New Michigan Law Thwarts Pot, Fracking Ballot Initiatives

Despite having more than 101,000 signatures beyond the threshold to put marijuana legalization on Michigan’s Nov. 8 ballot, state election officials said in a staff memo Tuesday that an “insufficient” number of signatures were obtained and the Board of State Canvassers should reject it at Thursday’s meeting.

MI Legalize rolled out a celebratory message on its website after submitting the petition with the hundreds of thousands of signatures of pot legalization supporters:

“Congratulations Michigan you made history today by filing the first grassroots cannabis legalization petition in the history of the United States — against all odds — #‎MILegalize 354,000 signatures submitted, probably over 375,000 collected!!!! The only campaign to file for the 2016 ballot-- Freedom, Jobs, Better Roads & Schools on the way #‎MILegalize2016 Thanks to everyone that helped. You made this happen! Together We Win! #‎PureMichigan.”

NEWSLETTER: Top Michigan Headlines from Patch Editor Beth Dalbey

It was a nice high while it lasted. In its report, the Bureau of Elections said 207,587 of them were “stale and void.”

Here’s the problem:

The petition for a ballot measure to legalize pot submitted by the activist group MI Legalize was signed by an estimated 354,000 people, but the signatures were collected outside of the traditional 180-day window, the Bureau of Elections said, according to a report in The Detroit News.

The quick review of the signatures could give MI Legalize representatives enough time to press the matter in court, according to MI Legalize executive director Jeff Hank, who thinks the 180-day signature window is unconstitutional.

“The only way we’re probably going to rectify this is through litigation, and the fact that the Bureau has made this decision in a timely fashion gives us enough time to litigate,” Hank said. “We’re going to fight for the rights of every Michigan voter and make sure we get this on the ballot.”

Potentially complicating that is legislation signed Tuesday by Gov. Rick Snyder that firmly sets the 180-day window as a matter of law.

“Establishing reasonable time limits on when signatures can be collected helps ensure the issues that make the ballot are the ones that matter most to Michiganders,” Snyder said in a statement.

Response to Anti-Fracking Petition

The bill was a response to a petition drive by the Committee to Ban Fracking in Michigan, which wants to restrict the use of horizontal hydraulic fracturing in oil and gas exploration.

In a statement, the anti-fracking group’s campaign director, LuAnne Kozma, said the state has “both a fracking problem and a democracy problem.”

“The Legislature’s attack on our campaign and on the state constitution, aided by our opponents in the oil and gas industry, will not stand,” Kozma said, vowing a lawsuit.

“The state has gone rogue on this issue for a long, long time.”

LuAnne Kozma, campaign director;

Committee to Ban Fracking in Michigan

Until 1986, groups like MI Legalize and the Committee to Ban Fracking in Michigan had four years to collect signatures for ballot initiatives. In 1986, Consumers Power sued to stop a constitutional amendment ballot initiative.

The Michigan Supreme Court ruled the 180-day statute was constitutional, “but only as it applied to constitutional amendment initiatives,” Ellis Boal, the anti-fracking group’s lawyer said in a statement. “

Also in 1986, the Board of State Canvassers imposed an onerous policy not found in state statute. The policy required ballot initiative proponents to prove voters were valid twice, at the time of signing the petition and during a later period. … Thereafter, the Bureau of Elections inexplicably applied the Consumers Power decision to statutory initiative.”

“The state has gone rogue on this issue for a long, long time,” Kozma said.

Image credit: Chuck Grimmett via Flickr / Creative Commons