News (Media Awareness Project) - US MI: Milan City Council Gridlocked on How to Deal With |
Title: | US MI: Milan City Council Gridlocked on How to Deal With |
Published On: | 2010-06-29 |
Source: | Milan News-Leader, The (MI) |
Fetched On: | 2010-06-29 15:00:41 |
MILAN CITY COUNCIL GRIDLOCKED ON HOW TO DEAL WITH MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAWS
The Milan City Council couldn't come to a conclusion during a special
meeting Monday on how to deal with state-level legislation that
legalizes medicinal marijuana for individuals with certain health issues.
Much of the gray area up for discussion seemed to materialize by way
of apparent contradictions between state and federal drug laws, and
choosing which ones to enforce.
Many aspects of the situation were hotly contested, with debate
lasting beyond the special meeting and extending into the regularly
scheduled City Council session.
City attorney William Beach began by summarizing the implications of
the bill and offering examples of how governing bodies in other
Michigan cities have approached the issue.
"Roseville created a special land-use permit for those growing
marijuana plants," he said. "Garden City said that if you want to
grow marijuana, you have to go to City Hall and get a permit."
Beach also cited the Grand Rapids' approach, which included
moratoriums of 90 days that delayed decision making on the subject.
"I want to show how different people approached it," he said.
Councilman Joe Chapin started the debate by saying he "would not have
a problem regulating" the medicinal use and dispensing of marijuana.
"I don't think we can stop it from coming," he said. "I think we
should zone it. Quite frankly, I do think we should put something
together soon."
Councilwoman Martha Churchill alluded to the oath she took when sworn
into public office, saying she could not betray it by creating
city-level laws that favored state policy over federal legislation or
the other way around.
"If we don't like the law that was passed, then shame on us," she
said. "When this constitutional law was pending, that's when we
should have fought it. We just have to live with reality."
Mayor Kym Muckler conceded that she felt people with certain medical
issues should be able to use marijuana if they so choose, but
rejected the idea of having the controlled substance available in the city.
"If sick people need the assistance of marijuana, they should be able
to get marijuana," she said. "I just don't think I want dispensaries in Milan."
Councilman Michael Armitage took, perhaps, the most aggressive stance
toward the legislation, enacting a motion to have Beach draft a legal
measure that would prohibit certain medical-related marijuana
activities in the city.
"At minimum, we have to take some sort of action," he said, prompting
the board to act. "I just want something we can vote on."
Armitage withdrew the motion after discussing the legal ramifications
with Beach and the rest of the council, but later proposed another
motion to create a moratorium of six months, which could prohibit the
city from acting on the matter in any way for that amount of time.
Churchill responded by questioning, "So, we're going to violate the
state Constitution for six months?"
After a bit more discussion, Muckler announced Armitage's motion was
"dead on the floor" because it didn't receive a secondary motion.
Several other options were discussed, including the amendment of
existing city laws to prohibit certain aforementioned activities, as
well as taxing the sale and use of medicinal marijuana, but none
garnered adequate support for a vote.
By meeting's end, the board left agreeing to consider the matter at a
future council session.
The Milan City Council couldn't come to a conclusion during a special
meeting Monday on how to deal with state-level legislation that
legalizes medicinal marijuana for individuals with certain health issues.
Much of the gray area up for discussion seemed to materialize by way
of apparent contradictions between state and federal drug laws, and
choosing which ones to enforce.
Many aspects of the situation were hotly contested, with debate
lasting beyond the special meeting and extending into the regularly
scheduled City Council session.
City attorney William Beach began by summarizing the implications of
the bill and offering examples of how governing bodies in other
Michigan cities have approached the issue.
"Roseville created a special land-use permit for those growing
marijuana plants," he said. "Garden City said that if you want to
grow marijuana, you have to go to City Hall and get a permit."
Beach also cited the Grand Rapids' approach, which included
moratoriums of 90 days that delayed decision making on the subject.
"I want to show how different people approached it," he said.
Councilman Joe Chapin started the debate by saying he "would not have
a problem regulating" the medicinal use and dispensing of marijuana.
"I don't think we can stop it from coming," he said. "I think we
should zone it. Quite frankly, I do think we should put something
together soon."
Councilwoman Martha Churchill alluded to the oath she took when sworn
into public office, saying she could not betray it by creating
city-level laws that favored state policy over federal legislation or
the other way around.
"If we don't like the law that was passed, then shame on us," she
said. "When this constitutional law was pending, that's when we
should have fought it. We just have to live with reality."
Mayor Kym Muckler conceded that she felt people with certain medical
issues should be able to use marijuana if they so choose, but
rejected the idea of having the controlled substance available in the city.
"If sick people need the assistance of marijuana, they should be able
to get marijuana," she said. "I just don't think I want dispensaries in Milan."
Councilman Michael Armitage took, perhaps, the most aggressive stance
toward the legislation, enacting a motion to have Beach draft a legal
measure that would prohibit certain medical-related marijuana
activities in the city.
"At minimum, we have to take some sort of action," he said, prompting
the board to act. "I just want something we can vote on."
Armitage withdrew the motion after discussing the legal ramifications
with Beach and the rest of the council, but later proposed another
motion to create a moratorium of six months, which could prohibit the
city from acting on the matter in any way for that amount of time.
Churchill responded by questioning, "So, we're going to violate the
state Constitution for six months?"
After a bit more discussion, Muckler announced Armitage's motion was
"dead on the floor" because it didn't receive a secondary motion.
Several other options were discussed, including the amendment of
existing city laws to prohibit certain aforementioned activities, as
well as taxing the sale and use of medicinal marijuana, but none
garnered adequate support for a vote.
By meeting's end, the board left agreeing to consider the matter at a
future council session.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...