close
close

Measures in North Dakota would eliminate local property taxes and legalize recreational marijuana

Measures in North Dakota would eliminate local property taxes and legalize recreational marijuana

North Dakota voters could ban most local property taxes, which would likely lead to dramatic cuts in state services. This is a measure in Tuesday's general election.

The vote also includes four other proposals, including one that calls for this Legalization of recreational marijuana and another is intended to make it more difficult to change the state constitution.

The measure to eliminate local property taxes based on assessed value would force the state to provide local governments with an estimated $3.15 billion in replacement revenue in each two-year budget, according to a legislative panel. The state now projects general tax revenues of about $5 billion for the current two-year budget.

Supporters of the proposed cuts say rising property taxes will increasingly frustrate voters and make the tax system difficult to understand. Opponents say the measure would force lawmakers to make massive cuts to government services.

Marijuana is also on the ballot as North Dakota voters decide whether to legalize recreational possession and use of the drug. North Dakota is one of the few states, including Florida and South Dakota, that have put measures on recreational marijuana use before voters. Two dozen states have legalized recreational marijuana, most recently Ohio in 2023.

North Dakota voters rejected previous measures in 2018 and 2022. The state Senate in 2021 rejected two legalization and taxation bills passed by the House of Representatives.

The measure would legalize recreational use of marijuana for people 21 and older at home and, if permitted, on other people's private property. The measure also sets numerous production and processing regulations, prohibited uses – such as in public or in vehicles – and would allow plants to be grown at home.

It includes maximum purchase and possession amounts of 1 ounce of dried leaves or flowers, 4 grams of a cannabinoid concentrate, 1,500 milligrams of total THC in the form of a cannabis product, and 300 milligrams of an edible product. Up to seven marijuana production facilities and 18 pharmacies would be allowed.

Supporters say the measure would allow law enforcement to focus limited resources on more important issues like fentanyl. Opponents say marijuana has harmful physiological and social effects.

Voters will also decide whether to add requirements for citizen-initiated constitutional measures. Such initiatives have been a simmering issue in the legislature for years because of the impression that the state constitution is too easy to change.

The measure proposed by the Legislature would limit constitutional initiatives to a single issue, require that only eligible voters circulate and sign initiative petitions, increase the number of signatures required to submit petitions and require that such measures be passed in both primary and primary elections general elections.

Republican Sen. Janne Myrdal, who introduced the measure, said the state Constitution “stands naked on Main Street in North Dakota, and anyone … from California or New York can throw a dart and change the game for $1 million.” the law in North Dakota.”

Myrdal, an anti-abortion leader in the House, denied that the measure was an attempt to block an abortion rights initiative. States across the country – including North Dakota's neighbors Montana and South Dakota – are experiencing a reversal of power following the fall of Roe v. Wade the introduction of such measures.

North Dakota lawmakers have grumbled in recent years over the origins and funding of ballot initiatives that added crime victim rights, ethics rules and term limits to the state constitution. Opponents say the new proposed restrictions represent an infringement on civic democracy.

The other two measures include constitutional amendments from the Legislature to change outdated disability provisions in the state constitution and administrative changes to the state's nearly $11 billion in oil tax savings.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *