If Measure 91 passes, Albany will have to figure out if it can collect a sales tax on marijuana.
Albany and other cities, including Lebanon, now have given voters another reason to support Ballot Measure 91, the legalization and state taxation of recreational marijuana. The cities have done so by enacting local sales taxes of 10 percent on recreational weed sales within their jurisdiction. Now voters may want to approve the state measure just to see their local city councils get slapped down for wanting to tax something that the ballot measure specifically says they must not tax.
The theory behind this potential local money grab is that if cities already have a local tax when a state law forbidding such a tax is passed, then the local tax can stand. Even it that was true in some cases, a very shaky supposition, then it still is obviously untrue in this particular case. Why? Because cities can’t very well tax something that under present law is illegal. So they don’t have any pre-existing tax on recreational marijuana at all. Their taxes don’t take effect until Measure 91 becomes law. So the very law change that would give meaning to their tax maneuver also cancels it at the same time.
Without further debate on this issue, three members of the Albany council, Rich Kellum, Floyd Collins and Bessie Johnson, and tie-breaking Mayor Sharon Konopa voted for the marijuana sales tax on Wednesday night. Ray Kopczynski, Bill Coburn and Dick Olsen voted no.
Konopa says the tax-enacting ordinance can be brought back for another look in November after the state election is over and the legality of local taxes is clearer. If the courts get involved, the legal question will remain unsettled for years. But citizens who can read will know that the council — and many others around the state — did something that Measure 91 specifically forbids. So much for a government of laws. (hh)
Like you said, the recreational use and taxing of marijuana is illegal until the voters say it isn’t.
But somehow the Mayor and three councilors perceive a door that is shutting, so they rush to run through it.
Their greed blinds them from the reality that the door doesn’t even exist.
Your point and opinion about these local sales tax ordinances is a fair observation, but in the end I would hope a voters decision for or against this measure is much more serious than for one to cast a vote motivated by a desire to play a game of gotcha with local government.
I commend counselors Olsen, Kopczynski, and Coburn for the common sense they have demonstrated on this particular issue.
As for the others, you have demonstrated beyond all doubt that your priorities are to serve government, NOT the people you govern. And that, to me, is indefensible at any level.
Stop serving your egos and start serving the public. This lunacy must end. NOW!
I hope clear hearts and minds prevail in the Measure 91, so this tax ordinance becomes a moot point. For many reasons, I’m voting NO. I don’t want it to become easier to obtain, I don’t want local services paid for by sin taxes. I don’t want DUI’s to double in this town! You want to open up a can of worms here? Vote yes. For those three councilmen and one mayor that voted to accept the ordinance, you have become the can opener that I will not vote for again.