In its ongoing dither as to what to do about marijuana, Durango City Council is reportedly considering banning recreational pot sales in the city’s downtown. Or, to put it another way, it will only allow such suspect behavior in other, presumably less worthy, parts of town.
Really? Downtown is to be protected and kept “family friendly” while other parts of town do not merit such attention? Since when does Durango have second-class neighborhoods? And how did the Grandview area, around Bodo Park or North Main, get nominated for that status?
Colorado voters approved the legalization of recreational marijuana in 2012 with 55 percent of the vote. La Plata County voters beat the statewide margin and said “yes” to legalized pot by 62 percent. That seems clear enough. Nonetheless, local governments seem unable to get their minds around the straightforward proposition that the voters chose to legalize and regulate marijuana in much the same way as alcohol.
Further complicating things is the feeling in some quarters allowing pot sales in Durango’s downtown would detract from the town’s ambiance and the “family friendly” atmosphere beloved by tourists. Never mind downtown Durango is the location for sometimes bawdy Snowdown events, the by-now-annual Zombie March and the largest concentration of bars in Southwest Colorado.
There is little reason to think a legalized pot shop or two would be that disruptive. For one thing, the cost of setting up a marijuana store is such that it is unlikely there would ever be that many. For another, it is a safe bet local authorities will keep a good watch on what goes on.
But what if the critics’ worst fears are right? What if a marijuana shop is disruptive, does interfere with a neighborhood’s appeal to families and is generally a negative influence on its surroundings? Why would it then be acceptable to palm them off on business owners, workers and residents in other parts of town?
The city cannot have it both ways. Either pot is problematic or it is not. It cannot be too risky for downtown but fine for other neighborhoods.
There are already provisions for keeping marijuana away from schools and kids, rules about publicly smoking it and other limits intended precisely to allay concerns about its proliferation. And if the city is not satisfied those are not enough, the council has the specific authority to disallow selling pot altogether. Amendment 64 legalized the sale of recreational marijuana; it did not require it. If convinced that is the right way to go, local governments can just say no.
But to say selling marijuana would be a threat to downtown but no problem for families shopping at Walmart or the Durango Mall, dining on North Main or living in Three Springs is inconsistent, insulting or both.
If our city councilors disagree with the voters and think marijuana should not be sold here, so be it. That is a defensible position. But if they do hold that view, they should ban marijuana sales, and the voters can weigh in at the next election.
If not, they can see to it the applicable regulations are enforced and let the market sort out the rest.
But they need to choose. To do otherwise is effectively to tell Durangoans the parts of town where so many of us live, work, eat or shop are somehow second-rate. That is not true, and it is not right.
