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.
Loading ...
This is a perfect example of why many people do not vote.
I recently learned that a Idaho Representative has or is about to introduce a Medical Marijuana bill.
Not only will Medical Marijuana help thousands of people it will also simulate Idaho’s economy if correctly regulated.
Please support any Representative in establishing an effective Medical Marijuana program in Idaho.
Politically this going to be a challenge. However, more and more voters that support Medical Marijuana are going to be asking politicians if they support this issue.
Someday and maybe not to far into the future when you or a loved one might ask as I did “Would Medical Marijuana have helped?”
Several years ago my father lost a long and painful five year battle against Alzheimer’s disease and severe arthritis. A proud man and a near mechanical genius he fell into a coma and passed away wearing diapers.
A study recently conducted by the Ohio State University shows promising evidence that Marijuana can reduce inflammation and block the development of plaque, which are the proposed contributing factors to Alzheimer’s disease.
It is too late for my father, however many other Alzheimer victims would benefit from the use of Medical Marijuana. It should be an option. Medical Marijuana should be legal in the USA just like Canada.
Studies around the world show Marijuana helps induce sleep, ease pain, soothe a variety of nervous disorders. People with HIV or Cancer use marijuana to stimulate appetite, reduce nausea, its found to lower blood sugar in diabetes, and the list goes on.
Several years ago I was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes. Currently I am on Metformin, a medication to help lower my blood sugar.
The side effect that is hardest to deal with is the “Weakness and Fatigue.” Many times fatigue will set in to the point were I feel I might collapse. I am following in my fathers footsteps, I too have severe arthritis.
So I asked myself “Would Medical Marijuana help?” Everything I’ve read points to “Yes.” I know my father could have benefited from Medical Marijuana and it might lower my blood sugar levels.
Why didn’t I medicate my father? Why don’t I medicate myself?
This is where the problems begins. Possessing Marijuana in the State of Idaho under any circumstances is a crime punishable by imprisonment. You cannot be were Marijuana is being smoked or used in anyway. Self administering Medical Marijuana is not an option, it is a crime in Idaho.
The sad thing is many of our young adults are being arrested for simple possession and are tagged as a drug user for the rest of their lives. The punishment in this case is worst than the crime.
Again, please support any Representative in establishing a Medical Marijuana policy / laws in the State of Idaho or any State.
Hopefully, your vote will be heard, counted and more importantly not challanged like it was in Hailey, Idaho.
I have had two chemo sessions, with another “treat” coming in a couple of days and I have never vomiting like I have after this medicine. Wretching bile in the most uncomfortable manner, not to mention severe pain in various joints. Pain meds help, but one of the best things I can do is smoke and then I feel like eating. Now I am not going by what has been said and reported, I am actually experiencing the side effects and receiving relief by my nummy Humgreen. Shame on everyone who decides whats best for my puking, uncomfortable self.
Well the newspapers didn’t really do a good job of reporting what really happened. The judge pointed out the overly cozy relationship between the city’s attorney and the plaintiffs attorney. He mentioned the fact that they didn’t seem to disagree on too much. The city’s attorney didn’t put up much of a fight. The plaintiffs attorney is the head of the democratic party in Idaho. You think he might be on our side, but he wasn’t. The judge was the only one to actually defend the initiatives, which was a complete 180 from what he did before, and didn’t actually rule on anything from the bench on the hearing date. He said he would have to do some research on the issues and would render a decision later. The press took that as an immediate ruling against medical marijuana. They were completely wrong. He probably will rule against it, but hasn’t done it yet. Good job Tony,maybe you should attend a few more court hearings, or take a basic law course at the community college. Tony ,the reporter for the Idaho Mtn express, also didn’t mention the judges comments concerning the impropriety of the city’s attorney,Ned Williamson, seeming to be in league with the plaintiffs attorney, Keith Roark.
I wouldn’t recommend any awards for coverage of the final(I guess) hearing on this matter. I say final, because in all our time spent on this, we have never been contacted by anyone who was willing to support us in any way. It’s funny, getting people to show up for a comic book convention, or a church or an antiques show doesn’t seem to be any trouble, getting people to show up and support something they supposedly care about, like legalizing or decriminalizing weed, and all you can hear are crickets and the breeze.
I doubt anyone will show up to support this in court. I’ll be there because this was our ( Ryan Davidson and myself) little project. But I seriously doubt the people who voted for this are going to be there.They’ll be too stoned to even notice. It’s like that Simpsons episode. The one where Homer got on the legalize it kick. Then he organized a big rally, everyone showed up, then they got too wasted to show up to vote on the right day. This is a small town, and small county. If 20 or 30 people showed up,things might tend to go our way. But too many people are afraid to admit their support publicly. And because of that, nothing will really change. Too bad, all that work for nothing.