Pubdate: Sun, 11 Oct 2015
Source: Blade, The (Toledo, OH)
Copyright: 2015 The Blade
Contact:  http://www.toledoblade.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/48
Authors: Tom Troyand, Jim Provance

OHIO'S ISSUE 3 MORE COMPLICATED THAN SUPPORT FOR LEGAL MARIJUANA

Questions, Gray Areas Worry Some

With 23 days left for Ohio voters to make up their minds on 
legalizing marijuana, there are a lot of complicated issues to consider.

State Issue 3 on the ballot Nov. 3 would amend the Ohio Constitution 
to allow adults 21 and older to possess an ounce of marijuana and get 
a permit to grow four flowering plants and keep 8 ounces of homegrown pot.

It also would allow anyone of any age to use marijuana for medical 
reasons - with a certificate from a licensed Ohio physician.

And a provision that both pays the bills for the campaign by the 
pro-legalization group ResponsibleOhio and arouses its harshest 
opposition would etch into the constitution 10 parcels in the state 
on which commercial marijuana could be exclusively grown. The 10 are 
already owned by investors in the marijuana legalization campaign.

If Issue 3 were simply a question of supporting legalization of 
marijuana, polls show a slim majority of Ohioans would say yes. But 
it's not that simple.

Issue 3 would usher in a projected $2.2 billion industry that today 
exists only in the shadows. It follows the model set in 2009 when 
four casino locations were written into the constitution, including 
one in East Toledo, by a majority of Ohio voters.

Numerous questions have surfaced about the amendment. Where could 
people smoke? How will law enforcement prosecute pot-impaired 
drivers? Who gets licenses to sell marijuana products? What effect 
will it have in the work force?

Dozens of organizations representing doctors, hospitals, businesses, 
farmers, and law enforcement have come out against the proposal. And 
while the "Vote No on 3" campaign says it has far less money to spend 
than ResponsibleOhio, it is maintaining a steady drip of opposition 
news conferences to alert - or scare - the public about the 
amendment's implications.

Dr. Bruce Barnett, a pediatric pulmonologist and vice president of 
medical affairs at ProMedica Toledo Hospital, said last week that 
states with legal marijuana have more people going to emergency rooms 
because of ingestion of the drug.

Wendy Gramza, the Toledo Regional Chamber of Commerce's president, 
said "funneling marijuana profits to a small group of investors" 
violates the principles of free enterprise.

Fewer organizations have endorsed the amendment, but the campaign to 
pass it is well-funded, with an estimated $20 million because each of 
the 10 investors, or investor partnerships, has agreed to put up at 
least $4 million, of which $2 million is for the campaign.

The proposal

Christine Link, executive director of the American Civil Liberties 
Union of Ohio, said marijuana prohibition has contributed to "mass 
incarceration" of nonviolent offenders, while leaving the supply and 
distribution of the substance in the hands of violent criminals.

The proposed amendment states that marijuana could not be smoked in 
"any public place." Marijuana smoking would be curtailed by the 
voter-passed ban on smoking in restaurants, bars, and other workplaces.

"We actually wrote the law back then so it would include marijuana in 
case that came up," said Shelly Kiser, director of advocacy for the 
American Lung Association in Ohio.

Ian James, the executive director of ResponsibleOhio, said the 
amendment permits marijuana smoking in private residences and not in 
bar smoking patios. He did not rule out smoking indoors in other 
private settings and cited the example of "hookah bars," which he 
said would require approval by the Marijuana Control Commission that 
would be established by the amendment.

Another area of uncertainty is whether motorists would be put at risk 
by stoned drivers weaving around on the highways. Police now use a 
field Breathalyzer test on those suspected of driving under the 
influence of alcohol, but suspicions of driving under the influence 
of marijuana would have to involve a blood test. The amendment 
prohibits driving under the influence of marijuana or smoking 
marijuana in a vehicle, but it leaves it up to future action by the 
General Assembly to define marijuana impairment.

"If you have enough marijuana in your blood you can be charged with 
driving while under the influence," said Jay McDonald, president of 
the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police, which opposes Issue 3.

"You have to take a blood sample," he said. "If they refuse, then you 
can get a search warrant. But you're not likely to do that unless it 
involves a fatality."

Mr. James said inventors are developing technology to measure 
marijuana impairment. He said it was not until 21 years after the end 
of alcohol prohibition that the Breathalyzer was invented.

"Science catches up with society," Mr. James said, adding that the 
Breathalyzer was developed because alcohol was legal.

Another complication is the presence of Issue 2 on the same ballot. 
According to the Republican-controlled General Assembly that put it 
on the ballot, Issue 2 would nullify Issue 3 if voters approve both.

The wording of Issue 2 says any ballot issue enacted on and after 
Nov. 3, 2015, that grants a commercial monopoly, is "prohibited from 
taking effect." And Issue 3 has been officially titled by Secretary 
of State Jon Husted as a "monopoly" because the 10 marijuana-growing 
facilities would get exclusive commercial growing rights.

ResponsibleOhio unsuccessfully challenged that word before the Ohio 
Supreme Court, contending that the 10 growers would compete with each 
other and that over time a new regulatory panel could add or replace 
licenses under certain circumstances.

Mr. James noted ResponsibleOhio's most recent advertising has 
emphasized, "Vote No on 2, Vote Yes on 3."

"There's a plan, and it's not just to defeat it. It's to crush it," 
Mr. James said.

Workplace testing?

One of the 10 marijuana "grows" would be on what is now North Toledo 
farmland. The parcel is optioned to Cincinnati businessman David 
Bastos, who plans a 300,000-square-foot facility that would 
eventually employ 300 people at union wages.

Despite making marijuana legal, Issue 3 would protect an employer's 
right to test workers for the drug, something Durable Corp., the 
35-employee Norwalk manufacturer of loading dock bumpers, has done 
for 15 years.

Tom Secor, company president, fears the amendment would make it 
tougher for employers to find new hires capable of passing the tests 
and stay on the job.

"I don't understand what marijuana does to you that's different than 
alcohol, but if one employee on the weekend gets drunk and the other 
gets high, on Monday morning there's no alcohol in the system of one 
but the other still has THC in his system," he said. "The question is 
'At what level and at what point do we need to be concerned about that?'

"I hope this gets defeated," he said. "Then the legislature should 
address the medical marijuana issue and take it off the table."

Mr. James called that "a manufactured concern" and said the people 
who Mr. Secor are concerned about are already consuming marijuana. He 
said private businesses would still be able to ban its consumption by 
their employees, just as they can ban consumption of legal nicotine.

A big step

Ohio would be the first state to go directly to full legalization of 
marijuana. The four others with legal recreational marijuana - 
Colorado, Washington, Alaska, and Oregon - and Washington, D.C., had 
years of experience first with medical marijuana.

Ironically, Ohio has one of the most lenient marijuana possession 
laws in the country. Ohio allows no jail time for small amounts of 
marijuana, unlike its neighbors.

"The jump to full legalization - the public's not ready for that. But 
they're getting close," said Sean Nestor, who managed the successful 
Toledo campaign to pass a local marijuana decriminalization effort in 
September.

Mr. Nestor, political director of the Ohio Green Party, is an avid 
supporter of legal cannabis, but he opposes Issue 3 because of its 
commercial structure.

A poll by Quinnipiac University on Thursday showed that Ohio 
registered voters favor legalization for personal use by 53 percent 
to 44 percent.

"You can't win a statewide ballot question on something as 
controversial as [Issue 3] with a majority that slim," Mr. Nestor said.

Lucas County Commissioner Pete Gerken, an early supporter of Issue 3, 
said Ohio voters are ready for legalization because "there's 
universal acceptance that prohibition of marijuana works no better 
than prohibition of alcohol worked in the '30s."

He said ResponsibleOhio is acting because the legislature has refused 
to consider medical marijuana. The Quinnipiac Poll showed support for 
medical marijuana at 90 percent.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom