PHOENIX — The mayor of Colorado’s second-largest city is urging ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ns not to legalize recreational use of marijuana, even as he admits voters in his state want to keep their nearly 4-year-old law.
Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers said the law approved by voters there has had dire consequences, including increased teen use and more criminal activity.
He said there is probably less support for the measure than when it was approved in 2012 by a margin of 54.8 percent to 45.1 percent.
But not that much less.
“Do I think that the citizens of Colorado would repeal it tomorrow? Probably not,†he said.
Suthers said Proposition 64 remains popular in his home state because voters are uninformed.
“People in law enforcement, people running a city, things like that, they’re going to see the neighborhood problems, they’re going to see the increase in DUIs, they’re going to see the school problems and things like that,†he said. “A lot of the average citizens are not going to see all that.â€
People are also reading…
Suthers and a police officer from Colorado were brought to ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ by foes of Proposition 205, which is on ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥â€™s ballot in November. The measure would allow anyone 21 and older to possess and use up to an ounce of marijuana as well as grow their own plants.
“It clearly will make our roads more dangerous, and Prop. 205 will clearly endanger ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥â€™s children,†said Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk. She chairs ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ns for Responsible Drug Policy, the group working to defeat the initiative.
“This is clearly not guesswork,†Polk continued. “Colorado passed a similar initiative for recreational marijuana in the year 2012 and is now suffering a whole host of negative consequences.â€
Suthers, under questioning, acknowledged that not all the claims can be linked to that law.
For example, he is not disputing statistics from the Colorado health department that show teen use of marijuana has not increased since recreational use became legal after the 2012 vote. Instead, he said, the big jump came after the 2006 vote to legalize medical marijuana — a law similar to what ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ already has.
But Suthers said ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ faces a bigger risk because its teen drug use now is lower than Colorado’s was in 2012.
He said ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ voters should wait until the Colorado law has been in effect for five full years — meaning two years from now — to see whether they still believe recreational use of marijuana is desirable.
That’s also the message from Jim Gerhardt, an officer with the Thornton Police Department and vice president of the Colorado Drug Investigators Association. He said legalizing recreational use did not reduce crime as had been advertised.
“There’s absolutely no reason to rush into this,†Gerhardt said. He said it’s easy for voters to adopt laws allowing recreational use but “it’s very, very difficult to undo what we’ve done.â€
As bad as they say the Colorado law is, Polk and other foes say there are some substantial differences that make the ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ proposal worse.
For example, the Colorado law makes the presence of five nanograms of THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, a “permissible inference†for jurors to conclude a motorist is impaired.
Proposition 205 does say driving while impaired remains illegal. But there is no similar language, meaning prosecutors would have to prove, on a case-by-case basis, that an individual was impaired while behind the wheel.
In Colorado, cities can refuse to allow marijuana dispensaries. There is no such option in the ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ measure.
Proposition 205 would allow for home delivery of marijuana.
And the ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ Constitution sharply restricts the ability of lawmakers to make changes in the initiative if there are unanticipated problems.
