Pubdate: Wed, 11 Mar 2015
Source: Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA)
Copyright: 2015 The Press-Enterprise Company
Contact: http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/letters_form.html
Website: http://www.pe.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/830
Author: Ben Boychuk

HAZY POLLING ON RIVERSIDE'S POT MEASURE

Public opinion is rich with ironies and contradictions. We're a 
people who detest Congress, but love our congressman. We think public 
education is a catastrophe, but our kids' elementary school is pretty 
darn good.

And depending on how a pollster frames a question, a voter could 
disapprove of a policy proposal, but approve of the same idea with a 
different word or two  in the very same poll.

So it appears to be the case with a Riverside ballot measure to 
legalize a limited number of medical marijuana dispensaries within 
city limits. The Riverside Medical Marijuana Restriction and 
Limitation Act  a clever name for an initiative that would in fact 
loosen restrictions and limitations  would allow up to 10 
dispensaries to open in certain locations around the city, away from 
residential neighborhoods, parks and schools. It would also permit 
home deliveries.

Riverside has banned medical pot dispensaries within city limits 
since 2013 and used local zoning rules to shut down dozens of illegal 
operators and block new dispensaries from opening for nearly a 
decade. The city, in fact, has spent more than $800,000 since 2007 to 
vindicate its zoning powers in court.

It's no surprise, then, that city officials oppose the measure. The 
city powers-that-be are so opposed, in fact, that they sued 
unsuccessfully to keep the measure off the June 2 mail-in ballot.

You needn't be a fan of California's initiative process  I'm 
certainly not  to wrinkle your nose a bit at the city's move. 
Riverside Safe Access gathered enough signatures to qualify for the 
ballot. Such are the perils of direct democracy.

Now that the campaign is beginning in earnest, Riverside officials 
hope to persuade voters that approving dispensaries is a bad idea. To 
that end, the city of Riverside commissioned a poll of 400 likely 
voters to find out where they stand on the question.

The poll is a delight. A majority of respondents oppose the measure, 
with 46 percent saying they're a definite no vote. Another 8 percent 
say they'll probably vote no, and 2 percent say they aren't sure but 
lean toward no. The total yes votes add up to 40 percent, with 27 
percent of likely voters supporting the measure. And yet, when asked 
whether marijuana should be taxed, regulated and legalized for adults 
living in the city, 50 percent say yes, 46 percent say no, and 4 
percent are up in the air.

Notice the change? A single adjective - "medical" - makes a difference.

I asked Riverside city spokesman Phil Pitchford about the wording 
discrepancy. Although the poll was designed to gauge voters' opinion 
on the ballot measure's specifics, he told me the decision to drop 
"medical" from that question was intentional.

Turns out, residents are skeptical of dispensaries operating in their 
city, but they wouldn't necessarily object to marijuana being legal 
if regulated.

That shouldn't come as much of a surprise. For good or for ill, the 
tide of public opinion on marijuana is gradually turning. A plurality 
of likely voters  49 percent to 47 percent  favor legalization in the 
Golden State, according to a Public Policy Institute of California 
poll published around this time last year.

And last week, the General Social Survey, which is widely regarded as 
the top of the top-tier of polling research, found that for the first 
time a slight majority of Americans  52 percent  favor legalization. 
That's up nine points from the last survey published in 2012.

Now for some qualification: Support for legalization efforts falls 
well within the margin of error on these surveys. And even though 
legalization has had some success around the country, Californians 
remain of two minds on the question.

Medical marijuana for cancer and AIDS patients? Sure. Californians 
enthusiastically approved marijuana for medicinal use in 1996. But a 
green cross down the street? No thanks.

When it comes to legalization with taxes and regulations, it's worth 
recalling again that Californians rejected a measure to do precisely 
that in 2010. They may have another chance to consider the question 
next year. And don't forget that whatever Californians may think of 
the virtues of cannabis, the feds still consider it a Schedule I 
controlled substance that serves no medical purpose. For the moment anyway.

Truth is, we like the idea of medical marijuana and general 
legalization in theory. But when it comes to the practice, we have 
serious reservations. The campaign to overturn Riverside's dispensary 
ban will be one more indicator of precisely where California is headed.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom