Panels debate marijuana laws on Killeen, Heights ballots | Center for Politics

Six debaters and a crowd of about 75 people gathered at the Lion’s Club Park Senior Center in Killeen on Saturday to discuss the pros and cons of approving Proposition A, an ordinance to decriminalize low-level marijuana offenses, which will be voted on in city elections in Killeen and Harker Heights on Nov. 8.

The proposition includes a clause that removes the ability of Killeen Police Department officers to prosecute or investigate marijuana-related possession below 4 ounces.

The panel was sponsored by Texas Veterans for Medical Marijuana, Texans for Responsible Marijuana Policy and Higher Education Texas and featured Killeen Mayor Pro-Tem Ken Wilkerson, Julie Oliver of Ground Game Texas and Bell County Commissioner candidate for Precinct 4 Louie Minor on the “Yes” panel. On the “No” panel were Killeen Councilman Jose Segarra, Bell County Commissioner candidate for Precinct 2 Chris Bray and Killeen Independent School District Board of Trustees member Oliver Mintz.

FOR

The forum began with the Yes panel, providing each candidate time to provide an initial statement before being asked a series of questions as a whole. Among the Yes panel’s points were claims that 87% of Americans are in favor of some type of marijuana use, that tax dollars could be better allocated towards fighting more serious crime than low-level marijuana possession and that marijuana arrests overwhelmingly affect Black residents. The total number of marijuana arrests in Killeen from Jan. 1, 2019, to Dec. 31, 2020, was 730. Of those, 106 are Black women and 443 are Black men, according to Killeen data. That accounts for 76% of all arrests, according to Killeen police data.

“Marijuana is not the bogeyman in the room,” Wilkerson said.

Oliver said the cities of Killeen and Harker Heights would not be liable for a lawsuit, a sentiment reiterated by Wilkerson when he said the ordinance is not in conflict with state law or “the city attorneys would have said something.” Oliver also claimed that Killeen’s position as a home-rule city would also shield it from legal troubles.

Against

The No panel, led by Segarra, Bray and Mintz, primarily focused on the legality of the ordinance. Bray, who used a significant portion of the panel’s time, pushed back against the Yes panel’s claim to represent veterans.

“I’m a vet, and I don’t agree with them,” he said.

Both sides included veterans.

Bray also leveraged his endorsement by Fraternal Order of Police Lodge #32, which is the Killeen Police Employee Association, to say that he has been assured that any attempts to discipline officers within Killeen for prosecuting marijuana possession charges would be met with a lawsuit. Bray said the ordinance “is not about medical marijuana use,” and that proponents of the ordinance are “using” the Killeen public.

“The other side is going about this the wrong way and using you,” he said.

Segarra, pushing back against claims by the Yes panel that marijuana is not linked to crime, said Saturday that 78% of crime in Killeen is due to domestic violence and that marijuana “was identified as an active substance in child abuse and neglect.”

According to Segarra, passing the ordinance means that the city would not longer hold its youth accountable and also pushed back against claims by the opposition by saying that the ordinance would harm the city’s case when it comes to Fort Hood’s future.

Finally, Mintz, an attorney, spoke on the legality of the proposition. According to Mintz, police officers swear an oath to the state and the constitution, meaning those laws supercede that of the city. Additionally, he read two legal case rulings, one of which was the City of Lomeda vs. Webb County, which stated that the city cannot enact laws that are inconsistent with higher law.

“Nothing is more inconsistent than telling police officers that they shouldn’t follow the law,” he said.

After each side spoke, the forum opened up for a 15-minute question and answer portion.

Additionally, moderation for the No panel was more strict, with the moderator interjecting while candidates spoke to request data and ask questions — something that was not done during the Yes panel.

District 54 candidates Jonathan Hildner and Brad Buckley also attended the event.