The Minnesota Legislature appears set to make the state the 23rd in the nation to legalize recreational marijuana.
After months of often impassioned debate, dozens of committee stops and the adoption of numerous amendments, the Minnesota House voted to approve a marijuana legalization bill on April 25. The Senate following suit just three days later.
Clocking in at around 350 pages, the House and Senate marijuana legalization bills are broadly similar to each other. They also contain some significant differences, which now have to be rectified in conference committee.
Under both bills, Minnesotans 21 and older will be able to buy marijuana products at licensed retailers, grow their own plants and possess some marijuana for personal use.
Adults would be able to purchase up to 2 ounces of cannabis flower, eight grams of cannabis concentrate, and 800 milligrams of edible marijuana products at one time.
Consumption would be allowed in a person’s private residence, on private property or on the premises of an establishment or event licensed to permit on-site consumption.
A process would also be created to expunge certain convictions for marijuana-related offenses.
At the Minnesota Capitol, increasingly polarization has been reflected not only in marijuana policy but on a host of other issues. Yet after winning majorities in both chambers of the legislature last year, DFLers ultimately had the upper hand if they stuck together and they did.
Time to prepare
While the bill would formally take effect on Aug. 1, advocates say that it will likely take much longer before Minnesotans can actually buy the product — perhaps a year or more.
First, the Office of Cannabis Management will need to be created and staffed. Supported in its work by the also new Cannabis Advisory Council, it will have extensive rulemaking authority. Then, growers and businesses for Minnesota’s “homegrown” market will need to be licensed.
Rep. Kristi Pursell, DFL-Northfield said that process stands in strong contrast to the situation last year, when the state provided minimal regulations for the THC-infused substances it had legalized, leaving local governments unsure as to how to handle them.
One notable difference between the House and Senate versions is how much cannabis one is allowed to possess. Under the Senate bill, one could stockpile up to 5 pounds of cannabis flower from home cultivation plus 2 pounds purchased elsewhere.
Under the House bill, 1.5 pounds would be the max allowable in total, but even that figure is exponentially higher than what is allowed in many other states.
The final bill is also likely to have much lower tax rates than those in many other states. The Senate version sets a tax rate of 10% whereas the House opts for a rate of 8%. Those taxes would be added on top of the state’s standard sales tax.
Rep. Jeff Brand, DFL-St. Peter, and other bill sponsors say they aren’t looking for Minnesota to pursue a “pot for potholes” approach. Concerned that setting the tax rate too high could help to sustain the black market, they’re aiming for a tax rate that merely covers costs related to legalization.
Varied degrees of local control
For local municipalities, the limited amount of local control allowed under both bills has been a frustration.
DFL legislators declined to add Republican amendments seeking to allow municipalities to outright bar marijuana businesses in their community.
Both the House and Senate bills do include a local registration process for cannabis businesses.
The Senate bill would allow local governments the ability to limit the number of cannabis businesses in their communities. The Senate version also includes revenue sharing with local governments.
Waseca County Administrator Michael Johnson said those additional provisions have made the Senate bill a significantly stronger piece of legislation, and he thanked the bill’s chief author for advocating for local government concerns.
“We still have a number of questions, but we’re happy to see a stronger local control element in the Senate bill,” Johnson said.
Brand expressed skepticism that the government would need to or should limit the number of cannabis businesses in one area or community. Even without any government mandates, he said that market forces would likely limit the number.
“I think it’s like the number of McDonald’s in a community; there’s not going to be more folks that sell this than the market can handle,” he said. “I don’t think you’re going to find enough support to have one on every corner.”
Law enforcement concerns
Road safety remains a critical concern for law enforcement. Thee currently is no reliable roadside blood level test to determine if a driver is impaired by cannabis.
Instead, the state will invest in special training to help officers determine if a driver is likely impaired by cannabis. The bill also includes a pilot project to evaluate the efficacy of oral fluid roadside testing.
Sen. Nick Frentz, DFL-North Mankato, said that public safety concerns have always been a top concern for legislators. Frentz, a longtime personal injury lawyer, expressed confidence that Minnesota law enforcement could meet the challenges of keeping roadways as safe as possible.
“I am confident that Minnesota public safety and law enforcement will be as effective as possible, and somewhat innovative, in trying to minimize the public safety impacts,” he said.
Both Faribault Police Chief John Sherwin and Owatonna Police Chief Jeff Mundale agreed that, given the inclinations of the Legislature and the voters who elected it, the move toward legalization over the last several months has been expected.
Sherwin said that while he thinks the perspectives of law enforcement have shaped the legislation somewhat, passage of the bill will still mean that Minnesotans can expect to deal with additional intoxicated drivers on their roadways.
He recalled attending a national conference several years ago where officials from Washington’s State Police talked about the impact that legal marijuana had on road safety. They reported additional crashes caused by impaired drivers, both in the morning and evening.
According to an analysis from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the rate of car crashes rose by about 6%, and fatal crashes were up by about 4%, in five western states (California, Nevada, Washington, Colorado and Nevada) after they legalized marijuana.
Mundale expressed concern about the challenges likely to fall on city government and law enforcement in the area of regulation. Given the difficulty and cost of enforcing producers, especially home growers, and the challenge of differentiating between legal and illegal products, he worries that THC products could fall into the wrong hands, including those of children.
“The new law is expected to create additional challenges regarding testing and enforcing suspected THC plant materials, as compared to current laws,” Mundale said in a statement.
Recent Comments