Pubdate: Fri, 21 Aug 2015
Source: Blade, The (Toledo, OH)
Copyright: 2015 The Blade
Contact:  http://www.toledoblade.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/48

YES ON ISSUE 1

A Proposal That Would Reduce Marijuana Penalties in Toledo Deserves 
Voters' Support Next Month

At the Sept. 15 primary election in Toledo, voters will have the 
opportunity to decrease penalties for marijuana use in the city. 
Whatever their feelings about November's ballot initiative to 
legalize marijuana across Ohio, this move to strike the city's 
outdated and unproductive penalties deserves a YES vote.

Toledo law adds penalties for crimes involving marijuana on top of 
what the state requires. Issue 1 on next month's Toledo ballot - 
called the Sensible Marihuana Ordinance, to reflect the antiquated 
spelling of marijuana in the municipal code - would reduce penalties 
associated with the drug to the minimum allowed by the state. The 
proposed ordinance also calls for Toledo to reduce its penalties 
automatically if Ohio weakens its marijuana laws.

Issue 1 would repeal Toledo's penalties for possessing and selling 
marijuana paraphernalia, such as bongs and pipes, that are used to 
ingest the drug. It would reduce those offenses to minor 
misdemeanors, as required by state law.

Current city law classifies possession and sale of drug paraphernalia 
as second-degree misdemeanors, which can result in three-month jail 
sentences and fines of as much as $750. Issue 1 also would eliminate 
the city's added penalties for selling marijuana to minors; state law 
is adequately tough.

These changes would reduce the number of people who face fines, jail 
time, and other penalties in Toledo for offenses related to small 
amounts of marijuana, Sean Nestor, the campaign manager for Sensible 
Toledo, the group behind Issue 1, told The Blade's editorial page.

Ohio already has some of the most lenient marijuana laws in the 
country, Mr. Nestor said, but Toledo's laws add penalties and the 
stigma of a criminal record where they aren't necessary. Similar 
ballot campaigns are active in several other Ohio cities.

Sensible Toledo seeks to differentiate itself from ResponsibleOhio, 
the campaign to legalize marijuana statewide, Mr. Nestor said. The 
proposed Toledo ordinance wouldn't repeal any state laws, he said, 
but would bring the city's policies in line with the state's. Any 
marijuana sale that is large enough to qualify as illegal trafficking 
under state law would still be banned.

Some portions of the proposal could be subject to legal challenge if 
they're found to contradict state law, Toledo Law Director Adam Loukx 
told The Blade's editorial page. The law department does not have a 
position on the proposal.

The ordinance wouldn't dramatically alter marijuana sentences in 
Toledo, but may help build momentum for a broader effort to 
decriminalize the drug. Colorado, Washington state, Alaska, and 
Washington have done so, recognizing that the war on drugs has done 
little to curb drug use, but has devastated communities and forced 
nonviolent offenders to carry criminal records for the rest of their lives.

The campaign to legalize marijuana at the state level offers 
compelling arguments: Thousands of Ohioans are arrested for marijuana 
offenses each year, producing a criminal record that can disqualify 
them from jobs and financial aid for college. African-Americans 
disproportionately account for marijuana arrests, though they use the 
drug at similar rates as whites.

But ResponsibleOhio has debased its message by tacking language onto 
the proposal that would create a state-sanctioned cartel for the 
drug's production; we'll have more to say about that as the statewide 
campaign progresses. Meanwhile, Sensible Toledo's campaign offers a 
credible way to reform archaic local marijuana laws.

Whatever their feelings about the statewide proposal, Toledoans 
should consider Issue 1 on its own merits. It wouldn't affect state 
law, and would help Toledo refocus its efforts, as other cities have, 
on dangerous criminal offenders rather than expend more resources 
than it needs to on largely victimless offenses. The Blade recommends 
a YES vote on Issue 1.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom