Many questions, fewer answers on marijuana decriminalization effort in Killeen

Approval of the proposed city ordinance — which would require Killeen police officers to ignore misdemeanor possession amounts of marijuana — could come earlier if the Killeen City Council votes to approve the measure, proponents say.

Those for the new city law say Killeen police charge and arrest a disproportionate number of Black residents when it comes to marijuana cases.

Opponents say it would bring more crime and drug use in the city, and put Killeen Police Officers in an awkward spot when it comes to enforcement of state law, which they are required to do.

So, how can a city in Texas require its police officers to ignore a state law in Texas?

The Killeen city attorney’s office did not want to answer the question last week.

CITY QUESTIONS

“We do not think it’s appropriate for the City Attorney’s Office to provide legal advice to media about the legality of Councilmembers regarding the petition,” Killeen spokeswoman Janell Ford said last week in response to Herald questions about the issue. “As you’re aware, our practice is to discuss items with council first during our public workshops/meetings. The City is following the provisions of the Charter by conducting a public hearing and considering the initiative ordinance at the July 26th council meeting. The initiative ordinance is also scheduled to be discussed at the July 19 workshop.”

However, the Herald was not just asking about the “legality of Councilmembers regarding the petition,” but rather the legal reasoning behind the issue.

Specifically, the questions sent to the city last week were:

• Please explain how and why something that is illegal under state law can be ignored by a city ordinance?
• How can an ordinance that goes against state law be allowed to be voted on by the Killeen City Council or the city? What is the legal reasoning behind this?
• If enough people signed a petition that said “burglary” would be decriminalized in the city, would the city allow it to be put on a ballot? Please explain.

The city has not answered them.

PETITION LEADER QUESTIONS

Perhaps more than anyone else, the local man leading the charge to get the petition signatures and get the new law passed in Killeen is Louie Minor.

Minor, a local businessman and Democrat running for a seat on the Bell County Commissioners Court this November, helped organize and lead news conferences about the effort, including on May 25, when organizers delivered the petition to City Hall. Minor was the main carekeeper of the petition, which people could sign at his office in north Killeen. And it was Minor who was approached by the local NAACP about the efforts of an Austin-based political organization.

“We were reached out by Killeen NAACP that there was an organization that was interested in getting this on the ballot here in Killeen,” Minor said in early June.

The Herald sent questions to Minor last week, also questioning legal reasoning behind the effort, and the juxtaposition it appears to have with state law.

Those questions were:

• Please explain how and why something that is illegal under state law can be ignored by a city ordinance?
• How can an ordinance that goes against state law be allowed to be voted on by the Killeen City Council or the city? What is the legal reasoning behind this?
• If enough people signed a petition that said “burglary” would be decriminalized in the city, would the city be required to put it on a ballot? If successful, does your petition open the door for other state laws in Killeen to be ignored? Please explain.
• Why are you trying to bring decriminalization to Killeen, where many active-duty soldiers live? What do you have to say to military officials who would frown on a city law such as this?
• Explain how decriminalization would be good for the overall health and reputation of Killeen?

Minor did not reply to the questions; however, he did forward the questions to Julie Oliver, an Austin-based politician and lawyer who is spearheading the effort statewide to install similar decriminalization laws in other Texas cities. Her group, Austin-based Ground Game Texas, already got decriminalization on the ballot in Austin in May, where it passed overwhelmingly.

In her responses to the Herald, Oliver said veterans’ concerns were among her reasons for the effort. She said she spoke to veterans in Killeen when she ran for Congress as a Democrat.

“I was routinely asked by the veterans’ community there (and in neighboring Copperas Cove). if I could do two things as a Congressional Representative: (1) help get veterans’ disability claims met in a timely fashion by the VA, and (2) legalize marijuana because they wanted alternatives to opioids, antidepressants, surgeries, or steroid shots,” Oliver said in an email to the Herald. “I’ve said it over and over again — if you want to thank a veteran for their service, legalize marijuana for responsible adult usage (as alcohol has been legalized for responsible adult usage). I wasn’t elected so I cannot do anything about veterans’ disability claims, but I can advocate for sensible changes to drug policies, and decriminalizing misdemeanor amounts of marijuana possession is sensible policy.”

Oliver also talked about the disproportionate amount of arrests from the Killeen Police Department.

“We know usage of cannabis is roughly the same across all demographics, but to date, we have had no explanation of why KPD targets Black and Brown residents for enforcement. Our Public Information Request revealed that Black Killeen residents (about 40% of the population) account for nearly 80% of all arrests for misdemeanor possession,” according to Oliver.

As to the question of “how can the City ignore enforcing laws on the books” — it’s called “local control,” Oliver said. “Cities are permitted to allocate resources how they see fit. Cities have broad discretionary powers when it comes to prioritization of laws. For example, section 13.046 of the Texas Election Code (state law) requires all Texas High School principals to serve as the High School Deputy Registrar and must distribute (at least two times a year) an officially prescribed registration application form to each student who is or will be 18 years of age or older during that year. Ignoring this law can be a Class A or Class C misdemeanor. And yet, I would guess that KPD doesn’t allocate resources to enforcing this law and ensuring that high school seniors are registered to vote at their high schools. The same can be said of traffic laws; cities don’t typically allocate resources to ensuring every four-way intersection has law enforcement stationed to ticket anyone ignoring state traffic laws, and police officers frequently hand out “warnings” for traffic violations (ignoring state law that makes it an offense).”

CITY COUNCIL QUESTIONS

Killeen City Council members, similar to police, swear an oath when they take office.

According to the “Oath of Office” Killeen council members sign, they swear to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State, so help me God.”

In addition, all seven members of the Killeen City Council and the mayor signed a city “Standards of Conduct” document this year, pledging “obedience to state law.”

That oath and pledge is raising questions: How can a council member vote to ignore state law if they are sworn to protect and defend state law?

For some on the Killeen council, it’s a big issue.

Last month, Killeen Mayor Debbie Nash-King brought up that oath when asked about the proposal to decriminalize marijuana in the city.

“Cannabis is a drug that is illegal in the State of Texas. I can see the pros and cons from both perspectives on this topic of debate. I can also respect the decision of the residents that took the time to sign the marijuana decriminalization petition. However, I took an oath of office as the City of Killeen Mayor to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State. Therefore, I will continue to follow the state and federal laws concerning decriminalizing marijuana,” Nash-King said previously when concerning the petition.

Similarly, Councilwoman Nina Cobb said her oath as a councilwoman binds her to support the state law.

“The Decriminalizing of Marijuana must match the law of the land and if not; it’s simple ‘I MUST FOLLOW THE LAW AND HONOR THE OATH TAKEN.’,” Cobb wrote in response to questions from the Herald last week.

Those questions to the council were answered by two members of the council — Cobb and Jose Segarra.

Here are the questions to the council and mayor:

1. According to the Oath of Office that Killeen council members sign when they are sworn in, council members swear to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State.” Does signing or supporting the proposed decriminalization ordinance in Killeen — which would require city police officers to ignore state law on misdemeanor amounts of marijuana — act as a violation of this oath? Please explain your answer.
2. In Killeen’s City Council Standards of Conduct, the document requires council members to be “diligent to set an example of obedience to state law.” By signing or supporting the decriminalization, is that a violation of the City Council Standards of Conduct? Please explain.
3. The City Council Standards of Conduct says the mayor and council should “hold themselves mutually accountable to his standard of conduct by all means available to them.” Do you plan to hold accountable those who have violated the council standards? Why or why not, and if so, how?
4. Please explain how and why something that is illegal under state law can be ignored by a city ordinance?
5. What do you have to say to Killeen Police Chief Charles Kimble, who has said his department will continue to enforce state laws?

Segarra answered each question individually. Here is how he answered the five questions:

1) “I believe it does, since we are not enforcing the laws of the state. We have always been told that when we pass an ordinance, it cannot contradict State law.”

2) “In my opinion, it is a violation. We then created a precedence to choose and pick which state laws we want to follow and which ones we ignore. Not a good way to set an example to our citizens.”

3) “I would hope, as a body of the council, we would not only hold ourselves accountable but follow state laws and enforce city ordinances that do not violate state laws.”

4) “I do not agree that it can or should be ignored, we are here to work together between state and municipalities. If we ignore them, then the state may ignore us when we need help in other areas such as funding for unfunded mandates like the 100% tax exemptions.”

5) “I support his decision, because he has a duty to uphold not only the laws of the city but also the laws of the state.”

Cobb chose to answer the questions in one summary, rather than individually. Here is what she said:

“It is a duty to respect the Code of Conduct and follow it as well as the laws of this land. It is imperative that I listen to all citizens about our city!! I respect the Trust Placed in me!! NEVER would I ask Chief Kimble or his department to not honor the laws of this land. It hurts to see men and women lose their freedom to addiction, illegal drug sales or simply riding in the car. We must teach, know the facts, and ensure that our citizens, especially our youth are equipped with correct information about marijuana while understanding the consequences. If it is the medical aspect, leave it to the proper professionals to prescribe or not prescribe; so, penalties are not faced. The Decriminalizing of Marijuana must match the law of the land and if not; it’s simple ‘I MUST FOLLOW THE LAW AND HONOR THE OATH TAKEN.’”

The other council members — Ken Wilkerson, Michael Boyd, Jessica Gonzalez, Riakos Adams, Ramon Alvarez and Mayor Nash-King — did not reply to the questions.

Moreover, Council members Wilkerson, Adams and Alvarez are among the list of petition signers. The Herald spoke briefly to Wilkerson last month, who confirmed he signed the petition.

Wilkerson said that he signed the petition as a “citizen” and not as a council member.

“That’s all you can sign it as, as a citizen,” Wilkerson said, “If it goes to the ballot, I’m not opposed to that.”

When asked if it would go against the oath that council members need to uphold the state laws and Constitution, Wilkerson quickly responded: “How are you supposed to change state laws and the Constitution, then?”