Pubdate: Wed, 24 Aug 2016
Source: Sun, The (Yuma, AZ)
Copyright: 2016 The Sun
Contact: http://www.yumasun.com/sections/opinion/submit-letters/
Website: http://www.yumasun.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1258
Author: Blake Herzog

GROUPS FOR AND AGAINST LEGAL POT FACE OFF

Leaders of the campaigns for and against the statewide proposition to 
legalize recreational marijuana use in Arizona appeared at a Yuma 
forum Tuesday to make their cases to an audience of about 30.

The faceoff was sponsored by the Yuma County Chamber of Commerce, 
which has found itself split on the question of Proposition 205, 
Executive Director John Courtis said at the beginning of the two-hour 
session, though the statewide Arizona Chamber of Commerce and 
Industry is a major funder of the campaign against it.

"The Arizona Chamber executives want to make sure every chamber is 
unique to itself. Flagstaff thinks one way, Prescott thinks another 
way. And we want to make sure Yuma is represented correctly, too."

According to the submitted ballot summary, a "yes" vote on 
Proposition 205 is in favor of:

Allowing adults age 21 and over to possess and privately consume and 
grow limited amounts of marijuana

Establishing a 15 percent tax on the drug's sales to go toward public 
health and education

Creating a licensed system of businesses authorized to grow and sell marijuana

Establishing a Department of Marijuana Licenses and Controls to 
oversee this system

Authorizing local governments to regulate and limit marijuana businesses

The measure is currently expected to be on the Nov. 8 general 
election ballot, but there is a court challenge from opponents 
appealing lower court decisions to the state Supreme Court, alleging 
the summary doesn't adequately inform voters about the law's effects.

Representatives from each side were given an hour to discuss their 
perspective. Adam Kinsey, manager of the Campaign to Regulate 
Marijuana Like Alcohol which backs the measure, said the limits on 
possession contained in the proposed law by each person is 1 ounce or 
six marijuana plants, with 12 plants permitted for a two-adult household.

Following the licensing process, most provisions would come into 
effect in 2018 and 2019, he said. Additional provisions, including 
the ability to consume marijuana at a dispensary like you can now 
drink alcohol at a bar, would come in 2021. As a voter-approved law, 
any changes enacted by the Legislature must be approved by a supermajority.

Kinsey said a state Joint Budget Legislative Committee report 
estimated the excise tax and licensing fees included in the law would 
raise $53.4 million in fiscal 2019 and $82 million in 2020, with 
about $30 million and $54 million of that going to K-12 education, 
respectively. State and local sales tax would generate another $22 
million in 2019 and $43 million in 2020.

He quoted liberally from Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, who opposed 
the state's 2012 voter-approved law authorizing recreational 
marijuana use, the first in the nation.

Kinsey said Hickenlooper has since said, "We were worried about a 
spike in the usage among kids, we were worried about a spike in 
driving while high, we were worried about edibles, but we haven't 
seen any of those - at least in a significant fashion - any of those 
fears materialize."

Kinsey said the current illegal transport and sale of marijuana for 
recreational use will persist if voters don't move to legalize it: 
"It's a billion-dollar criminal enterprise right now. It's a 
billion-dollar black market right now. It's not going to go away, 
this is an acknowledgement that it is there and deciding how to handle it."

He said medical marijuana users could still obtain a card if one is 
prescribed by a physician, and they would not be subject to the 15 
percent excise tax.

Kinsey and the speaker who followed clashed most specifically on two 
questions about the proposition: whether it affects drug-free 
workplace policies and whether a legal intoxication limit can be 
adopted for drivers.

He said the measure makes it clear that employers retain their right 
to fire someone who fails a drug test for marijuana, though he 
acknowledged there is some debate on it.

"If you have testing right now, for your employees, you can have 
testing after Prop 205 passes, if it's a fireable offense now, it's a 
fireable offense after it passes," he said.

He said it was written into the proposed law to address any issues 
employers had with it.

"That looks pretty specific to me: 'does not affect the ability of 
employers to enact and enforce workplace policies restricting the 
possession or consumption of marijuana and marijuana products by 
employees.'" he said.

The state can adopt a "per se" intoxication level similar to the .08 
blood alcohol content to trigger a DUI, adding one had recently been 
enacted in Colorado.

"It does not prevent that type of testing, that type of standard to 
be passed, in Arizona. And I imagine we'll probably see one fairly 
soon," he said.

Approximately two-thirds of the audience at the forum, held at the 
Yuma Heritage Library, indicated they were in favor of legalization 
when Sheila Polk, Yavapai County attorney and co-chair of political 
action committee Arizonans for Responsible Drug Policy, asked for a 
show of hands.

The second speaker, she said Proposition 205 would create an 
exception for marijuana users under any drug-free workplace policies, 
where drug use alone wouldn't be enough to trigger sanctions.

"What they wrote into this is for an employer, to discipline an 
employee for marijuana, what you have to prove is your employee is 
impaired, due to marijuana, and they are engaging in an act that 
constitutes negligence or malpractice," she said, forcing employers 
to wait for an unsafe action to occur.

She also said there is a provision which prohibits any laws which 
will penalize drivers just because they have marijuana in their 
system. "We will never be able to have a per se amount of THC in a 
driver's system. The result is our roads are more dangerous." She 
added that whether or not states had a "per se" amount in their laws, 
marijuana-related driving and road fatalities are rising.

Polk said the law was backed primarily by local and national medical 
marijuana interests, and written to give existing medical 
dispensaries a prohibitive advantage in the new recreational market.

She added that marijuana use by youths has been shown by research to 
negatively affect their academic outcomes and college attendance.

"We're talking about legalizing a substance to get about $54 million 
in a couple of years for education, legalizing a substance that will 
hurt education in Arizona. But here's the other thing, we don't need 
that $54 million for education in Arizona," she said, since state 
voters approved Proposition 123 in May, expected to divert more than 
$3 billion in state trust land funds being held for schools into campuses.

One thing that proved uncontroversial is Arizona's 2010 
voter-approved medical marijuana law, with even Polk saying that the 
drug has some medicinal benefits.

Two attendees said after the event the opposition had made some 
points that resonated with them, one saying it changed their opinion.

Sandy Hernandez of Yuma said "I appreciated hearing Sheila's 
perspective because as a proponent of medical marijuana I thought, 
why not just do recreational? But because I know more, I really think 
I'll probably vote against the recreational."

She said the difficulty of making changes to a voter-approved law 
after it was passed, which Kinsey emphasized, was the primary reason 
she was leaning against it.

AJ Buchtel said he is originally from Colorado, and saw that the 
approval of recreational marijuana there initially created a lot of 
new jobs. "I know there are a lot of small towns that wouldn't 
ordinarily have a lot of business going on, and it's really helped them."

He said the one thing he doesn't agree with in Arizona's proposed law 
is any restriction on employers' ability to enforce anti-drug 
policies in the workplace, but he still plans to vote for it "because 
that's the kind of thing you could get three-fourths of the 
Legislature to agree on."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom