PROP. 19 BRINGS UP MANY QUESTIONS

For most California ballot measures over the years, the debate has
been about whether the initiative is good or bad for the state.

But what if supporters and opponents don't agree about what the
initiative says?

That's the case with Prop. 19. The measure, on next month's ballot,
would make California the first state in the country to legalize marijuana.

The measure would let people possess and cultivate pot for personal
use. It also would allow, but not require, local and state
governments to regulate and tax the commercial production,
distribution and sale of marijuana.

Supporters say the measure would raise millions in tax revenue while
ending an ineffective fight against a drug comparable to alcohol.

Opponents, including major party candidates for governor and attorney
general, call the measure a "jumbled, legal nightmare." They predict
it will lead to an increase in use, with unknown implications for
communities and the workplace.

California voters seem receptive to the measure. A Field Poll last
month showed Prop. 19 leading among likely voters, 49 to 42 percent.
That compares to a July survey that showed 44 percent for and 48
percent against.

Here are some questions and answers on Prop. 19 and how it could
work. If the measure passes, expect some busy lawyers.

Q: Are there any other places that have legalized marijuana?

A: Not to the extent that Prop. 19 proposes. Portugal and the
Netherlands legalized small amounts of marijuana for personal use.
The Netherlands allows for the sale of small amounts of marijuana, 5
grams, at licensed coffee shops.

Q: What does Prop. 19 say about personal use?

A: If the measure passes, a person 21 or over could have up to 1
ounce for personal use and cultivate marijuana on up to 25 square
feet per residence.

The League of California Cities has said the initiative could allow
someone to fill an entire parcel with pot plants if there was no residence.

People could not use marijuana in the presence of minors or in
public. It also could not be used on school grounds.

Q: How would Prop. 19 govern the commercial production, distribution
and sale of marijuana work?

A: This is the second major part of Prop. 19. How it would translate
into reality is not as clear.

It would be left up to local and state governments to decide whether
to allow the commercial production, distribution and sale of marijuana.

Some state lawmakers who support the measure have said it's likely
that, if Prop. 19 passes, the Legislature will pass a statewide
regulatory regime. That would prevent an archipelago of different
local rules and regulations.

Some local governments, such as Oakland, already have passed
ordinances that would take effect if 19 passes.

Q: How much revenue would Prop. 19 generate?

A: Another unknown. That's because the initiative leaves it up to
local and/or state governments to set the regulation and tax rates on
commercial production, distribution and sale of marijuana.

"We don't know how many local governments would choose to do this,"
said Paul Golaszewski of the Legislative Analyst's Office last month.
"If local governments don't authorize commercial sales, there
wouldn't be any additional tax revenue."

Revenue also would depend on the pre-tax price of marijuana. A Rand
Corporation report last summer estimated that Prop. 19's approval
would cause pre-tax marijuana prices to drop by 80 percent.

Another consideration is tax evasion. Marijuana taxes that are too
high could give rise to a black market.

"There will be a sweet spot somewhere," state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San
Francisco, who supports Prop. 19, said at a September hearing on the measure.

Q: How would Prop. 19 affect the rules of the road?

A: The initiative bans consumption by "the operator of any vehicle,
boat, aircraft while it is being operated, or that impairs the operator."

Currently, someone is presumed drunk if the blood-alcohol level is
0.08 percent or higher. Critics of Prop. 19 note that the initiative
contains no comparable benchmark for marijuana.

"There's no medical statute for marijuana and none proposed. There
will be an increase in drugged driving," Pleasant Hill Police Chief
Peter Dunbar said at a legislative hearing last month.

Prop. 19 supporters said authorities already are trained to recognize
if someone is driving under the influence of a nonalcoholic
substance, such as prescription pills. Any stoned motorists would be
punished as such.

Q: How would Prop. 19 affect workers and employers?

A: The initiative reads that "no person shall be punished, fined,
discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege" because
they smoke pot or otherwise do what's allowed by Prop. 19.

The measure adds that "the existing right of an employer to address
consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee
shall not be affected."

To the California Chamber of Commerce, that means an employer
couldn't do anything about a potentially stoned employee until after
an accident.

Business groups also contend that Prop. 19 would leave employers
vulnerable to lawsuits. An employee dismissed for poor job
performance could claim that he actually was fired because his boss
disapproved of his occasional joint on the weekend.

Opponents disagree with those interpretations.

"Nothing in 19 allows someone to come to work under the influence,"
said Alex Kreit, a criminal-law attorney in San Diego working with
the Prop. 19 campaign.

As for fired workers who claim marijuana as the cause, he said.
"There might be some employees who try to push that argument. But if
I'm their attorney, they're going to have to show me some pretty
persuasive facts."

Q: What will the federal government do if Prop. 19 passes?

A: The Obama administration has generally taken a hands-off approach
to medical marijuana users and dispensaries. But federal authorities
won't stand by if California voters approve Prop. 19.

In a letter made public Friday, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder
said the Justice Department will continue to enforce the federal
Controlled Substances Act.

"We will vigorously enforce the CSA against those individuals and
organizations that possess, manufacture or distribute marijuana for
recreational use, even if such activities are permitted under state
law," Holder wrote.

Q: What about the Federal Drug-Free Workplace program?

A: Federal law requires drug-free workplaces for businesses that
contract with the federal government or receive federal grants.
Participating businesses must certify that they are drug-free.

At last month's hearing, skeptics said Prop. 19 would put employers
at risk of losing their contracts or grants.

Kreit, the criminal law attorney, said that isn't so. "Prop. 19
undoubtedly allows employers to have drug-free workplaces," he said.