Pubdate: Thu, 10 Sep 2009
Source: Times-Standard (Eureka, CA)
Copyright: 2009 Times-Standard
Contact: http://www.times-standard.com/writeus
Website: http://www.times-standard.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1051
Author: Thadeus Greenson, The Times-Standard

POT INITIATIVE ENTERS CIRCULATION

Months ago, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said it's "time  for a debate"
on the legalization of marijuana in  California. Now, some want to
skip the debate and get  to the legalization.

Wednesday, the first of three initiatives seeking to  effectively
legalize marijuana possession, cultivation  and sales entered
circulation. While there seems to be  a rising tide of support for
such a state policy  change, it remains wholly unclear if any of the
three  initiatives would garner support from a majority of the
state's voters. And, if one does, the potential impacts  on Humboldt
County are murky.

"Complete legalization would not be good for the  Humboldt County
economy," said local attorney and  longtime medical marijuana advocate
Greg Allen. "But,  there's no question that for the state's economy,
legalization would be a good thing."

After years in the background as the state was awash in  controversy
over medical marijuana laws, the debate  over out-and-out legalization
in California was thrust  forward amid the state's epic budget crisis
earlier  this year. With the state then facing a projected $42
billion deficit, state Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San  Francisco,
introduced a bill in February seeking to  legalize, regulate and tax
marijuana. It was the  prospect of new tax revenue -- to the tune of
an  estimated $1.3 billion, according to the state Board of
Equalization -- that seemed to give the idea a  foothold.

Ammiano and his staff trumpeted both the new revenue  stream and a
bundle of enforcement savings as reasons  for the cash-strapped state
to give the bill serious  consideration. The governor said it was time
for a  debate, and a sprinkle of lawmakers throughout the  state
agreed, including North Coast Sen. Patricia  Wiggins.

"We've heard estimates about how much money this could  raise, and
while it's hard to know how close to the  mark those estimates are, my
staff have heard from  police and sheriff officials from throughout my
  district who say decriminalization would also allow  them to devote
more of their time and resources to more  pressing law enforcement
matters," Wiggins said at the  time.

For the first time, it also seemed public sentiment was  on the side
of legalization, although many say they  fear legalization would lead
to more minors accessing  the drug and more abuse in general.

In April, a California Field Poll estimated that 56  percent of
registered voters supported the idea of  legalizing marijuana for
recreational use and taxing  its proceeds.

In the Capitol, however, the topic soon lost steam.  Under the weight
of another budget crisis, Ammiano had  essentially shelved the bill,
saying it needed more  study and retooling.

Now, as they've been known to do, Californians are  taking matters
into their own hands and turning to the  initiative system. But, not
everyone in the marijuana  advocacy community is entirely optimistic.

Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National  Organization for
the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML),  said pro-marijuana initiatives
generally lose support  from the point when they are initially
announced, as  opposition groups begin advertising and speaking out
against them.

"They all lose support," he said, adding that NORML  expects them to
lose between 5 and 8 percent of  supporters at the polls.

NORML is so convinced in the drop-off effect, St.  Pierre said, that
it will only launch an initiative  effort if its polling shows 58.5
percent of likely  voters in favor of a proposition.

"Can 56 percent hold? Here at NORML we wouldn't launch.  That just
wouldn't be high enough for us," St. Pierre  said.

The proverbial cat, however, is out of the bag, and St.  Pierre said
NORML will consider endorsing one of the  soon-to-be-competing
initiatives, likely basing its  decision on which is most likely to
pass.

The initiative that entered circulation Wednesday --  the other two
are currently under review at the  Attorney General's Office -- would
repeal all state  laws that currently make it a crime for people over
the  age of 21 to use, possess, sell, cultivate and  transport
marijuana, except those that make it a crime  to drive under the influence.

If it gets the 430,000 signatures to make it to the  ballot, and then
gets more than 50 percent of the vote,  the law would also expunge
convictions based on the  repealed laws. That might represent a
challenge in  getting it passed, St. Pierre said.

When people start talking about expunging records,  overturning
convictions and even offering reparations  to those who have served
prison time on marijuana  offenses, St. Pierre said they tend to lose
middle-of-the-road, pragmatic voters.

"Things like reparations or expungement typically  retard or kill the
initiatives," he said. "They make  the process much more difficult."

But expungement might have its positives, Allen said,  and would
certainly translate to a savings of state  revenue if everyone with
marijuana convictions were  released from prison and taken off parole.

"Getting these people out of the system, and I mean  completely out,
would save us a lot of money," Allen  said.

According to the California Department of Corrections  and
Rehabilitation, 809 people were in California  prisons for
marijuana-related offenses as of the end of  2007 -- the last day for
which statistics were  available. At an annual cost of $49,000 per
inmate to  the state, that equates to an estimated $39 million  that
taxpayers spent in 2007 to keep marijuana  offenders behind bars. And
that doesn't include funds  spent to keep offenders in county jails,
where the vast  majority of those convicted of marijuana offenses end
up serving their sentences.

Whether legalization would be a benefit or a hindrance  to Humboldt
County remains up for debate, Allen said.

There's the possibility, he said, that the county could  carve out a
high-end, boutique-type niche for itself,  eventually becoming what
Napa Valley is to wine and  drawing tourists from across the state,
and the  country, to come sample the Humboldt brand of  marijuana.

However, Allen said there's also the distinct  possibility that
massive farming operations in the  Central Valley would flood the
market, driving the  price of marijuana down so far Humboldt County's
smaller scale growers would be unable to compete.

Allen said the federal government's reaction to  legalization in
California could also prove to be the  "joker in the deck" in how
legalization affects the  marijuana market.

In any event, it's very hard to tell what the impacts  to Humboldt
County would be, Allen said, both because  it's difficult to determine
how legalization would  change the marijuana market and because it's
just about  impossible to tell how big a part marijuana currently
plays in the local economy.

"It's interesting, and it's hard to actually really  project where
it's going to go," Allen said. "I think,  in the long run, complete
legalization would be really  problematic for Humboldt County. We
don't know how much  of Humboldt's economy comes from marijuana sales,
but  we know it's a lot."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake