Politics
Idaho Official Explains Why Medical Marijuana Initiative Will Not Appear On November Ballot
Idaho’s top elections official is explaining his determination that a campaign for an initiative to legalize medical marijuana did not submit enough valid voter signatures for the measure to appear on the November ballot. He also said that possible illegal petitioning conduct has been referred to the State Police for “review and potential criminal investigation.”
Secretary of State Phil McGrane (R) wrote in a letter to the campaign on Monday that his office received “received numerous complaints concerning the petition process” for the marijuana initiative—adding that “even under the most favorable assumption” that every petition sheet turned in was timely filed and that every submitted signature was valid, activists still wouldn’t have met minimum requirements.
To be certified for the ballot, the team needed to submit signatures from at least 6 percent of registered voters as of the state’s last general election, which currently amounts to 70,725. They also needed to meet that 6 percent threshold in at least 18 of the state’s 35 legislative districts.
“The petition contains no more than 58,024 county-certified signatures and meets the six-percent legislative-district threshold in only thirteen (13) districts. It is therefore 12,701 signatures short of the 70,725- signature statewide requirement and five (5) legislative districts short of the eighteen-district requirement,” the secretary of state wrote. “Those shortfalls are independently dispositive and exist before any signature or petition sheet is excluded because of the additional issues described below.”
“The statutory circulation and filing deadlines have passed, so additional signatures cannot now be gathered or submitted to cure either shortfall,” McGrane said.
The secretary of state’s letter details a number of specific alleged issues with the medical cannabis campaign’s petition drive.
Idaho state law requires that people who circulate initiative petitions be residents of the state, but “complaints and county-clerk records identified numerous circulator affidavits in which the circulator attested to Idaho residency while listing an out-of-state address,” the letter says. “In certain instances, county clerks also reported that a circulator presented an out-of-state driver’s license after being asked for identification.”
“The Office notified you of these concerns, provided lists of circulators whose residency could not be verified, requested supporting documentation by June 30, 2026, and explained the statutory consequences of nonresidency. Based on materials later provided by your organization, the Office was able to confirm residency for ninety-five (95) circulators. As of the Office’s follow-up review, however, residency remained unconfirmed for 293 circulators reflected in county-clerk records and campaign-finance reports. The available records substantiate the residency concern as to certain circulators and leave material residency questions unresolved as to others.”
Another issue detailed in the letter is the allegation that “a majority, if not all, of the petition packets” submitted by the cannabis campaign failed to include required introductory language and a warning that it is a felony for someone to sign a ballot petition with a name other than their own or to sign a petition more than once.
“Because the issue appears across the submitted petitions, it raises a broader concern about whether the petitions were circulated in the form required by law,” McGrane said. “This concern is separate from, and adds to, the signature shortfalls described above.”
The letter further says that one county “transmitted a petition sheet containing a signature attributed to a person whose voter record reflected that the person had died in 2021.” The sheet also contains entries associated with voter records that had been removed from the voter rolls.
“Similarities in the handwriting and voter information raised a credible concern that prior voter information may have been used to create purported signatures,” the secretary of state wrote. “The Office has referred this matter and other isolated complaints to the Idaho State Police for review and potential criminal investigation under applicable law.”
Finally, the letter cites “discrepancies” regarding an alleged campaign finance compliance issue related to required disclosures for paid petitioners.
“Although reports were later amended and additional names were added, the Office’s latest reconciliation identified approximately 175 paid circulators appearing in county records who were not properly identified in the applicable campaign-finance reports,” it says.
Activists with the Natural Medical Alliance of Idaho (NMAI), which was behind the medical cannabis initiative, said in a statement on Tuesday that organizers are “shocked that the initiative did not qualify for the ballot,” placing the blame for the failure to turn in enough valid signatures on the first petitioning contractor it engaged before switching to a different firm late in the drive.
“NMAI organizers oversaw this effort actively and in good faith. As the campaign progressed, we saw signs that our original signature gathering vendor’s operation was disorganized, but when concerns were raised we were assured that legal requirements, including requirements related to reporting and residency, were being followed and signatures were on pace to surpass the threshold. It appears that our confidence was misplaced. The Secretary of State’s letter describes missed deadlines, circulator documentation and payment disclosures, and petition materials prepared incorrectly or submitted late. We take every claim in that letter seriously and no one wants answers more than we do. We believe every statement made in the letter originated with our initial vendor. None of our concerns extend to the second firm we brought in late in the drive, whose work was professional throughout. NMAI has zero tolerance for signature fraud or prohibited conduct and will cooperate fully with any review.”
The campaign said it is now “examining every legal and procedural remedy available, and whatever comes next, the need remains.”
“The demand Idahoans expressed through this campaign is not going away,” NMAI said. “Idahoans deserve the right to make their own healthcare decisions and a government that trusts them to do so.”
While the cannabis campaign submitted more than 150,000 total signatures in May, there were some recent indications that there could be an issue meeting the county-level requirement as well as potentially the statewide total.
A judge ruled last month that signatures in Minidoka County were turned in too late to be counted. Separately, some petitions for the medical cannabis measure throughout the state were at risk of being thrown out due to the possibility they may have been collected by out-of-state circulators.
Meanwhile, voters in November will see a different kind of cannabis proposal on the ballot: A constitutional amendment that the legislature approved to make it so only lawmakers could legalize marijuana or other controlled substances—preventing the reform from being enacted by voters via a future ballot initiative.
While NMAI pursued ballot access for the legalization measure, Idaho lawmakers have also pushed back in other ways. Both the Senate and House of Representatives passed a resolution this session urging voters to “reject” the medical marijuana petition.
The measure, sponsored by the Senate State Affairs Committee, claims that cannabis legalization in other states has led to a host of harms, including “increased cartel activity, development of black market marijuana production, human trafficking, and increased crime rates” as well as “increased rates of serious health issues,” environmental harms and “safety concerns on job sites.”
It argues that the marijuana initiative would not only increase costs to the state but that its list of approved medical conditions is “so broad that almost anyone could qualify.”
“The Idaho Medical Cannabis Act lacks safeguards to such an extent that it would effectively legalize widespread recreational use of marijuana,” the resolution claims. “The legalization of marijuana would have devastating impacts on Idaho children and their families… The Legislature urges the citizens of Idaho to reject any effort to bring the Idaho Medical Cannabis Act to the ballot.”
A statement of purpose filed with the legislation says it “addresses the devastating impact that legalizing marijuana has had on other states” and “identifies the significant problems” with the ballot initiative.
Contrary to the claims made about marijuana reform in the legislative resolution, advocates often point to data showing that legalizing and regulating cannabis diminishes the size of the illegal market and has not led to increases in youth use.
Meanwhile, NMAI recently released an analysis showing that Idaho could see more than $100 million worth of medical marijuana sold on an annual basis and up to $28 million in new yearly revenue for state coffers if voters approved the legalization initiative.
The Idaho Medical Cannabis Act, which NMAI unveiled last October, would provide patients with qualifying conditions access to marijuana from a limited number of dispensaries and provide a regulatory framework for the market.
Here are the main provisions of the Idaho Medical Cannabis Act:
- Health practitioners would be able to recommend medical cannabis to patients with conditions that include, but are not limited to, cancer, anxiety and acute pain.
- Medical marijuana patients or their designated caregiver could purchase up to 113 grams of smokeable cannabis, or 20 grams of THC extract for vaping, per month.
- The state would be start by issuing three vertically integrated cannabis business licenses, after which point it could license up to six total.
- Marijuana would be reclassified under state law as a Schedule II, rather than Schedule I, controlled substance.
- State and local law enforcement would be barred from assisting in federal drug enforcement activities related to the state-legal cannabis program.
- There would be anti-discrimination protections for those who use or sell marijuana in compliance from state law, preventing adverse actions by employers, landlords and educational institutions.
- It does not appear that there would be any equity-centered reforms, nor would the initiative provide for a home grow option.
The campaign in February also released the results of a statewide poll showing that 83 percent of likely voters back medical cannabis legalization, including 74 percent of Republicans, 95 percent of Democrats and 92 percent of independents.
Asked how they would vote if the current medical cannabis legalization does appear on the November ballot, 76 percent of respondents said “yes.” Of that cohort, 50 percent said they would “definitively” vote yes, and just 21 percent said they’d vote “no.”
After the medical cannabis initiative was unveiled last year, a separate campaign that launched in 2024, Kind Idaho, told supporters that it would be suspending its own signature gathering for a ballot initiative to legalize the personal possession and cultivation of marijuana by adults.
Kind Idaho previously introduced medical marijuana ballot measures intended to go before voters in both the 2022 and 2024 elections, but the efforts proved unsuccessful.
—
Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments.
Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access.
—
Legislators separately held a hearing last year to discuss a bill to enact medical cannabis legalization legislatively, but there hasn’t been meaningful action on the issue in the months since.
Idaho Gov. Brad Little (R) last year signed legislation setting a $300 mandatory minimum fine for marijuana possession. A prior version of the proposal, which did not pass, would have set a $420 mandatory minimum fine for possessing cannabis.
Read the secretary of state’s letter about the medical cannabis petitions below:
