Hailey, Idaho, sues to overturn voter-approved cannabis initiatives
Times-News: Magicvalley.com, Twin Falls, ID
Several Hailey city officials sued their city Friday over three pro-marijuana voter initiatives, a course of action aimed at getting a judge to rule against the legality of the measures and bring and end to the controversy.This lawsuit, which has been in the works for 3 1/2 months, has allowed council members to freeze any implementation pending a judge’s ruling.
Plaintiffs Mayor Rick Davis, councilmember Don Keirn and police chief Jeffrey Gunter, all say the initiatives passed by voters in November violate their freedom of speech, conflict with federal law, state law or are otherwise illegal.
Those allegations assembled into a complaint by attorney Keith Roark, have already been raised by city attorney Ned Williamson and the Idaho attorney general.
A judge’s ruling, however, carries the force of a final verdict.
The initiatives would legalize medicinal marijuana and industrial hemp, and make the enforcement of marijuana laws a lower police priority. Voters did not approve a fourth initiative to legalize marijuana.
According to the text of their complaint, the city officials allege their freedom of speech would be abridged because the initiatives “require the City of Hailey and its officers to advocate for changes in marijuana laws”. What I don’t understand is how a city official acting under direction of the majority of the voters is afforded any free speech rights in the first place. Nothing is requiring the mayor to say he personally favors changing marijuana laws, merely that as mayor his duty is to express the will of his constituents.
The main point of their complaint, however, is that city ordinances cannot be enforced which do not comport with Idaho law. As they put it:
The Idaho Constitution provides that cities can enact and enforce laws that are not in conflict with the general laws of the State of Idaho. The Hailey Medical Marijuana Act purports to legalize the use and possession of 35 grams of marijuana for medicinal purposes. This act conflicts with state and federal law and in such a circumstance, the courts have held that a local ordinance is invalid.
Another point of contention is that the requirement to advocate for marijuana law reform would create a conflict for city officials who are also federal employees.
One city council member, Carol Brown, is a federal employee. Council Member Brown will have to recuse herself from any discussion of these laws in order to retain her federal position. However, these initiatives mandate that Ms Brown advocate changes in marijuana laws and appoint one member of the oversight committee. To comply with initiatives, Council Member Brown may have to resign from the Hailey City Council.
This conflict may indeed exist, but it is not a good reason to overturn the will of the voters of Hailey. Federal employees can’t be partisan operatives in political campaigns, either, so some people have to choose between working for the government or working for a campaign. Similarly, if the voters want their officials to stand up for marijuana, some will have to choose between their city job and their federal job.
In their press release from today, the City of Hailey expressed that should a judge declare that all or parts of the initiatives are legal, Hailey city officials will comply.
At the time the initiatives were presented to the voters, the City believed that the initiatives were contrary to the general laws of the State of Idaho. Even though all City officials shared this belief, the City was mandated by Idaho Supreme Court precedent to place the initiatives on the ballot. The rule in Idaho is that even patently illegal initiatives must be placed on the ballot in order to allow voters to express their political belief regarding any particular law, legal or illegal.
[T]he Mayor and the entire City Council, serving in their executive and legislative roles respectively, believe that neither the Mayor nor City Council are the proper members of the government to declare the initiatives legal or illegal. The only governmental authority that can rightfully declare laws legal or illegal is the court….
…Once the court issues its decision, City officials will then decide what, if any, action is appropriate. If the initiatives are not in violation of State law, the City will likely be in the position of respecting the will of the voters and the initiatives will be upheld. On the other hand, if the initiatives are illegal, then the City will likely repeal the initiatives….
I spoke with Heather Dawson, the Hailey City Administrator, who confirmed that the mayor and council would uphold any parts of the initiatives that are found legal under state law. She also told me that city initiatives have been quite uncommon in the past, save for the recent marijuana initiatives filed by the Liberty Lobby of Idaho.
