COLUMBUS —The Ohio House voted 81-12 on Wednesday to put a question before voters that could undercut a marijuana-legalization measure that will appear on the same Nov. 3 ballot.

The lawmakers’ ballot proposal is aimed at derailing the marijuana-legalization proposal, along with other future attempts to use the state constitution to sanction monopolies.

“The people’s constitution should never, ever be a shopping center for market opportunities,” said Rep. Mike Curtin (D., Columbus), one of the resolution’s chief sponsors. “It is no exaggeration to call this a grave threat to our state constitution.”

ResponsibleOhio plans to file petitions on July 1 to put its proposed constitutional amendment to legalize the possession and use of marijuana for medical, recreational, and commercial purposes on the ballot.

If approved by voters, the measure would carve the specific parcel numbers of 10 investor-operated growing facilities into the constitution. Among them is a North Toledo farm.

The House amendment would not retroactively address other monopolies already exist in the constitution, such as the Las Vegas-style casinos in Toledo, Columbus, Cincinnati, and Cleveland.

Ian James, ResponsibleOhio’s executive director, said the group will not make the business decision to back away from the campaign because of the big question mark that could be waiting at the end of an expensive process.

“We have a commitment to spend $20 million-plus on this campaign…,” he said. “Ultimately, we trust the voters to make the right decision. We believe the voters should make the decision since the Statehouse refuses to make the decision on legalization…”

When asked if the legislative action could become an issue in the upcoming campaign for votes, Mr. James said, “It already is a campaign issue, because they’re clearly trying to take away voters’ rights, stifle them.”

The entire northwest Ohio delegation supported the resolution. It now goes to the Ohio Senate.

Critics argued that the House language is too broad and could ensnare other citizen-initiated ballot issues affecting such things as collective bargaining and gay marriage if they are interpreted as providing exclusive monetary rights to certain groups of people.

Rep. Dan Ramos (D., Lorain) tried unsuccessfully to change the legislature’s proposed amendment so that it would apply only to future elections and not a competing amendment on the Nov. 3 ballot.

“[Supporters of Responsible Ohio] are exercising their rights as they exist today,” he said. “We cannot and should not retract those rights retroactively. This prevents the voters from deciding.”

The constitution currently states that, should voters approve of both amendments on the same ballot, the one receiving the biggest “yes” votes would rule.

Secretary of State Jon Husted has further suggested that the General Assembly’s amendment would take effect immediately upon passage, automatically killing the conflicting marijuana proposal because it wouldn’t take effect until after 30 days.

Contact Jim Provance at: jprovance@theblade.com or 614-221-0496.

First Published June 25, 2015, 4:00 a.m.