The Legislature reached a reasonable compromise on the law regulating recreational marijuana in Massachusetts, and we urge Gov. Charlie Baker to sign the measure.

The compromise bill approved by the Legislature this week leaves intact much of Question 4, which was approved by 53.6 percent of the state’s voters in November, including provisions already in effect allowing adults 21 and older to possess and use small amounts of marijuana and to grow up to 12 plants per household.

However, the Legislature approved changes in two important aspects of the law: raising the total tax on the sale of marijuana, and refining the method by which communities can block retail shops, farms and manufacturers. Retail sales are expected to start next July.

The conference committee which worked out differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill satisfied legislators who called for fine-tuning of the 9,000-word ballot question, as well as advocates for Question 4 who sought to preserve the will of the voters. “We’re in a lot better place than we were when we started,” House Speaker Robert DeLeo, an opponent of the ballot question, said Wednesday.

“The compromise alters the approach on taxes and local control contained in Question 4, but it falls far short of the onerous House language, which would have added untold difficulties to establishing an effective regulatory system,” Jim Borghesani, a spokesman for the Yes on 4 campaign, said in a statement this week.

The Legislature split the difference between the Senate’s desire to stay with a maximum 12 percent tax on marijuana sales that was established by Question 4 and the House proposal to raise it to 28 percent. The compromise sets a 10.75 percent state excise tax in addition to the standard 6.25 percent sales tax, and allows communities to add a local tax of up to 3 percent.

That adds up to a maximum 20 percent tax, which falls in the middle of the seven other states that have legalized recreational marijuana. Washington state has the highest tax at 37 percent, while voters in Maine approved a 10 percent tax when sales begin next year.

Revenue will be used to pay for regulation of pot sales and other uses designated by the Legislature, such as anti-addiction programs. Medical marijuana will remain untaxed.

The Legislature settled on a creative approach to resolve a difference in how communities may exercise local control over the recreational marijuana industry. The Senate wanted to keep the language in Question 4 which required a referendum allowing voters to decide whether a community may ban or limit pot shops. The House voted to give that power to local officials such as city councils and select boards.

The compromise retains the referendum in the 260 cities and towns that approved Question 4, while allowing local officials to approve a ban in the other 91 communities that voted against. That provision expires after 2019 when all communities will have to hold a referendum if they want to ban pot sales.

The change — which some lawyers suggest may be challenged on the basis of violating the state constitution’s “equal protection” clause — has no impact in Hampshire and Franklin counties, where a majority of voters in all communities favored Question 4.

The Legislature also altered the makeup of a Cannabis Control Commission that will oversee both the recreational and medical marijuana industries. The ballot question called for a three-person board appointed by Treasurer Deborah Goldberg. Now, the members of a full-time, five-person commission will be appointed by Goldberg, Baker and Attorney General Maura Healey.

The final measure also calls for stricter limits on advertising, and bans “the use of bright colors, cartoon characters and other features designed to appeal to minors” in marijuana packaging.

We are satisfied that the Legislature achieved the goal expressed late last year by state Senate President Stanley Rosenberg, of Amherst, when key provisions of the ballot question that he supported were delayed.

“The Legislature has a responsibility to implement the will of the voters while also protecting public health and public safety,” he said. “This short delay will allow the necessary time for the Legislature to work with stakeholders on improving the new law.”

]]>