North Dakota voters to decide on legalizing recreational cannabis for third time in 6 years – Bismarck Tribune

Supporters of Measure 5 say the proposal differs from previous versions because it was created by North Dakotans, aligns with local values ​​and promises an economic boost through taxes and fees. Opponents argue that legalization raises social and enforcement issues and that it lacks the economic benefits that supporters claim.

If approved, the measure would legalize marijuana for those over 21 and place limits on the number of commercial grow facilities and dispensaries. It would also limit the number of personal plants allowed and limit the amount of cannabis and THC-based products a person can possess.

The chairman of the committee sponsoring the measure, Steve Bakken, told the Tribune that he believes legalizing marijuana in North Dakota is “just a matter of time” and that this year’s version gives full control to the Legislature and the state. Bakken is a member of the Burley County Commission and a former mayor of Bismarck.

“We wanted to make sure that what ends up being passed is applicable to law enforcement, the legislature, the attorney general’s office, the judiciary and fits within the century-old code of laws that already exist,” Bakken said.

“And that’s why we created Measure 5 extremely conservatively — so that the state has all the power, (and) all the power to run it, to license it, to regulate it, to make sure that the quality is there, to make sure that the purity is there and then afterwards to tax it as they saw fit.”

The measure’s estimated fiscal impact for the 2025-27 state budget period includes $10.2 million in revenue, $8.3 million in costs and an unspecified amount of additional costs related to behavioral health and social impacts, according to the ballot language.

Bakken also stressed that the wording in the measure does nothing to reduce the restrictions that public and private employers may already have on drug use.

“If you are required to take a drug test now, you will still have to take a drug test. None of that changes,” Bakken said. “And opponents like to say we have a shortage of workers.” This does not change the group of workers. Nothing about the group of workers changes with Measure 5.”

Mark Freese, a former Bismarck police officer and criminal defense attorney of 20 years based in Fargo, advocates for the legalization of cannabis because he believes the continued crime associated with its use is bad policy.

“I do not advocate the use of marijuana. I advocate legalizing the conduct of adults 21 or older — who can make their own decisions — and stop criminalizing generations upon generations of our citizens,” Freese said.

“People who use marijuana will continue to use marijuana. If they can’t get it legally in North Dakota, they’ll get it legally in Canada, Montana or Minnesota, or after November, South Dakota, or wherever they get it,” he said.

Pat Finken, chairman of the Brighter Future Alliance, is believed to be the architect behind the failure of previous legalization efforts in 2018 and 2022.

“What it comes down to is simple: Marijuana is not safe,” Finken said. “This is not some harmless entertainment opportunity. It’s a drug.”

And according to Finken, and viewpoints expressed by others, including the state’s Catholic bishops, normalizing drug use is not good for society as a whole.

In an open letter, Bishops David Kagan and John Folda of the Diocese of Bismarck and Fargo, respectively, reminded parishioners that Pope Francis recently spoke out against drug legalization because of potentially adverse socioeconomic effects.

Finken also refuted Bakken’s statement that legalizing marijuana does not affect the labor market.

Many of the jobs Finken talked about are in the transportation and energy sectors, where employers require pre-employment and random drug testing.

“They can’t hire people without a clean drug screen, and that’s getting harder and harder every day. That goes for truck drivers, oil field workers, all of that,” he said. “I mean, it’s hard enough to find people to work… And we need more soldiers. We need more heavy equipment operators, more truck drivers, all those things. And that works against all of that.”

Freese countered some of the opponents’ arguments, stressing that decriminalizing marijuana use could instead be positive in terms of societal impact. Marijuana convictions, Freese said, prevent people from serving in the military, working in various federal jobs, enrolling in medical or pharmacy school and, in some cases, getting access to housing.

“The consequences of these crimes do not match the behavior,” Freese said. “I think there are probably going to be both positive and negative social consequences coming out of it (legalization). But at the end of the day, the negative consequences of reducing our workforce because they are criminals, denying people those opportunities that I discussed earlier, I think are not worth the cost of continuing to support this crime.”

Recreational cannabis is legal in 24 states, two US territories (Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands) and the District of Columbia, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Montana and Minnesota allow it, and dispensaries in Montana report that more than 30 percent of customers come from North Dakota, according to Bakken. Passage of Measure 5, he argued, would encourage those consumers to buy locally, boosting North Dakota’s revenue and helping residents avoid potential trouble with federal authorities.

“Because it’s not legal in North Dakota, as soon as you cross that state line, you’re now committing a federal crime. You are trafficking. But people don’t connect the two,” Bakken explained.

Previous attempts to legalize marijuana in 2018 and 2022 failed. More than 59 percent of voters rejected legalization in 2018, and nearly 55 percent rejected the 2022 attempt, according to the North Dakota Secretary of State’s office.

If voters approve the legalization of marijuana, then, according to the wording contained in Measure 5, the legal use of cannabis by people 21 and older would take effect on December 5. Passage of the measure would also require the state Department of Health and Human Services to develop and implement an adult cannabis use program that would allow the commercial production and processing of cannabis and the sale of marijuana products no later than Oct. 1 2025

Mandan Police Chief Jason Zeigler said the language contained in the measure would create difficulties for law enforcement. Ziegler also serves as president of the North Dakota Association of Chiefs of Police, a group that includes county sheriffs, deputies and police officers, and opposes pot legalization.

“People who say it’s not addictive — there are studies that show it’s addictive. It is just as addictive, if not more so, than alcohol,” Ziegler said. “We can’t control alcohol, can we? We still have DUI issues.”

From a law enforcement perspective, Ziegler pointed to the tests and measures now used to determine if a person is intoxicated. THC, the active ingredient that gives the user a high, can be detected in a person’s blood and urine long after the intoxicating effects wear off—in many cases, up to 30 days. Ziegler noted that while field breath tests for alcohol are not considered invasive, blood tests to detect THC levels may be — and may require law enforcement to obtain a search warrant for each test. Similarly, saliva tests in development may also be considered invasive, requiring a warrant.

“You have to go in and avoid the mouth to get it out. So what makes a reasonable person think we wouldn’t have to have a search warrant for that, too?” asked Ziegler. “We should have it for all kinds of other crimes, like rapes and sexual crimes and stuff. That is true. Why not have him for that?’

Ziegler said he also worries about the potential abuse of edibles, citing the potential for overdose, especially in children.

Bakken said he and other supporters of Measure 5 are well aware of opposing positions, but also believe legalization, regulation and revenue generation are valid reasons for passage.

“Are you saying no because you want to prevent him from entering the country?” Well, it’s already here, so if you’re not going to limit it in a way that gives the state the power and the power to do it, to manage that resource, then you run the risk of having an unrestricted drug trade,” Bakken said.