forum.dwylbtzle.info Forum Index
forum.dwylbtzle.info Forum Index
forum.dwylbtzle.info
FREE-RANGE FLOYD-FREAK ASYLUM
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

We did it! 3of4 Cannabis initiatives passed in Hailey, Idaho
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    forum.dwylbtzle.info Forum Index -> Everything Else
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 9:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005118075
Wednesday, November 21, 2007



Hailey officials stew over pot initiatives

City alleges harmful impacts if pro-marijuana issues enacted


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By TERRY SMITH
Express Staff Writer


The recent passage of three pro-marijuana initiatives in Hailey presents city government with a plethora of problems, city officials stated Monday in a press release.

The issue will put the city at odds with the U.S. and Idaho constitutions, Hailey police stand to lose federal funding for drug law enforcement and one City Council member may have resign. Those are a few of the potential problems cited in the announcement.

City officials stopped short of saying how they will resolve the dilemma, but announced that the topic will be discussed at a City Council meeting on Monday, Nov. 26.

Hailey voters approved three marijuana reform initiatives on Nov. 6: one to legalize medical use of marijuana, another to legalize industrial use of hemp and a third that would make enforcement of marijuana laws the city's lowest police priority.

The electorate voted down a fourth initiative that would have required the city to tax and regulate sales and use of marijuana.

The man responsible for the initiatives, Ryan Davidson, who lives in Garden City and is chairman of The Liberty Lobby of Idaho, said earlier that the Hailey initiatives are part of a wider grassroots effort to reform marijuana laws statewide.

City officials wrote in the press release that The Hailey Medical Marijuana Act conflicts with both state and federal law "and in such circumstances the courts have held that a local ordinance is invalid." City Attorney Ned Williamson said earlier that litigation is likely to ensue from enactment of the measure and will be expensive for city taxpayers.

City officials further wrote that The Hailey Lowest Police Priority Act also conflicts with state law because "Idaho prohibits adoption of legislation that is administrative in nature." Officials further contend that "this act impacts the ability of Hailey police officers to be deputized under federal law and reduces the ability of the Hailey Police Department to receive federal funds for drug enforcement purposes."

The initiatives also present a dilemma for elected officials, particularly Councilwoman Carol Brown, who is a federal employee.

The problem, officials wrote, is that all three of the initiatives require that the city lobby for reform of marijuana laws and Brown is prohibited from doing so under federal ethics laws.

"Council member Brown will have to recuse herself from any discussion of these laws in order to retain her federal position," officials wrote. "Stated differently, council member Brown may have to resign from the Hailey City Council."

City officials further wrote that the lobby requirement may put the city at odds with First Amendment "rights of freedom of speech and political expression."



print version email


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leave a Comment

Show: Sort: Newest first Oldest first
There are 8 comments


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comments below are from the readers of mtexpress.com and in no way represent the views of Express Publishing Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

grassroots 11/21/07 - 07:44
Why the whining? - Hailey is not the first city in our country to enact pro-marijuana laws! A simple call to officials in Denver and other major west coast city offices should provide guidance here. Can't image these municipalities have not dealt with, and successfully resolved, the federal issues in question. Do your homework then proceed to support the majority of voters in Hailey.


common sense 11/21/07 - 08:08
When the people of this country VOTE for something

And our government DOES NOT LET IT HAPPEN..

we are NO LONGER living in a democracy.


bhones2u 11/21/07 - 09:06
So what! it's time for a change; Don't forget this is a Democrocy and the people have spoken. Do we only pass legislation that benefits our RULERS?


wake up 11/21/07 - 10:13
Yes, this appears to be a problem stemming from the government having difficulty adjusting to the will of the people. Not the people's problem. Figure it out and respect the desires of the electorate.


someguy 11/21/07 - 12:42
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." Voltaire


Mir Egal 11/21/07 - 16:15
To Every One From Every State:

If nothing else, this should illustrate that every state in our nation has a growing percentage of folks who support medical marijuana.

It's Idaho; not New York, not Florida, not California. It may not be a large percentage in Burley or Idaho Falls, but if the entire state doesn't have the opportunity to decide, then this kind of story will become rote.

I don't care if you like the idea of medical marijuana or hate it, but it should be voted on in every state in America. There is a demonstrated interest in clarification of the plant's medical efficacy, as it has appeared in over 25% of state ballots in some form or another in the last decade.

Federal marijuana laws are over 70 years old, and they are embarrassingly obsolete. If you respect the democratic process, you should urge your state representatives to initiate legislature that lets the majority decide whether or not marijuana is a legitimate alternative to other prescribed medication.


Karl Stopper 11/22/07 - 20:59
Step aside, politicians and Hailey Police Department, for the will of the voters, otherwise be prepared to be held in contempt of society.


roy sandefur – hailey idaho 11/24/07 - 02:17
Well
I WAS angry
(when the constitution was violated for three years)
But if the "city officials" want a REAL stew
some REAL problems
keep right on with yer smug attempts to thwart the will of the people some more
and violate the bill of rights
some more
and you'll REALLY tick me off
haven't you little PASHAs had enough yet?
(he heeee heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!)

-Roy Sandefur
Idaho Liberty Lobby
and CITIZEN of The United States Of America
(ever heard of it?)

roy sandefur – hailey idaho 11/24/07 - 03:20
quote from above article:

"Council member Brown will have to recuse herself from any discussion of these laws in order to retain her federal position," officials wrote. "Stated differently, council member Brown may have to resign from the Hailey City Council."

City officials further wrote that the lobby requirement may put the city at odds with First Amendment "rights of freedom of speech and political expression."

Well, gee
that's an interesting opinion, isn't it?
THIS we KNOW, for certain:
FIVE Idaho Supreme Court justices have written THEIR opinions
with no dissentions:
That The Town Council of Hailey
Ketchum
and Sun Valley
VIOLATED The People's first amendment rights to free speech
and the right to petition the Government
for three years
PRESUMING that they were the gatekeepers of the PEOPLE'S RIGHT to the initiative process
which thing BY GOD they ARE NOT!
and that's not opinion
that's FACT

_________________



Last edited by Dwylbtzle on Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:22 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's an older one:

http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005117206
Wednesday, September 26, 2007



Marijuana initiative makes Hailey ballot

Cannabis advocate meets city’s initiative process requirements


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By TERRY SMITH
Express Staff Writer

Ryan Davidson



Hailey's electorate will vote in November on proposed initiatives to legalize or decriminalize marijuana within the city limits.

After legal battles with Hailey for more than three years, pro-marijuana advocate Ryan Davidson, chairman of Liberty Lobby of Idaho, has successfully complied with city requirements to put his initiatives before the voters.

Davidson was notified on Friday, the deadline for completion of initiative requirements, that his pro-marijuana initiatives will be on the ballot for the city's Nov. 6 general election.

"The only way this is going to go away is to let the people vote on it," said Hailey City Council President Rick Davis at Monday's council meeting.

Hailey's electorate will vote on four different initiatives to legalize or decriminalize marijuana. The first, and the one Davidson said is most important, would mandate the city to regulate and tax marijuana sales and use and would require the city to advocate and lobby for reform of marijuana laws statewide or nationally.

If approved by the voters, adoption of the law could be delayed for up to one year. The initiative requires the establishment of a community oversight committee to work out the details of legalization and gives the committee one year to get the job done. The four-member committee would be composed of representatives appointed by the City Council, the mayor, the Hailey Police Department and Liberty Lobby of Idaho.

"Nothing's going to be immediately legalized if the initiative passes," Davidson said Monday.

A second initiative before the voters would legalize medical use of marijuana. Another initiative would make enforcement of marijuana laws the lowest priority for the Hailey Police Department. The fourth initiative would allow for industrial use of hemp, a marijuana by-product.

The City Council discussed the initiatives briefly at its Monday meeting when City Clerk Heather Dawson formally notified the council that the initiatives have qualified for the ballot.

Council members seemed more amused than alarmed by the initiatives and mused that Hailey may receive national news media attention because of the issue.

The only action taken by the council was a vote to not summarize wording in the initiatives and to have them printed as written on the ballot.

"The voters have to vote on this. The Supreme Court was very clear," said Hailey City Attorney Ned Williamson.

He was referring to an Idaho Supreme Court decision in September 2006 when the high court ruled in Davidson's favor in a lawsuit against the city of Sun Valley. In that ruling the court determined that municipalities do not have the right to determine the constitutionality of proposed initiatives.

Davidson won a second major court victory earlier this month when U.S. District Court in Boise issued a preliminary injunction that bars the city of Hailey from requiring that initiators of initiatives be residents of the city.

Davidson's legal battles with cities in the Wood River Valley began in August 2004 when he filed petitions for initiative elections with the cities of Hailey, Ketchum and Sun Valley.

Davidson said Monday that he will continue to push for marijuana legalization elections in Ketchum and Sun Valley and hopes to have the issues on ballots for next May's primary elections.

Davidson acknowledged that if voters approve his pro-marijuana initiatives, further litigation might ensue because of conflicts with state and federal law.



print version email


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leave a Comment

Show: Sort: Newest first Oldest first
There are 22 comments


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comments below are from the readers of mtexpress.com and in no way represent the views of Express Publishing Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to
jerry 09/27/07 - 22:59
its about time someone getts with the times drug law with weed is just bad no need fort cops to b in the look for pot smokers ther are real crimes out there

Kelly 09/28/07 - 08:21
Meth is a horrible problem, we should be spending our money on eradicating it and not worrying about a few smokers.


Reply to Kelly
Joe 11/01/07 - 18:28
Seems like jerry has had a bit too much to smoke.

Chris Keith 09/28/07 - 20:15
This one should pass easily. You don't have to be a "Pot Head" to realize that enforcing Marijuana laws cost much more money and destroy more lives than to simply legalize it and leave the harmless smokers to their plant. Now if the rest of the country would wake up and follow our lead!!!


STM 11/01/07 - 14:03
Legalization by the city is not going to do much. Look at the California Medical Marijuana issue. The state allows MMJ and the Feds are raiding and closing dispenseries constantly. The Feds do not care what your marijuana laws are. Marijuana is federally illegal and the DEA is hysterical about it. The DEA does not go after dangerous drugs just the sitting ducks in the MMJ dispenseries.


Reply to STM
zz 11/01/07 - 14:19
Funny that you mention California. I live in California and it sure seems like pot is legal here to me. Yea sure you hear of a dispenser getting shut down now and then but by and large it is legal.

When you take the state and local law enforcement out of the picture it is, for all intents and purposes, legal. There just aren't enough feds in California to make a difference.

I think the feds are kinda funny carrying on about California and their pot while they have so many other pressing issues to deal with, like terrorists.

Reply to STM
Phrag 11/01/07 - 14:58
It is true that a change in city or state law is not going to directly change federal policy, but this is the path that is making the most progress. People have tried to change this policy from the top down, but those at the top seem too set in their ways to admit that a change is needed. This is seen time and time again in cases like the Ed Rosenthal trial and retrial, Gonzalez v. Raich, and the NIDA stonewalling of research requests by UMass Amhesrt.

Enacting policy change on city and state levels, while difficult, has resulted in much more progress. As more cities and states make changes to their own policies, the federal officials will be forced to react. They could choose to keep the status quo and expend an ever increasing amount of resources to fight against policies approved by their own citizens. They may choose to take notice of the policies, see their effects on the local population and decide to remodel their own if the results are helping society. I am hoping for the latter.

David Conway 11/01/07 - 14:39
Let's be totally honest. The smoking of marijuana is a terrible waste of a God-given life. But, in reality, the money and time spent trying to stop this drug from being circulated is astounding. The drug has caused many unnecessary deaths and people ceing forced into situations that can be prevented, such as children in school. Alcohol has about the same effect as marijuana, but alcohol is legal, maybe just put an 18 year old age limit and strictly enforce that. Come on people, lets do something to help stop the violence and the eventual decadence of our beautiful nation.


Reply to David Conway
craig bowers 11/01/07 - 15:01
David... Let me quote you. "Alcohol has about the same effect as marijuana, but alcohol is legal, maybe just put an 18 year old age limit and strictly enforce that."

There are three better options than the ones you gave.
1. We ban alcohol. Why not? It has the same effects according to you... isn't that your only argument?

2. We ban alcohol, and approve marijuana. Marijuana is proven to be better than marijuana in almost every way. It is much healthier, there have been tests, and there is no evidence showing that it may cause cancer, you CANNOT overdose on marijuana, you cannot die from marijuana, it is much less addictive than alcohol, there is almost no withdrawal symptoms, and you get much less intoxicated than alcohol on marijuana. There are countless websites that will support what I just said, but here's one www.drugwarfacts.org

Also, still on #2, if this law gets passed hemp will be legalized. Hemp is a wonderful plant. If you care anything about the environment, hemp is a much better alternative for producing paper and clothing.

3. We could legalize all drugs. I'm not 100% in support of this, but it's still better than limiting safe drugs that are only illegal because of lobbyists that have been around since the 30's trying to banish pot. Marijuana is one of the oldest drugs, I can't remember off the top of my head but it's been used for at least 4000 years.

Get your facts straight David. I really think the only people that should vote on this are people who have smoked at least once. Because it has shown that smoking pot isn't addictive, then the only reason they would keep doing so is because they realize it isn't that bad, and the positives outweigh any negatives (if you can name some that aren't also applied to alcohol I'll give you a cookie).

Reply to David Conway
Phrag 11/01/07 - 15:07
I think you view the effects of smoking marijuana a bit too harshly. Simply smoking marijuana does not mean that someone is wasting their life anymore than having a glass of wine makes you an alcoholic. Yes some people are wasting their lives while smoking marijuana, but I am not sure you can say all people would be living a much more productive life if they were to quit. There are also many people that use marijuana and live productive lives at the same time. If you want examples, you need only look at many popular musicians and entertainers who have admitted to smoking pot.

I believe the prohibition of marijuana, which places the majority of marijuana production under the control of organized crime, has caused more deaths than the use of marijuana alone.

The effects of alcohol abuse can actually be much more damaging to the body than the effects of marijuana abuse. I have heard of marijuana addiction causing people pain, anxiety and insomnia. These are horrible things to go through, but when compared to the possible effects of alcohol addiction, which include kidney failure and death, I think marijuana could reasonable be considered less harmful in the worst case scenarios.

blah chewedknee 11/01/07 - 15:11
Power to the people!
Let them decide.


noah 11/01/07 - 16:18
it's not even a matter of getting with the times - pot prohibition was never really about protecting people from themselves - it was about the big industries being threatened by the amazing, versatile hemp that anybody with a hill of mud could grow..


CJC – Hailey 11/01/07 - 16:28
This is a rare opportunity for the voters of Hailey to stand up and let the city know what you think, and this may be the only chance to stand and be heard. It will not change much right away if the initiative/s are passed, which I personally think that some, if not all will pass, based on the general liberal demographic of this valley. The long term however could be siginificant, and it would put our law enforcement on notice, to get down to the real business at hand, and leave the hippy's alone. As Kelly mentioned, the meth, and I'll go on to further that comment and add, the murders, the sexual predators who are lurking in the midst of our community, illegal immigration and employment of illegals, gangs, rapists. The stuff that keeps you awake at night. i know I don't worry about the neighbor down the street burning one after a long day of work, I do worry about the neighbor down the street who's name I found on the sexual offender website, becuase they have to register where they live, and it's two blocks over. Those are the kind of things our police should be policing... not the casual user. I'll take a pothead neighbor over an alcholic neighbor any day of the week. Stand up and be heard!


Administrator 11/01/07 - 17:01
You can discuss this topic and others on the new Mt Express Forums. This topic is listed in the Local Elections Category under the Hailey Election. The forum requires registration.

www.mtexpress.com


Iandanger – Catonsville, MD 11/01/07 - 17:47
I would like to make mention, you said that Hemp is a Marijuana byproduct, that is not accurate. Industrial hemp is a completely seperate breed of plant from Marijuana and it doesn't contain THC, the active drug in Marijuana.

It is the misunderstanding that keeps the plant illegal despite its numerous economic benefits.


Reply to Iandanger
Owen 11/02/07 - 10:30
I'm sorry this is not just inaccurate, this is spreading misinformation to the public.

This same information is used to keep the public consciousness thinking that these two plants are the same, and one cannot be legalized without the other.

While I believe no plant should be out-lawed, the legalization of the usage of hemp would be a great victory for everyone out there who claims to actually give a damn about global warming and conservation of nature. (e.g. less need for plastics, less need to farm trees, and many more)

Max 11/02/07 - 06:21
Dear Ryan Davidson,
I would really appreciate it if you brouight your campaign to Florida and legalized it here. With it being legalized it will take away the world debt in a couple of years. Anyways good luck on the vote


vern 11/07/07 - 14:08
vote ron paul in 08...he`ll leagalize it


Matt 11/08/07 - 01:23
please legalize medical marijuana i have Glaucoma


Human57 11/08/07 - 20:37
This is fabulous - what a patriot!!!! what a soldier - give all my kudos to this soldier of the plant!!!

God loves those who love His creation!

Human


M town 11/09/07 - 08:32
I think it's a good thing. The cops will less worry about that and focus on bigger problems.


Greg – Idaho Falls, ID 11/20/07 - 03:01
Yowza, well I think it's great. We are effectively surrounded by states that have the compassion and understanding to make access to medical marijuana less complicated. I'm going to included some links for those who are more than likely shocked and amazed than Idaho could possibly have anything to due with marijuana. But you have to keep in mind folks, it's the biggest cash crop in the state. norml.org also I found this Hailey article in Time magazine from a link at hempbc.com so look around. Information is available if you want it, keep an open mind and let's assume for now if you don't need access that you won't stop someone who does simply because you don't want to. Here's some more info, videos.med.wisc.edu www.safeaccessnow.org



roy sandefur – hailey idaho 11/24/07 - 02:58
You CAN fight city hall!


_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Subject: HI!
Date: 11/24/2007 2:52:10 P.M. Mountain Standard Time
From: Dwylbtzle
Reply To:
To: carol.brown@haileycityhall.org




Sincerely sorry about yer first amendment rights
http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005118075

-Yer's in freedom:
-Royboy


******************************************************
*************************************************************


Twisted Evil Razz Cool Wink Laughing
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I sent that to Robin
the current mayor of Hailey
too
saying:
"Leave this for the new guy"

************

Surprised they better be damn immaculate as they hammer out their statement on how they plan to implement these laws Evil or Very Mad Razz Laughing

there are lawsuits
and there are LAWSUITS
they better not worry about GOVERNMENT lawsuits
they better worry about IDAHO LIBERTY LOBBY lawsuits
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 2:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

oops Embarassed
correction
I meant Susan
Robin is her assistant
sorry, Susan,
didn't mean to boot you out of office, early
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rick.davis@haileycityhall.org

then I sent it to rick davis
the mayor-elect

Twisted Evil
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 3:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"We will use the power of the city
To control the wealth of the city"
-Tom Hayden

ya see....
that's the difference between a Communist
and myself

The Communists killed 100 million people
in the twentieth century

I don't want to control anyone's "wealth"

I just want to kick Tom Hayden's ass

a gentlemen's fisticuffs bout
of course
only if he accepts
as a point of honor
(if he has any)
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote




_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Judge Roy Bean
The Law west of the Big Wood

...-'course, west of the Big Wood River is just some barren dirt hillside
with a coupla tufts of dead brush Confused








Out here, on the perimeter, we is stone IMMACULATE!"--Jim Morrison
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005118075
roy sandefur – hailey idaho 11/24/07 - 19:49
oops
correction
I meant Susan
Robin is her assistant
sorry Susan,
didn't mean to boot you out of office early


Flynn – Sandpoint 11/24/07 - 21:30
Wow, I am so thankful I left a community that appears to be being
manipulated by both an out of the area nutball and in town fruit loops.
WOW


roy sandefur – hailey idaho 11/25/07 - 09:17
I've lived in The US all my life
Boise, for almost twelve years
(which IS this area)
and Blaine County for well over three years
It's ALL our turf

The fight we fought to the Idaho Supreme Court
and the Federal Courts
now has effected the whole nation

Where are YOU?
Do they have cancer there?


The citizens voted on four initiatives
three won
I don't think we "manipulated" any gun to anyone's head

_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ol' FLYNN doesn't seem to like ANYONE! Laughing
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005118075
roy sandefur – hailey idaho 11/25/07 - 09:47
Don't y'all just LOVE democracy?
Whenever anyone doesn't like the results of any election
it's ALWAYS four things:
outsider "nutballs" "manipulated" everyone
Insiders, (voters), are insane "fruit loops"
The "good guys" didn't get their message out
or the election was rigged
sheesh!

_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

reminds me of mister KONG:

when Bush won twice
the Demoncrats didn't get their message out
(just FAILED to get their message out) Confused
and the election was rigged with Satanic witchcraft

when the Demos gained some seats, in Congress
Of course, it was a glorious triumph of the people Rolling Eyes
and reason
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ryan Davidson 11/25/07 - 12:48
Tomorrow, on Monday, November 26th, the Hailey City Council will be holding a meeting to discuss the three recently-enacted cannabis initiatives. The meeting starts at 5:30. Here’s the agenda:

www.haileycityhall.org

I believe that this “discussion” is a bit of a ruse, and that the council is looking to build public support for a repeal of the initiatives. They may not say it, but I think they're definitely considering it. Here’s why:

Shortly after the election, newly-elected mayor and current councilman Rick Davis blasted the initiatives in an article in the Idaho Mountain Express.

www.mtexpress.com

One of his arguments was that he thought that medical marijuana had been abused in other states. So it seems he wants to penalize Hailey residents for things that other people in other states have done. The mayor has a right to criticize, but the appropriate time was during the campaign, when voters were still making up their minds. Now, the initiatives have been enacted, and they are the law of the city, on the same footing as any other law. Rick Davis should now be respectful of the will of the people.

After the mayor’s diatribe in the Express, the city issued a press release, written by the city attorney and the city clerk. It can be read as a news story on SunValleyOnline.com.

sunvalleyonline.com

This press release is nothing more than another political attack against the initiatives. The city attorney lists everything he thinks is legally wrong with the initiatives. Again, I believe the purpose of such attacks is to build public support for the repeal of the initiatives. The council wouldn’t dare risk the wrath of the electorate by immediately repealing a citizen’s initiative. (It took the Idaho Legislature years to work up the courage to repeal term limits, and it was only after all of their other schemes, such as lawsuits, failed miserably.) It looks like the powers that be in Hailey are trying to wage a public relations campaign against the initiatives in order to scare the voters. If they can scare enough voters, they’ll probably feel comfortable enough to repeal the initiatives.

Once an initiative is enacted, it immediately becomes the law of the city. Cities, and specifically city attorneys, are obligated to defend all ordinances from legal attacks and lawsuits. The city attorney is courting disaster and possibly violating his legal ethics by listing every legal problem he feels is wrong with the initiatives. He’s given a blueprint to every attorney in Idaho who would want to sue the city over the initiatives! If a lawsuit is filed against the city, one wonders as to what kind of a defense the city attorney could put forth, since he’s already on record as declaring the initiatives to be illegal. This situation stinks.

If you read the city’s press release, you can see that all of the issues listed by the city attorney are of a highly technical legal nature. That’s why I feel the “discussion” during Monday’s meeting will be something of a mockery. No member of the public is going to be familiar with all of the arcane legal theories and arguments that could be used for or against each paragraph of each initiative. Neither would most attorneys. There are no “municipal initiative specialist” attorneys in Idaho. None of the council members are attorneys. They would therefore simply take whatever their own counsel says at face value. So what kind of discussion will there be? I’m guessing that the city attorney will simply read his laundry list of complaints out to the council, who will all look at each other and say, “Well, we’re not attorneys, and we pay Mr. Williamson a lot to know the law. So let’s just do what he tells us to.”

(This was pretty much the discussion that took place in 2004 when I appeared before the council to tell them that the city attorney’s opinion on initiative law was incorrect. The Supreme Court and the Federal Court agreed with me, by the way.)


Ryan Davidson 11/25/07 - 12:50
...continued...

As for the city attorney’s specific arguments against the initiative, let me just say that they are all either incorrect or highly debatable. There are substantial legal arguments to counter every thing he has alleged. For instance, his allegation that “Idaho law” prohibits the electorate from passing an “administrative law” is very dubious. There is nothing in Idaho Code that says this. There were two Idaho Supreme Court cases that spoke to this issue, but both were overturned as a result of my litigation. Further, the Supreme Court has always stated that it is a very fine line between a law that is administrative in nature, as opposed to a law that is legislative in nature. Differentiating between the two is always difficult, according to the Supreme Court. In the Boise Ten Commandments monument lawsuit, the City of Boise argued that an initiative to place a monument in a park is an administrative matter, because there was already an agency that made those decisions (the Parks Board); therefore, because the Board “administers” the parks, any initiative relating to parks was administrative in nature. I pointed out to the Supreme Court that this logic was ridiculous, because there is generally an agency or board that administers every facet of city government operations. Therefore, under Boise’s logic, any and every potential initiative could have been considered administrative in nature.

This is all fairly basic legal stuff, but there’s no mention of this in the city attorney’s press release. And it’s just the tip of the iceberg. As you can see, it’s all technical, legalistic, and boring. How many members of the public would be able to bring up these kinds of arguments at a council meeting?

That’s why I feel this meeting is something of a sham. That’s why I feel that everyone who believes that the council should respect the will of the people should attend this meeting to make their feelings be known. I remember that after the term limits initiative was repealed, I spoke to many individuals who did not support the concept of term limits in general, but were absolutely opposed to the Legislature overturning the will of the people. These folks rightly understood that if the government could overturn an initiative they didn’t support, they could just as easily overturn an initiative they did support. These are especially the type of people who should show up and testify against what the city council is trying to do. Tell them that they should respect the will of the people. I see this as a basic First Amendment issue. The First Amendment applies to all speech, even that with which we disagree. Good Americans stand up for speech they disagree with, because they understand that it may soon be their favorite form of expression that is on the chopping block.

I specifically designed each initiative so that a citizens’ oversight committee would have to be formed. The purpose of such a committee, as I saw it, would be to work out any legal, procedural, or policy issue that would come up. The committee would ideally be in close contact with both the city council and the police department, and would work with both to come up with solutions that would be mutually agreeable to all. This committee is supposed to be open to the public, with many opportunities for input and testimony.

It is in this committee - and not in the council - that issues related to the initiatives should be worked out. Therefore, I would ask that if you testify in front of the council tomorrow, you remind them of this fact. If the council tries to throw you a curveball, and asks you, “Well, what about the case of Smith vs. Barney, or what about Idaho Code § 12-6969, or what about the US Supreme Court’s decision regarding state’s rights?” be honest and tell them that you don’t know anything about it (if you don’t) and then immediately go on to tell them that they should respect the will of the very same voters who put them into office, and that they should immediately begin to form the community oversight committee, who will spend all their time researching all the issues that were raised.

Remember, if you can’t attend, you can always send emails to the mayor and council, or can send them letters, or call them at home (I’m sure they’d love to hear from you.)

If you need any more ammo, please feel free to contact me.

Good luck,

Ryan Davidson, Chairman

Liberty Lobby of Idaho

HaileyCampaign@aol.com

(208) 353-8157


roy sandefur – hailey idaho 11/25/07 - 17:53
Is Davis reading all the responses to all of these stories in all these newspapers?
Go read 'em!
97 percent seem to be all for the new LAWS
one percent think the voters are mushy minded manipulated fools
and 2 percent are really concerned about spelling and punctuation
(he heee heeee!)

_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dwylbtzle



Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 4483
Location: Sun Valley, Idaho

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

roy sandefur – hailey idaho 11/25/07 - 18:46
Fine
Nix the valid election
be booted next election
and we have a SPECIAL election and re-enact the initiatives by the voters again
We can last as long as the self-ordained pashas can

_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    forum.dwylbtzle.info Forum Index -> Everything Else All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 4 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group