The Safety and Licensing Committee met 07/27/2022. The first item they took up was the resolution that, if passed, would add a non-binding referendum question to the November ballot asking voters to weigh in on the legalization of marijuana in Wisconsin.
After amending the resolution slightly to make it clearer that the question was about legalizing marijuana statewide and not simply in Appleton, the committee ended up voting 4 to 1 to approve the resolution with Alderperson Sheri Hartzheim (District 13) providing the one dissenting vote. If approved by the Common Council, voters in the November 2022 election will be asked to vote on the following question: “Should marijuana be legalized for adult-use, taxed, and regulated like alcohol in the State of Wisconsin?” The vote will not result in any changes to Wisconsin or Appleton law, but it sounded like the results could be used by an advocacy group to lobby for changes to state law.
Alderperson Chris Croatt (District 14) mentioned that he had entered the committee meeting expecting to vote against it, partly due to lingering negative feelings prompted by the unwillingness of past Common Councils to hold referendums on large capital projects such as the library. During the committee meeting, however, current Council members signaled a strong openness to having residents request referendums and utilizing referendums as a way to receive feedback from residents. This caused Alderperson Croatt to change his mind about voting no.
Alderperson Hartzheim started things out by making a motion to deny the resolution. She was seconded by Alderperson Croatt.
Alderperson Alex Schultz (District 9) spoke first because he was the principal sponsor of the resolution. He noted that most of the whereas clauses of the resolution spoke about the experience of neighboring states that legalized marijuana and laid out the economic benefit and potential law enforcement cost savings the state could realize if it followed suit.
One of the key things fie him was that 22% of US military veterans reported using medical marijuana to treat PTSD.
He said that Wisconsin was behind every neighboring states. There were a lot of benefits, although certainly also some pitfalls, to marijuana legalization. Essentially, what they were trying to do with the referendum was to get a temperature of the residents if the state. He said there was a push by more than a dozen municipalities to put this question on their November ballots to demonstrate where the public stood. One opinion poll showed that 60% of Wisconsin residents were in favor of legalizing marijuana in some firm and 83% favored realizing medical marijuana.
Alderperson Nate Wolff (District 12) who was a cosponsor of the resolution, said he had been approached by an individual who asked him to try to get this on the agenda for discussion. He thought that when constituents asked for a referendum to be placed on the ballot that council members brought it forward and talked about it.
He noted that, in the past, he had brought forward resolutions to decriminalize marijuana in Appleton by lowering the fine amount, so he supported this. He also said there were other things he would have liked to see on the ballot, but those things had not been brought forward.
The City Attorney in attendance at the meeting (I’m not sure which one it was) interjected and said that almost all of the comments to that point had been appropriate but he wanted to make sure that the discussion was kept to the merits or not of including this referendum on the ballot, not to the legalization of marijuana in and of itself.
Alderperson Denise Fenton (District 6), who was a cosponsor of the resolution but not a member of the committee, said that when constituents came to them with an issue, even for something like this where they were asking for their voice to be heard, it behooved the council members to listen to those constituents.
She had heard the argument that Appleton couldn’t change anything by putting this referendum on the ballot, but the city had put referendum questions on ballots before and those also had been done at the behest of citizens. When residents asked the council to let their voices be heard the Council out to do that. Even though the city couldn’t unilaterally do anything in response to the results, she thought the vote results from one of the state’s larger cities could provide a way to let state representatives know how citizens felt on the issue.
Alderperson Kristin Alfheim (District 11) thought the whole point of the referendum was to ask the opinion of the larger body of people they represented. She wasn’t sure what reason there would be to deny that.
As they saw across not only Wisconsin but other states as well, there was a rising desire for marijuana legalization coming from members of both political parties. All they we’re doing with this referendum was gathering information from everyone who showed up to the polls, which she thought was the first thing they should be doing. If the results did show there was a desire for legalization, then perhaps people could start preparing something that would come to fruition.
She said, “I support this measure because it is merely asking for public opinion, and I think that is the basis of what we do, and it does have an impact as a municipality as we go. it is not a fluff piece. It’s giving the chief, it’s giving our human resource, it’s giving everybody a chance to say ‘Hey this might actually take place someday.’ Maybe we should start talking about it.”
Alderperson Croatt wanted to make sure that everybody was aware that there was a difference between an advisory referendum and a binding referendum. One simply gauged the pulse for something, while the other locked the Council into action.
Clerk Kami Lynch said she had attached a memo to the agenda packet that went through what an advisory referendum was. Advisory referendums were non-binding questions which just surveyed electors to elicit their views on a particular matter. Wisconsin State Statutes gave no legal effect to the results other than the weight the governing body voluntarily assigned results.
Alderperson Croatt asked her to go over the costs.
Clerk Lynch answered that the estimates were very preliminary. Ballot programming was all done through Outagamie County, and the costs were fluid and depended upon what else was on the ballot. Costs to add this question to the ballot were roughly estimated to be $2,250 give or take a couple hundred dollars.
Alderperson Hartzheim said she had moved to deny the resolution because she believed the information they were looking for was already contained in the whereas clauses of the resolution. According to a Marquette University Law School poll conducted in February of this year, 61% of Wisconsinites thought marijuana should be fully legalized and regulated like alcohol. “What more information do we as council members in Appleton need than that?”
She understood and appreciated it was important to hear the voice of the people, “but we are the hearers of the voice of the people in things that we have jurisdiction over.”
This particular thing was a state issue. The state was behind in acting the way 61% of Wisconsinites felt it should, but that had nothing to do with what Appleton could do. She believed that people individually putting pressure on state representatives could and would make a difference, but she didn’t think an advisory referendum in Appleton would make a huge difference. She pointed to the advisory referendum on fair redistricting maps, and asked Clerk Lynch whether anything had happened in regards to that because she wasn’t aware of anything having come of it.
She finished up by say, “I am not in favor of this, not because I do not want to hear the voice of the people, but because I believe that we already know primarily what the voice of the people is based on the whereas clauses included in the resolution before us.”
Clerk Lynch responded to her question and said that the resolution which put the non-partisan redistricting question on the April 2021 referendum had directed her to send the results to a few places at the state level. She sent letters with copies of the election results. She did not hear back from anyone she sent the letters to, but she noted she had not asked for a response.
Alderperson Wolff said he actually agreed with the things Alderperson Hartzheim pointed out. He agreed they already knew the statistics, but clearly the state legislators were getting the point which was why he was supporting this. He thought they had to keep telling state representatives that this was something they wanted. It was a way to show the votes were there and say that the state should listen to those votes.
Alderperson Alfheim thought it was a sad state of affairs that they were making the effort to get a poll of the people and send the results to Madison and did not get a response back. “[Appleton is] a municipality with thousands and thousands of votes, and we never got a response. That is exactly the point of us doing this. Because if you ask politely, if you put your name out there, and the leadership of the state chooses not to even respond to the clerk of courts for an entire municipality, there’s a problem. […] If our constituents have come to us saying we would like this heard, it is our job to pass it up the hill. And if they don’t respond again, we’re going to do it again, because that’s our job. Our job is to represent the people that we support here.”
Alderperson Fenton did not think political polls were a good gauge of people’s opinions because they generally surveyed a very tiny percentage of people. Constituents in Appleton had told the council members that they would like their voices heard. They had the opportunity to allow every single registered voter in Appleton to make this voice heard on the matter rather than the couple thousand people who were called by a pollster and actually picked up the phone and responded.
She stated, “I am in favor of giving the largest number of people a voice as possible.”
Alderperson Hartzheim believed that while alderpersons represented the people, “we represent the people of Appleton in our neighborhoods in our districts to the city of Appleton and the government within the city of Appleton.” Yes, they could be a voice to elected representatives higher up the hill, but that was not the purpose of the City of Appleton’s government. Rather, Appleton’s government was to govern the City of Appleton.
Alderperson Croatt said he had come into the meeting thinking he would not support the resolution. That was mainly due to baggage he was carrying around from the past. In past years, they had tried holding referendums regarding things taxpayer dollars were spent on including the library project, but previous Council had chosen not to put those referendum questions on ballots claiming that alderpersons were elected to make the tough decisions so they didn’t need to get the public’s input.
He said, “I’m all for getting public input.” And he was not concerned about the cost of the referendum because it was a very small amount of money to get some data.
He did note, “We haven’t placed things on the ballot that are big, big expenditure projects, and that frustrates me because I think we should of.”
His main concern was what the Council was going to use the data from this referendum for. What kind of action would it prompt? He didn’t see them taking a lot of action based on it, and he agreed with Alderperson Hartzheim that a lot of the information was already available.
Alderperson Hartzheim, in response to Alderperson Fenton’s statement that polling numbers were not necessarily representative of the voters in Appleton, said that the city of Appleton was not necessarily in the business of doing a poll. There were very scientific ways of polling people and groups of people and getting accurate data that would be far more accurate than just a pulse poll of the voters that tend of come to a fall election. She said they might not even get a great voter turnout this fall so it would be difficult for them to even use the data from the election to make a blanket statement about how the people in Appleton feel. [I did not find that to be a persuasive argument. Voting ultimately seems like a much better indication of what people want than opinion polls because it shows the opinions of people who are committed enough to actually go out and take action to officially express their opinion on a particular matter.]
She had difficulty with this referendum not because of the issue (she agreed that Wisconsin was behind on marijuana legalization) but because she didn’t believe that this had a place in Appleton as part of its voting in November.
Alderperson Schultz said that the impact of this referendum would come from the fact that it would be part of a statewide initiative. They were taking the temperature of a number of communities across the state. He thought it was important that Appleton participate in that initiative because they were a city that was large enough to have an impact on what happens in the state. “This isn’t just asking Appletonians what they think about the law in the State of Wisconsin. This is about asking the State of Wisconsin what they think about legalization. And we need to be part of that discussion. I think not being part of this discussion makes us look sort of detached or just essentially not involved. And I think that would be a shame.”
Alderperson Alfheim said, “We can’t not do it because not enough people might show up. That’s not a good enough reason to do it.” They were trying to use the referendum to poll the people which she thought would be better than the results of an opinion poll. “I don’t know about you as far as polls from Marquette University, but raise your hand if you have a land line. [If] You don’t have a land line you’re not getting called. We know this.” [That doesn’t actually seem to be accurate. Per the Marquette University Law School Poll: “Unlike many state polls, the Marquette Law School Poll includes cell phones as well as landlines to help ensure a representative sample of all Wisconsin residents.” (https://law.marquette.edu/poll/about-the-poll/)]
She thought there was value in taking the pulse of the people and that they ought to do it because the people legitimately felt they were not being heard or responded to by Madison. “This is our community. It is our community that is asking for something that is not being responded to. I actually think it is our responsibility to carry that up and if they don’t answer, well that’s on them.”
Alderperson Croatt wanted to know if the wording of the referendum question as presented in the resolution was the way it would appear on the ballot.
Clerk Lynch confirmed the Council could craft the question as they would like. Her general suggestions for a question to go on the ballot was that it be concise and not too long. The question as presented worked well for ballot placement.
Alderperson Croatt agreed it was concise and overall, he liked that it was asked in a straightforward and non-confusing manner. His one concern was that it was a little too open and might give voters the impression that they were voting on legalizing marijuana in Appleton.
Alderperson Alfheim was not one of the authors, but she did point out that there would be plenty of education and press on the question and what it was for.
Alderperson Croatt said he would feel better about supporting the resolution if it was worded a little differently and made it clear it was about a state effort, not about something in Appleton specifically.
Based on a suggestion from Alderperson Schultz, the committee ended up voting to amend the referendum question to read “Should marijuana be legalized for adult-use, taxed, and regulated like alcohol in the State of Wisconsin?”
After the amendment was approved there was not any further discussion on the item as amended. They voted first 1-4 to deny the resolution with only Alderperson Hartzheim voting in favor of denial. They then voted 4-1 to approve the resolution with Alderperson Hartzheim voting against it.
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=965305&GUID=07DCC9A7-CAA9-4AB1-8BDF-2589CA67A235
Be the first to reply