SIDES ALIGN OVER POT DECRIMINALIZATION BALLOT QUESTION

Voters will decide a statewide ballot question this week that would
make possessing an ounce or less of marijuana a civil offense instead
of a crime.

But long before Question 2 landed on the state ballot, Framingham
voters were ahead of the curve in tackling the same debate. In 2000,
67 percent of voters in the 6th Middlesex District approved a
non-binding ballot question urging their state representative to
support similar legislation.

Jim Pillsbury, a Framingham resident and an architect of that ballot
question, said lawmakers should have listened back then. "It was time
years ago, and I think it clearly reflects the attitudes of working
people," said Pillsbury, now mounting a write-in campaign for state
Rep. Pam Richardson's seat.

Framingham was the first of many communities to vote on such ballot
questions. Thirty similar measures passed in legislative districts
across the state in the last eight years, but the law has remained the
same - with good reason, say many law enforcement officials.

In a recent talk at Keefe Technical School in Framingham, Middlesex
District Attorney Gerry Leone said the measure sends the wrong message
to children, could reverse a decline in marijuana use among teens and
foster a boom in marijuana sales of an ounce or less.

"It will create a cottage industry, aimed primarily at kids," Leone
said.

Possession of marijuana is now punishable by up to six months in jail
and a fine of up to $500.

A Yes vote on Question 2 would replace criminal penalties with civil
ones. Violators would receive a citation similar to a traffic ticket
and a fine up to $100.

Juveniles would be fined and complete a Department of Youth Services
program, including community service and a drug awareness program, or
pay a bigger fine. Their parents also would be notified.

Proponents say the measure would end the creation of arrest records
called Criminal Offender Record Information reports that can stand in
the way of getting jobs, housing or student loans.

"We think for a single offense, there should be no justice system
involvement," said Whitney Taylor, chairwoman of the Yes on Question 2
campaign.

The referendum also would save millions spent on low-level marijuana
arrests, she said. Eleven other states have adopted similar laws as
long ago as the '70s, with studies showing little evidence that
marijuana use or crime increased, Taylor said.

"We're not asking Massachusetts voters to jump off into some unknown
with us," she said.

But Leone said many of these arguments are misleading. In the Bay
State, first-time marijuana offenders receive only probation and
records of the offense are sealed if they stay clean, he said. Yet
citation records are easily available at town halls, he said.

Concerns about CORI would be better handled by addressing CORI laws
directly, he said.

Police also do not troll for marijuana users, Leone said. In most
cases, marijuana violations are charged in conjunction with other
crimes, he said.

And an ounce of marijuana is worth about $600 - no small amount, Leone
said. He also expressed worries that the initiative is backed by
out-of-state financiers like George Soros.

However, Taylor said even if the offense on a CORI file is sealed, an
employer can still tell the record exists just by looking at a
statewide database - enough for an application to be tossed out.
Meanwhile, it is highly unlikely anyone is going to town halls to look
up civil citations, she said. She said Leone's estimate of the value
of an ounce of marijuana is far off the mark, and in any case,
Question 2 would have no effect on laws against the sale and
trafficking of marijuana.

And plenty of Massachusetts people are behind the measure, including
125,000 people who signed the petition to put Question 2 on the
ballot, Taylor said.

While Taylor said there is no evidence to support this, Leone
predicted an uptick in crime and accidents if the question passes.

Pillsbury said law enforcement has good reason to want the law to stay
unchanged - "There's nothing easier than busting somebody for pot." He
called most arguments against the measure "reefer madness" that has
little basis in science.

He predicted Tuesday's ballot question will mirror Framingham's vote
eight years ago. "Decriminalization will pass and it will pass
overwhelmingly in this state," Pillsbury said.