I would like the idea of proving an idea on a small scale to make it easier to sell at larger scales. But honestly, being one of the first places that legalized it, we got a large influx of "undesirables" from other places that hadn't legalized it, causing problems we wouldn't have had if we weren't one of the first states to legalize it.
What makes them "undesirable" though? Are they not contributing to the local economy or something else? I don't think it's a problem intrinsically linked to substance decriminalization, and might even be a benefit of decentralized government. Delaware's lax incorporation laws, for instance, encourage people to do business there, which benefits the state.
I use the term "undesirable" somewhat ironically, because I also don't think arresting people who have nowhere else to sleep makes any sense, but it's the only remotely understandable problem I've heard complained about from people who were against legalization.
And eventually, it became illegal again, and tourists were stuck buying truffles. So just sayin'.
As a former Santa Cruz resident of ~4 years at UCSC, do you think this will affect enforcement at the local level? Living there between 2010-2014, there didn't seem to be much drug enforcement by the police at all, at least not for possession.
Okay, enough trolling. I sent you a real email. Bye