Legalization, not disturbing. Revenue distribution, disturbing.

First is 35% into the General Operating Fund. This revenue will disappear. That is what General Operating Funds do.

Next is 25% to Restoring our Communities Fund. Based on the wording in the article I read, this revenue will go to communities “devastated” by discriminatory drug enforcement or the failed “war on drugs.” $20 million low interest loan program for starting a licensed cannabis business for “social equity applicants” including those who have lived in a “disproportionately impacted area.”

If a county has 3 million people, and 1 million are impacted by drugs, is that any more devastating than a county that has 30,000 people, with 10,000 of them impacted? It should not be determined by how many, but by what percentage.

What exactly is a “social equity applicant?” Who determines which communities have been “devastated” and where the “disproportionately impacted areas” are?

Then there is 20% for mental health and substance abuse treatment, and 8% for law enforcement training, and 2% for public drug education.

Couldn’t we just put the 20% in to the mysterious General Operating Fund, and give the 35% to the mental health and substance abuse treatment?

10% for paying bills, which bills? The oldest, the biggest, the most urgent, the ones with the most impact on health, education and welfare of the general public, or the ones that will make the most friends in political circles?

Karen Limes