With NORML Efforts
From my application for the position of Executive Director
When NORML Executive Director Erik Altieri announced his resignation, in early 2023, I informed Keith Stroup and the other board members of my intentions:
Keith Saunders <keithsaundersphd@gmail.com>
Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 9:42 AM
to Keith
Hi Keith,
I am going to be sending an announcement to the board later this morning, but I wanted to send you a personal note--I am going to put in my application for the NORML ED position. As a student of social movements and culture I love what NORML has represented over the past 50 years, and I want to work to institutionalize NORML in the new era of legalization so that new generations of marijuana users may continue to have a collective voice in their own interests. I believe my value to the organization over the next 7 - 10 years would be greatest in the ED position, and I hope that you would consider endorsing my candidacy. Thank you.
I later put in my application and interviewed for the position the first times in June, 2023, and again in the summer of 2024. An ill-advised 10-month “suspension” of the NORML ED search to explore a merger with MPP resulted in scrapping the original search, and reinitiating the process . As of February, 2026, the job remains filled by “interim” ED Randy Quast.
Here is a draft of the Executive Summary and Addenda from my application, excerpted.
Keith Saunders’ Statement of Purpose in application for the position of Executive Director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
–NORML is the product of a 59-year social movement related to the prohibition and popularization of marijuana in the United States.
–NORML employs a particular model of resource mobilization that is very strong in terms of participants, but has not been on the vanguard of reforms in the 21st century.
–NORML should keep its volunteer member-based organizational model into the future.
–NORML needs to find means of appealing to new potential members who have no memory of what motivated many people to join NORML in the past; and NORML needs to be able to change as its membership changes.
–NORML needs to finish having its books audited and start applying for grants, as well as develop additional resources.
–NORML needs to reduce operating expenses without reducing services, and new operating expenses must augment revenue.
–NORML should encourage at least one new, 501(c)7 chapter to be developed as a test-case and should that show promise, try to claim territory for marijuana users.
IN ADDEMDUM (Thoughts and Queries):
***If a content creator on a social media platform can build an audience of whatever size needed to generate 1,000 fans who will spend $100 a year on that content, that is a base of $100,000 a year. With 1,000 fans at $100 a year, it is reasonable to envision 10,000 additional fans at just $10 a year, for another $100,000. Add 100,000 fans at just $1 a year.
That is $300,000 from 111,000 fans, on three tiers. Could NORML bring in such revenue or more from created content? (I think so).
***Ethan Nadelmann said (2021) that the marijuana policy reform movement’s successes marks the first time a social movement has created an industry. He was wrong. The social movement to prohibit drugs created an industry beforehand. In fact, it provided Dr. Nadelmann with his occupation for the better part of 25 years, as founder of the Lindesmith Center and Executive Director of the Drug Policy Foundation. Earlier, it had led to the creation of NORML. Prohibition creates the conditions of its own negation.
***What can NORML offer people who enjoy using marijuana, that will feel as valuable to them as NORML’s work to legalize was under prohibition, in settings without prohibition?
***How will NORML’s chapter membership profiles change? What personality types will we see emerge to take the place of the proud deviant, who does not believe their deviance is wrong and will speak up loudly when they believe they have been wronged? What will chapters do if not work for reforms? Will it be possible to maintain a nationwide chapter-network of people who enjoy using marijuana, or will there be more influence than ever from people who enjoy making money, and use marijuana to do so?
***What about other consumer advocacy groups? During the roll-out of tobacco smoking restrictions, there was the formation of “smokers’ rights” groups, but unlike the marijuana reform groups, the pro-tobacco groups sprung from PR agencies hired by the industry. Consumer Reports is a gigantic operation and were this a for-profit situation, they might be inclined to buy out NORML for its expertise and member data. [n.b., unwittingly, I had planted the seed for the proposed MPP merger by including this point in my application materials as well as speaking about it directly in my first interview.] However, it is not, though technically we are both competing for consumer protection nonprofit donations. NORML is niche enough and the absence of interstate commerce makes the testing of consumables impractical. In fact, I would recommend to NORML that we pursue a collaboration with Consumer Reports (based in NY with some testing facilities in CT–both have retail now) on testing marijuana-related non-consumables, such as consumption devices, grinders, etc. We provide the technical and cultural knowledge specific to cannabis and offer NORML’s 50-year reputation as cannabis consumer advocates; they do the testing, and we co-publish the results.
***What nonprofits are comparable to NORML? The NRA due to near single-issue advocacy? NAACP seeking civil rights for a sector of the population? NARAL for the institutionalized, annual public demonstrations? What 100-year nonprofits are still in operation, how have they been structured, and what can we learn from them?
***If NORML is to serve a purpose beyond legalization and to do so in ways as meaningful as its mission to end prohibition has been to people, what purpose will that be and could it ever be as meaningful to people? What other consumable product categories have advocates that have formed nonprofit chapters, regularly lobby their elected officials for changes in law, and hold public awareness events? If we eliminate the lobbying and the public awareness events, we have a group of people who enjoy using marijuana in a nonprofit chapter of a national organization.
***NORML needs to become more “mobile” through the development of a multi-function app that will provide users practical value while providing NORML and chapters with data regarding members, their activities on behalf of their chapter’s and NORML’s efforts, and offers chapters and the national organization donations and retail portals. There are barriers to putting anything overtly marijuana-related up on the various app “stores.” There are work-arounds regarding third-party filters, but the hassle of having to re-work and then re-stock any app is not worth it. But there is nothing preventing NORML from offering it through its website, which is our domain. Websites are passive and require people to initiate contact; with an app there is the capability of pushing information and donation opportunities upon “fans.” Micro-Donations (of less than $1) are becoming feasible at volume and with an app people can throw a quarter toward a cause with a couple taps on the alert they were just sent.
***When we first started seeing legalization victories, we began to see what appeared to be clumsy attempts to make a point by those who advocated marijuana reform on principle, as part of a larger philosophy. This was most clearly pronounced when Colorado NORML sued the state to stop the implementation of A-64—the Libertarians who ran the chapter objected to the taxation. In zero-sum-game, issue-politics, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, but what happens when there is no longer an enemy in common? The schisms in some state marketplaces between independent operators and MSO’s mattered not in the least to NORML when criminal prohibition was in full effect, yet we now must take positions in consumers’ interests and take sides on industry issues.
***NORML is an archetype of marijuana culture, but to survive as a consumer advocacy organization it needs to be tied into the consumer culture as it becomes, in the absence of prohibition.
***NORML will be claiming to represent consumers, but a growing number of consumers today never used marijuana under its prohibition, and in a generation they will be the majority. They lack any connection to the common denominator among all past marijuana users in the U.S., and we should expect their sentiments to be quite different both going into the experience of using marijuana and through contextualizing the experience as enjoyable. If NORML is to continue to advocate on behalf of people who enjoy using marijuana, we are going to have to expect our members to become different than they have been.
***Or maybe that common denominator of enjoying marijuana under criminal prohibition was the spur. Those marijuana users brave or stupid enough to stand up against prohibition found value in NORML because they found like minds. Remove the prohibition and those same personalities will fight each other just as vehemently as they each did prohibition, if something should come between them. The enjoyment of marijuana offers a loose social bond, one not strong enough to thwart conflicts of interests that may be associated with marijuana use itself.
***We can only estimate how many members NORML and its chapters may have; the question is, within what margins? How much effort and resources would it take for NORML to conduct a member census and how accurate would it be? After we have identified our members, would we care to survey them, and if so, what would we want to learn from them? We have the capacity to generate a rich dataset that will provide NORML value in a variety of ways. There may be grants available to do this.
***Board of directors interlocks: NORML should recruit board members from complementary nonprofits and NORML board members should seek seats on the boards of complementary nonprofits. This creates informal partnerships that can be formalized for overlapping projects and goals.
***Macrosocial, multigenerational considerations show us that NORML’s original core constituency–Baby Boomers–are aging (59 - 77), and that Generation X (40 - 58) has a smaller population, less disposable income per capita, and less wealth than Boomers did, at the same ages. Millennials (21 - 39) are the largest generation in American history numerically, though they carry more debt than any prior generation and have lower mean income and less wealth at this time than Generation X. Economic status for a portion of younger X and older Millennials is expected to improve, as their Boomer parents pass them inheritances.
Asking people to prioritize NORML over personal spending and getting them to donate is challenging in the best economic times. Combined, the reduction of charitable deductions from income tax, COVID-19’s impact on the economy, rapidly rising inflation since 2021, and the looming risk of recession have combined to stanch the flow of donor money to all nonprofits. “Retail” contributions still have the potential to outpace the volume of institutional donors (there are tens of millions of marijuana users), but these are the same people who are most acutely experiencing tight economic times. Granting foundations are also seeing a reduction on returns from their endowments and this is reducing available funds, but a numerical 20% drop in the ability to grant will not affect the size of grants being awarded as much as the number.
Goodwill, Savers, and Habitat for Humanity operate stores that sell donated items as a means to generate revenues to fund their charitable operations. Due to the nature of what they offer, they actually see more volume when the economy suffers, from people looking to save money on their purchases. Not that NORML should get into the used clothing and furniture business, but there has to be some manner by which NORML could offer something to marijuana users in their everyday lives that they would find worth spending a little money for, without NORML becoming too involved with merchandise.
***The Case for 501(c)7 NORML Chapters
The idea of operating a NORML chapter as a 501(c)7 social club came from my frustration with the slow pace Massachusetts has taken in implementing its legal markets. Legalization took effect in December, 2016, and it will likely be after December, 2023 that the first social consumption establishments open [n.b., almost there, maybe in 2027]. When the indoor tobacco smoking ban was made into state law special provisions were made for establishments that generated a large share of revenue (something like more than 80%) from tobacco sales, and private, non-profit clubs, with certain provisions.
Shortly after marijuana was legalized, and more than a year before first retail sales, a nonprofit smoking club opened in Worcester, where smoking “anything legal” had been approved by the City Council. Tobacco smoking was allowed, but the draw was a place to legally smoke marijuana in downtown Worcester. [n.b. Once the club was permitted to sell food (shakes & brownies!) tobacco smoking was forbidden, cannabis smoking remained.]
What do people who enjoy using marijuana need, besides marijuana? NORML does not promote the use of marijuana nor does it stand to gain from the sale of marijuana products, but it does accommodate and work for those who make the choice to use it responsibly. In Massachusetts, the nonprofit exemption to indoor smoking can be filled by a NORML chapter organized as a 501(c)7 social club.
As a social club, a chapter will be able to collect an initiation fee, annual dues, and fees for use of facilities. Pricing to accommodate walk-in members (tourists, patients, general public) makes the club accessible and will generate an in situ NORML chapter with contact information for thousands of known marijuana consumers, all of voting age, every year. NORML will be able to count them as members in grant applications and for promotional purposes.
[Former NORML Board member] Madeline Martinez was ahead of her time, opening the World Famous Cannabis Café in Portland, OR. The state’s indoor smoking restriction shut down that business; I don’t know if Oregon has any exemptions for nonprofit clubs. Research into state indoor smoking laws is worthwhile, and it may be another point of member advocacy—anti-smoking laws were written for tobacco smoke not marijuana smoke. Those states that allow indoor smoking in commercial social consumption sites should allow the same behavior in private clubs, or it just takes a slight modification of existing law to make that possible.
NORML has the ability to lay claim to a portion of cultural territory, literally. Those who enjoy using marijuana will always need a place to use it. A NORML Café chapter would offer a resource for people who want to use marijuana that perpetuates the organization, creates a self-sustaining revenue stream, and provides a location for information sharing and basing collective actions.
As cannabis is increasingly normalized, consumption spaces will become appealing in the way that bars, restaurants, and recreational clubs are to organizations like businesses (outside of cannabis) or volunteer groups, and social events like birthday parties or bridal showers. NORML needs to take advantage of legalization and meet these consumers where they are, and there is no more direct way than providing them the place to use marijuana.
***The internet creates a “placelessness” of space and time, with distance and synchronicity losing significance. NORML needs to adapt to this greater change, as well, especially as a geographically-organized collection of chapters with a coordinating cell. NORML is a hub-and-spoke organization (or pyramidal) only in relation to ownership of the brand and the creation of messaging and content specific to the national office–otherwise, it is a four-dimensional matrix in a situation where dimensions themselves are in flux. Points in this flux are where chapters form.
Chapters create spaces, most of them ephemeral, where NORML’s normativity is prevalent. Some chapters have created longer-lasting (i.e. stand-alone offices) or recurring (annual Protestivals) spaces. Erving Goffman, from whose work NORML draws the meaning of its acronym, wrote extensively about the significance of space to identity and social practices. In the move from the stigmatized to the normal, there will be a different relationship between those who enjoy using marijuana and the spaces they inhabit. Their enjoyment is no longer relegated to the “back places” (Goffman) or “little pockets of liberation” (St. Pierre).
Chapter members meeting in the quotidian world is elemental to NORML, insofar as sharing the enjoyment in using marijuana matters to fostering “affective alliances.” Sharing joints matters, to put it bluntly—or at least using marijuana in the same place, at the same time. For all else we talk about related to marijuana, from policy to culture, at root there is the feeling of being high together that has been the engine. Unlike naturally-occurring caffeine, nicotine, psilocybin, and opiate, which all may be simply eaten or absorbed through mucous membranes, marijuana is not psychoactive without preparation that has to be learned and taught. It is an inherently social substance.
Yesterday (March 10), the American Cannabis Consumer Alliance was launched by veteran activist Kaliko Castile. The ACCA is targeting consumers in legal states—the folks that NORML has not been able to reach. The ACCA joins MPP and NORML in the space of single-issue, cannabis-related, 501(c)4’s. I signed up immediately upon learning of the organization. The Alliance’s greatest upcoming challenge will be getting consumers in legal states to become politically active. I speak from experience with NORML—in those states where marijuana was legalized, donations of money and time fell off considerably.
A cannabis consumer-advocacy organization in a legal state must provide members with benefits made possible by legalization, to maximize appeal. That was the idea behind the social consumption chapter—claim physical spaces for cannabis consumers and use that space to generate memberships and revenues. If there is to be a fifth phase of resource mobilization in the movement, it will come from apolitical consumers, themselves.