Pubdate: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 Source: Traverse City Record-Eagle (MI) Copyright: 2012 Associated Press Contact: http://www.record-eagle.com/opinion/local_story_128175513.html Website: http://www.record-eagle.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1336 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/props.htm (Ballot Initiatives) POT LAW MAY SEE BALLOT Court: Should Have Been Considered by Detroit Voters in '10 DETROIT (AP) - A state appeals court said Friday that Detroit officials and a judge in 2010 illegally blocked voters from considering whether to ease penalties for marijuana possession, a ruling that could pave the way for the measure getting on the ballot this year. In a 2-1 decision, the court said the city clerk had a "clear legal duty" to put the question on the ballot, even if officials believed the proposed ordinance would conflict with state law. Advocates had submitted enough petition signatures. The ballot proposal would have dropped penalties for people 21 or older who possess less than an ounce of marijuana on private property in Detroit. The appeals court acknowledged that marijuana possession still would be illegal under Michigan law, even if the Detroit ordinance passed, but said that's not the issue. "We emphasize that judicial pre-election determinations of the legality of ballot proposals are disfavored as undue interference with the legislative process, including the initiative process, the most direct form for citizens to pass laws," judges Henry Saad and Elizabeth Gleicher said. Judge Jane Markey disagreed, saying it was proper for officials to block a vote on a proposed law that "sought to accomplish an illegal purpose." Tim Beck, a spokesman for a group in favor of the ordinance, said he hopes the question will be part of the August election. [sidebar] "We emphasize that judicial pre-election determinations of the legality of ballot proposals are disfavored as undue interference with the legislative process ... ." Judges Henry Saad and Elizabeth Gleicher - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom