I have a dear friend who was pregnant with her first child years ago. She was reading up on pregnancy, childbirth, caring for a newborn, and breast feeding.

She learned about the process of expressing breast milk. One day we were driving, about to get on the highway, which I called the “expressway.” She mentioned that she thought it was strange that people call highways “expressways,” because “express means to squeeze out your breast milk.”

I pointed out that the word “express” means lots of things. She quickly realized I was right, and I quickly realized that she was so incredibly wrapped up in the changes that were happening within her body, and the plans that she had to make for the near future, that she just wasn’t thinking of other meanings of the word.

“Regulate” means a few different things.  www.merriam-webster.com defines it as:
to govern or direct according to rule
to bring under the control of law or constituted authority
to make regulations for or concerning
to bring order, method, or uniformity to
to fix or adjust the time, amount, degree, or rate of

But to pro-pot activists, “regulate” is code for “legalize.”

I get that – “regulate” marijuana means to bring it under the control of government rules and regulations, and out of the control of the black market. It’s a valid use of the word, just as expressing breast milk is a valid use of the root “express.” And one way to bring pot under the control of legal authorities is to make it legal.

The most extreme example of that can be seen here in Colorado, where pot and pot-infused products are legally sold in retail stores to anyone in the world who is 21 or older, and pot grow operations to supply stores are legal. Here pot is fully legal and is regulated by the State and municipalities. (Growers and sellers have lots of rules to follow, and state employees are supposed to check up on them to verify that the rules are being followed.)

The oldest example of regulation of pot can be seen in The Netherlands, where cannabis coffee shops, although illegal, have been tolerated, as long as they don’t keep more than the tolerated amount of pot, or sell more than the tolerated amount of pot. Large-scale growing of pot is illegal and laws against it are enforced. In The Netherlands, pot remains illegal, but many of the laws against it are not enforced – this is a form of regulation.

The Twitter account associated with this blog has had 3 or 4 comments over the last few months about how the account “doesn’t seem like it’s for regulation.” I understand why the Tweeters have been confused. In their world, “regulate” means legalize, and my tweets are often about problems with pot.

When this blog and Twitter account were started, I didn’t realize that people could be so wrapped up in their issues that a narrow use of the word “regulate” would be the only use they could conceive of. Like my friend who was so obsessed with the baby in her tummy that all she could think of when she heard “express” was breast milk. (Not expressing feelings, not express mail, not espresso, not the expressway.)

One person on Twitter actually asked if the account was a “regulate marijuana page or an anti-marijuana page.” Well, it’s a I’m-stuck-with-it-but-I’m-not-going-to-bend-over-and-take-it-any-way-the-industry-wants-to-give-it-to-me page.

What I support is MEANINGFUL regulation. I don’t think legalization is good. But as a central Denver resident, I am stuck with it, so my focus is on regulation.

This blog was started AFTER we had legalized pot here in Colorado, during the process of drafting up regulations for pot. Although I didn’t vote for legalized pot, I’m not interested in trying to change that in Colorado. I wasn’t interested in pot policy at all until the City of Denver began the process of coming up with rules to regulate pot consumption, pot growth, pot product manufacturing and retail sales within the City limits. This was a process that I felt could be influenced, and needed to be influenced, by citizens. This is why the blog and Twitter account have the word “regulate” in their titles.

I also knew that the real work of regulating (coming up with regulations) BEGAN after legalization. Some pro-pot people seem to think that “legalize” and “regulate” are synonymous, and that the work of “regulation” in Colorado ENDED with legalization. Nope.

Denver has mostly finished drafting its rules. The State seems to be mostly tying up loose ends. But lawsuits and amendments and all kinds of other legal processes still have the potential to change pot rules here in Colorado and in Denver.

Regulation, making the rules and enforcing them, is an ongoing process, and always will be. Sadly, Colorado’s enforcement of its own rules is really ineffective; Colorado’s regulation of pot is ineffective. We still have unlicensed medical marijuana dispensaries operating 4 years after they applied for licenses. And these stores are allowed to apply for retail licenses! Colorado isn’t even enforcing the medical marijuana rules it drew up years ago. 2013 audits of the State’s and the City’s medical marijuana regulation showed that they’d been doing a terrible job.

The tweets and blog posts are meant to show why it’s so important to actually regulate the pot that we’ve legalized, and to actually enforce the rules. Regulation as I see it (strict, meaningful regulation) is fully a part of Amendment 64. The words “regulate” and “regulation” are all over the place in the text of that Amendment.

What I’m realizing now is that effective regulation of such an industry may not be possible, or may take decades to achieve. Despite the tax revenues coming in for the purpose of regulation, we have some bumbling government employees, some unethical businesspeople, and lots of citizens not paying attention. It may just be growing pains, or it may be more like Pandora’s box – we have unleashed lots of things here, that we may never be able to effectively control.

It is easier for Denver residents to prevent a new liquor store from opening than to prevent a new retail marijuana store from opening.

Like the residents of most municipalities in the United States, Denver citizens have a voice in many areas of the governance of our City. Our City ordinances require public hearings for a variety of decisions made by City officials, from zoning variance requests, to neighborhood parking regulations, to liquor licenses.

Hearings at which the “desires” of neighbors are heard and taken into account by the hearing officer include, but are not limited to, hearings for new cabaret licenses (for bars that allow live entertainment or dancing), hearings for new escort service companies (who knew?), and hearings for all types of new liquor licenses, including (but not limited to) those for liquor stores, restaurants, and taverns.

However, hearings at which the “desires” of neighbors are heard and taken into account by the hearing officer are not required for new retail marijuana stores, and will not be until January 1, 2016.¹

At this time, public hearings are required, and up to 3 neighbors from up to 5 blocks away can speak, but needs and desires testimony isn’t admissible.

The Denver Post is pretty pro-pot in my opinion, but even the Denver Post editors favored meaningful public hearings in an editorial last year. “To us, the requirement that residents near a proposed pot shop be able to express their thoughts on the needs and desires of the community is only reasonable.”²

City Council Blocked Neighbor’s Voices

As with much legislation on marijuana, this part of the Denver ordinance was undoubtedly led by the marijuana industry. Were they afraid that that the 1/3 of Denver voters who didn’t want pot legalized would try to prevent stores from opening in their neighborhoods? Why would that matter? If they tried, they’d surely be up against the 2/3 who voted for legal pot… or would they? Not everyone who uses pot wants a pot store next door to them, just as not everyone who consumes alcohol wants a liquor store next door, and not everyone who uses gasoline wants a gas station in the neighborhood. Were the marijuana industry and City Council afraid that the 2/3 of Denver voters who voted for legal pot would realize belatedly what that actually meant to their daily lives? So they made sure the voters wouldn’t have a voice in their own neighborhoods when companies started applying to open retail pot stores?

Amendment 64 allowed retail marijuana stores, and also allowed individual municipalities to decide not to allow retail marijuana stores. Why would Denver lawmakers not allow these voters to have a voice in their own neighborhoods?

Either this was a deliberate silencing of Denver citizens, or else this was a mistake that City Council made. If this was a mistake, the ordinance should be amended. A change in this policy has already been called for in an Open Letter to Denver’s City Council, published on this blog in December.³

If this was a deliberate silencing, everyone needs to understand that citizens’ voices were deliberately silenced.

Potentially Serious Consequences for Neighborhoods

The consequences could be serious for neighborhoods. Studies show that neighborhoods which are saturated with liquor stores have a lot of problems.⁴ Not all, but many, of the harms to neighborhoods with lots of liquor stores are directly translatable to neighborhoods with lots of marijuana stores, such as more frequent drunk driving (more frequent stoned driving), and more alcohol-related car accidents (more pot-related car accidents).

It’s unclear to me whether the neighborhoods have problems because of all the liquor stores, or if the same underlying issues that cause the neighborhoods’ problems also allow lots of liquor stores. In either case, the City should welcome neighbors to voice their desires, and should allow their desires to have some influence. Active citizenship can reduce neighborhood problems, and active citizens can, and do, block new liquor stores, all over this country. If you want the kind of activism in your neighborhood that can stop crime and promote safety (ultimately increasing property values and reducing calls to the cops), you also need to allow neighbors to have a voice in shaping the faces of their neighborhoods as this new marijuana industry moves in.

Legalization: Not Just About Growing and Smoking

Legalization of pot is not just about my friends’ rights to grow it in their basements and smoke it in their back yards.

And it’s not just about plants. A large part of the marijuana market in Colorado is made up of concentrates and infused products, products which are vaporized or eaten, including hash oils, and infused candy, soda, and baked goods. This is a surprise to many people who are unfamiliar with the marijuana industry.⁵ Bubba Kush is to Cheeba Chews as Lactinato Kale is to Stouffer’s frozen Macaroni and Cheese with Broccoli. The hash chocolate taffy and the box of frozen macaroni and cheese and vegetables can be kept longer and can be shipped farther and more easily, enabling large scale production, increasing sales, and making the original plants more profitable.

Legalization of pot is about commercialization of pot.

And this is the big difference between laws that prohibit the use of marijuana and the laws regarding the prohibition of alcohol. Alcohol was already commercialized before our country’s Prohibition Era, and most Americans consumed alcohol pre-prohibition. Before marijuana was made illegal, it had not been commercialized, and not many people used it. With commercialization comes increased use. Commercialization of marijuana is currently in its infancy. This business is going to get a lot bigger.

The tobacco industry is watching this new marijuana industry with interest, and at least one retail marijuana business owner is welcoming the interest, and is hoping to sell out someday for a windfall.⁶

Denver: An Incubator

The City of Denver has become an incubator for this new industry, which has the potential to be like the tobacco industry.⁷ The marijuana industry has the potential to have more power than, and to reach farther into neighborhoods than, the tobacco and alcohol industries. Colorado’s marijuana industry has a near-monopoly on legally growing, legally producing, and legally selling pot plant products and marijuana-infused products. As with tobacco, in Colorado, the manufacturers of marijuana products also grow their own raw materials. Unlike tobacco products, but like alcohol products, marijuana products can legally only be sold in marijuana retail stores. Unlike Colorado liquor store owners, Colorado marijuana store owners have no limit on the number of stores they can own.

The more protection and promotion that cities and states give to the marijuana industry, the richer and more powerful the marijuana industry will become. Marijuana-related companies will have shareholders who will push for profits and growth. Growth will have to be obtained by attracting new users, or getting existing users to use more.

As the industry grows, the cities that gave birth to the industry may no longer have much control over it.

Not Really About Freedom

Legalization of pot is not really about freedom. Legalization of pot is about enriching an industry that has the potential to become, over time, full of just a few large, powerful companies, like the tobacco industry.

Taking citizens’ voices away from the process of deciding what their neighborhoods look like may ultimately turn out to have been a jumpstart to a lobby representing huge, powerful corporations.

Do we need another powerful lobby pushing the rights of corporations over citizens, and heavily influencing our country’s lawmakers? Denver’s City Council is enabling, fostering, and cultivating this very thing.

Notes:

______________________________________________________________________________________

1. Here are Denver’s “Policies and Procedures Pertaining to Retail Marijuana Licensing:” http://www.denvergov.org/portals/723/documents/Retail%20Marijuana%20Licensing%20Procedures.pdf
2. Here’s the Denver Post editorial on meaningful public hearings: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_23879565/public-hearing-every-new-pot-shop
3. Here’s an “Open Letter to Denver’s City Council” by Kathleen Wells and Liz O’Sullivan https://regulateit.wordpress.com/2013/12/13/an-open-letter-to-denvers-city-council/
4. Here’s just one study about neighborhoods with many liquor stores: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdch/Outlet_Density_Associated_Harms_Summary-3.10.2011_373894_7.pdf
5. Here’s a letter to the editor of the Denver Post, from a surprised shopper: http://blogs.denverpost.com/eletters/2014/01/19/difference-between-pot-thc/28262/
6. Here’s an article about several marijuana business owners. http://www.westword.com/2014-01-02/news/ganjapreneurs-in-colorado/full/  The very end of the article mentions selling a marijuana business for a profit, and big alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical companies watching Colorado.
7. Here’s an article that compares the marijuana lobby to the tobacco lobby: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/03/legal-marijuana-colorado-big-tobacco-lobbying

Tonight I explained to a doctor from out of state why medical marijuana in Colorado is not going away with the introduction of recreational retail marijuana.

Medical marijuana stores will continue to exist in Denver, usually in the same buildings as new recreational retail marijuana stores. Dispensaries (medical marijuana stores) are the only entities who can apply for licenses to operate recreational retail pot stores until 2016, but there are several reasons they are keeping the medical side of their businesses instead of converting completely over to recreational.

1. Retail pot sales will be more heavily taxed than medical pot sales. Many people who currently have medical marijuana registry cards will continue to buy on the medical side instead of on the retail side, to save money.

2. The State has set THC limits on retail pot edibles (food or candy products infused with THC), but medical pot edibles have no THC limits. I’ve heard that 40% of the medical market is edibles. This is a huge part of the market, and I suspect this is part of why some stores are keeping the medical side. (Edibles for retail are allowed no more than 100 mg of active THC, but most edible products have more THC than that.)

3. Dispensaries can sell pot to 18, 19, and 20 year olds, but retail stores can’t. These under-21  buyers have to be “patients,” of course, and must have their registry cards. From personal observations of the dispensary next door to my old office, this under-21 age group is a big part of the marijuana market.

Medical marijuana will stay in Colorado, and will begin to pop up in other states. Medical is the marijuana industry’s camel’s-nose-in-the-tent to full legalization. Here’s the strategic plan of the Marijuana Policy Project: http://www.mpp.org/about/strategic-plan-2013.html

A month ago, I had no idea about this strategic plan – I mean, it seemed like this is what was happening here in Colorado, but I didn’t realize it was so organized nation-wide. Now I feel stupid not to have seen it, not to have had a problem with medical marijuana (until the sign spinners and radio ads for the dispensaries started). A great “New Yorker” article from the November 18, 2013 issue discussed the success of the campaign for public acceptance of medical marijuana. I don’t have the article in front of me, so I can’t quote it, but it indicated that the successful approach was something like “We’ll give people a choice between cancer and marijuana. And they’ll pick marijuana.” And they did.

“That’s the smell of pot,” I said, as we entered the Denver parking garage vestibule earlier tonight.

“I know,” said my 10-year-old.

We don’t use marijuana. No one has ever smoked pot in front of my kids. My son first smelled it downtown on the street months ago and asked my husband what the smell was. So now my 10-year-old can identify marijuana when he smells it.

Right now in Colorado, it’s illegal to use marijuana unless you have a “card,” a medical marijuana registry identification card. It’s illegal, even for medical users, to use marijuana in view of, or in a place open to, the general public. If you get caught using in public, your card gets taken away for a year. ¹ Without a card, you can’t currently legally buy marijuana.

Despite the rules and the potential for punishment, some people smoke it on the streets of Denver.

Things will change in less than a month. On January 1^st, recreational pot will become legal under Colorado law. Legalization under State law will undoubtedly increase pot usage in the State, both of Colorado residents, and of marijuana tourists.

The consumption of marijuana for recreational use is going to be regulated very differently from the consumption of medical marijuana. In Denver, recreational users will not be permitted to use on public property, but they will be allowed to use anywhere on private property, even on a front lawn in full view of the public.²

With this huge relaxation of regulations concerning marijuana consumption, I expect a lot more use on public property.

As a parent of 2 kids, ages 8 and 10, I am troubled by this. The more kids see pot used, the more normal they think it is. The more normal kids think pot is, the more likely they are to try it. Pot is really bad for developing brains, especially until you’re in your early 20’s.

If we continue to walk around our Greater Capitol Hill neighborhood for errands, as we always have, my kids will likely be exposed to a lot of pot-smoking. This is a ridiculous thing our City leaders have foisted on us.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Notes:

1. “No patient shall… [e]ngage in the medical use of marijuana in plain view of, or in a place open to, the general public. In addition to any other penalties provided by law, the state health agency shall revoke for a period of one year the registry identification card of any patient found to have willfully violated the provisions of this section or the implementing legislation adopted by the general assembly.” Colo. Const. Art. XVIII, Section 14
2. If you use pot on a front lawn, you have to own the place, rent the place, or have permission from the owner. This ordinance is not finalized yet; the City Council’s final vote is this Monday, December 9.