Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0680.000 2008-2010 Ntv of ti~ Thomas P. Whittemore, Chair William P. Kenoi°.•' Louis Kaoiwi, Vice Chair Aiayor Richard Behenna, Member Carol Ignacio, Member Donn Mende, Member +r ' ai • Melvin S. Morimoto, Member ~Tf•OF'NF•~ Anita Politano Steckel- Member Michael Sump, Member County of Hawaii POLICE COMMISSION Hilo Lagoon Centre 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 313 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone: (808) 961-8412 • Fax: (808) 961-8563 December 29, 2009 r~Q Honorable J Yoshimoto fir- r- Chair, Hawaii County Council 25 Aupuni St. Hilo, HI 96720 , Dear Chairman Yoshimoto and Council Members: 'Y RE: Chapter 2, Article 16, Hawaii County Code Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis Ordinance On Friday, December 18, 2009, the Hawaii Police Commission reconsidered a complaint brought by two citizens who claimed the Hawai `i County Police Department violated the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis Ordinance (Chapter 2, Article 16, Hawaii County Code 1983 [2005 Ed.]), since police officers provided ground support for a marijuana eradication mission undertaken by the federal government in March of 2009. At our Commission meeting and in previous testimony submitted to the Commission by members of the Peaceful Sky Alliance (hereinafter "PSA"), it is clear there is not a meeting of the minds between PSA and the Police Department leadership with respect to the requirements and restrictions of this voter- approved initiative. In reviewing the aforementioned Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis Ordinance, the Commission has concern surrounding some of the ambiguous verbiage. We learned that once the Hawaii County Council supplanted its own finding in place of the County Clerk's determination that the petition lacked the requisite number of valid signatures, the County was without authority to "clean up" the language and to address the obvious ambiguities in the law as presently written. It is the understanding of our Commission that the Hawaii County Council is the legislative body of the County empowered with the authority to amend our laws through ordinance. For this reason, please consider this a formal request that the Council undertake a review of the aforementioned Code section and rectify the ambiguities. The Commission feels it cannot perform its Charter-mandated requirement of investigating and reviewing complaints made by the public against the Police Department and its personnel since the underlying law concerning this particular issue is wrought with ambiguity. Ref. To: >'r G-Kc~ Rrf. 00te. __tgN 13 2911 Hawai `i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Honorable J Yoshimoto o December 22, 2009 Page 2 The following represent the particular issues and areas of the Code that the Commission seeks clarification: I. Does the ordinance make marijuana legal? HPD has taken the position that marijuana remains illegal, and that per the legislative history of this initiative (derived through testimony before the Hawaii County Council) the present law simply offers the police an option with respect to enforcement. Representatives of PSA aver that since marijuana is the lowest law enforcement priority on Hawaii Island, it's possession in the manner and quantities identified in the ordinance effectively render the marijuana legal. 2. Is HPD prohibited from receiving funding for marijuana eradication missions? HPD has taken the position that they may receive federal and state monies for the eradication of marijuana from large scale growers and distributors. Representatives of PSA aver that the receipt of any money violates the law. 3. Is HPD prohibited from expending County funds for marijuana eradication missions or other marijuana enforcement? HPD has taken the position that County funds may be expended for marijuana eradication missions targeting large scale growers and distributors, as well as for investigation of marijuana possession and distribution cases. Representatives of PSA aver that any expenditure of County funds for any of the aforementioned purposes violates the law. Finally, there needs to be clarification of the federal and preemption issue. Our police officers take an oath to honor and defend federal, state and county law. Is it the intention of the Council that this ordinance supersedes federal and state law? The Police Commission has been advised that the Prosecuting Attorney has sought an opinion from the Attorney General for the State of Hawaii on the preemption issue, but has yet to receive a response. The Commission felt it appropriate as a preliminary matter to ascertain what the intent of the Council was when this initiative was allowed to proceed to the voters for their consideration. Thank you in advance for your consideration of these very important issues. The Commission wishes to ensure they have a clear understanding of the law prior to investigating and making recommendations concerning allegations of wrongdoing on the part of our police officers. Please communicate your response to the Commission at your earliest convenience. Very trulurs, THOMAS P. WHITTEMORE Chair, Hawaii Police Commission c: Honorable William P. Kenoi, Mayor Honorable Harry Kubojiri, Chief of Police