A citizens’ initiative on this year’s state ballot seeks to make marijuana more readily available to seriously ill persons.

Question 5 envisions nonprofit marijuana dispensaries, where patients who would benefit from marijuana’s medicinal properties could purchase the controlled substance. There is a good argument for such a system: Maine doctors can currently prescribe pot to patients suffering from debilitating conditions like glaucoma, cancer and AIDS, but legally obtaining marijuana is difficult.

But the Maine Chiefs of Police Association and Maine’s Office  of Substance Abuse oppose the legislation. We believe they raise enough questions to justify a No vote on Question 5.

We take this stand with some reluctance, because the therapeutic value of marijuana in treating certain forms of chronic pain, nausea, and lack of appetite has been widely confirmed.

And we have been dismayed to see that policy-makers often put suffering individuals last on their list of priorities. When abusers turned to pain medications, for instance, policies were enacted that tended to discourage physicians from prescribing these essential drugs.

Those of us who are contemplating the question in good health should keep in mind that we might someday need therapy ”“ perhaps medicinal marijuana ”“ that is closely regulated by the state.

So we appreciate the efforts of supporters of Question 5, who have drafted well-considered rules for the dispensation of marijuana. This proposal would not open the door for public cafés; it would simply allow the cultivation, harvesting and dispensing of marijuana for those holding a physician’s prescription for it.

We hope the backers of the Maine Medical Marijuana Act, if they are unsuccessful next week, will urge the Legislature to consider this proposal. In 1999, Mainers voted to legalize medical marijuana, and the state has  an obligation to make this goal a reality.

Legislative hearings and work sessions should be held to address law enforcement concerns. They would also be helpful in making it clear that the goal is not to encourage  marijuana consumption, but to provide and monitor a non-traditional but promising form of therapy. Discussion and analysis could find common ground on the proposal, and put the controversy to rest.