‣ Make off-the-job marijuana use a fireable offense
‣ Make marijuana part of bar and restaurant smoking bans already in place. Possibly would target“ smoking clubs” where cannabis is consumed rather than alcohol
‣ Shops have to have both state and local approval
‣ Create a regulatory system similar to medical marijuana dispensaries that follow marijuana from seed to sale( aka vertical integration)
From ccpl. online. org / amendment64analysis, it is projected that the amendment will raise $ 60 million in revenue and savings coming from the excise tax, new state and local taxes, and lower law enforcement costs. That $ 60 million can go up after 2017 when the excise tax can be raised.
But Mr. Corry sees a problem with those numbers, especially if the Task Force gets their wish to keep vertical integration. Vertical integration is the current model governing medical marijuana in the state, meaning that 70 percent of whatever retailers sell has to be grown by the retailer. This means that the retailer and the producer are owned by the same entity. This would be a serious case of the state cutting off its nose to spite its face.“ If they try to impose this model on the Amendment 64 industry they’ ll lose out on the excise tax( 15 percent). If the retailer gets its marijuana from its own grow there’ s no excise tax charged or collected by the government. That provision would be rendered an annuity because it can’ t tax itself.” Mr. Corry believes that the vertical integration model was intended to be prohibitive and cites the example of Sen. Chris Romer who created the model. Corry added,“ Romer’ s goal was to put 80 percent of dispensaries out of business. They didn’ t even try to hide it.”
As for medical marijuana, legal since 2000, the passage of the amendment may change the business of medical marijuana inextricably, affecting patients, doctors and owners. Steve Horwitz believes that most currently operating dispensary centers will likely change to retail. Under the new law, you can either be a medical dispensary center or a retail shop, not both.
And that is better for the client and the growing of retail business, in his view, saying that“ the passage of Amendment 64 will affect us in a fantastically positive way and the reason for that is simple. It’ s your marketplace. Now that Amendment 64 has passed people don’ t feel they need the protection of a red card.” And in January 2014 when adults over 21 showing a photo ID can come in off the street and buy marijuana, the dispensaries will want a piece of the growing clientele pie, giving them ample motivation to make the switch to retail. To sweeten the deal, the Task Force is recommending that current dispensary owners get first priority for retail applications. Currently, it is estimated that red card holders in the state number 85,000 and that is diminishing.
On March 12, 2013, Russell Haythorn of 7News Denver reported that the city of Denver is considering opting out of Amendment 64 along with many other cities. Opponents of the amendment have argued that a legal market in Colorado would increase access to minors and would simply increase overall use. They cite it as a gateway drug that increases exposure to criminal elements and harder drugs such as heroin or cocaine. Additionally, with the legalization in place, demand for marijuana will increase, dropping the price and making it affordable for more users.
Mr. Corry adamantly disagrees, saying that under prohibition“ children have more access to marijuana than they do alcohol because there is a black market for marijuana and none for alcohol. You don’ t have a schoolyard beer seller. We hope to bring marijuana into the legal market and the medical marijuana experience has shown that there is not one single documented case of a child getting marijuana from a dispensary.”
So the Task Force recommendations are just that- recommendations. They have submitted them to the Legislature, but the Legislature can come to the table with their own set of recommendations for the governor, and as Mr. Vicente reminded me, the Task Force“ created non-binding resolutions to guide the legislature so none of those resolutions have any power.”
But why include such prohibitive recommendations when it is clear that the voters of Colorado have fully embraced legalization?
Mr. Corry points to the“ moral component” comparing marijuana legalization to gambling by saying“ Gambling brings a lot of money to our state. Gambling isn’ t for everybody but that doesn’ t mean we shouldn’ t have casinos because they’ re good for the state as a whole because it brings in a ton of revenue and marijuana is the same thing. Alcohol is the same thing. But we ought to be able to purchase it and the government should tax it and benefit from it.”
As it stands, 19 communities throughout the state are considering more strictly regulating marijuana retail sales and private cultivation. In Denver, 67 percent of voters approved the amendment but the City Council is considering an opt-out of 64, which would make it the largest city to do so.
FUTURE
Until the governor signs the recommendations into law, all we can do is try to read the tealeaves. But all of the gentlemen mentioned had some promising predictions for the future of marijuana legalization in Colorado and the country. Pot tourism, Mr. Corry believes“ could be a good thing for the state.” He continued by saying,“ people come to exercise their freedoms in Colorado and we should encourage pot tourism, people could come from other places and spend their money in Colorado.” He also envisions smoking bars, much like alcohol bars, where people could develop a“ connoisseur mentality, where you’ ll have a lot of different varieties like you do in a bar and pick between different types of vodka, tequila, whisky or beer, and I’ d like to see that.”
Steve Horwitz sees a“ lot of activity and energy going on and I do believe that we will see legal marijuana in this country in one to four years.”
Optimistic? Perhaps, but Tvert, Vicente, Horwitz and Corry are in agreement about the future of marijuana laws. Mr. Tvert believes that educating the voting public about marijuana can help“ garner public support among lawmakers to push federal legalization forward.” Mr. Vicente concurred, saying,“ Federally, the writing is on the wall. We have 18 medical states, two states at full legalization and we’ ll see more and more states passing marijuana legalization laws. The federal government is going to have to adapt to really reflect the changing views of the American public.”
Mason Tvert along with Brian Vicente pulled off a huge, trajectory-changing victory with the passage of 64. And Mr. Tvert firmly believes that“ the initiatives in Colorado and Washington are perhaps the largest step forward we’ ve ever seen when it comes to ending marijuana prohibition in this country.”
thcmag. com 47