Arizona Proposition 207, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2020)
| Arizona Marijuana Legalization Initiative | |
|---|---|
| Election date November 3, 2020 | |
| Topic Marijuana | |
| Status Proposed | |
| Type State statute | Origin Citizens |
The Arizona Marijuana Legalization Initiative may appear on the ballot in Arizona as an initiated state statute on November 3, 2020.
The ballot initiative would legalize the possession and use of recreational marijuana for adults (age 21 years or older). The ballot initiative would allow people to grow no more than six marijuana plants for personal use in their residence, as long as the plants are within an enclosed area with a lock and beyond public view.[1]
The ballot initiative would make the Arizona Department of Health and Human Services responsible for adopting rules to regulate marijuana, including the licensing of marijuana retail stores, cultivation facilities, and production facilities. The ballot initiative would require the department to first accept license applications (between January 19, 2021, and March 9, 2021) from nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries and entities operating within counties with fewer than two nonprofit dispensaries.[1]
The ballot initiative would place a 16 percent tax on marijuana sales. The revenue from the tax would be used to implement and enforce marijuana regulations. The remaining revenue would be allocated as follows:[1]
- 33.0 percent for community college districts;
- 31.4 percent for municipal police and fire departments and fire districts;
- 25.4 percent for the state's highway user revenue fund;
- 10.0 percent for the justice reinvestment fund; and
- 0.2 percent for the Arizona Attorney General to enforce.
The ballot initiative would also provide local governments with the power to ban marijuana facilities and testing centers and give local control over elements of regulation, zoning, and licensing.
The ballot initiative would also allow anyone convicted of certain marijuana-related crimes to petition for the expungement of the criminal record starting on July 12, 2021.[1]
Text of measure
Full text
The full text of the ballot initiative is below:[1]
The URL or file path File: Arizona I-23-2020.pdf does not exist.
Sponsors
Smart and Safe Arizona led the campaign in support of the ballot initiative.[2] Former Arizona Rep. Chad Campbell (D-24) was chairperson of the campaign committee.[3]
Campaign finance
| Total campaign contributions: | |
| Support: | $2,769,254.68 |
| Opposition: | $0.00 |
The Smart and Safe Arizona PAC was registered in support of the ballot initiative. The PAC received $2.77 million in contributions, including $1.03 million from Harvest Enterprises, Inc. The PAC expended $2.67 million.[3]
Support
The contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of the ballot initiative were as follows:[3]
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Donors
The following were the top five donors who contributed to Smart and Safe Arizona:[4]
| Donor | Cash | In-kind | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Harvest Enterprises, Inc. | $850,000.00 | $180,000.00 | $1,030,000.00 |
| CuraLeaf | $600,000.00 | $0.00 | $600,000.00 |
| Cresco Labs, LLC | $300,000.00 | $0.00 | $300,000.00 |
| MM Enterprises USA, LLC | $200,000.00 | $0.00 | $200,000.00 |
| Arizona Dispensaries Association, Inc. | $0.00 | $60,000.00 | $60,000.00 |
Background
Arizona Proposition 205 (2016)
In 2016, a citizen-initiated measure, titled Proposition 205, appeared on the ballot. Proposition 205 would have legalized marijuana under state law. Voters rejected the ballot initiative, with 51.3 percent opposed. Arizona was one of five states to vote on a citizen-initiated legalization measure in 2016. Voters in neighboring California and Nevada, along with Maine and Massachusetts, approved their respective ballot measures.
The campaigns surrounding Proposition 205 received a similar amount of contributions. The largest donor behind the support campaign was the Marijuana Policy Project, contributing 22.5 percent of the campaign's total funds. The largest donor behind the opposition campaign was Discount Tire, which provided 15.7 percent of the campaign's total. Kevin Sabet, the co-founder of SAM Action, said the measure's defeat provided opponents of marijuana legalization with a model. He stated, "The overarching lesson was that if we could raise enough money early, we can win. Arizona was the only state where we were toe to toe with the 'yes' side, and it's the only state we started early in."[5]
Legalization in the U.S.
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.[6] 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."[7]
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."[8]
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.[9]
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.[10]
Michigan became the first state in the Midwest to legalize marijuana after voters approved Proposal 1 in 2018.[11] North Dakota Measure 3, which was also on the ballot in 2018, would have legalized marijuana but was defeated.[12]
As of 2019, two states—Illinois and Vermont—had legalized the recreational use of marijuana through the legislative process and governor's signature.[13][14]
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 | Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden) | Divided | ||||
| Washington | Initiative 502 | 2012 | Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden) | Democratic | ||||
| Alaska | Measure 2 | 2014 | Republican (McCain-Romney-Trump-Trump) | Republican | ||||
| Oregon | Measure 91 | 2014 | Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden) | Democratic | ||||
| Ohio | Issue 3 | 2015 | Pivot (Obama-Obama-Trump-Trump) | Republican | ||||
| Arizona | Proposition 205 | 2016 | Pivot (McCain-Romney-Trump-Biden) | Republican | ||||
| California | Proposition 64 | 2016 | Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden) | Democratic | ||||
| Maine | Question 1 | 2016 | Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden) | Divided | ||||
| Massachusetts | Question 4 | 2016 | Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden) | Divided | ||||
| Nevada | Question 2 | 2016 | Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden) | Republican | ||||
| Michigan | Proposal 1 | 2018 | Pivot (Obama-Obama-Trump-Biden) | Republican | ||||
| North Dakota | Measure 3 | 2018 | Republican (McCain-Romney-Trump-Trump) | Republican | ||||
| Arizona | Proposition 207 | 2020 | Pivot (McCain-Romney-Trump-Biden) | Republican | ||||
| Montana | Initiative 190 | 2020 | Republican (McCain-Romney-Trump-Trump) | Divided | ||||
| New Jersey | Amendment | 2020 | Democratic (Obama-Obama-Clinton-Biden) | Democratic | ||||
| South Dakota | Amendment A | 2020 | Republican (McCain-Romney-Trump-Trump) | Republican | ||||
| Maryland | Marijuana Legalization Amendment | 2022 | 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 |
Path to the ballot
In Arizona, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated state statute is equal to 10 percent of the votes cast for the office of governor in the most recent gubernatorial election. Petitions can be circulated for up to 24 months. Signature petitions must be submitted four months prior to the election at which the measure is to appear.
The requirements to get initiated state statutes certified for the 2020 ballot:
- Signatures: 237,645 valid signatures were required.
- Deadline: The deadline to submit signatures was July 2, 2020.
If the secretary of state certifies that enough valid signatures were submitted, the initiative is put on the next general election ballot. The secretary of state verifies the signatures through a random sampling of 5 percent of submitted signatures working in collaboration with county recorders. If the random sampling indicates that valid signatures equal to between 95 percent and 105 percent of the required number were submitted, a full check of all signatures is required. If the random sampling shows fewer signatures, the petition fails. If the random sampling shows more, the initiative is certified for the ballot.
Stages of this initiative
On September 3, 2019, committee Smart and Safe Arizona filed the ballot initiative.[1][15] On March 26, 2020, Stacy Pearson, campaign manager of Smart and Safe Arizona, said the ballot initiative had received more than 320,000 signatures.[16]
Petitioning of Arizona Supreme Court
| Coronavirus pandemic |
|---|
| Select a topic from the dropdown below to learn more.
|
On April 2, 2020, four ballot initiative campaigns filed a petition asking the Arizona Supreme Court to allow the campaigns to gather signatures through E-Qual, which is the state's online signature collection platform, during the coronavirus pandemic. E-Qual is available for federal, statewide, and legislative candidates but not ballot initiatives.[17]
The legal petition stated, "The Novel Coronavirus 2019 (“COVID-19”) pandemic changed, quite literally, everything. ... Although this new reality is essential for public health, it is catastrophic to the Initiative Proponents’ exercise of their fundamental constitutional right. ... In short, signature gathering will halt, and the Initiative Proponents’ hard work and investment is in jeopardy. ... This Petition presents an important legal question of first impression: whether the fundamental constitutional rights of the Initiative Proponents are violated by their exclusion from an online petition signature gathering system maintained by the Secretary in the middle of a public health emergency that severely limits (or outright bars) their ability to otherwise collect initiative petition signatures."[17]
The four ballot initiative campaigns that filed the petition are:[17]
- Arizonans for Second Chances, Rehabilitation, and Public Safety, which is behind the Criminal Justice Procedures for Offenses Defined as Non-Dangerous Initiative;
- Smart and Safe Arizona, which is behind the Marijuana Legalization Initiative;
- Invest in Education, which is behind the Tax on Incomes Exceeding $250,000 for Teacher Salaries and Schools Initiative; and
- Save Our Schools Arizona, which is behind the Limits on Private Education Vouchers Initiative.
Secretary of State Katie Hobbs (D), who was named as the defendant, said she would not oppose the challenge from the campaigns. She stated, "I think that in light of the circumstances that we’re in right now, it’s a reasonable request. We are certainly not opposing it and would hope for a quick resolution... I plan to let the court know that my office can implement the necessary changes, should that be the court’s order... Every voter in the state is eligible to sign an initiative petition. That makes it no different than candidates for statewide office using the system to get the necessary signatures to put their own names on the ballot."[18] Attorney General Mark Brnovich (R) disagreed with the campaigns, stating, "A health crisis is not an excuse to ignore the constitution."[19]
On May 13, 2020, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled against the campaigns in a 6-1 decision.[20]
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Arizona Secretary of State, "I-23-2020," September 3, 2019
- ↑ Smart and Safe Arizona, "Homepage," accessed February 20, 2020
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Arizona Secretary of State, "Campaign Finance," accessed February 19, 2020
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedfinance - ↑ Washington Post, "What the future of marijuana legalization could look like under President Trump," November 9, 2016
- ↑ LA Weekly, "What Killed Prop. 19?" November 4, 2010
- ↑ Washington Post, "How Democrats derailed marijuana legalization in California," November 10, 2014
- ↑ Washington Post, "Obama: I’ve got ‘bigger fish to fry’ than pot smokers," December 14, 2014
- ↑ CNN, "Ohio voters reject legal marijuana," November 4, 2015
- ↑ Time, "These States Just Legalized Marijuana," November 8, 2016
- ↑ Forbes, "Michigan Voters Approve Marijuana Legalization," November 6, 2018
- ↑ Grand Forks Herald, "ND voters snuff out recreational marijuana measure," November 7, 2018
- ↑ Burlington Free Press, "Vermont's legal marijuana law: What you should know," January 23, 2018
- ↑ NPR, "Illinois Governor Signs Law Legalizing Recreational Use Of Marijuana," June 26, 2019
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedKJZZ - ↑ Marijuana Moment, "Arizona Marijuana Activists Have More Than Enough Signatures To Put Legalization On Ballot, They Say," March 26, 2020
- ↑ 17.0 17.1 17.2 Arizona Supreme Court, "Arizonans for Second Chances, Rehabilitation, and Public Safety et al. v. Hobbs," April 2, 2020
- ↑ Arizona Capitol Times, "Hobbs won’t contest legal challenge to put initiative signature gathering online," April 6, 2020
- ↑ AZCentral, "Arizona Supreme Court rejects bid by groups to gather initiative petition signatures online," May 13, 2020
- ↑ Arizona Supreme Court, "Order," May 13, 2020
State of Arizona Phoenix (capital) | |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2026 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |