A Michigan Court of Appeals decision has ensured that a local proposal to permit cannabis dispensaries in Howell will remain on the ballot. This ruling comes after the city's clerk attempted to withdraw her consent for the question to appear before voters.
The ballot initiative seeks to amend Howell’s city charter to introduce “an application process, selection criteria, licenses, fees, and regulations for two adult-use retail cannabis establishments.” However, legal complications emerged after concerns were raised about the potential conflict between the proposed charter amendment and the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MRTMA), which governs recreational cannabis use statewide. Specifically, questions arose about whether the local measure would supersede state law, leading to the city clerk’s reversal.
The Howell city clerk initially approved the proposal to move forward, allowing county election officials to include it on the ballot. However, following a separate Michigan Court of Appeals decision regarding a similar ballot measure in Farmington, where it was ruled that the measure exceeded the narrow scope of what could be enacted through a ballot initiative under state law, the Howell clerk reconsidered. She then sought to retract her approval.
This led the group advocating for the measure, the Open Stores in Howell Committee, to file a lawsuit against the clerk’s decision. The group had already won at the trial court level, and the recent appellate court decision upheld that victory.
In its ruling, a three-judge panel emphasized the importance of adhering to election deadlines and rejected the idea that the Howell city clerk had the authority to change her position after certification. The court stated, “The crux of defendants’ argument is that the City Clerk has a continuing duty to approve or reject a petition even beyond the deadline for certification to the County Clerk. Again, defendants have provided no authority for that position.” The court further highlighted that allowing clerks to backtrack could disrupt crucial election processes, including ballot printing and mailing deadlines.
While this decision clears the way for the ballot question, the court did leave open the possibility for future legal challenges if the proposal is approved by voters.
Livingston County Clerk Elizabeth Hundley, also named as a defendant in the case, remarked on the ongoing difficulties local clerks face in managing cannabis-related proposals. "There needs to be some clarification so that everyone — including local clerks and their legal counsel — knows what can and cannot be included in the language of these petitions," Hundley said.
Despite these legal hurdles, Hundley confirmed that her office's priority is to ensure that ballots are ready for the upcoming November 5th election. Absentee ballots are already being mailed to voters who requested them.
Share this article:
Spotted a typo, grammatical error, or a factual inaccuracy? Let us know - we're committed to correcting errors swiftly and accurately!
Helpful Links Categories Recent News 
