Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 710 Draft 01 2006-2008COUNTY OF HAWAII RESOLUTION NO. STATE OF HAWAII '71Q © 8 A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE PETITION (ORIGINAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY) FILED BY THE PETITIONERS COMMITTEE FOR THE LOWEST LAW ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY OF CANNABIS ORDINANCE ON JUNE 23, 2008, PROPOSING TO AMEND THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE RELATING TO LAW ENFORCEMENT WHEREAS, the power of the voters to propose ordinances is known as initiative, and is authorized in Article XI, Hawai' i County Charter; and WHEREAS, on June 23, 2008, the petitioners committee for the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis Ordinance filed an initiative petition entitled "Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis Ordinance", with the Office of the County Clerk; and WHEREAS, the petition proposed an ordinance amending the County Code (2005 Edition, As Amended) by adding an Article relating to Law Enforcement (see Exhibit 1); and WHEREAS, it is determined that the Committee needs 4,848 signatures of qualified voters to be deemed sufficient (32,321 total votes cast for mayor in the 2004 special election x 15% = 4,848 qualified voters); and WHEREAS, according to the County Clerk's "Certificate of Insufficiency" (see Exhibit 2) dated July 15, 2008, the initiative petition was determined to contain 2,214 valid signatures, which is 2,6341ess than the required amount; and WHEREAS, Section 11-5 (c), Hawaii County Charter, requires the Council to review the Clerk's certificate, and to approve or reject the certificate or to substitute its own determination of sufficiency of the petition by resolution; and WHEREAS, this Council believes that Democracy is best practiced when voters directly participate in governmental decisions and practices; and WHEREAS, the power of the voters to propose ordinances through the initiative process is one of the most fundamental forms of participatory democracy; now, therefore BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII that it stipulates to findings 1-10 of the County Clerk in the Certificate of Insufficiency. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that it finds the Petitioners Committee acted in good faith in attempting to collect the required amount of valid signatures. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that it finds there is no way for the Petitioners Committee to validate signatures prior to submitting the initiative petition to the Clerk for a determination of sufficiency. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that it finds this extremely important issue should be decided by the voters that will be directly impacted by the proposed ordinance. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the County of Hawaii does hereby substitute the Clerk's findings of insufficiency with this resolution as its own determination of sufficiency. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the County Clerk shall transmit a copy of this resolution to the Petitioners Committee. Dated at Kona , Hawaii, this 13th day of August 2008. INTRODUCED BY: COUNCIL MFjM)~'ER, COUNTY OF HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL ROLL CALL VOTE County of Hawaii Hilo, Hawaii I hereby certify [hat [hc foregoing RESOLUTION was by the vote indicated to the right hereof adopted by the COUNCIL of the County ofHawai`ion August 13, 2008 ATTEST: AYES NOES ABS EX FORD }{ Ii1GA g HOFFMANN X IKEDA JACOBSON X NAEOLE X PILAGO g YAGONG g YOSHIMOTO }[ 5 4 0 0 CO YJCLI Reference: C-1348.2 /Waived PWIRC RESOLUTION NO. ~1.~ ~8 gage ~ ) .THE COUNTY OF HAWAII, THE STATE OF HAWAI'~ AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW ARTICLE TO THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED) _. .. _._ -..,. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE Ct;-kJNTY~OF HAWAII - Section 1: TITLE ~F,. R ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' <~ ~ This Article shall be known as the ~ ~~ ~ - -~ 'LOWEST LAW ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY OF CAN1~4-B~Ij~~-MaE' ' ~ _-' r a ~' -- oo Section 2: PURPOSE fJ#'F. ~,~' ,,~,,_,~,,, ,,. _~_,~ ~ ..'y! ~ _ The purpose of this Article is to; ~ - ~.' .: ~ o0 (a) Provide law enforcement more time and resources to focus on serious crimes. -. ~, (b) Allow our court systems to run more efficiently; (c) Create space in our prisons to hold serious criminals; (d) Save taxpayers money and provide more funding for necessities such-as education and health care. (e) Reduce the fear of prosecution and the stigma of criminality from non-violent citizens who harmlessly cultivate and/or use Cannabis for personal, medicinal, religious, and recreational purposes. Section 3: FINDINGS (a) The Institute of Medicine has found that Cannabis (marijuana) has medicinal value and is not a gateway drug. (b) According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the use of Cannabis (marijuana) directly results in 0 (zero) deaths per year. (c) According to the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), the marijuana eradication program has not stopped Cannabis cultivation in the County of Hawaii, rather the program has only decreased the availability of the plant, which increases it's `street'value, resulting in more crime. (d) The National .Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) also reported that a large increase of the use of methamphetamine, crack cocaine, and other hard drugs was related to the marijuana eradication program's implementation. (e) According to public record, the mandatory program review'for the marijuana eradication program, required by Section 3-16 of the County Charter to be performed at least once every 4 .years, has never been performed in the 30 years that the program has existed. (f) Law abiding adults are being arrested and imprisoned for nonviolent Cannabis offenses, clogging our court dockets, overcrowding our prisons, tying up valuable law enforcement resources I "ExxzBZZ ~~~ (Page 2) and costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in Hawai i County alone each year. (g) The citizens of the Cities of Hailey,,~ Idaho; Denver, Colorado; Seattle, Washington; Columbia, Missouri; Eureka Springs, Arkansas and Santa Barbara, Oakland, Santa Monica, and Santa Cruz, in California, and the citizens of Missoula County, I~lontana, all voted for Cannabis (marijuana) to be placed as law enforcement's lowest law enforcement:;priority within the past five years. _ Section 4: DEFINITIONS R ~ (; ~ ~ ~ (a) "Adult" means any individual who is 21 (tv~ty~e~~ye~,r~ .~~age or older. (b) "Adult personal use"means the use of C Q s,.ocl, ; ~-~te-p~:operty by adults. It does not include: (a) distribution or sale of Cannabis; ~ ..... .. , . ... - (b) distribution, sale, cultivation, or use of Cannabis on public property; (c) driving under the influence; or _ (d) the commercial trafficking of Cannabis, or the possession of amounts of Cannabis in excess of the amounts defined as being appropriate for adult personal use.. (b) `~liarijuana",(as defined in the Hawaii Revised Statutes of Chapter 712-1240) means Cannabis. (c) "Cannabis"means all parts of the Cannabis plant, whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the Cannabis plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds, or its resin. (d) `~.owest Law Enforcement Priority"means a priority such that all law enforcement activities related to all offenses other than the possession or cultivation of Cannabis for adult persona{ use shall be a higher priority than all law enforcement activities related to the adult personal use of Cannabis. The Lowest Law Enforcement Priority regarding possession or cultivation of Cannabis shall apply to any single case involving 24 (twenty four) or fewer Cannabis plants at any stage of maturity or the equivalent in dried Cannabis, where the Cannabis was intended for adult personal use. (e) The "dried equivalent" of 24 or fewer Cannabis plants shall be presumed to be 24 (twenty four) or fewer ounces of usable Cannabis, excluding stems and other non active parts. A greater amount may also fall under the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority provisions described herein if such amount is shown by competent evidence to be no more than the dried equivalent of 24 plants. Section 5: LOWEST LAW ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY POLICY RELATING TO THE ADULT PERSONAL USE OF CANNABIS (a) The cultivation, possession and use for adult personal use of Cannabis shall be the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority for law enforcement agencies in the county of Hawaii. (b} The County of Hawaii's County Council, the Police Commissioner, the Chief of Police and all associated law enforcement staff, deputies, officers and any attorney prosecuting on behalf of the County of Hawaii shall make law enforcement activity relating to Cannabis offenses, where the 2 (rage 3) Cannabis was intended for adult personal use, their Lowest Law Enforcement Priority. Law enforcement activities relating to Cannabis offenses include but are not limited to investigations, citation, arrest, search or seizure of property, or providing assistance to the prosecution of Cannabis offenses involving only the adult persona( use of Cannabis; (c) Neither the Chief of Police, the Police Commissioner, nor any attorney'prosecuting on behalf of the County of Hawaii, nor any associated law enforcement staff, deputies, nor officers shall seek, accept or renew any formal or informal deputizat~on or co iqq11~~ federal law enforcement agency for the purpose of investigating, citing, orrresting~~,Gaf~arching or seizing property from adults for Cannabis offenses subject to the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis where such activities would be in violation of that policy,~r I~1~uc~~t~~orities exercise such powers that may be ancillary to deputization or commissioning for another purpose. OFF. CF ";~?-~ ~ `~ C~.~,-.,~ (d) The Hawaii County Council shall not authorize the a~q~pt~p~tce_or the issuing of any funding that is intended be used to investigate, cite, arrest, prosecute:; ~ earch.o~ seize property from adults for Cannabis offenses in a manner inconsistent with the county s Lowest Law Enforcement Priority policy. Section 6: COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS To the full extent allowed by the Constitution of the State of Hawaii, the people, through their county government, request that neither the County Prosecuting Attorney nor any attorney prosecuting on behalf of the County of Hawaii shall prosecute any violations of the sections of Chapter 712-1240 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes regarding possession or cultivation of Cannabis in a manner inconsistent with the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority, as described in Section 4 and 5 of this article; in cases where the amount possessed or grown is less than 24 (twenty four) plants or the dried equivalent, possession for adult personal use shall be presumed. Section 7: EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR CANNABIS ENFORCEMENT (a) Neither the Hawaii County Council, nor the Police Commissioner, nor the Chief of Police, nor any attorneys prosecuting on behalf of the County of Hawaii, nor any associated law enforcement staff, deputies, or officers shall spend or authorize the expenditure of any public funds for the investigation, arrest, or prosecution of any person, nor for the search or seizure of any property in a manner inconsistent with the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority as defined in Section 4 and 5 of this article. (b) The Hawaii County Council shall not support the acceptance of any funds for the marijuana eradication program. Section 8: COMMUNITY OVERSIGHT The Hawaii County Council shall ensure the timely implementation of this chapter by working with the Chief of Police and/or the Police Commissioner to; (a) provide for procedures to receive grievances from individuals who believe that they were subjected to law enforcement activity contrary to the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis, which is described in Section 4 and 5 of this Article; (b) publish a reporting semi-annually on the implementation of this chapter every first day of June and (Page 4) every first day of December, from this day forward, with the first report being issued June 1, 2009. These reports shall include but not be limited to: the number of all arrests, citations, property seizures, and prosecutions for all Cannabis offenses in the county of Hawaii, the number of complaints regarding marijuana eradication over-flights; the breakdown of all Cannabis arrests and citations by race, age, specific charge, and classification as infraction, misdemeanor, or felony, the estimated time and money spent by the County on law enforcement and punishment for adult Cannabis offenses, and any instances af:offlcers p~~~IQpi~~s~,sting in state or federal enforcement of adult Cannabis offenses'. These ~or~ li~l published with the cooperation of the County of Hawaii's Prosecuting Attorney, the Chief of Polices d all associated law enforcement staff in providing needed data. ~ 23 P 3 '~ Section 9: NOTIFICATION OF LOCAL, STATE, ANQfFt£•DEI"OFI`1CIIALS After the enactment of this Article, the County Clerk 'shad send letters on an annual basis (every June 1st of each year) to the Mayor of the County of Hawaii, the County of Hawaii voters' Congressional Delegation, Hawaii's U.S. senators, the County of Hawaii voters'representatives in the Hawaii State Legislature, the Governor of Hawaii, and the President of the United States. This letter shall state; `7he citizens of the County of Hawaii have passed an initiative to make Cannabis offenses the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority, where the Cannabis is intended for adult personal use, and request that the federal and state branches of government remove criminal penalties for the cultivation, possession and use of Cannabis for adult personal use; the citizens also request that Cannabis policies here within the county of Hawaii be dealt with from our local law enforcement only. " The letters may also state, be it the will of the County Council; that according to the 3 year study performed by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, more people used methamphetamine as a result of the marijuana eradication program; they may also express that methamphetamine is a growing problem in our community and more help would be appreciated in that area, and that the first action that would help in that area would be to end the marijuana eradication program. This duty shall be carried out until state and federal laws are changed accordingly. Section 10: STATUTORY AND CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION All provisions in this article shall only be implemented to the full extent that the Constitution of the State of Hawaii and the Hawaii Revised Statutes allows, and in the event, and only in the event, that a court of competent jurisdiction determines that any provision in any section of this article may not be directed by voter initiative or by action of the County Council, then that specific mandatory provision only shall be deemed advisory and expression of the will of the people that the provision shall be implemented into law by whichever government branch or official whom has the power to implement it, and that the Hawaii County Council shall take all actions within their power to work with those branches of government to express the will of the people and to encourage, support, and request the implementation of those provisions. Section 11: SEVERABILITY In the event, and only in the event, that a court of competent jurisdiction should find one or more of he sections, or parts of the sections of this Article illegal, or any provision of this Article or the application hereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Article and the application of :uch provisions to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. 4 JMtY Os N~!k 40 • ~~{J CASEY JARMAN - :• County Clerk ___ MO':_. ,TE•OI ~M~'~ OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK Elections Division County of Hawaii Hawaii Counh~ Building 2J ~1upuni Streel Hilo, Hawaii 96720 July 15, 2008 CERTIFICATE OF INSUFFICIENCY Pursuant to Article XI, Hawaii County Charter, the initiative petition submitted by the PETITIONER'S COMMITTEE FOR THE LOWEST LAW F.;NFORCEMENT PRIORI"1'Y OF CANNABIS ORDINANCE, entitled "Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis Ordinance", is hereby certified to be insufficient. The petition is insufficient under Hawaii County Charter § ll-4(c)(I) as it is signed by less than the required number of qualified voters of the county. Pursuant to § I 1-5(a) of the Hawaii County Charter, the following findings show the particulars wherein the petition is defective. (I) 32,321 total votes were cast for Mayor in the 2004 Special Election. Under IIawai`i County Charter § 11-2(c), the petition must be signed by qualified voters in the county equal in number to at least 15% of the total number of persons who voted for Mayor in the most recent second special election or last preceding general election. Fifteen percent (15%) of 32,321 equals 4,R48, which represents the total number of signatures needed for sufficiency. 1'he petition tiled on June 23, 2008 contained 4,954 signatures, 106 more than required. "EXHIBIT L" Haivai'i C'nunly is an equal oppordunity provider and employer. (2) Upon review by the Elections Office, 2,214 signatures were found to be valid signatures of qualified voters. This number is 2,634 less than the required amount. (3) 1,515 signatories could not be confirmed as registered voters. (4) 221 signatories failed to provide their residence addresses on the petition as required by § 11-4(b)(4) of the Hawaii County Charter. (5) 961 signatories provided residence addresses that did not match the residence address in the voter registration database. (6j i2~ signatories are not residents o~`Hawai`i County. (7) 6 signature dates were prior to the date of the petition. (8) There were 49 duplicate signatures. (9) 15 people failed to sign their names. (10) Some signatures may have had more than one reason for invalidity. A representative of the Committee will be invited by telephone, upon the signing and filing of this certificate, to pick up a copy of this certif cate. This certificate will also be mailed to Post Office Box 1380, Pahoa, Hl 96778 by regular mail. DATED at Hilo, Hawaii, this 15th day of July, 2008. (.~C Casey Ja an County Clerk, County of Hawaii 2