The Herald last week sent questions to the Killeen mayor and City Council about the ongoing lawsuit over the city’s decriminalized marijuana law, which became a law last year after it was passed by voters and amended by the council.
Earlier this year, the Bell County government sued the city over the controversial city law, saying it violates state law. That lawsuit has dragged on since April, and is now in a state appeals court. The city is paying for the lawsuit’s defense with taxpayer money.
What follows are the questions and how each city elected official answered. Not responding by deadline were Council members Riakos Adams, Michael Boyd, Nina Cobb and Joseph Solomon.
Jose Segarra
1) Why ask for an extension for the opening briefs for the lawsuit?
The City asked for an extension to submit opening briefs because the trial court had not yet issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law. Additionally, the City’s outside counsel has been extensively engaged in handling temporary restraining order and temporary injunction proceedings for another case.
2) How much money is this extension going to cost the city to pay for the attorneys?
The city will not have any extra-legal costs due to the extension since it is billed for the services rendered.
3) The judge in the lawsuit declared that Prop. A is “unconstitutional, unenforceable and invalid.” How do you respond to that, and please explain what your reasoning is for defending this lawsuit? The Judge acknowledged that the ordinance appeared to contradict state law but chose not to issue an injunction or declaratory relief. Instead, he ruled against the City’s plea to the jurisdiction. While my intentions were never to defend this lawsuit, as I was opposed to Prop A, I strongly believe that the people deserve a clear and definitive ruling from the court regarding whether Prop A is right or wrong, otherwise it may set a precedent for us to have to deal with other issues, in the future, that may go against state law in our city. Clarity on this matter for our citizens is what I want, and I believe the court is the one that can, hopefully, provide this.
4) Do you truly believe the city can win this lawsuit? If so, why?
Given the complexity and vagueness of the issue at hand, seeking clarity through the courts is a reasonable approach. The legal proceedings will allow for a thorough examination of prop A, and my hope, again, is that the court’s decision will bring clarity to the issue, putting to rest the uncertainty surrounding who is right in this case.
5) What is your response to people who say this is needlessly costing taxpayers money?
While there are costs associated with the court proceedings, the pursuit of clarity and resolution is crucial for all taxpayers. The fact that a substantial number of people voted in favor of this issue indicates the significance of taking this action. With such a complex and contentious situation, having the courts decide on the matter seems to be the most reasonable course of action. By seeking a court decision, the city can address the concerns of both those who voted for and against the issue, ensuring that the decision is made based on legal interpretation and impartial examination of the facts. Ultimately, this approach can lead to a fair and conclusive resolution, which will benefit the entire community by provide clarity, once and for all, on this issue.
6) Some council members have said you have to support Prop A because it is the will of the people. Is there a double standard because the will of the people had spoken against Riakos Adams being elected in May, but then the council voted 5-1 to reappoint Adams to the council in July after his election loss? Please explain.
The question appears to be speculative since we cannot definitively determine the will of the people, given that Mr. Adams is the only candidate who received 230 votes from the people, in the last election among all applicants. When you take into consideration the will of the people, Mr. Adams only lost to one person among the many applicants that applied. Moreover, let’s shift our focus towards addressing current and upcoming issues that can bring about a positive impact on our city. Instead of dwelling on the same question concerning a council member whose sole intention is to contribute to our city’s welfare, it’s time to set aside any unnecessary drama and let him focus on advancing the well-being of our community.
7) Does local law trump county and state law, in your opinion?
On this particular issue and where we are with it, I will let the courts decide on this, thank you!
Ramon Alvarez
1) Why ask for an extension for the opening briefs for the lawsuit?
“The City requested an extension for opening briefs because the trial court had not issued findings of fact and conclusions of law yet and because outside counsel has been heavily involved in temporary restraining order and temporary injunction proceedings in another case.” – City Attorney
2) How much money is this extension going to cost the city to pay for the attorneys?
“The City will not incur additional legal expenses as a result of the extension because the City is invoiced for services rendered.” – City Attorney
3) The judge in the lawsuit declared that Prop. A is “unconstitutional, unenforceable and invalid.” How do you respond to that, and please explain what your reasoning is for defending this lawsuit?
The Judge simply acknowledged that the ordinance appeared to contradict state law therefore he chose NOT to issue an injunction or declaratory relief, as requested by Bell County. Furthermore, as I’ve stated on and off the record previously, the job of an elected official is NOT to pretend to be an attorney or a Court of Law. I am neither of those nor do I pretend to be one. As an elected official my highest duty is to listen to the majority will of the people and to strive to carry out said will to the best of my ability. And I believe that is what this Council has done and will continue to do. Voter suppression is a term thrown around when it benefits or impacts certain people or political parties. But ignoring the 70% of voters who voted in support of Prop A, by legal election, is just that. I then view the defense of the County’s lawsuit for Prop A an indirect effect of upholding the will of the people.
4) Do you truly believe the city can win this lawsuit? If so, why?
I believe the City will prevail in the Plea to the Jurisdiction in the Court of Appeals, based on information provided. In regards to the lawsuit itself, I am eager for a Court to make a final ruling so we can all have some finality. I will not be surprised if a larger issue of government overreach isn’t fleshed out during this process as well.
5) What is your response to people who say this is needlessly costing taxpayers money?
Again, the City did not file the lawsuit. Bell County did. That question may be better posed to them. Remember they receive our tax dollars as well and the County Attorney’s salary is significantly more than we have allocated to this lawsuit. And it’s difficult to call defending a majority vote of the people as needless.
6) Some council members have said you have to support Prop A because it is the will of the people. Is there a double standard because the will of the people had spoken against Riakos Adams being elected in May, but then the council voted 5-1 to reappoint Adams to the council in July after his election loss? Please explain.
The Council did NOT appoint Riakos Adams to the District 2 seat that he lost to Joseph Solomon. He was appointed to an At-Large seat due to his experience. And if you look to the past, you will see that several persons who lost elections were appointed to Council. This is nothing new. What we do know is that he was the only applicant who received any votes from Killeen voters.
7) Does local law trump county and state law, in your opinion?
“While local ordinances do not generally trump state law, there are significant procedural and substantive issues in this case that are not answered by a general response to this question. These important legal issues such as standing and governmental immunity which have already been brought up in this case as well as substantive issues that will be fleshed out in future court proceedings should not be discounted by oversimplification.” – City Attorney
This is a broad question which many have eyes on. Does State law trump Federal law? Seeing what some states are doing one may assume so. This begs the question, are you for or against small government? Only time and court proceedings will tell. Stay tuned!
Jessica Gonzalez
1) Why ask for an extension for the opening briefs for the lawsuit?
Per our attorney The City asked for an extension to submit opening briefs because the trial court had not yet issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law.
2) How much money is this extension going to cost the city to pay for the attorneys?
Per our attorney: The city will not have any extra-legal costs due to the extension since it is billed for the services rendered.
3) The judge in the lawsuit declared that Prop. A is “unconstitutional, unenforceable and invalid.” How do you respond to that, and please explain what your reasoning is for defending this lawsuit?
As I have stated on numerous occasions, the process we are going through now is as it is designed to be! Our citizens followed the procedures required to bring forth a petition, and over 70% of the voting body supported the proposal. It is in the right place, decent and in perfect order for the courts to decide. There are a several things that I had to carefully consider here and the number one being the citizens followed procedure, the council voted no to this proposition which ultimately led to us allowing our constituents to take it to the polls. As it turned out, our citizen body overwhelmingly was in support of the proposition.
I think it would be irresponsible to “wipe away” valid votes and disregard the request of our people. That is a slippery slope EVERYONE should be concerned about (if legal votes can be so easily wiped away, it’s prop A today but what will it be tomorrow?) There is a process in our American government when this sort of challenge arrises and again, I believe, the proper place is for our courts to make the final determination.
4) Do you truly believe the city can win this lawsuit? If so, why?
The City is seeking clarity for all of our citizens be it for or against this proposition. The courts final ruling will answer many questions that are on our books that have been vague. We will all benefit from the information we will be provided in conclusion.
5) What is your response to people who say this is needlessly costing taxpayers money?
Being well informed and ensuring that we are taking all appropriate avenues to find a reasonable response and protocol moving forward should be a rallying cry for all of our citizens. It is important that we not disregard any legal and valid votes cast and
that we ensure that the ordinance overall is in compliance (by final determination) if this is the people’s will. The court will need to make the fair, just and final ruling. That to me is important! All voices are heard, every vote is tallied and in a contentious situation such as this, the courts will be the one to administer justice in whichever direction fair and impartially.
6) Some council members have said you have to support Prop A because it is the will of the people. Is there a double standard because the will of the people had spoken against Riakos Adams being elected in May, but then the council voted 5-1 to reappoint Adams to the council in July after his election loss? Please explain.
There is no double standard as the council was the one responsible for making a determination and we all agreed, less one, to vote in support of Councilmember Adams. Your question is not valid and I sincerely hope that you all can move forward and focus on some of the important challenges and overall successes of our growing city. We are at a place where there is a collective movement by citizens, various organizations, various leaders in and around our City to get us to a point that we are a quality, affordable place to live, a viable option for businesses and future developments, as well as a safe place for us to call home. There are some great things happening in Killeen, some wonderful people who should be celebrated and some amazing businesses who have or are in preparation to open their doors and create more job opportunities. That too is the will of the people, please help us help keep them informed about those things that are so very important to their daily lives.
7) Does local law trump county and state law, in your opinion?
“Please keep in mind while local ordinances do not generally trump state law, there are significant procedural and substantive issues in this case that are not answered by a general response to this question”, per our Attorney. She further stated that these important legal issues such as standing and governmental immunity which have already been brought up in this case as well as substantive issues that will be fleshed out in future court proceedings should not be discounted by oversimplification.
The courts will make a final determination on the above mentioned case and will set a clear precedent moving forward.
Mayor Debbie Nash-King
(The mayor answered the questions with one paragraph):
I can see the pros and cons from both perspectives on this topic of debate. The residents of Killeen did follow the proper process to get Prop A on the ballot, and it passed. However, cannabis is an illegal drug in the State of Texas, resulting in a lawsuit against the city. As mayor, I took an oath of office 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.
Click Here For This Articles Original Source.
