To the editor:

Advocates for the ballot initiative to legalize recreational marijuana have been trying to distract Massachusetts voters and keep the true issues raised by the proposal out of sight. Their initiative, crafted by and for industry consultants and venture capitalists, is boilerplate language designed to keep us from taking a thoughtful, deliberate approach to updating our marijuana laws to Massachusetts concerns.

The first indication of the distraction strategy is in the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol’s (CRMLA) response to my creating Safe Cannabis Massachusetts to oppose the ballot question. Rather than making a case for their plan, they resorted to personal attacks. They’ve picketed my office and clients. They say I’m motivated by personal gain, even though my work and that of those involved with me in this effort has been on a volunteer basis.

I’ve worked on public health issues in Massachusetts for the past 15 years. My opposition to the CRMLA scheme is based in the conviction that this initiative is harmful to Massachusetts communities.

CRMLA, on the other hand, relies on a campaign of disinformation and the belief that voters will only read the title of the ballot question and not the following 25 pages. Their plan ties the hands of local governments when determining the number of marijuana stores and locations. In Cambridge, where I live, we’d have to have a minimum of eight pot shops and no ability to call for a buffer zone between playgrounds, daycare centers and other places where children commonly gather. Their plan also legalizes excessive home cultivation of marijuana, up to 12 plants per household ($18,000 worth of weed for “personal use.”) This poses unreasonable risks in terms of youth diversion, home invasions, and liability for landlords and homeowners.

CRMLA is indifferent to the policy implications of legalizing marijuana for recreational use. If they cared about the policy implications and how it impacted Massachusetts communities, they would have created a proposal drafted in Massachusetts instead of cut and pasting from a DC marijuana think tank.They would debate policy positions instead of relying on personal attacks.

Marijuana may one day be federally legalized; but in Massachusetts if we’re going to do it, we should do it right. We shouldn’t use a paint-by-numbers approach designed by people who want to profit from marijuana here but don’t want to live here.

-- Daniel J. Delaney, Safe Cannabis Massachusetts