Florida state Sen. Jason Pizzo (D) recently sued the state over a TV ad that encouraged voters to oppose a legalization initiative that will be on the ballot in November.
Pizzo is accusing the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) of using taxpayer money to produce the ad in an attempt to influence the election, which is illegal under Florida law.
The ad, which ran in September as a public service announcement, warns that law enforcement has a difficult time detecting when a driver is under the influence of marijuana and claims that DUIs increase in states that legalize recreational weed. The ad also warns that insurance premiums increase when a driver is arrested for a DUI.
Pro-cannabis group Smart and Safe Florida, the force behind the legalization initiative, reportedly sent cease-and-desist letters to 54 TV stations running the ad, claiming it was state-funded political messaging pedaled as a public service announcement. Pizzo’s lawsuit says FDOT is not allowed to spend money on elections and is seeking an injunction against the state’s use of tax dollars.
Nebraska officials question weed petitions
Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen is questioning whether nearly 100,000 signatures for medical marijuana legalization were legitimate.
Evnen has filed a claim in court alleging most of the signatures gathered were likely invalid after one of the petition circulators was accused of faking 202 signatures. The circulator was investigated after a county election commissioner found misspelled names, the names of deceased individuals and wrong dates of birth on 38 petition sheets. Investigators claim the circulator chose the names at random from a phone book. He is now facing felony charges.
Evnen and the state’s Attorney General’s Office are questioning whether signatures notarized by Notary Public Jacy Todd — who notarized the circulator’s fake signatures — should be thrown out. Evnen also claims that other circulators and notaries should be investigated for fraud.
Missouri court considers tax stacking
A Missouri appeals court is hearing a case over whether counties are allowed to stack a weed tax on top of city taxes. The argument is reportedly over the word “and.”
According to the state’s constitutional amendment legalizing marijuana, “local government” is defined as “an incorporated area, a village, town, or city; and, in the case of an unincorporated area, a county.”
Attorneys for St. Louis and St. Charles counties argue that the “and” in the amendment allows them to add a county marijuana tax onto local city marijuana taxes.
However, attorneys for a local dispensary argue that the “and” indicates the tax can be levied by a village, town, city or county, depending on an area’s incorporated status.
No hearing date for the case has been set.