PRESS RELEASE: DC Marijuana Initiative Supporters Announce Election Night Party

PRESS ADVISORY
8:00pm–11:30pm EST, Tuesday, November 4, 2014

CONTACT: ZACK PESAVENTO
(202) 420-1065
ZACK@DCMJ.ORG

DC Marijuana Initiative Supporters Announce Election Night Party

Proponents of Ballot Initiative 71, which legalizes the cultivation and possession of limited amounts of marijuana in the District of Columbia, will hold an election night party and fundraiser to benefit the DC Central Kitchen. Starting at 8:00pm on Tuesday, November 4, supporters of the “Yes on 71” campaign will gather at Meridian Pint to watch the election results.

Ballot Initiative 71 allows adults over the age of 21 to possess up to two ounces of marijuana, give (but not sell) up to one ounce of marijuana to other adults, and cultivate up to three mature marijuana plants at home. If successful, the bill will be transmitted to Congress for a mandatory review period after lawmakers convene again in January. Without interference, the bill’s provisions could go into effect as soon as April 2015.

WHO: Adam Eidinger, chair, DC Cannabis Campaign; Dr. Malik Burnett, vice-chair, DC Cannabis Campaign; Supporters of Ballot Initiative 71

WHAT: Election Night Fundraiser for DC Central Kitchen

WHERE: Meridian Pint, 3400 11th St NW, Washington, DC 20010

WHEN: Tuesday, November 4 from 8:00 PM to 11:30 PM EST

The DC Cannabis Campaign, Metropolitan Wellness Center, Drug Policy Alliance, Students For Sensible Drug Policy, DC Brau, DC Central Kitchen, Capital City Hydroponics, E.F.F.O.R.T.S. (Employment For Former Offenders Receiving Treatment Services) and Meridian Pint are partnering to support the election night fundraiser. Attendees will be encouraged to make a donation to DC Central Kitchen or bring a canned food item.

The DC Cannabis Campaign is the official campaign committee for Ballot Initiative 71. The campaign is a project of residents from across the District of Columbia, Drug Policy Action, and Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps.

###

PRESS RELEASE: DC Cannabis Campaign Dismisses Obstruction Rumors on Initiative 71

PRESS RELEASE
October 20, 2014

CONTACT: ZACK PESAVENTO
(202) 420-1065
ZACK@DCMJ.ORG

DC Cannabis Campaign Dismisses
Obstruction Rumors on Initiative 71

Joint Public Hearing on October 30 to
Consider Complementary ‘Tax and Regulate’ Bill

WASHINGTON, DC — Supporters of Ballot Initiative 71 will speak at a Joint Public Hearing at the John A. Wilson Building on October 30 that is set to discuss a separate legislative proposal known as the “Marijuana Legalization and Regulation Act of 2014”. Although Ballot Initiative 71 would legalize the cultivation and possession of limited amounts of marijuana in the District of Columbia, it does not address the sale of marijuana due to existing restrictions on ballot measures. Advocates for the “Yes on 71” campaign will push back against reports that the DC Council might supplant the ballot initiative with its own legislation.

“There’s a natural complementarity to the two measures,” said Adam Eidinger, the chair of the DC Cannabis Campaign. “The ballot initiative will provide relief for private residents who continue to face fines and arrests under the current decriminalization regime, while the District Council’s legislation pursues the more complex task of taxing and regulating private businesses.”

A survey of likely voters in September showed 65% support for Ballot Initiative 71. The ballot initiative is subject to a 60-day congressional review period because it amends criminal law. The review period will need to begin once the 114th Congress is in session because the 113th Congress will not have enough time to satisfy the 60-day requirement following the November 4 election. If Congress does nothing, Ballot Initiative 71’s provisions will go into effect once the 60-day review period expires some time in the spring.

DC Cannabis Campaign officials are optimistic about the future of Ballot Initiative 71 following recent meetings with DC Council Chairman Phil Mendelson.

“We expect the District Council to respect the will of the voters who want real marijuana reform,” said Dr. Malik Burnett, the vice chair of the DC Cannabis Campaign and D.C. Policy Manager for the Drug Policy Alliance. ”We feel confident that Ballot Initiative 71 will get a fair shot to pass unimpeded through Congress just like any other bill. Without interference, we could really see a sensible legalization policy go into effect this spring.”

The DC Cannabis Campaign is concerned that people of color continue to face disparities in the enforcement of penalties under the decriminalization law that went into effect on July 17. A Drug Policy Alliance review of records from the Metropolitan Police Department found that 77% of marijuana-related tickets have been issued in neighborhoods that are predominately home to people of color. White marijuana dealers were also found to be 20 times less likely to be arrested than black dealers in 2011 — the highest racial disparity of its kind in the nation.

Ballot Initiative 71 allows adults over the age of 21 to possess up to two ounces of marijuana, give (but not sell) up to one ounce of marijuana to other adults, and cultivate up to three mature marijuana plants at home.

The “Marijuana Legalization and Regulation Act of 2014” would establish a regulatory structure that permits private businesses to cultivate and sell marijuana and marijuana-based products to adults in the District of Columbia. The legislation, which was introduced by Councilmember David Grosso, also creates a special fund to collect marijuana-related revenues for dedicated expenditures.

The District of Columbia’s Committee on Business, Consumer, and Regulatory Affairs and the Committee on Finance and Revenue will hold a Joint Public Hearing at 11:00am EST on October 30 in Room 500 of the John A. Wilson Building at 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.

The DC Cannabis Campaign is the official campaign committee for Ballot Initiative 71. The campaign is a project of residents from across the District of Columbia, Drug Policy Action, and Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps.

###

Press Release: DC Residents Submit Marijuana Voter Initiative For General Election

PRESS RELEASE
January 15, 2014

CONTACT: Adam Eidinger 202-744-2671
Adam@DCMJ.org

DC Residents Submit Marijuana Voter Initiative For General Election

Passage Would Allow Possession of Small Amounts of Marijuana

WASHINGTON, DC – After soliciting comments from the public since October 2013 and working within the District of Columbia’s limited powers afforded to voter initiatives, the DC Cannabis Campaign submitted ballot initiative language on Friday, January 10, 2013. The campaign’s ballot initiative can be viewed at www.DCMJ.org

The proposed initiative is currently being reviewed by the DC Board of Elections and Ethics for legal completeness. The campaign anticipates a public hearing next month. Once approved, the campaign will need to gather over 23,000 signatures from registered voters of the District of Columbia by this summer in order to make it on to the general election ballot in November.

“We’ve listened to the public for three months and worked with stakeholders to submit the most workable language that enshrines marijuana consumer rights, including limited home cultivation,” says Adam Eidinger who submitted the initiative. “Our initiative will restore dignity to a whole group of people living in the shadows, who’ve had opportunities denied for simply using marijuana versus other legal even more dangerous substances.”

The Home Rule Act of the District of Columbia prohibits ballot initiatives from creating taxing authority, like those passed in Colorado and Washington, but the campaign believes that residents should not have to fear government repression for growing, consuming, and possessing marijuana in the privacy of their homes.

“Back in 1998, over 69% of District residents approved a medical marijuana ballot initiative that allowed the home cultivation of cannabis, but in 2010 the Council removed this right,” says Bill Piper of the Drug Policy Alliance. “We want to return this right back to the people.”

“Mayoral candidate and current Ward 6 councilmember Tommy Wells decriminalization of marijuana legislation is a good start for fixing DC’s unjust marijuana laws, “ says Piper. “The next step is allowing DC residents to grow their own supply of marijuana so they are not reliant on the illicit market. Ultimately, the city should tax and regulate marijuana like alcohol.”

When marijuana possession in DC is decriminalized this Spring, home cultivation will not be permitted and will remain a criminal offense. The campaign’s ballot initiative seeks to change this and allow individuals to grow up to six plants inside their homes and a maximum of 12 plants in a residence.

“We allow people to brew beer at home, so why shouldn’t we allow District residents the freedom to grow a few marijuana plants?” asks Eidinger.
For more information visit http://DCMJ.org

###

Washington Times: D.C. proposal would allow ounce of weed, 6 plants per household

“Activists in Washington, D.C., plan to submit an initiative by week’s end that would put marijuana legalization on the ballot in the nation’s capital in November — making the city one of a handful of jurisdictions poised to ask voters to consider the issue this year.

The proposal that is expected to be submitted to the D.C. Board of Elections would allow residents to legally grow up to six marijuana plants per household and possess and transfer up to an ounce of the drug without penalty.

Submission of the ballot language is just the beginning of an arduous process that will require supporters, who have formed a campaign committee and recruited volunteers, to collect thousands of signatures and persuade voters to approve the measure.”

Continue Reading…


SOURCE: Andrea Noble, Washington Times


Also see DCist: Marijuana Activists Will Submit Final Legalization Ballot Initiative This Week


Georgetown Voice: Capital Cannabis – The campaign to legalize marijuana in Washington, D.C.

“Do not make references to anything illegal or you will be asked to leave.”

For four years, that sign hung at Capitol Hemp, formerly the city’s largest vendor of hemp products and artisan glassware. The Adams Morgan headshop stocked everything a stoner would need—pipes, rolling papers, vaporizer equipment—but, of course, these products could only legally be used for consuming tobacco. Selling tobacco accessories becomes peddling drug paraphernalia when “direct or circumstantial evidence” suggests that the clerk would “reasonably know” the merchandise will be used to consume a controlled substance.

Yet, given these parameters, the store was in compliance with District law and generated over $1 million in annual sales. The underground shop served as the unofficial headquarters of the District’s pro-cannabis activists. D.C. flags emblazoned with the pro-statehood slogan “No taxation without representation” joined paintings of hemp leaves lining the walls. A history of D.C.’s medical marijuana program was printed on the counter. Along with smoking instruments, Capitol Hemp also sold books on medical cannabis and marijuana legalization.

All the while, the owners of the store leveraged their success as small-business owners to advocate for reform of hemp laws. In 2010, Capitol Hemp donated $25,000 to help pass California Proposition 19, a voter initiative that sought to legalize all forms of cannabis, including industrial hemp farming. While hemp is genetically related to marijuana, it is not psychoactive. In the United States, selling hemp products is legal, but growing the plant is not.

Even so, on Oct. 26, 2011, D.C. police raided Capitol Hemp, arresting six people. The officers executed a search warrant for selling drug paraphernalia and suspected drug possession. Tests taken at the scene for THC, the psychoactive chemical found in marijuana, were positive.

In exchange for dropping the charges and returning $350,000 in seized glassware, the owners, Adam Eidinger and Alan Amsterdam, agreed to shut down the store, forcing them to lay off their ten employees.

Two days after police raided Capitol Hemp, officers stormed two other Adams Morgan headshops, again seizing property and alleging the sale of paraphernalia. A few months earlier, Mayor Vincent Gray (D) had publicly come out against selling drug paraphernalia.

Eidinger and Amsterdam were anomalies among headshop owners, who usually refrain from any smack of issue advocacy. Until police raided his store, Eidinger had no reason to believe he was breaking any laws. “Historically, headshop owners have been afraid to be political in any way,” Eidinger said. “We worked it out with lawyers ahead of time to make sure our store wasn’t getting us into trouble. They still used it against us.”

A veteran anti-war and anti-GMO activist, Eidinger decided that the closure of his store meant that it was time for him to head a campaign to legalize recreational marijuana in the District of Columbia. “They still said that if you sell hemp, it’s like code that you’re pro-marijuana. Well, yeah, it is. It is. But they were right. We were a store that believed in the legalization of marijuana, and now we all think that’s what I am. They think that’s what I am, so I might as well do it,” he said. “If they had not raided my store, I wouldn’t have taken a leadership role in the campaign.”

Last month, DCMJ, the campaign Eidinger founded, released a draft of a referendum that would legalize recreational use of marijuana for adults over 21. Possession of up to two ounces would be permitted, as would growing up to six cannabis plants for personal use.

A poll conducted by Public Policy Polling released last April found that 63 percent of D.C. residents would support legalizing marijuana and regulating its sale for adults. Moreover, 75 percent of D.C. residents would approve of decriminalization.

Even though support for legalization has ballooned in recent years, anti-drug taboo remains strong. This obstacle, in addition to the tall legal hurdles the measure faces, poses a challenge for advocates of legalization. Offered as a way to help remedy the racial discrepancies in enforcement of drug laws, the proposed law is so far struggling to gain traction among young, predominantly white residents of the city, whom the drug war seldom reaches.

Despite the obstacles and potential pitfalls, marijuana activists remain confident that they can change the law. With other states eyeing legalization in 2014, D.C. could both provide a symbolic victory to pro-marijuana activists and serve as a model for how the rest of the country should proceed. “It’s a serious change, and it’s such a serious change that it could actually be a flipping point switch for the whole country,” Eidinger said.

***

Drug laws have been the subject of differential enforcement for decades. A June 2013 report by the American Civil Liberties Union found that, nationwide, a black person was 3.73 times more likely than a white person to be arrested for marijuana possession between 2001 and 2010, despite similar rates of usage between the two groups.

In fact, the gap in arrest rates between whites and blacks in the District of Columbia is much greater than the national average. While the arrest rate for possession was about 0.185 percent for white Washingtonians, the arrest rate for black Washingtonians was found to be 1.49 percent.

While many observers would blame the inconsistency in enforcement on racial profiling, there are likely several factors at work.

“There are many reasons for the disparity. It may include some amount of racial profiling by police but it may include other stuff, and probably does,” said Art Spitzer, legal director of the ACLU office in Washington, D.C. “There’s lots more police riding around and walking around in Anacostia than there are in the Georgetown University campus.”

Kristopher Baumann, chairman of the D.C. Police Union, explained the discrepancy by saying that all crime is centered in communities predominantly consisting of minorities. “We’ve had large concentrations of criminal activity that’s been going on for two decades, and that’s where unfortunately, the crimes are located,” he said.

Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance agreed that police presence factors into the disparity but says there are other factors at work.

“I would say, unquestionably, the reason racial disparities are so stark is that the police are focused in communities of color,” Piper said. “That begs the question, ‘Why are the police not just patrolling certain areas but searching people?’ I’m pretty sure if the D.C. Police Department went into Georgetown and searched people randomly, they’d find a lot of pot. But those searches would probably stop pretty quickly because they’d get a lot of phone calls from affluent people. So, instead, they patrol the areas of people who have less political clout.”

Nonetheless, concerns about racial disparities in arrest rates prompted D.C. Councilmember Tommy Wells (D-Ward 7) to introduce legislation to the Council decriminalizing possession. Under his proposal, people who are caught with weed would be slapped with a civil fine of $25 instead of facing jail time.

“It’s an issue of social justice,” Wells said in an interview with the Voice last week. “Once you have a criminal charge, you can’t even work on a construction site or get a commercial driver’s license. You may even get kicked out of your housing. The charge dissociates you from society and limits economic opportunities. The ACLU reported that right now, there’s a disproportionate impact on African Americans, and it’s unfair.”

Groups ranging from the ACLU, NAACP, and the Drug Policy Alliance have all expressed support for Wells’s legislation.

“Wells’s bill is a really good start because it ends the mass-arrests of young people of color,” Piper said. “I think once we get rid of mass incarceration, we can have a city-wide conversation about treating marijuana more like alcohol.”

Conversely, while Eidinger thinks that decriminalization would be a positive step, he thinks it wouldn’t go far enough to address the racial disparities associated with marijuana prohibition.

“If you’re going to fine marijuana users $100 or $25 or you’re going to search them and harass and stop them while they’re just trying to go about their business, police are used to doing that,” he said. “I don’t think that much has changed. I mean, the only thing that’s changed is that they’ll put the cuffs on you and they won’t take you to the jail.”

Eidinger also thinks that the Council is only taking up decriminalization now to draw away support for his legalization initiative.

“I think there are nine city councilmembers that are pretty much pro-legalization, but they don’t say it out loud,” he said. “In fact, they’ll only support decriminalization…They want to get decriminalization through the Council and that’s probably going to pass at the end of January.”

Wells’s bill is expected to pass the Council before the end of January. With nine co-sponsors and the support of the Mayor, the measure is assured success.

A few weeks ago, Eidinger said that he would withdraw his proposal if Wells’s decriminalization bill drew support away from legalization. Now, he says, he’ll go forward with his proposal “no matter what.”

***

DCMJ’s draft proposal only legalizes up to two ounces of marijuana, double the amount that was legalized in Colorado last year. The referendum proposal hasn’t been formally submitted to the D.C. Board of Elections yet because Eidinger is waiting to incorporate comments from the public into the draft proposal.

District law prohibits referendum measures from authorizing new taxation or spending. If the initiative is passed next November, it will only legalize cannabis, not regulate its cultivation or sale. In effect, Eidinger is betting that the measure will force D.C.’s hand to set up such a regulatory scheme, even if it is unwilling to do so right now.

In fact, the Council could vote to modify or even repeal the law if it passes. In addition, since Congress retains the power to overturn D.C. laws with impunity, the federal legislature could also interfere with the law taking effect.

But, first, the referendum needs to make it on the ballot. To do that, DCMJ needs to collect the signatures of at least five percent of the voters in the District, which amounts to about 20,000 names.

To do that, DCMJ needs to organize a campaign and raise money. “DCMJ is going to have to raise $350,000 to run a competitive campaign here, to run a professional campaign,” Eidinger said.

***

Activism on the issue is further complicated by the continued criminality and the history of cannabis use in minority communities.

“We really are handicapped by the heavy police presence in the city, the long history of abuse on the issue. …The African American community, which has been doing a lot of organizing, has hesitated to do anything public. People are very nervous,” Eidinger said. “I think a lot of cannabis users are afraid to speak out. …You’re trying to change something that’s a criminal activity right now.”

So far, Eidinger says that the pro-legalization activism has noticeably been missing another cohort: young people.

“I feel that most of the activism is coming from people who are in their 40s and 50s and they’re people who have been working on this issue for a long time,” he said. “Where are the really young people, who are probably the most affected? I don’t know, maybe it’s not the college kids who are getting busted, and it’s just poor black kids in Southeast who are getting busted. I don’t know.”

Eidinger points to a common theme in drug policy activism. Whites are much less affected, so they tend to prioritize the issue less. Piper said he noticed the same general trend. “I’ve always found, generally, that there’s a disconnect on this issue in that it is sometimes hard to get younger, white people really motivated, because to some extent, marijuana is already legal for them. Because they’re less likely to be searched, and caught, and arrested, and, if they are arrested, they’re less likely to do jail time,” he said.

No college campus in the District has organized affiliated campaign committees to legalize marijuana in 2014, even though Eidinger’s proposal has been widely circulated. “Someone needs to step up. I mean, where are the leaders?” Eidinger asked. “I want to see the millennial leaders step it up, and I’m calling it out.”

Out of several progressive campus groups, only a representative from Georgetown Solidarity Committee said they may support the proposal in due time. “This [issue] presumably falls under that umbrella, mostly because of the catastrophic impact drug laws have had on urban communities and low-income individuals,” Alexandros Taliadoros (SFS ‘14), an active member of GSC wrote in an email to the Voice. “While it’s possible that Solidarity might support the ballot initiative, we have not discussed it as a group.”

***

Closer to home, it remains to be seen whether the University will lessen the punishment for students caught in possession of marijuana once it is either decriminalized or legalized. The student code of conduct was changed earlier this year to get rid of the tiered system against which the severity of violations was judged. Now, each violation is taken on a case-by-case basis, though marijuana infractions historically carried a heavier penalty than being caught drinking alcohol underage.

“Federal law prohibits possession, manufacturing, use of marijuana. We continue to comply with federal laws,” Rachel Pugh, director of media relations, wrote in an email to the Voice.

Additionally, there are no formal changes in the works for the student code of conduct. “The Office of Student Conduct is not planning at this time to make any changes to its policies regarding the decriminalization of marijuana,” Whitney Maddox, judicial coordinator at the Office of Student Conduct wrote in an email to the Voice. “Any changes that occur in the policies or the Code of Student Conduct must be discussed and vetted through the Disciplinary Review Committee.”

Georgetown University Police Chief Jay Gruber did not respond to a request for comment regarding how GUPD would change its policies if marijuana is legalized.

***

For DCMJ, much work remains to be done. Over 5,000 have signed up to help the organization collect signatures, but Eidinger knows only a portion of them will show up.

Still, activists sense a shift in the national conversation on drug policy over the past few years. Asked if he had any reservations for legalization in D.C., Bill Piper wasn’t too worried. “I’m not that concerned because I think the tide is turning very quickly,” he said. “I think 5 years ago, if D.C. legalized or even decriminalized marijuana, it would have been major news. Now, it’s more of the same.”

Given the altered climate, activists no longer have to rely on protests or civil disobedience to get their message across. Now, it’s more about the ground game, like it is for mainstream movements. “Our tactics have changed,” Eidinger said. “We don’t have to get arrested on this issue, we do have to get it on the ballot.”


Source: Georgetown Voice

Legislative Summary: Simple Possession of Small Quantities Act (B20-409)

This legislative summary was written by Grant Smith, Policy Manager, Office of National Affairs at the Drug Policy Alliance:


On July 10, 2013, Councilmember Tommy Wells (D- Ward 6) introduced the “Simple Possession of Small Quantities of Marijuana Decriminalization Act of 2013” (Bill Number 20-409). This bill was co- introduced or co-sponsored by nine out of thirteen Councilmembers. The legislation would reform D.C. law to eliminate criminal penalties for possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less or paraphernalia intended to use or possess marijuana weighing one ounce or less. This legislative summary outlines how the legislation as it was introduced would reform D.C.’s marijuana law.

Overview

This legislation was co-introduced by Councilmembers Barry (D-Ward 8); McDuffie (D-Ward 5); Evans (D- Ward 2); Bonds (D-At Large); Grosso (I-At Large); Graham (D-Ward 1); and Cheh (D-Ward 3).

This legislation is co-sponsored by Councilmembers Mendelson (D-Chairman) and Catania (I-At Large).

This legislation has not received support from Councilmembers Alexander (D-Ward 7); Orange (D- At Large); or Bowser (D-Ward 4).

This legislation was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety, which is chaired by Councilmember Tommy Wells.

Timeline

After holding public hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety scheduled for October 23, 2013 and October 24, 2013, the Committee would next conduct a markup of the legislation and vote on whether to send the bill to the Committee of the Whole comprised of all thirteen Councilmembers for further consideration.

Summary

This legislation consists of eight sections that make a number of revisions to D.C. laws. The first section contains the title of the bill.

Section 2

  • Under this legislation, any person in the District of Columbia found in possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would no longer be subjected to arrest or charged with a misdemeanor criminal offense under D.C. law and would no longer be subject to up to 180 days in prison or up to a $1,000 fine.
  • Possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would become a civil offense punishable by a $100 civil fine and forfeiture of the marijuana that triggered the fine. The fine would likely be issued in a manner similar to how a traffic citation for a civil infraction is issued by the Metropolitan Police Department. A police officer would seize any marijuana and issue the citation.
  • A person under the age of 18 in possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would be subject to a $100 civil fine and forfeiture of the marijuana that triggered the fine but would also be required to attend a drug awareness program within one year of notice to the person under 18 and their parent or legal guardian of its availability.
  • The parents or legal guardian of the person under the age of 18 would be notified of the issuance of the marijuana citation and the availability of a drug awareness program.
  • A qualified drug awareness program would be made available to a person under the age of 18 without cost and a qualified program would be required to provide at least four hours of group discussion or instruction based on science and evidence-based principles and practices specific to the use and misuse of marijuana, alcohol and other drugs.
  • A person under the age of 18 who fails to complete the four hours of a drug awareness program within one year of its availability would be subject to eight hours of court-ordered community service and an additional $200 fine.
  • Any person in the District of Columbia found in possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would not be subject to any additional penalty, sanction or disqualification for engaging in such conduct other than the penalties described above.
  • Under this legislation, the possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would not warrant or authorize the seizure of a person’s property under D.C. civil asset forfeiture laws. A person whose only conduct was possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would not face civil asset forfeiture of property such as vehicles, real estate or other property for that conduct but would still face seizure of any marijuana.
  • D.C. laws are revised to specify that transfering (or “sharing”) marijuana weighing one ounce or less without renumeration (expectation or receipt of money, services, favors or other forms of tangible or intangible compensation) would no longer be treated as marijuana distribution or manufacturing. Presently, the act of sharing marijuana under D.C. law is treated the same as distributing or selling marijuana.

Section 3

  • Under this legislation, any person found in the District of Columbia possessing paraphernalia for the purpose of consuming or storing marijuana weighing one ounce or less would no longer be subjected to arrest or charged with a misdemeanor criminal offense under D.C. law punishable by up to 30 days in prison and a fine.
  • Possession of paraphernalia for the purpose of consuming, carrying or storing marijuana weighing one ounce or less would no longer be a criminal or civil offense and would become lawful conduct under D.C. law.
  • Transferring (or “sharing”) paraphernalia intended to be used to consume, carry or store marijuana weighing less than one ounce without renumeration (expectation or receipt of money, services, favors or other forms of tangible or intangible compensation) would no longer be a criminal or civil offense and would become lawful conduct under D.C. law.

Section 4

  • Under this legislation, a person whose only unlawful conduct was possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would not furnish cause or authorize a judge to issue a search warrant and subsequent seizure of any property other than seizure of any amount of marijuana.

Section 5

  • This legislation amends D.C. Code pertaining to public assistance to clarify that a person who commits the civil violation of possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would generally not be rendered ineligible for public assistance.

Section 6

  • This legislation amends D.C. Code to clarify that a person who commits the civil violation of possession of marijuana weighing one ounce or less would not have their D.C. issued drivers’ license suspended or revoked.

Section 7

  • This section pertains to the projected cost of implementing this legislation.

Section 8

  • This legislation would take effect following approval by the Mayor (or in the event of a veto by the Mayor, action by the Council to override the veto) and a 60 day period of review by the United States Congress.

For additional information, please contact Grant Smith, Policy Manager, Office of National Affairs at the Drug Policy Alliance gsmith@drugpolicy.org or 202-683-2984

Letter to DC Councilmembers

Dear Councilmember:

The undersigned organizations call upon you to co-sponsor and prioritize passage of legislation that would eliminate all penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana under District of Columbia law. Residents of the District of Columbia are arrested for marijuana possession at greater rates than residents of any U.S. state and almost any U.S. city, and the District spends more per capita on marijuana arrests than any other state in the country.

We are appalled by the waste of taxpayer dollars, law enforcement resources and time expended on marijuana possession arrests in D.C., the onerous collateral consequences that follow an arrest, as well as the stark and unacceptable racial disparities in local marijuana law enforcement. We join many of our fellow D.C. residents in support of legal possession of up to two ounces of marijuana in the District of Columbia.

African Americans comprise just over half the D.C. population, but accounted for more than nine out of every ten marijuana possession arrests in 2010, according to MPD data recently analyzed by the American Civil Liberties Union. The overall marijuana arrest rate in D.C. has grown by more than 60 percent since 2001 and — even more disturbing — the racial disparity in D.C. marijuana arrests has widened by more than 75 percent during that period, from 4.1 to 1 in 2001 to 8.0 to 1 in 2010. Literally tens of thousands of D.C. residents – most of whom are African American or Latino – have been arrested for marijuana possession in the past decade.

The consequences of drug arrests and convictions are severe. In the months and years following a marijuana arrest, individuals with criminal records are denied jobs, rental housing, accreditations, loans and other means to achieve economic self-sufficiency and contribute to the tax base. Unable to pursue many occupational, educational and financial opportunities, people with criminal records are marginalized and left vulnerable to homelessness, untreated physical and mental illnesses, substance dependence, and exposure to HIV and other blood-borne infections. People, including young people, who use marijuana should no longer be criminalized or otherwise be penalized. Where legislation seeks to mandate education for young people about drug use, that information should be based on legitimate scientific and medical evidence.

An April 2013 Public Policy Polling survey found that nearly two-thirds of D.C. voters would support a ballot measure that legalized, taxed and regulated marijuana like alcohol. Nearly two- thirds would support a ballot measure that made possession up to an ounce of marijuana for personal use legal for adults 21 or older. 75 percent of D.C. voters expressed support for removing criminal penalties for marijuana possession. 54 percent expressed support for removing criminal penalties for possession of any drug.

California, Connecticut, Nebraska, Colorado and five other states have repealed criminal penalties for marijuana possession while two states are moving forward with taxation and regulation of marijuana like alcohol. Marijuana policy reform legislation is also pending in Congress and in many states at a time when national polling shows a solid majority of Americans support ending marijuana prohibition. We urge and respectfully request that you prioritize repeal
of all criminal and civil penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana in the District of Columbia.

Sincerely,
American Civil Liberties Union of the Nation’s Capital
Bread for the City
DCMJ.Org
Drug Policy Alliance
HIPS
NAACP Washington, DC Branch
The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
START at Westminster