Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0680.001 2008-2010Murashige, Laura From: Sent: To: Council testimony Subject: Testimony for February 2, 2010 Attachments: Hawaii County Council Testimony Feb2 -10 v4 docx Aloha Attached please find testimony for Hawai'i County Council Committee on Public Safety and Parks and Recreation February 2,2010 4:30pm Comm 680 Mahalo Matthew Rifkin www.peacefulskyalliance.org 2/1/2010 Peaceful Sky Alliance [peacefulskyhawaii @gmail.com] Monday, February 01, 2010 10'51 AM P /PSPRG pi z( IVED *FEB 1 BE! ll 11 OCT?: OO d= Hra,nr Page 1 of 1 Comm. No. Ref. Tot Ref. Dafo FEB 0 2 201 L February 2, 2010 4:30pm Hawai'i County Council Testimony Committee on Public Safety and Parks and Recreation Comm. 680 - Comment Aloha Council Chair and Council Members... My name is Matthew Rifkin, and I am a member of the board of the Peaceful Sky Alliance I am here to address several issues in the letter from Thomas Whittemore to this Council. There is a bill in the state legislature that also seeks to make offenses involving the personal use of marijuana by adults the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority. The language is very similar to our Law. Although HB 1193 is not yet law, it has passed the first reading and it would not make it this far if the language in the bill contained ambiguities or lacked legal merit similar to the concerns raised by Police Commission Chair Whittemore. Let me address the three points raised in the December 22 letter... First, the Peaceful Sky Alliance DOES NOT claim that the Law makes marijuana legal. It instructs the police and prosecutors to make the adult personal use of marijuana on private property their LOWEST PRIORITY. It specifically directs the Prosecuting Attorney not to prosecute cases that meet the criteria of the law. The law enforcement community is being told to focus on more important issues than marijuana. Second, yes, we assert the law now reads that County of Hawaii may not accept any funds from either state or Federal agencies for the purposes of marijuana eradication helicopter flights. Section 14 -101 (b). Third, the Law does not prohibit the police from investigating, arresting and prosecuting large scale growers and distributors. It does prohibit them from participating in marijuana eradication missions, either directly or by providing ground support. Mr. Whittemore cites the need for clarification of the Federal 'and preemption issue. I will remind the Council that on November 3, 2009 I testified and presented you with a California Superior Court Ruling that upheld the rights of voters in Santa Barbara to pass a Lowest Law Enforcement Priority Law. I will quote again from the Court Ruling made in 2007... "Santa Barbara is free to decline to enforce federal criminal statutes. Indeed, the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal government from impressing "into its service and at no cost to itself' the police officers of the 50 states." Finally, I am including a Seattle Times article from January 16, 2010 concerning the newly elected City Attorney, Pete Holmes. One of his campaign promises was that he would enforce and uphold the wishes of Seattle voters who passed Referendum 75 in 2003. Mr. Holmes is quoted as saying: "We are not going to prosecute marijuana - possession cases anymore. I meant it when I said it during the campaign." In fact, on his first day on the job, he dismissed two cases that were pending from the previous administration, and several others are about to be dismissed What does Seattle's City Attorney understand about the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis that Corporation Counsel Ashida, Prosecutor Kimura and Police Commission Chair Whittemore do not? The Peaceful Sky Alliance maintains that this law is valid and needs to be enforced This includes the creation of grievance procedures, better, more specific police reports, an end to the arrest and prosecution of adults who are within the parameters of the Law and an end to the marijuana eradication over flights. Thank you. Matthew Rifkin Vice President Peaceful Sky Alliance Court Upholds Law Making Marijuana Santa Barbara's Lowest Law Enforcement Priority (7/10/2007) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT media @aclu org "Measure P is a proper legislative enactment," Court Rules SANTA BARBARA, CA - The American Civil Liberties Union applauded today's ruling by a California Superior Court judge to uphold a voter - enacted initiative that directs police to focus resources on serious crime by making manuana use the lowest law enforcement priority Citing California's ban on lawsuits that punish public participation in the political process, the court dismissed the city of Santa Barbara's challenge of the law, known as Measure P, which was brought against Heather Poet because she was the proponent of the challenged initiative "Today's ruling is a major victory for the democratic process and a resounding affirmation of voters' right to de- prioritize marijuana enforcement," said Adam Wolf, an attorney with the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project, which represented Poet in the proceedings "The people of Santa Barbara would rather local law enforcement focus on combating serious crime than policing mariluana use. Today's ruling confirms that the voters can make this fundamentally local decision about their community's safety " In addition to finding that the city of Santa Barbara's suit against Poet arose from "her constitutional right to participate in the process of formulating laws" and ran afoul of California's ban on strategic lawsuits against public participation ( "SLAPP ") the court held that neither state nor federal law precludes localities like Santa Barbara from prioritizing the enforcement of certain criminal offenses including the de- prioritization of manluana offenses As the ruling states, "Nothing in [Measure P] prohibits enforcement of state law. Police officers can still arrest those who violate drug possession laws in their presence The voters have simply instructed them that they have higher priority work to do " "Santa Barbara is free to decline to enforce federal criminal statutes," the ruling continues. "Indeed the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal government from impressing 'into its service - and at no cost to itself - the police officers of the 50 States "' Measure P was passed on November 7, 2006 by over 65 percent of the electorate. Designed to free law enforcement resources to better address violent and serious crime, Measure P makes "investigations, citations arrests property seizures, and prosecutions for adult manluana offenses, where the marijuana was intended for adult personal use the city of Santa Barbara's lowest law enforcement priority " The measure does not de- prioritize marijuana offenses related to public use or driving under the influence "It was terrifying to be sued by my own government, and for a fleeting moment it made me feel maybe') shouldn't have gotten involved in the democratic process," said Poet "But this decision proves we do have a voice and we should never be afraid to use it It also affirms that people in Santa Barbara, and throughout America, can protect their communities by having police focus on serious crime, rather than marijuana offenses." Santa Barbara is not alone in enacting its lowest law enforcement priority ordinance Since 2000, at least 11 cities and counties, including seven in California, have enacted legislation treating certain marijuana offenses as a low or the lowest law enforcement priority. Today's ruling, issued by Judge Thomas Anderle of the California Superior Court in Santa Barbara, is online at:www aclu org / drugpolicy /medmarquana /304471g120070710 html The ACLU's motion calling for a dismissal of the city of Santa Barbara's lawsuit is available at. www aclu org/ drugpolicy /decnrn/296271g120070507 html The full text of the Measure P initiative is available online at'www taxandregulate org /sb06 /Fulltext htm Seattle's new city attorney to dismiss cases of pot possession By Emily Heffter Seattle Times staff reporter January 16, 2010 Seattle's new city attorney is dismissing all marijuana- possession cases, starting with those that were already under way under the old city attorney. City Attorney Pete Holmes, who beat incumbent Tom Carr in November, said he dismissed two marijuana- related cases in his first day on the lob and several others are about to be dismissed In addition, his new criminal division chief, Craig Sims, said he is reviewing about 50 more cases. Unless there are out of the ordinary circumstances," Sims said, the office doesn't intend to file charges for marijuana possession. "We're not going to prosecute marijuana- possession cases anymore," Holmes said Thursday during a public interview as part of Town Hall's Nightcap series. "I meant it when I said it" during the campaign Seattle voters approved Referendum 75 in 2003, making marijuana the lowest priority for local law enforcement. City records show that Carr still prosecuted many cases. In the first six months of 2009, Carr declined eight of the 62 marijuana - related cases filed with his office, a city report shows. Of the cases he took up, marijuana was the only charge in 21 cases In the second half of 2008, Carr dismissed 21 marijuana- related cases and filed 60 others. Of those, marijuana possession was the only charge in 20 cases. Holmes' policy change comes amid several state -level efforts to decriminalize or legalize marijuana A ballot initiative filed Monday would legalize adult marijuana possession, manufacturing and sales in the state The Legislature is also considering two bills to decriminalize and regulate marijuana, or to make it legal in the state. The drug would remain illegal under federal law. Emily Heffter 206 - 464 -8246 or eheffter(Wseattletimes.com Copyright © The Seattle Times Company