The Tuesday Count: Marijuana a prevalent issue on state and local ballots

July 29, 2014

Click here for the latest Tuesday Count

Edited by Brittany Clingen

Tuesday Count Lineup:

4 certifications
125 measures for 2014

---

Topics featured in this report:

---

Certifications (News)
Hunting (Quick hits)
Marijuana (Spotlight)

Marijuana is once again shaping up to be a hot-button issue on ballots across the nation. While an initiative seeking to legalize recreational marijuana was just certified for a spot on the November ballot in Oregon, many Californians and Floridians will be weighing in on the issue of medical marijuana. Florida's Amendment 2 looks to be a shoe-in for November, with two recent polls showing 88 percent approval for the measure. In California, however, the issue will be featured on many local ballots, rather than in the statewide arena, making for more complex and possibly closer races. In fact, many cities, including Santa Ana and Costa Mesa, will likely see competing ballot measures seeking varying degrees of restriction on medical marijuana. Though marijuana is one of the more prevalent issues on 2014 ballots, voters will decide on a range of other contentious issues, including mandatory labeling of food containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and hunting wolves in Michigan's Upper Peninsula.

Oregon

With just over a month to go before the last filing deadline of the year, final certifications are rolling in and solidifying statewide ballots for 2014. Oregon saw two contentious initiated state statutes certified within the past week, one addressing the mandatory labeling of foodstuffs containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the other legalizing marijuana. November 2014 will mark the third time in as many election cycles that GMO labeling has been put before voters. Both California's Proposition 37 and Washington's Initiative 522 were defeated in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Oregonians similarly defeated Measure 27, another GMO labeling initiative, in 2002. Despite these past setbacks, supporters of this year's measure are optimistic. "In only six weeks, we were able to collect more than 31,500 signatures more than the number needed to qualify. That is a powerful indication that Oregonians understand that protecting the profits of chemical conglomerates and agribusiness giants should not take precedence over the public's right to know what is in the food they eat and feed their families," said Sandeep Kaushik, campaign spokesman for the supporting group, Oregon Right to Know. The Oregon Secretary of State confirmed supporters submitted a total of 118,780 valid signatures, significantly more than the 87,213 required.

Voters in Oregon will also decide whether to legalize recreational marijuana for people ages 21 and older. If the marijuana initiative is approved, it will further allow adults over this age to possess up to eight ounces of "dried" marijuana and up to four plants. Additionally, the measure would task the Oregon Liquor Control Commission with regulating sales of the drug. Supporters are hoping to ride the wave of successful marijuana legalization measures from 2012. Two years ago, voters in Washington approved Initiative 502, thereby legalizing the recreational use of marijuana. Coloradans followed suit when they approved Amendment 64 during the same election. However, voters in Oregon rejected Measure 80, a similar, though slightly less stringent, marijuana legalization measure. Measure 80 would have allowed adults over the age of 21 to possess an unlimited supply of marijuana and given an industry-dominated board permission to regulate sales.

Washington

Though 23 Initiatives to the People were filed in Washington state in 2014, only one submitted signatures by the July 3, 2014 deadline for consideration on the November ballot. That measure, Initiative 1351, was certified by the secretary of state, securing its place on the ballot. If approved by voters, the measure would require fewer students per classroom in every grade. According to the official ballot summary,

“

This measure would direct the legislature to allocate funding for smaller K-12 class sizes, with extra class-size reductions for all grades in defined high-poverty schools and for grades K-3 in all schools; and for increased student support staffing, including counselors, teaching assistants, librarians, and others. Increased funding for these changes would be phased in over four years. Schools lacking enough classrooms to reduce class size could use funding for additional staff providing direct student services.

”

Colorado

Colorado is the third state to see measures certified for its 2014 statewide ballot. Though the state's filing deadline is not until August 6, two initiated constitutional amendments submitted signatures early. Amendment 68 joins Amendment 67, which addresses abortion, on the November ballot. If approved, Amendment 68 would establish a kindergarten through twelfth grade education fund, providing additional revenue to address local educational needs. The fund would be capitalized through additional revenues generated by the expansion of limited gaming at horse racetracks in Arapahoe, Mesa and Pueblo counties. The legalized gaming would, at the very least, include slot machines, card games, roulette and craps. The measure would amend Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution by adding a new section to it. Amendment 68 marks the twenty-second time the subject of gambling has been put to a vote of the people in Colorado and the twenty-eighth time for education. Thirty other initiatives have the potential to make the 2014 ballot, if supporters submit enough valid signatures by the prescribed deadline.

2014 Count
Number:	125 measures
States:	Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia and Wyoming

Quick hits

• Lawsuit against Citizens United v. FEC advisory question in California: The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (HJTA) filed a lawsuit against Proposition 49's placement on the ballot by Gov. Jerry Brown (D). According to HJTA, a legislatively referred advisory question is an illegitimate use of the ballot since the ballot is used for law making. Jon Coupal, president of the association, said, "Legislative power can be exercised in numerous ways but this is not one of those." Coupal cited American Federation of Labor v. Eu as the basis for the lawsuit, noting, "If the people can’t do it, certainly the Legislature can’t do it, either." American Federation of Labor v. Eu was a 1984 lawsuit before the California Supreme Court. The court ruled placing initiated advisory questions on the ballot unconstitutional, but remained silent on legislatively referred ones. Derek Cressman, director of Yes on 49, responded to the lawsuit, saying, "They are worried they can’t win this debate on substance so they are trying to prevent this debate from happening. It frankly looks like censorship."

• Pro-wolf hunting initiative goes before legislature in Michigan: The battle over wolf hunting in Michigan is complicated, to say the least. In 2012, Public Act 520 was signed into law, establishing wolf hunting seasons in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. Keep Michigan Wolves Protected, an opponent of wolf hunting, successfully collected signatures to place a veto referendum on the ballot, known as the Wolf Hunting Referendum. The Michigan Legislature, however, passed a new law, Public Act 21, rendering the referendum legally meaningless and merely symbolic. PA 21 shifted the responsibility of declaring game species and hunting seasons from the legislature to the Natural Resource Commission. Prior to PA 21, game animals needed to be declared in law, which subjected them to potential referenda. Infuriated by the legislature's move, wolf hunting opponents sought a second veto referendum to overturn PA 21. The Natural Resources Commission Referendum was certified for the ballot on May 6, 2014. Now, Citizens for Professional Wildlife Management, a pro-wolf hunting group, has sent their indirect initiated state statute to the legislature following a successful signature collection. Their Natural Resources Commission Initiative would render the veto referenda moot by empowering the Michigan Natural Resource Commission to be the sole designator of what animals are listed as game species and how wildlife is managed in the state. Legislators have 40 days to act. If they don't, the initiative will end up on the November 4, 2014 ballot. Keep Michigan Wolves Protected is encouraging the legislature to not vote on the issue, thus allowing voters to decide in the fall.

• Medical marijuana doing well in Florida polls: Floridians appear poised to pass Amendment 2, thereby legalizing medical marijuana, in November. According to a Quinnipiac University Poll, 88 percent of voters voiced support for medical marijuana. Only 10 percent said they were against marijuana for medicinal purposes. While approval ranges across demographics, all categories of people supported medical marijuana by at least 80 percent or more. Eighty percent of Republicans backed medical marijuana, as did 94 percent of Democrats. Young people, ages 18 to 29, supported medical marijuana by 95 percent. In Florida, all initiated constitutional amendments require at least a 60 percent supermajority vote for approval on election day. The poll, therefore, comes as good news to Amendment 2 proponents.

• Arkansas initiatives may be defeated by deadline mix-up: Whether the Arkansas Secretary of State incorrectly set the petition signature gathering deadline could decide the fate of two potential initiatives in Arkansas. Opponents of the statewide alcoholic beverage legalization initiative, Let Local Communities Decide For Themselves, are arguing that the first batch of signatures submitted to place the measure on the ballot should have been filed on July 4, which would have been four months prior to the November 4 election. The state's deadline was July 7. On July 22, Secretary of State Mark Martin (R) defended the signature filing deadline saying that July 7 was set as the deadline because it was the first business day after July 4, a federal holiday. In a statement, Martin's office described the practice of rolling the signature deadline forward to the next business day if the original date falls on a holiday as "standard practice since Amendment 7 went into effect in 1925." However, the office also stated they would be reviewing the law to determine if there is an issue. If the secretary of state ultimately agrees with the opposition's point and invalidates the initiative's signatures, the same rules would apply to the minimum wage initiative, which also submitted its first batch of signatures on July 7. Supporters of the alcoholic beverage amendment have pointed out that Arkansas Code Annotated 7-1-108 and Amendment 51 both state, “If an election law deadline occurs on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the deadline shall be the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday.” However, Let Local Communities Decide for Themselves's attorney, Elizabeth Robben Murray, has argued that Amendment 51, which regards voter registration, does not apply to initiatives or referendums.

Spotlight

Medical marijuana ballot measures prominent on local California ballots, many competing measures vie for approval in key cities:

Santa Ana Committee to support medical marijuana logo

Although California will not feature a statewide ballot measure concerning medical cannabis like Florida, voters in cities and counties throughout the Golden State will make decisions concerning drastic changes to the medical marijuana industry through the many local ballot measures that have already cropped up, both through initiative petitions and council referrals. Earlier this month, four measures were proposed in Orange County alone. A set of competing measures will likely be seen by voters in both Santa Ana and Costa Mesa during the fall election.

In a classic battle between city council and citizen activists, the November election in Santa Ana will feature the Santa Ana Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative, as well as a competing council-approved measure seeking more restrictive regulation of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives. In 2007, the city banned medical marijuana dispensaries from operating in the city. The prohibition, however, has been largely unenforced, and, according to reports, at least 80 collectives are operational within the city. A group of medical marijuana activists submitted signatures for an initiative that would rescind the ban and provide regulation for the medical marijuana industry. City officials, seeing the proposed initiative as too lax and a danger to the city, proposed their own regulatory ordinance. The two measures will compete for votes on November 4, 2014. If both are approved, the one with the most "yes" votes will be enacted, and the other will be rejected. Below is a list of key provisions about dispensaries in each measure, highlighting the differences between the two:

Competing Santa Ana Marijuana Measures
Citizen-initiated measure		Council-referred measure
Allows use by anyone over 18	Allows use by anyone over 21
Allows 1 dispensary for every 15,000 residents, with min. of 22	No minimum number of dispensaries required
No cap on the number of collectives allowed	Requires at least 500 feet between collectives
Restricts to 600 feet from K-12 schools	Restricts to 1,000 feet from schools, parks and residential
Not prohibited from growing marijuana onsite	Prohibited from growing marijuana onsite
2 percent additional sales tax for marijuana	5 percent, growing to 10 percent, additional sales tax for marijuana
No restrictions on operating hours	10:00 AM to 8:00 PM operating hours
Restricts to commercial and industrial zones - C1, C4, C5, M1 and P & C-SM	Restricted to certain industrial zones - M-1 and M-2
Prohibits from owning an alcohol and beverage control license	Prohibits the sale of food, alcohol or tobacco onsite
Requires simple registration	Requires an annually renewed permit
Prohibits use of federal marijuana enforcement funds	Does not prohibit federal funds
Does not require a background check	Requires background check for operators and employees
Does not require a background check	Denies approval to owners or employees if convicted of drug charge
Requires certain lighting and an alarm system	Requires at least one security guard

Competing measures will likely also be seen by voters in Costa Mesa, where two citizen initiative groups will be battling it out in November. Here, the city council will be an interested bystander, rather than a contender. In 2012, federal law enforcers shut down the city's medical marijuana dispensaries. Hoping the city can avoid such federal task forces through proper regulation and taxation of medicinal cannabis, two separate groups are seeking to put initiatives before voters in the fall.

The "Act to Restrict and Regulate the Operation of Medical Marijuana Businesses" would require background checks for medical marijuana workers and limit the number of dispensaries in the city to eight. A more recently announced initiative called "An Initiative to Provide Revenue to the City of Costa Mesa Citizens" seeks to allow only four collectives. Both would establish an additional 6 percent sales tax for medical cannabis and institute certain restrictions, such as minimum distance buffers between dispensaries and schools. If advocates of both measures are able to collect the required 4,896 valid signatures to qualify them for the ballot, both would require a simple majority for approval. If both receive affirmation from more than 50 percent of voters, the one with the most "yes" votes will be enacted, and the other will be rejected.

See also

2014 ballot measures

Tuesday Count • 2014 Scorecard

• Ballotpedia's Tuesday Count for 2014
• 2014 ballot measures
• Local ballot measure elections in 2014
• Potential 2014 ballot measures