Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Ethics Conflict topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident raises conflict-of-interest concerns over councilmember Fisher’s cannabis ties; borough attorney says Fisher recused from cannabis matters

Stockton Borough Council · March 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

During public comment Michael Odenwald alleged a conflict of interest involving Councilperson Matthew Fisher and his employment in the cannabis industry. Borough Attorney Lisa Maddox responded that Fisher recused himself from cannabis applications and the cannabis ordinance; council closed public comment and entered executive session later in the meeting.

During the March 16 Stockton Borough Council meeting resident Michael Odenwald used the public-comment period to ask council to address what he described as a potential conflict of interest involving Councilperson Matthew Fisher and Fisher’s employment in the cannabis industry. Odenwald asked whether the council or the cannabis committee had provided prior scoring reports to new committee members and questioned who chairs the cannabis committee.

Mayor Aaron Lipsen said there were roughly a dozen participants on the Zoom call and declined to adopt Odenwald’s framing of a conflict. Borough Attorney Lisa Maddox responded directly, saying, "Mr. Fisher did recuse himself from all matters related to the cannabis applications and the cannabis ordinance because of his involvement in the cannabis industry." Maddox added that Fisher’s participation on the Finance Committee did not, in her view, create a conflict for those matters discussed at the meeting.

No formal investigation or additional action was recorded in the minutes; the cannabis committee was described by the mayor as continuing to research options and expected to report further details at a future meeting. The minutes record that council later scheduled a special meeting for March 26 and that the public-comment period occurred twice during the session, with Odenwald raising related budget and timeline questions in a second appearance.

The council did not take formal disciplinary action or open a referral in response to the allegation during this meeting. Attorney Maddox’s statement was the explicit response recorded in the minutes.