Next month, South Dakota voters will once again determine the state’s fate of recreational marijuana with Initiated Measure 29.

If passed, the measure would allow those aged 21 and older to “possess, grow, ingest and distribute marijuana or marijuana paraphernalia,” according to Attorney General Marty Jackley’s explanation.

Proponents say IM-29 is a “common-sense policy” that would boost the state’s revenue with licensed businesses as opposed to black market sales and allow law enforcement to eliminate prosecuting non-violent marijuana offenses to focus on “real crime.”

Voters originally opted for and passed the legalization of marijuana in 2020. However, the measure was challenged by Gov. Kristi Noem and two law enforcement officers. Ultimately, it was extinguished in 2021 by the South Dakota Supreme Court, citing the ballot measure at the time violated the state Constitution’s requirement that amendments do not encompass more than one subject, according to previous Argus Leader reporting.

Opponents argue that voting Yes on IM-29 could lead to increased public health risks, especially among teens, as well as impaired driving. The measure would also allegedly “open the door for increased crime, suicide rates… and mental health problems.”

What would IM-29 do for South Dakota?

If passed, the debated initiated measure would add four new sections to Title 34 of the state’s codified laws, which covers public health and safety.

IM-29 would legalize recreational marijuana for adults aged 21 and older in South Dakota, allowing for possession of up to 2 ounces. Residents would also be able to grow up to six marijuana plants with no more than 12 per household.

It would still remain illegal to drive under the influence, and the measure would restrict where it is contained or consumed, including schools, certain properties depending on the property owner, places of employment according to the employer, and any other locations where tobacco is prohibited.

A fiscal note on the measure says it would “not decriminalize the sale of cannabis but would decriminalize the sale of cannabis accessories.” In other words, marijuana-derived substances would be allowed but marijuana would remain illegal under federal law.

IM-29 also discloses that South Dakota counties may see incarceration expenses reduced by $581,556 per year.

No changes would be made to the medical marijuana program.

What proponents are saying:

IM-29 sponsor, and Executive Director for South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Law, Matthew Schweich says voting yes on IM-29 would protect personal freedom and restore the will of the people of South Dakota, referring to the outcome of the 2020 election on the matter.

“Whether we pass measure 29 or not, cannabis already exists in South Dakota. The question is, are we going to be pragmatic and take a common sense approach or are we going to stick with an obsolete failed policy prohibition that has done nothing for us for a century?” he stated during a Sept. 19 South Dakota Public Broadcasting debate against former state lawmaker and Protecting South Dakota Kids Executive Director Rhonda Milstead.

During that debate, Schweich also said he supports “strong labeling and packaging” as well as THC caps on marijuana products.

Proponents for IM-29 said if passed, the measure would help create new South Dakota jobs, reduce spending on incarceration and generate millions in new tax revenue.

This time, they say, the measure is shorter and simpler compared to previous attempts to legalize recreational marijuana in the state.

What opponents are saying:

During the SDPB debate last month, Milstead said she thinks no amount of THC will be safe for people.

“So why invite trouble into our state in the form of a drug that is not safe, not responsible and will never be regulated?” she said during the debate.

According to the 2024 Ballot Question Pamphlet, opponents of IM-29 also say the measure will harm South Dakota children, families and communities, going as far as to say that a research report on child abuse said marijuana is often actively used the most by perpetrators of child abuse and neglect.

Mayor Paul TenHaken has also shown opposition to marijuana use and possession for both medical and recreational use. In 2021, TenHaken proposed a cap on the number of medical marijuana dispensaries in Sioux Falls.

On Sept. 30, TenHaken posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, that he is encouraging others to vote No on IM-29, saying he “believes adding another legally addictive vice would not have positive community benefits at this time.”

This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: IM-29, legalizing recreational marijuana, on the ballot in South Dakota