My City wants to Ban Marijuana Dispensaries

I'm learning that some people who voted for the marijuana proposal are all, "but just not in my backyard!".
 
So I have the ear of one of the Councilmembers. We don't agree on everything but we do talk frequently on city matters and this is one of them. His main reason for the ban is that it's against federal law even though he personally opposes prohibition. I told him he took an oath to uphold the US and Michigan Constitutions--not the federal laws. No one in the city can enforce federal drug laws.

What's the best argument to persuade someone with this position?
 
What's funny is most of Council and the Mayor are democrats and part of the city's Democratic Club.

The notion that the Democrats are the champions of civil liberties is outdated. But all the towns I have connections with (Howell, Brighton, Hartland, LInden, Fenton, Byron) are also moving to quash any legal sales, and they're not all Democrat strongholds.

Byron is especially missing the boat here. They've got nothing - a small pot shop would breathe life back into them.
 
So I have the ear of one of the Councilmembers. We don't agree on everything but we do talk frequently on city matters and this is one of them. His main reason for the ban is that it's against federal law even though he personally opposes prohibition. I told him he took an oath to uphold the US and Michigan Constitutions--not the federal laws. No one in the city can enforce federal drug laws.

What's the best argument to persuade someone with this position?

Democrats? Money. That actually works with Republicans too.

Meet him halfway. Have him create legislation that would open it up if the feds decriminalized it, then move the goalpost again.
 
The notion that the Democrats are the champions of civil liberties is outdated. But all the towns I have connections with (Howell, Brighton, Hartland, LInden, Fenton, Byron) are also moving to quash any legal sales, and they're not all Democrat strongholds.

Byron is especially missing the boat here. They've got nothing - a small pot shop would breathe life back into them.

There's two adjacent cities I could see allowing this; Southfield and Oak Park. I don't know if they opted out yet. If they opened shops across the street (which are already commercially zoned), my city would get all of the perceived "negative" impact (Traffic, "transients", smells) and none of the benefits. It's one argument I'm trying.

The ordinance ban isn't final yet since there's still a second reading.
 
So I have the ear of one of the Councilmembers. We don't agree on everything but we do talk frequently on city matters and this is one of them. His main reason for the ban is that it's against federal law even though he personally opposes prohibition. I told him he took an oath to uphold the US and Michigan Constitutions--not the federal laws. No one in the city can enforce federal drug laws.

What's the best argument to persuade someone with this position?
You could tell him that since it is against federal law a local ban is redundant, let the feds and the state deal with it.
 
So I have the ear of one of the Councilmembers. We don't agree on everything but we do talk frequently on city matters and this is one of them. His main reason for the ban is that it's against federal law even though he personally opposes prohibition. I told him he took an oath to uphold the US and Michigan Constitutions--not the federal laws. No one in the city can enforce federal drug laws.

What's the best argument to persuade someone with this position?

Did you ask them why they're not a dry alcohol area? Oh riiiight probably because they drink and therefore alcohol is different, somehow. I know that wouldn't work for you but I like shaming hypocrites...
 
OMG don't you get it think of all the street corner dealers that will lose their income if there are legal despensaries :/
 
Did you ask them why they're not a dry alcohol area? Oh riiiight probably because they drink and therefore alcohol is different, somehow. I know that wouldn't work for you but I like shaming hypocrites...

What's funny is one long-time councilman did a hit and run after drinking at an alcoholic establishment in the city earlier in the year. He resigned. Shockingly, no one on Council made a push to ban alcohol in the city. :eek:
 
Last edited:
It amazes me that these municipalities are so willing to cast off potential revenue, without having any idea of how much money that actually amounts to.
 
It amazes me that these municipalities are so willing to cast off potential revenue, without having any idea of how much money that actually amounts to.

They seem to think cities will get very little so it's not worth the risk. I think it's a combination of NIMBY and the fact Council tends to just do whatever city staff tells them to.

The point I've been making is voters decided to regulate marijuana like alcohol. The city had 10 years to "opt-in" to allow medical marijuana facilities, but did nothing. So voters took up Prop 1 to allow it across the board, but now municipalities are just outright banning them. I think if they enact the ban it will go to a voter referendum--there is a lot of resident support to allow this including from entrepreneurs.
 
Last edited:
Good News🙂

Council is starting to pull back. They’re delaying the second reading after getting a ton of angry emails from residents. I’m not sure what will become of it, but so far it’s a better result than the other communities who already opted out.
 
Back
Top