Ohio Cannabis Referendum Campaign Faces Payment Allegations

Petitioners involved in the effort to place an Ohio cannabis referendum on the state’s November ballot have reported not receiving full compensation for signatures collected. The referendum aimed to overturn specific provisions of Ohio Senate Bill 56 (S.B. 56), a legislative overhaul of the state’s adult-use marijuana law and a ban on intoxicating hemp products. The allegations of unpaid work have emerged following the campaign’s failure to gather the requisite number of signatures by the deadline, as reported by Marijuana Moment.

Details of the S.B. 56 Referendum Effort

The proposed referendum sought to challenge S.B. 56, a law that took effect on March 20, modifying the voter-approved adult-use marijuana framework. Key changes introduced by S.B. 56 include:

• Reducing the maximum THC level in adult-use marijuana extracts from 90 percent to 70 percent.
• Capping THC levels in adult-use flower at 35 percent.
• Prohibiting smoking in most public places.
• Banning the possession of marijuana outside its original packaging.
• Criminalizing the transportation of legal marijuana from other states into Ohio.
• Banning intoxicating hemp products, including THC-infused beverages.

Ohioans for Cannabis Choice, the campaign behind the referendum, needed to collect 248,092 valid signatures, along with 3 percent of an individual county’s gubernatorial turnout in 44 of Ohio’s 88 counties, to qualify for the November 3 ballot. Mark Fashian, formerly president of Midwest Analytical Solutions and a fundraiser for the effort, stated during a May 4 injunction hearing in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas that approximately 208,000 signatures were collected.

Allegations of Unpaid Signature Collectors

Several petitioners have come forward claiming they were not paid for their work. Lisa Flagella and Amanda Ward stated they received no payment for signatures collected for the S.B. 56 referendum. Thomas Miller and Pat Manning reported receiving only partial payments. Flagella, for instance, collected 1,012 signatures over 10 days and has not been compensated, potentially amounting to approximately $9,000 based on a reported rate of $9 per valid signature.

Pam Lauter, owner of Ohio Petitioning Partners, a subcontractor hired to recruit signature collectors, also stated she has not been paid. Lauter described the situation as “the biggest debacle I have ever been involved with,” indicating a broader financial issue within the campaign’s operational structure.

Campaign Response and Contractor Involvement

Dennis Williard, a spokesperson for Ohioans for Cannabis Choice, stated via email that the campaign made a decision “to suspend paid signature collection as we assessed how many signatures we had collected at that point because we did have a large grass roots movement of unpaid volunteers collecting signatures.” The campaign did not disclose the total number of signatures collected. Larry Laws of L&R Political Consultants, hired by lead consultant Arno Petition Consultant, indicated that Ohioans for Cannabis Choice may not have expended more than $100,000 on the signature collection effort, suggesting a significant financial shortfall given the scope of the operation.

Petitioners, including Flagella, Miller, and Manning, along with seven others, sent a formal demand letter for immediate payment to Lauter, Laws, Arno, and other individuals associated with Ohioans for Cannabis Choice on March 27. The letter highlighted that professional petitioners, including those from California and Florida, were instructed to cease work and subsequently denied earned pay. The Ohio Attorney General initially rejected the referendum’s summary language in January, certifying it on February 3 after revisions, a delay that Fashian noted limited the campaign’s signature collection period. Paid signature collection was reportedly halted on February 25, weeks before the March 19 deadline.

---

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Hemp Gazette does not provide medical recommendations, diagnoses, or treatment plans. Always consult a qualified healthcare practitioner before making any decisions regarding your health or any medical condition. Statements concerning the therapeutic uses of hemp, cannabis, or cannabinoid-derived products have not been evaluated by Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Medicinal cannabis products in Australia are accessed via prescription pathways under TGA regulation.