pepper Petersen, New Approach’s political director, said, "As our state reopens for business, we must also reopen for democracy. Our signature drive will allow Montana voters to exercise their constitutional right to a ballot initiative in a safe and responsible way."
• On May 7, 2020, the Montana Secretary of State issued a declaratory order enabling campaigns to circulate petitions online so that supporters may print, sign, and return it to a county elections office without notarization. Prior to the order, supporters had to take the signed petition to a notary for verification.
• On June 19, 2020, New Approach Montana reported submitting 80,000 unverified signatures to county clerks. Pepper Petersen, a spokesperson for New Approach Montana, said, “Our campaign implemented strict health protocols and worked around the clock so that Montana voters could sign our petitions safely and qualify these popular initiatives for the November ballot. We collected signatures from every corner of the state and all 100 state house districts.”
• On July 17, 2020, New Approach Montana reported that county clerks had accepted 52,315 signatures from the 80,000 raw signatures submitted on June 19. The county authorities submitted these to the Montana Secretary of State on July 17.
• On August 13, 2020, the Montana Secretary of State certified the initiative for the ballot.

Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired FieldWorks LLC, MontPIRG, and Tenacious Campaigns LLC to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $1,232,445.93 was spent to collect the 50,936 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $24.20.

Lawsuit

• On April 6, 2020, New Approach Montana filed a lawsuit arguing that the state was violating its right to petition the government by prohibiting electronic signature gathering. The plaintiffs also argued that under the Montana Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, which permits an electronic signature if state law requires a signature, petitioners are allowed to collect electronic signatures for initiatives through companies like DocuSign. Ted Dick, campaign manager for New Approach Montana, said, "[B]allot initiatives are a constitutional right for the people of Montana and we believe it is imperative that democratic processes are maintained even as we combat the spread of the coronavirus. Therefore we are taking legal action that proposes a pragmatic solution to a problem that we should not ignore."
  • On April 21, Montana Secretary of State Corey Stapleton (R) and Montana Attorney General Tim Fox (R) asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit by New Approach Montana. Stapleton and Fox argued that the lawsuit contains invalid requests for the court to legislate in violation of the separation-of-powers principle and that New Approach Montana put themselves in the position to fail to qualify their measure for the ballot by delaying signature-gathering efforts. The response also argued that the lawsuit filed by New Approach Montana made no claims about the constitutionality or fairness of the state's laws but only invalid claims about the unpredictable circumstances brought about by the coronavirus pandemic and the hardships caused by executive orders that are authorized by the state constitution.
  • On April 30, Missoula District Judge John Larson ruled against the petitioners arguing that the State's "compelling interest in maintaining the integrity and security of its election process outweighs any burden on [the] Plaintiffs' constitutional rights."

Reports and analyses

Note: The inclusion of a report, white page, or study concerning a ballot measure in this article does not indicate that Ballotpedia agrees with the conclusions of that study or that Ballotpedia necessarily considers the study to have a sound methodology, accurate conclusions, or a neutral basis. To read a full explanation of Ballotpedia's policy on the inclusion of reports and analyses, please click here. If you would like to submit a report or analysis to be considered for inclusion in this section, email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Estimated tax revenue of recreational marijuana sales

The report was published in September 2020 by the University of Montana Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BBER) at the request of New Approach Montana. The report concluded that a 20% tax on recreational marijuana sales would generate between $43.4 and $52.0 million annually in revenue from 2022 to 2026. The report estimated recreational marijuana sales to be between $217.2 and $259.8 million over that five year period. The report used public data on marijuana use, frequency of use, and daily usage of Montana residents and visitors to estimate these totals.

The full text of the report can be found here.

How to cast a vote

Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Montana.

How to cast a vote in Montana

The information below covers regular voting policies in the state. Information may have not applied to the election on November 3, 2020, because of temporary changes in response to coronavirus. Click here to read about changes made for the 2020 elections. Poll times In Montana, polling place must be open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., although in areas with fewer than 400 registered voters, polling places may open as late as 12:00 p.m. Registration requirements Check your voter registration status here. To register to vote in Montana, each applicant must be a citizen of the United States, a non-temporary resident of Montana for at least 30 days prior to the election, and at least 18 years old by the day of the election. People serving a felony sentence in a penal institution and those who have been declared by a court to be of unsound mind are not eligible to vote. An individual can register to vote in person by completing a registration application at their county election office. They can register by mailing the application to their county election administrator or submitting it when applying for or renewing a driver’s license or state ID. Applicants may also register to vote at their county election offices, certain designated locations, or at their designated polling location on Election Day. Automatic registration See also: Automatic voter registration Montana does not practice automatic voter registration. Online registration See also: Online voter registration Montana does not permit online voter registration. Same-day registration See also: Same-day voter registration Montana allows same-day voter registration. An eligible voter may register before noon on Election Day. Residency requirements In order to register to vote in Montana, applicants must have lived in the state for at least 30 days prior to the election. Montana law says an individual does not gain residency if they relocate for, "temporary work, training, or an educational program, without the intention of making that county or the state the individual's permanent home at the conclusion of the temporary work, training, or educational program." Verification of citizenship See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States Montana does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury. All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters. Verifying your registration The site My Voter Page, run by the Montana secretary of state’s office, allows residents to check their voter registration status online. Voter ID requirements Montana requires voters to present identification while voting. Montana's voter identification requirements are outlined in Section 13-13-114 of Montana Code. The law states, "Before an elector is permitted to receive a ballot or vote, the elector shall present to an election judge one of the following forms of identification showing the elector's name that is current, valid, and readable:" “ (i) a Montana driver's license, Montana state identification card issued pursuant to 61-12-501, military identification card, tribal photo identification card, United States passport, or Montana concealed carry permit, or student photo identification card issued by the Montana university system or a school that is a member of the national association of intercollegiate athletics; or (ii) (A) a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check, or other government document that shows the elector's name and current address; and (B) photo identification that shows the elector's name. ”

See also

2020 measures

• 2020 ballot measures
• Marijuana on the ballot

Montana

• Montana ballot measures
• Montana ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Montana Voter Information Pamphlet

Support

• New Approach Montana campaign website
• New Approach Montana Facebook page

Opposition

Submit links to editor@ballotpedia.org.