HAILEY CITY ATTORNEY TO DEFEND POT INITIATIVES

Lawsuit Filed On The Eve Of Another Marijuana Election

An anti-marijuana lawsuit filed earlier this month puts Hailey City
Attorney Ned Williamson in the ironic position of having to defend
three controversial pot initiatives that he has staunchly opposed.

"I will do my best to defend those laws," Williamson told the Idaho
Mountain Express in February, shortly after Hailey Mayor Rick Davis
announced that the lawsuit would be filed.

Williamson was then asked if defending the marijuana initiatives
would be difficult for him.

"I will do my best to defend those laws," he said
again.

Wiliamson could not be reached this week for comment.

The lawsuit, filed by Hailey attorney Keith Roark on behalf of Davis,
City Councilman Don Keirn and Hailey Police Chief Jeff Gunter, seeks
to have the obviously illegal pro-pot initiatives officially ruled
illegal in Blaine County 5th District Court. The three initiatives,
one to legalize medical use of marijuana, a second to legalize use of
industrial hemp and a third to make enforcement of marijuana laws the
lowest priority for the Hailey Police Department, were approved by
Hailey's electorate last November.

Davis, Keirn and Gunter are the lawsuit's plaintiffs. The city of
Hailey is the defendant. Williamson is the city's attorney.

Some Express readers seem amused by the irony of Williamson's
defending the initiatives.

"Hey Ned bro, we'll be stopping by yer office to have a bull session
and brainstorm about our strategy as we just heard yer gonna be our
attorney in this initiative matter fighting for our cause," a Hailey
reader, identified as Roy Sandefur, wrote in an online comment to a
Jan. 30 story on the Express Web site.

But Ryan Davidson, the man who keeps putting pro-pot issues on the
Hailey ballot, does not find the situation funny. Davidson, chairman
of The Liberty Lobby of Idaho, told the Express in February that the
nature of the lawsuit is contrary to the basic premise of the
American judicial system.

"So they're willing to sue themselves," Davidson said. "It just
sounds bizarre. Both parties can't have the same interest in the
outcome. That's collusion and it's banned in the American justice
system. It should be thrown out out of hand.

"Ned Williamson has been the chief critic on behalf of the city,"
Davidson said. "So if he's put in a position of having to defend the
initiatives, how can he come up with a valid defense? It's a conflict
of interest."

Davidson's four-year battle with the city of Hailey is like a chess
game. The city makes a move, Davidson counters.

When city officials threatened a lawsuit last January, Davidson filed
new petitions to put all three initiatives, plus a fourth one that
was rejected by the voters in November, before the electorate again
on May 27.

The fourth one, a backdoor approach to pot legalization, would
require the city to tax and regulate sales and use of the drug in the
city.

Mayor Davis said another vote on the initiatives doesn't make much
sense to him, but "the court said we have to allow the elections."
Davis was referring to an Idaho Supreme Court ruling in September
2006 when the high court ruled in Davidson's favor in a lawsuit
against the city of Sun Valley. The justices held that municipalities
do not have the authority to determine the constitutionality of
citizen initiatives, regardless of the apparent illegality.

Davis said the timing of the lawsuit filing has nothing to do with
the election.

"That's just when it all came together," he said.

Officially, the lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment from 5th
District Court declaring the three previously approved initiatives
illegal.

"The lawsuit primarily alleges that the three initiatives are illegal
because they are contrary to the general laws of the state of Idaho
and the United States," states a news release from the city of Hailey.

Davis said a court determination of illegality can likely be applied
to three of the initiatives that will be put to the voters on May 27,
but if the fourth one passes, another lawsuit may be necessary.

Pass or not? Davis isn't making any predictions.

"I have no idea," Davis said. "There's been a lot more publicity this
time about the initiatives. I think people are a lot more educated
now about the issues. But I don't know if it will have a different
outcome or not."