skip to Main Content
History Can Offer a Sobering Reality for Full Legalization in California

By Fiona Ma

Although Election Day is about one year away, Californians are already talking about the potential legalization of cannabis for adult recreational use through the initiative process.

Next year, we are very likely to see at least one initiative proposal (and possibly several different measures) when we head to the ballot box.

But that statement is far more complicated than it first appears.

It is true — polls show that a majority of people support the concept of legalizing cannabis. But, as with most ballot initiatives, the details will determine the outcome.

And where there are details, there is complexity.

Details and complexity

First, the relatively simple. For a fee of $200, any Californian can begin the initiative process by drafting and submitting ballot language to the Attorney General, who prepares the ballot title and summary (which appears on the petition, in the statewide Voter Guide mailed out by the Secretary of State, and on the ballot).

Once the Attorney General prepares and releases an official ballot title and summary, the petitioner can go about the work of collecting signatures to qualify the initiative for the November ballot. This means that under the current formula set forth by the State Constitution, a petitioner has to collect at least 365,880 valid signatures for their initiative to make it on to the ballot. If the initiative is a constitutional amendment, the number of signatures required rises to 585,407.

On paper, this appears to be an easy process.The reality of ballot measures, however, is seldom easy.

First, it’s costly. Hundreds of thousands of signatures are required per initiative, so the cost of gathering enough signatures for nine (9) separate cannabis questions on the ballot could run in the tens of millions of dollars. According to the Attorney General’s office, there are currently nine (9) legalization measures that have been cleared for circulation, with more pending in the review process. Lack of funding to pay signature gatherers, or alternatively, a strong and organized grassroots campaign to collect signatures, means that several of those measures will never advance further than they are now.

Second, even if multiple cannabis measures qualify, the competing measures create an additional set of complications. For instance, many of the initiatives require the state to create a new agency to govern cannabis, while others require existing agencies to extend their scope of practice. Some of the proposals lay out cultivation and transportation standards, while others are silent on those issues. And this is before we even get to the subject of taxes. The list of potential conflicts between any two of the competing initiatives goes on and on.

And that should give proponents of legalization some pause. In the event that two or more measures make it to the ballot, and are approved by the voters, the Constitution is clear: any conflicts between the two measures will be resolved in favor of the initiative that receives the most “Yes” votes.

So, what is the best strategy

Two strategy options

Proponents have two options:

  1. First, they can move forward with several proposals and risk that they all get defeated at the ballot box by an electorate that may see a lack of agreement and coordination between advocates of legalization as a sign that California just isn’t ready to take this step.
  2. The alternative scenarios, where two or more legalization measures pass, practically begs a years-long, legal battle that costs millions of dollars and keeps the industry in limbo.

The possibility of a ballot initiative passing would increase if all proponents came together and put forward a single proposal that comprehensively addresses all of the issues that have arisen in this debate:

  • Cultivation and conservation standards;
  • Industry regulations and local control;
  • Public safety and criminal justice; and,
  • Access to bank services and taxes that invest in California and recover the taxes that the state is due.

Regardless of how one stands on legalizing cannabis, we can all agree that this is going to be one of the most fascinating ballot measures in the history of California.

Regardless of which proposal (or proposals) appear on the ballot, one thing is absolutely clear: California is once again showing the world what democracy in action looks like.

Fiona Ma

Fiona Ma

About Fiona Ma, CPA, State Board of Equalization

Assembly Speaker pro Tempore Emeritus Fiona Ma was elected to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) on November 5, 2014 and represents close to 10 million people in 23 counties from the Oregon border to Santa Barbara County. The 5,000 person tax agency affects every taxpayer in California and has broad regulatory and adjudicatory powers and is the only elected tax board in America.

Ms. Ma was elected to represent the 12th Assembly District from November 2006 to November 2012 (after serving the maximum three terms). She was the #112 woman to ever be elected to the California Legislature and the first Asian woman to ever serve as Speaker pro Tempore since 1850 (first Legislature). Ms. Ma first became interested in politics as a small business owner advocating on behalf of other small businesses. She was an elected delegate to the 1995 White House Conference on Small Business under President Bill Clinton and later was elected a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors from 2002-2006.

In the Assembly, Ms. Ma authored groundbreaking legislation to protect consumers, prevent the spread of Hepatitis B, and increase access to quality healthcare. As a joint author of Proposition 1-A (Nov 2008), she was the legislature’s leading advocate to bring high-speed trains to California. Additionally, Ms. Ma has been and continues to be a leader in promoting trade and fostering relationships between California and Asia.

Ms. Ma received her B.S. from the Rochester Institute of Technology (NY), her M.S. in Taxation from Golden Gate University (SF), and an MBA from Pepperdine University. She has been licensed in California as a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) since 1992. Fiona can be reached at [email protected].

This Post Has One Comment
  1. In 2015 and beyond the true cannabis activist is the tax paying cannabis activist. Voters and cannabis entrepreneurs alike, it’s time to show California where you stand in the movement. Ms. Ma is fighting for our future, are you?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Stories

CDTFA Cannabis Creditor: Myths and Truths

By Hilary Bricken, Attorney at Husch Blackwell Dealing with creditors is never a fun experience. However, some creditors are more severe than others, especially in the cannabis industry. One of…

If FL Supreme Court approves cannabis ballot language, will voters go for recreational weed or not?

The long wait on whether Floridians will get a chance to vote to legalize recreational cannabis for adults 21 and older is almost over, as the Florida Supreme Court is…

Missouri strips marijuana licenses connected to company accused of predatory behavior

Missouri’s health department on Wednesday stripped two coveted marijuana micro-licenses tied to an out-of-state company that had been accused of predatory practices and had listed the licenses for resale. The…

Dug In: Big Island Grown’s Deep Cannabis Roots

Big Island Grown (BIG) is a vertically integrated cannabis company based in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii County, on the Big Island of Hawaii, whose reach now extends to several islands in the…

More Categories

Back To Top
×Close search
Search