Bell County Commissioners, Killeen Council react to latest from Prop A lawsuit

Killeen Daily Herald
By Kevin Limiti | Herald
August 6, 2023

A lawsuit filed by Bell County against the city of Killeen over decriminalized marijuana has caused a mix of reactions from Bell County commissioners.

Some Killeen City Council members also reacted, saying that defending the Proposition A vote is justified by the majority of people who voted in favor of it when it was put on the ballot last year. The crux of the issue is Bell County officials say Proposition A violates state law by decriminalizing marijuana for up to 4 ounces and prevents police from doing their jobs.

The lawyers for the city of Killeen asked the appellate court last month to delay the lawsuit until late August while they prepared an opening brief.

Bell County Commissioner Bobby Whitson, R-Harker Heights, said he didn’t have much of a reaction other than “it’s just lawyers doing what lawyers do.”

“It was very clear that our district judge felt that Proposition A is unconstitutional and illegal and now they’re filing with the appellate court and extending with the appellate court trying to draw it out as long as they can,” Whitson told the Herald. “I hate to see Killeen spend taxpayers dollars up to $100,000 to continue to fight what the district judge already said is blatantly illegal and unconstitutional.”

“The law is very clear,” he said.

Meanwhile, Bell County Commissioner Louie Minor, D-Killeen, had a vastly different opinion on the matter, telling the Herald that he believed the lawsuit would fall in the city of Killeen’s favor.

“I believe there’s a lot of things at play here,” Minor said, explaining that the U.S. Supreme Court ruling against the states of Texas and Louisiana — where they sued over the Biden administration’s immigration policy — showed that the county did not have standing in this case.

“I don’t believe the county or the state can show they have been harmed,” he said. “You have to have standing in the case. But that’s for the court to decide. But the interesting thing about this case is that I believe — and it’s in the court records — is that the county asked the attorney general’s office to join this lawsuit and they didn’t join the lawsuit.”

An unknown factor in this case is House Bill 2127, signed into law in June by Gov. Greg Abbott, and widely known as the “Death Star” bill. This bill allows the state to override local law that runs afoul of state law.

But Minor believed that the bill might actually work in the city of Killeen’s favor.

“There’s a lot of issues going on with the state, and municipalities are at odds with a lot of things, so this is definitely another one where the courts are going to have to decide,” he said.

Councilwoman Jessica Gonzalez said the extension is not going to cost taxpayers any additional money because the attorney is billed for services rendered. The city attorney also said there would be no additional cost.

Gonzalez, did, however state that the process the city was undergoing is exactly how it’s supposed to be.

“Our citizens followed the procedures required to bring forth a petition, and over 70% of the voting body supported the proposal,” she said in an email, referring to the election on Proposition A last November. “It is in the right place, decent and in perfect order for the courts to decide.”

Gonzalez defended the will of the people, and said it should be up to the courts to decide if the local law crosses a line with state law.

“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 arises and again, I believe, the proper place is for our courts to make the final determination,” she said.

Councilman Ramon Alvarez said in an email to the Herald Thursday that the job of an elected official was not to act like a lawyer.

“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,” Alvarez said. “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.“

Alvarez said he was “eager” to hear the court’s final ruling, but believed the city would win in the Court of Appeals.

Councilman Jose Segarra said due to the complexity of the lawsuit, “seeking clarity through the courts is a reasonable approach.”

“The fact that a substantial number of people voted in favor of this issue indicates the significance of taking this action,” he said, explaining the city’s defense of the lawsuit. “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.”

Mayor Debbie Nash-King said she could see the pros and cons of both arguments.

“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,” Nash-King said. “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.”

Ground Game Texas, a progressive poetical organization based in Austin instrumental in getting Proposition A on the ballot last year, has also joined the lawsuit and has allied itself with the city.

Ground Game also asked that its opening brief be delayed.

“Appellant (the City of Killeen) seeks to extend the time to file its opening brief (a summary of the legal arguments it intends to make) because the trial court (Bell County’s 146th Judicial District Court) has not issued findings of fact and conclusions of law and because appellant’s counsel have been heavily involved ... in another case,” according to the city’s motion for an extension of time that was filed on July 24, days before the deadline. “The potential impact of the requested extension on these judicial proceedings is insignificant.”

Bell County opposed the motion, according to court records.

The city of Killeen has capped the amount it will spend on the lawsuit to $100,000 until Sept. 30, the end of the current fiscal year. As of June 21, the city has spent an estimated $42,000 on lawyers’ fees in defense of the lawsuit, but did not have an updated amount by deadline.