Last updated : December 23, 2024
Supporters of legalizing marijuana in the state of Ohio will have to wait a little bit longer to put their concerns to the voters, following the failure of a state-wide petition to gain enough signatures for the measure to appear on the state’s ballot this November. The effort was backed by Responsible Ohio, a political action committee with the stated purpose of seeing that pot becomes legal or decriminalized within the state. Responsible Ohio reportedly spent around $20 million on the effort, but it appears to have fallen almost 30,000 signatures short of the required threshold to be placed on the Nov. 3 ballot.
Under Ohio law, a measure must garner a number of signatures equal to 5-percent of the total number votes cast in the last gubernatorial election, or a total of 305,591 signatures. Likewise, the petition must obtain signatures from residents of 44 of the state’s 88 counties. The petitioners did get signatures from 77 counties, clearing that threshold, but they only were able to gather a total of 276,082 signatures that were validated by the Secretary of State’s office.
The PAC had submitted 695,273 signatures, as it is common practice for organizers of ballot initiative petition drives to try to obtain more than twice the required total in anticipation that many signatures with invalidated during the process. Responsible Ohio has asked a court to look into the discrepancy, and in the interim the PAC’s leaders have stated that they will continue to seek additional signatures until the July 30 deadline for petitions. The group said that around 40,000 more signatures have not yet been accounted for.
Responsible Ohio’s leaders have stated their intention to appeal the issue to state’s Supreme Court if necessary in order to see that all valid signatures have been properly counted.
The Secretary of State’s office has said that discrepancies were found in several counties between digital and paper version of the signatures. It is not uncommon during ballot initiative drives for signatures to be tossed out for a variety of reasons. In many cases, signers of petitions sign more than once, and some use names that are not registered as voters in the counties of residence.
Opponents of the measure have questioned the techniques used by Responsible Ohio, and they have described the effort as “shoddy.” They also have expressed concerns that the PAC is largely backed by investors based in Cincinnati. Some opponents of the initiative feel that the effort is largely aimed at securing a monopoly on the sale of legal weed in the state for those firms, rather than a sincere effort to promote the legalization of the drug for all citizens of the state.
The ballot measure, as proposed, would allow the recreational use of marijuana by all citizens of the state of Ohio who are 18 years of age or older. However, the provision that has left even some pro-pot supporters upset is one that would designate 10 specific facilities in the state as the only locations that would be allowed to grow the plant. These facilities would be investor-owned and operated for commercial purposes, a stipulation that has not appeared in other pro-marijuana legislation passed elsewhere in the Untied States.
Supporters of the bill say that it would allow residents of the state to grow their own pot plants for personal use. Those terms, however, would limit personal usage growers to no more than four plants total. It would only allow individuals 21 years of age or older to grow marijuana plants, and it would decriminalize possession of any amount of weed that was 8 ounces or less.
There is also a competing pro-pot proposal called the Fresh Start Act. Organizers of that drive say that they currently have 500 petitioners in the field seeking signatures for the ballot initiative. The bill would include reviews of current criminal sentences brought down against non-violent marijuana law offenders. This would allow convicted individuals to ask the court to review their current sentences. Previously sentenced individuals who’ve completed their prison terms would also have the chance to ask the court to review their records at an expungement hearing.
It remains to be seen whether either measure, or perhaps both measures, will be put to voters in November.
