Massachusetts Lawmakers Skeptical of Ballot Push to End Recreational Marijuana Sales
- The proposed ballot measure seeks to end legal recreational marijuana sales in Massachusetts while keeping the medical marijuana system intact, with a potential vote in November 2024 and implementation by January 1, 2028.
- Opponents, including lawmakers and industry representatives, warn the measure would eliminate regulated stores, harm state and local budgets, and push consumers toward the black market, undermining public safety.
- Supporters criticize the current system for high-potency products and unmet promises, but several lawmakers suggest stronger regulations or more research instead of a full repeal.
- Polling shows 63% of residents oppose the measure, and the state has generated nearly $2 billion in revenue from legal sales, yet the campaign plans to continue pursuing the initiative, setting up a potential major statewide political battle.
A proposed ballot measure to end legal recreational marijuana sales in Massachusetts drew skepticism Monday from lawmakers and sharp criticism from industry reps, as opponents warned it would gut a regulated market without stopping demand. The proposal would repeal adult-use marijuana sales while keeping the state’s medical marijuana system intact. If the Legislature doesn’t take action by May 6, supporters would need to collect 12,429 more signatures by July 1 to place the measure before voters in November. If approved, the change would take effect January 1, 2028.
At a hearing before the Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions, opponents argued the measure would create financial and public safety problems by eliminating licensed stores and pushing consumers back toward unregulated sellers. Caroline Pineau, owner of Stem Haverhill, called the proposal “destructive,” warning that it would “decimate state and local budgets at a time we simply cannot afford it.”
She also argued that the initiative would “replace a taxpaying industry that checks IDs and sells safe product with a market controlled by street dealers.”
That concern surfaced repeatedly during the hearing, including from lawmakers themselves. Representative Michael Day (D) asked Wendy Wakeman, spokesperson for the Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts, whether the proposal would effectively recreate the very black market legalization was intended to curb.
“Are we not setting up a black market with this question?” Day asked.
Wakeman responded, “It’s a great question . . . That’s not how I look at it, but I see your point.”
Wakeman told lawmakers that legalization “has not been a net-positive for the state of Massachusetts,” pointing to concerns about high-potency products and arguing that the legal system has not delivered on promises made to voters. But several members of the committee appeared unconvinced that ending legal sales altogether was the right response.
Senator Cindy Friedman (D) questioned why supporters weren’t pursuing narrower changes, such as more research or tighter safeguards, rather than a full repeal. Senator Paul Feeney (D) similarly suggested that stronger regulations would make more sense than dismantling the entire adult-use system.
The hearing also included renewed criticism of how the petition drive has been carried out. Opponents pointed to earlier allegations that some signature gatherers misrepresented the initiative, telling voters they were signing petitions related to housing, fentanyl or public safety rather than marijuana. Those claims were reviewed by state officials, but the challenge ultimately failed for lack of sufficient admissible evidence.
The broader political picture could also make the initiative a tough sell. Testimony referenced polling released last month showing that 63% of Massachusetts residents oppose the measure. The state’s legal marijuana market has also become a significant source of public revenue, with testimony noting that Massachusetts has collected nearly $2 billion since legal stores launched.
Even so, Wakeman indicated the campaign intends to keep moving forward through the ballot process, setting up what could become a major statewide fight over whether Massachusetts should reverse course on one of its most significant marijuana policy changes.