The sale of these psychedelic substances would remain prohibited except in these centers. The ballot measure would also establish a five-member commission and a 20-person advisory board to promulgate regulations.

A Yes the vote would allow people 21 and older to grow, use and share a certain amount of five psychedelic substances; create a system of psychedelic therapy centers offering supervised use of substances; and establish taxes, regulations, and oversight for this system.

A No this vote would not make any changes to current laws regarding psychedelic substances, which are currently illegal. (Eight Massachusetts municipalities have passed measures ordering police not to make arrests for possession of certain psychedelics.)

Massachusetts for Mental Health Options, the “Yes on 4” group, includes medical professionals, advocates and veterans seeking additional opportunities for treatment of post-traumatic stress, depression and other issues mental health.

They brought in $5.7 million, plus $452,000 in in-kind contributions, including from several Boston tech executives, according to campaign finance reports. The group said it has spent $4.7 million so far.

Coalition for Safe Communities, the group formed to oppose the measure, is made up of medical professionals, law enforcement and others who challenge the scope of the ballot measure. The group reported no donations or expenses.

The Massachusetts for Mental Health Options maintains that it is crucial to have psychedelics as an option for treating certain mental health conditions. They highlight research and stories showing how psychedelics – particularly psilocybin – can change the lives of people with treatment-resistant depression, substance use disorders, and anxiety and depression. cancer.

Approved and regulated centers for supervised consumption will provide a much-needed alternative to currently available mental health treatment options, advocates say, while allowing personal use, growth and sharing in certain quantities — but not allowing retail sales — will increase accessibility .

Some supporters of Question 4 support the measure as part of a broader decriminalization effort. Criminalization may deter people who have used psychedelics and have a negative experience from seeking help out of fear of legal problems, said Ismail Ali, director of policy and advocacy at the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies.

Many opponents of Question 4 generally support legalization or decriminalization of psychedelics to some extent, but disagree with the details of the proposed law.

James Davis, founder of Bay Staters for Natural Medicine, said he was concerned that the services would be too expensive.

Others have raised concerns about the cost of the program to the state. The proposed law would use revenue from licensing fees, fines and a tax on substances at licensed centers to pay for themselves. But since the centers won’t appear right away, neither will revenue from the 15 percent excise tax the vote calls for.

Some opponents say there isn’t yet enough research into the potential dangers of these substances, especially when combined with other drugs or taken by people with certain illnesses. Research indicates that some psychedelics may worsen symptoms in people with certain mental health conditions, and that ibogaine may pose heart risks.

“It would be ridiculous and dangerous and set a bad precedent for us to set … to try to jump the gun, so to speak, without doing the proper research, because of social pressure and money.” , said Dr. Anahita Dua, a vascular surgeon at Massachusetts General Hospital and president of the Coalition for Safe Communities.

Additionally, allowing people to grow these substances in a 12-by-12-foot space at home could endanger children or pets, she said, despite the content of the proposal. the requirement that the area be prohibited for under-21s.

The Massachusetts Medical Society, which represents doctors, residents and medical students, has not taken a position on the ballot question, but said in testimony in March that it opposed the creation of ‘a system that “classifies psychedelic therapy as evidence-based when the safety and effectiveness of these agents have not been fully approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration.”

The Massachusetts Association of Chiefs of Police has not taken a position on the ballot issue, but executive director Michael Bradley said its main concern is the lack of clear procedures for law enforcement to measure the level impairment of a driver’s faculties under the influence of psychedelics. Driving while impaired by psychedelics would remain illegal.

In the movement to legalize magic mushrooms in Massachusetts

Supporters of psychedelic ballot questions include big names in Boston’s tech scene

FDA panel rejects psychedelic drug MDMA as treatment for PTSD

Stella Tannenbaum can be contacted at [email protected].