Highland residents overwhelmingly against marijuana dispensaries in city

Public reaction to the Highland city council’s vote to allow marijuana dispensaries was strong and overwhelmingly negative at the last council meeting.

A standing-room-only crowd attended the meeting to share its reactions to the Nov. 4 vote to allow permits for marijuana dispensaries after they become legal Jan. 1. Many speakers told the council they consider marijuana a “dangerous product” that will bring in “riffraff and welfare” as well as crime and the degradation of the community.

“This is a very serious situation that requires more consideration than you’ve given it,” said resident Bob Freeman. “We don’t have to be the liberal kingdom of the United States of America. This is a conservative city and I would recommend you reconsider.”

Madison County Board member David Michael suggested the council could put it on the ballot and let the voters decide. Others called for a simple reversal of the vote, which would allow one dispensary permit subject to council approval and an additional 3 percent tax on top of taxes already levied by the state and other governmental bodies.

Public comment went on for at least two hours, and the ensuing debate among council members was peppered with more questions from the audience. The initial vote had been 3-1, with councilman John Hipskind as the sole no vote.

Hipskind reaffirmed his belief the issue should go to the voters, even though putting it on the ballot would have a dollar cost to the city.

“Sometimes government has to spend a little more money than it should ... to make sure the people get a voice,” he said.

Councilwoman Peggy Bellm reiterated marijuana “is legal whether we like it or not.” She said she voted in favor of it because whether or not the city allows a dispensary, people can acquire and use marijuana in their homes.

“If someone wants to use marijuana, they’re going to get it,” she said.

Bellm added she knew people who had used it for medicinal purposes and wanted them to get it in town from a safe source, not from the black market where it might be contaminated.

“I saw it as protecting citizens who need it for medical purposes,” Bellm said.

Bellm said she was not opposed to a referendum, but was not sure it was the best way to deal with the issue.

“I know full well that when someone doesn’t want something, we hear from them,” she said. “If they do want something, we rarely hear it.”

Councilman Rick Frey said he had been “on the fence all the way to the vote” and spent 30-40 hours studying the issue. Both he and councilwoman Sarah Sloan said they voted yes because they wanted control over when and where dispensaries would be permitted.

“I thought that to be in control of it would be better,” Sloan said. “If it’s going to be here, I would like to know who is supplying it.”

City attorney Michael McKinley said there are two ways to put the question on the ballot. A petition signed by a sufficient number of citizens would have to be submitted by Monday, Dec. 16, or the city council would have to pass a measure calling for the referendum by Monday, Dec. 30.

This story was originally published November 22, 2019 at 1:19 PM.