Making Pot Pay
Unpacking Proposition 64
Your Presenters:
Sherry Daley
Senior
Governmental
Affairs and
Corporate
Communications
Director
Jennie Lewis
Governmental
Affairs and
Corporate
Communications
Associate
The Creation of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act
Development of policy
CCAPP Coalition Responds
California Initiative becomes
most progressive legalization in
the nation
The question on everyone’s mind…
Will it pass???
Your attention please!
Advertising Dollars
Yes on 64
No on 64
A Look at the Numbers
Apples to Apples?
Review of Colorado, Oregon and Washington
• • Among those 18-25 years old, marijuana usage has increased from 21 percent in 2006 to 31
percent in 2014.
•
• • Among those 26 or older, marijuana usage has increased from 5 percent in 2006 to 12
percent in 2014.
•
• • 33% of marijuana users who have reported marijuana use in the past 30 days have used
daily.
•
• • Marijuana-related arrests have decreased by 46 percent between 2012 and 2014, while
possession arrests were cut in half and sales arrests have decreased by 24 percent.
In 2014, when retail marijuana stores began operating, there was a 32 percent increase in marijuanarelated traffic deaths in just one year.
Colorado marijuana-related traffic deaths increased 92 percent from 2010 – 2014. During the same
time periods all traffic deaths only increased 8 percent respectively.
In 2009, Colorado marijuana-related traffic deaths involving operators testing positive for marijuana
represented 10 percent of all traffic fatalities. By 2014, that number nearly doubled to 19.26 percent.
The Colorado State Patrol DUID Program, started in 2014, indicated:
77 percent (674) of the 874 DUIDs involved marijuana
41 percent (354) of the 874 DUIDs involved marijuana only
Approximately half (51%) of Oregon adults had seen marijuana product or store advertising in their community in the
past month; less than one-third (29%) had seen information about health risks of using marijuana.
More than half of adults (61%) knew that 21 years or older is the legal age to use marijuana in Oregon, and more than
half (59%) knew that it is still illegal to use marijuana in public spaces. However, nearly two-thirds (63%) said they
didn’t know when it is legal to drive after using marijuana.
Three in four (75%) adults knew that driving under the influence of marijuana increases the risk of a traffic crash, and
half (54%) knew that users that start young face greater health risks.
Marijuana-related calls to the Oregon Poison Center were stable from 2013 through mid-2015 and increased in the
second half of 2015. From 2013–2015, calls for persons under age 13 increased.
Marijuana-related arrests decreased from 2012 to 2015.
• Current marijuana use among Oregon eighth- and 11th-graders is similar to national estimates.
• From 2012–2015, nearly one in 10 eighth-graders, and approximately one in five 11th-graders, report
current marijuana use each year.
• In 2015, 9% of Oregon eighth-graders and 19% of Oregon 11th-graders report current marijuana use.
• Among eighth-grade marijuana users, approximately two in five (41%) reported they used between one
and two days in the past month; one-third (30%) reported they used on 10 or more days in the past
month.
• Among 11th-grade marijuana users, approximately one-third (34%) reported they used between one
and two days in the past month; and two in five (40%) reported they used on 10 or more days in the
past month.
Nine percent of all Oregon adults agreed that they use marijuana more often now that it
has been legalized in Oregon.
A higher proportion of younger adults (ages 18–34 years) reported using more
marijuana after legalization compared to adults 35 years and older (15% vs. 6%).
Approximately half (55%) of adults agreed that more underage people will be trying
marijuana now that it has been legalized in Oregon.
Belief about increased underage use was higher among people that had never personally
used marijuana. 72% of adults that never used marijuana agreed with this statement
compared to 46% among those that had ever used marijuana.
Approximately one in five (19%) current marijuana users reported driving within three hours of use in the past
year.
Frequent marijuana users (20+ days of last 30) were more likely (36%) than less frequent users (7%) to have
driven within three hours of using marijuana.
Approximately three of four adults agreed that driving under the influence of marijuana increases the chance
of a traffic crash (75%)
Recreational marijuana consumers may legally buy up to 2,529 grams of
marijuana per transaction which includes useable, concentrate, and infused
product
July 2015: 1,164 licenses issued – 533 producer, 460 processor, 171 retailer
licenses representing 735 individual businesses 59,394 pounds (950,304 ounces) were produced during one
year of recreational commercialization
68% of the marijuana-infused products in the state fall within the baked goods or desserts category
90% of public safety violations against recreational licensees deal with minors
The average potency of marijuana flower for one Seattle based retailer during the month of July 2015 was
21.24% - for marijuana concentrates the average potency was 72.76%
During 2013-2014, 48% of statewide student expulsions and 42% of suspensions
directly involved marijuana
98% of the student drug violations within the Seattle Public Schools from September
2013 to May of 2014 involved marijuana
In 2014, youth under the age of twenty made up 45% of statewide Poison Center calls –
since legalization in 2012, these calls have increased 80%
43% of adults polled in Washington reported using marijuana within the last year:
24% used at least once a month
17% used at least once a week
6% used daily
15% of respondents used marijuana for medicinal purposes:
11% used at least once a month
9% used at least once a week
5% used daily.
44% of marijuana DUI cases for 2015 (January – April) tested by the Washington State Patrol Toxicology
Lab were over the legal limit of 5 nanograms per milliliter of blood
64% of the marijuana DUIs reported by the Spokane Valley Police Department during 2014 involved
youth
61.9% of drivers do not believe marijuana makes a difference in their driving ability according to the
Roadside Survey conducted by the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission
Drivers with active THC in their blood involved in a fatal driving accident have increased 122.2% from
2010 (16) to 2014 (23) according to the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission.
Apples to Apples, or Apples to Oranges?
Is Proposition 64 different?
Prop 64
Administering Agency Department of Consumer Affairs,
Board of Marijuana Control
Home Grow Permitted? Up to six living marijuana plants
and possess the marijuana
produced by the plants
DUI References current statute on DUI;
provides funding for DUI
prevention and enforcement
within 20% allotted to law
enforcement
Effect on Medical Marijuana None specific, some effect from
regulations on cultivation
Colorado
Oregon
Washington
MJ Enforcement Division (MED)
Oregon Liquor Control Commission Liquor Control Board
Up to six plants, three flowering
4 plants, no more than 8 ounces
useable MJ
5 nanogram per milliliter, 0
tolerance for under 21
Research what MJ DUI level should 5 nanogram per milliliter, 0
be by January 1, 2017, report
tolerance for under 21
recommendations to legislature
Builds on medical marijuana
regime. Medical providers get
access first.
Specifically exempts MM
No
MM not impacted by the statute.
Prop 64
Tax Rate $9.25 per ounce cultivation tax,
15% retail tax (in addition to sales
tax) medical marijuana would be
pay 15% tax, but be exempt from
retail sales tax
Local Control Local government may prohibit
cultivation and sale with a
majority vote, cannot prohibit
home grows or use
Revenue Distribution* See slides on Revenue
Colorado
Oregon
Washington
15% cultivator, 10% sales tax (in
addition to 2.9% regular sales
tax). Local tax can be applied.
$35 per ounce (flowers) $5 per
ounce (leaves) $5 immature
plants, indexed for inflation
25% producer to processor, 25%
producer to retailer, 25% retailer
to consumer (normal sales tax
applies)
Local municipalities can opt out,
regulate number and location,
tax separately
Cities and counties can only opt
out if a petition for ballot is
obtained and the voters pass
Liquor board has decision as to
where licenses are given. Long
court battle to ensue. No revenue
sharing.
Fund to support administration,
school construction; legislature
must budget after first $40
million allocation; prevention,
education, treatment and law
enforcement being considered
Education, treatment and law
40% schools, 20% AOD/MH, 25%
law enforcement, 5% prevention,
miscellaneous
15% for prevention for middle
school and high school aged, 50%
health, dental, etc.
Prop 64
Advertising Prohibitions No advertising, packaging, labeling
or product design attractive to
children.
Colorado
Oregon
Washington
May create regulation to restrict
advertising
Prohibits advertising of MJ
Prohibits of advertising to minors;
prohibits advertising near schools,
day care, etc.; prohibits advertising
of paraphernalia.
THC Limits No limit
No limit
No limit
Establishes classes of THC products;
no limit
License fee To be set by costs to administer
(reasonable)
<$5,000
$1,000 annually
$1,000 annually
Follow the Money
Proposition 64 Revenue Provisions
Forever Fund
Expected tax and
license revenue: One
Billion per year
60% of tax fund after all previous
payments have been made
towards prevention and substance
abuse treatment = $600 million
Implementation and
Enforcement - $20
Million Per year
for 10 years
$91 million is total amount for the
medical expansion for SUD
treatment for the entire state 20152016 budget.
Business and
economic
development - $10
Million first 5 years,
$50 Million after this
time for five years
California Dept. of
Highway Patrol $3 Million per year
over 10 years
Research - $10
Million
disbursed over
10 years
Projected amount from AUMA
bill = 574 Million for the first
year. After all of the deductions
end in 10 years after enactment,
estimated allocation is increased
to approximately $600 million
Implementation:
• 2600 (c) The Legislature may, by majority vote, enact laws to
implement this division, provided such laws are consistent with the
purposes and intent of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of
Marijuana Act.
A call to action:
• Who will decide the details?
Revenue Sections/Not AOD Related:
• Twenty percent (20%) shall be deposited in the Environmental
Restoration and Protection Account,
• Twenty percent (20%) shall be deposited into the State and Local
Government Law Enforcement Account
Revenue Sections/Study:
• Ten million dollars ($10,000,000) to a public university or universities
in California annually beginning with fiscal year 2018-2019 until fiscal
year 2028-2029 to research and evaluate the implementation and
effect of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act,
Revenue Sections/Study:
• (1) Impacts on public health, including health costs associated with
marijuana use, as well as whether marijuana use is associated with an
increase or decrease in use of alcohol or other drugs.
• (2) The impact of treatment for maladaptive marijuana use and the
effectiveness of different treatment programs.
• (3) Public safety issues related to marijuana use, including studying the
effectiveness of the packaging and labeling requirements and advertising
and marketing restrictions contained in the Act at preventing underage
access to and use of marijuana and marijuana products, and studying the
health-related effects among users of varying potency levels of marijuana
and marijuana products.
• (4) Marijuana use rates, maladaptive use rates for adults and youth, and
diagnosis rates of marijuana-related substance use disorders.
• (5) Marijuana market prices, illicit market prices, tax structures and rates,
including an evaluation of how to best tax marijuana based on potency,
and the structure and function of licensed marijuana businesses.
Revenue Sections/Study:
• (6) Whether additional protections are needed to prevent unlawful monopolies or anticompetitive behavior from occurring in the nonmedical marijuana industry and, if so,
recommendations as to the most effective measures for preventing such behavior.
• (7) The economic impacts in the private and public sectors, including but not necessarily
limited to, job creation, workplace safety, revenues, taxes generated for state and local
budgets, and criminal justice impacts, including, but not necessarily limited to, impacts on
law enforcement and public resources, short and long term consequences of involvement
in the criminal justice system, and state and local government agency administrative
costs and revenue.
• (8) Whether the regulatory agencies tasked with implementing and enforcing the Control,
Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act are doing so consistent with the purposes of
the Act, and whether different agencies might do so more effectively. (9) Environmental
issues related to marijuana production and the criminal prohibition of marijuana
production.
• (10) The geographic location, structure, and function of licensed marijuana businesses,
and demographic data, including race, ethnicity, and gender, of license holders.
• (11) The outcomes achieved by the changes in criminal penalties made under the Control,
Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act for marijuana-related offenses, and the
outcomes of the juvenile justice system, in particular, probation-based treatments and the
frequency of up-charging illegal possession of marijuana or marijuana products to a more
serious offense.
Revenue Sections/DUI:
Sum of three million dollars ($3,000,000) annually to the Department of
the California Highway Patrol beginning fiscal year 2018-2019 until
fiscal year 2022-2023 to establish and adopt protocols to determine
whether a driver is operating a vehicle while impaired, including
impairment by the use of marijuana or marijuana products, and to
establish and adopt protocols setting forth best practices to assist law
enforcement agencies.
Revenue Sections/Community Economic Dev.:
Sum of ten million dollars ($10,000,000) beginning fiscal year 20182019 and increasing ten million dollars ($10,000,000) each fiscal year
thereafter until fiscal year 2022-2023, at which time the disbursement
shall be fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) each year thereafter, to the
Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, in
consultation with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and
the Department of Social Services, to administer a Community
Reinvestments grants program to local health departments and at least
fifty-percent to qualified community-based nonprofit organizations to
support job placement, mental health treatment, substance use
disorder treatment, system navigation services, legal services to
address barriers to reentry, and linkages to medical care for
communities disproportionately affected by past federal and state drug
policies.
Revenue Sections/Pharma Study:
Sum of two million dollars ($2,000,000) annually to the University of
California San Diego Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research to further
the objectives of the Center including the enhanced understanding of
the efficacy and adverse effects of marijuana as a pharmacological
agent.
Revenue Sections/AOD :
Sixty percent (60%) shall be deposited in the Youth Education,
Prevention, Early Intervention and Treatment Account, and disbursed by
the Controller to the Department of Health Care Services for programs
for youth that are designed to educate about and to prevent substance
use disorders and to prevent harm from substance use. The Department
of Health Care services shall enter into inter-agency agreements with
the Department of Public Health and the Department of Education to
implement and administer these programs. The programs shall
emphasize accurate education, effective prevention, early intervention,
school retention, and timely treatment services for youth, their families
and caregivers. The programs may include, but are not limited to, the
following components:
Revenue Sections/AOD :
(A) Prevention and early intervention services including outreach, risk
survey and education to youth, families, caregivers, schools, primary
care health providers, behavioral health and substance use disorder
service providers, community and faith-based organizations, foster care
providers, juvenile and family courts, and others to recognize and
reduce risks related to substance use, and the early signs of problematic
use and of substance use disorders.
Revenue Sections/AOD :
(B) Grants to schools to develop and support Student Assistance
Programs, or other similar programs, designed to prevent and reduce
substance use, and improve school retention and performance, by
supporting students who are at risk of dropping out of school and
promoting alternatives to suspension or expulsion that focus on school
retention, remediation, and professional care. Schools with higher than
average dropout rates should be prioritized for grants.
Revenue Sections/AOD :
(C) Grants to programs for outreach, education and treatment for
homeless youth and out-of-school youth with substance use disorders.
(D) Access and linkage to care provided by county behavioral health
programs for youth, and their families and caregivers, who have a
substance use disorder or who are at risk for developing a substance
use disorder.
Revenue Sections/AOD :
(E) Youth-focused substance use disorder treatment programs that are
culturally and gender competent, trauma-informed, evidence-based
and provide a continuum of care that includes screening and
assessment (substance use disorder as well as mental health), early
intervention, active treatment, family involvement, case management,
overdose prevention, prevention of communicable diseases related to
substance use, relapse management for substance use and other cooccurring behavioral health disorders, vocational services, literacy
services, parenting classes, family therapy and counseling services,
medication-assisted treatments, psychiatric medication and
psychotherapy. When indicated, referrals must be made to other
providers.
Revenue Sections/AOD :
(F) To the extent permitted by law and where indicated, interventions
shall utilize a two-generation approach to addressing substance use
disorders with the capacity to treat youth and adults together. This
would include supporting the development of family-based
interventions that address substance use disorders and related
problems within the context of families, including parents, foster
parents, caregivers and all their children
Revenue Sections/AOD :
(G) Programs to assist individuals, as well as families and friends of
drug using young people, to reduce the stigma associated with
substance use including being diagnosed with a substance use disorder
or seeking substance use disorder services. This includes peer-run
outreach and education to reduce stigma, anti-stigma campaigns, and
community recovery networks
Revenue Sections/AOD :
(H) Workforce training and wage structures that increase the hiring
pool of behavioral health staff with substance use disorder prevention
and treatment expertise. Provide ongoing education and coaching that
increases substance use treatment providers’ core competencies and
trains providers on promising and evidenced-based practices.
(I) Construction of community-based youth treatment facilities.
Revenue Sections/AOD :
• (J) The departments may contract with each county behavioral health
program for the provision of services.
• (K) Funds shall be allocated to counties based on demonstrated need,
including the number of youth in the county, the prevalence of substance
use disorders among adults, and confirmed through statistical data,
validated assessments or submitted reports prepared by the applicable
county to demonstrate and validate need.
• (L) The departments shall periodically evaluate the programs they are
funding to determine the effectiveness of the programs.
• (M) The departments may use up to four percent (4%) of the moneys
allocated to the Youth Education, Prevention, Early Intervention and
Treatment Account for administrative costs related to implementation,
evaluation and oversight of the programs.
Revenue Sections/AOD :
(N) If the Department of Finance ever determines that funding pursuant
to marijuana taxation exceeds demand for youth prevention and
treatment services in the state, the departments shall provide a plan to
the Department of Finance to provide treatment services to adults as
well as youth using these funds.
(O) The departments shall solicit input from volunteer health
organizations, physicians who treat addiction, treatment researchers,
family therapy and counseling providers, and professional education
associations with relevant expertise as to the administration of any
grants made pursuant to this paragraph.
MJ DUI
Will California get it right,
or will our roads become
more deadly?
Not your parent’s pot
Will California get it right, or
will the new pot potency
damage adolescent brains?
Setting the tone for the next generation
Can revenues and proposed programs
teach a generation to be healthy about
all substances?
The New ER
Is California ready for
the rise in ER cases?
Edibles
Will California “get it
right” when it comes to
new products,
enticements, and
advertising?
Stacks of money
Will the promise of endless revenue be a
reality, or will getting it right become
Proposition 36, or the California Lottery?
To download this presentation:
ccapp.us/membership/faq