Court halts 2nd voter-approved marijuana issue in Port Huron

Two days after another marijuana measure was approved by Port Huron voters, a temporary restraining order from a circuit court judge is keeping that law from taking effect — at least for now.

“The issue is very simple. We are not sure what the ordinance is asking us to do is constitutional,” City Manager James Freed said Thursday. “We cannot, without due process, take people’s property rights. We are asking the court’s direction on this because at the end of the day the taxpayers of Port Huron would be responsible for (legal costs defending marijuana lawsuits).”

The ballot proposal, which passed Tuesday by a margin of roughly 400 votes, would amend the last proposal approved by voters in November.

Both were initiated by the outside group Progress for Michigan 2020. 

The first initiative legalized both recreational and medical marijuana businesses in the city. The second aimed to reprioritize medical facilities after the provisional licenses identified earlier this year spurred several lawsuits against the city.

Unsuccessful marijuana applicants have contested licensing results, and this spring, Judge Cynthia Lane pressed pause on the process to formally award them to allow marijuana operators more time to intervene in the ongoing court battle.

In a complaint filed Thursday, the city alleges it would be in violation of pending litigation if it had to enforce the second petitioned ordinance from Progress for Michigan.

It cites provisions in that measure repealing licensure already identified for recreational marijuana, also alleging it would violate due process rights of the five entities slated to become local retailers and designated consumption establishments.

However, the temporary order from Lane on Thursday rules the latest ballot ordinance as “not effective” until the court issues a judgment on whether it can be enforced.

The action prevents the city from publishing Progress for Michigan’s second measure and delays it from becoming legal. According to the city’s complaint, the board of canvassers is set to certify Tuesday’s election results Friday, and the publication would’ve had to come within five days.

Freed told City Council members via email that a hearing on the issue is set for 9:30 a.m. Aug. 19.

“There may be some of the license holders/defendants who have no objection to the second petitioned marijuana ordinance,” he wrote, “but we know for certain some of the license holders/defendants support the city’s position in this case.”

Progress for Michigan has previously maintained its Aug. 3 measure was aimed to put marijuana patients first, instead requiring the city to develop a new application scoring system for recreational licenses once several medical licenses have been issued.

Its spokesman Sam Pernick has also said it was meant to prevent continued litigation, calling the ongoing disputes "sore loser lawsuits."

Still, other marijuana operators — including those who were successful in getting licenses this year — have said they thought continued court action would be likely if Tuesday's measure passed. City officials have said something similar.

In a statement Thursday, Pernick said, "When the city said they expected further litigation, we did not expect that they would actually sue to overturn a proposal that their own citizens passed by a huge margin just 48 hours after the election."

Pernick did not immediately respond to other questions Thursday.

In its defense of lawsuits contesting scoring results against the city, officials have said provisional licensees were named according to the rules outlined by Progress for Michigan in its first ordinance.

Contact Jackie Smith at (810) 989-6270 or jssmith@gannett.com. Follow her on Twitter @Jackie20Smith.