[00:00:01]
KNEW THE LAWS PROTECTING HER SO AS A MEDICAL CARD HOLDER, SHE WHO IS ALSO MY WIFE, WHO I WILL PROTECT AS MUCH AS ANY OTHER MINORITY IN THIS COMMUNITY.SOME OF OUR CITIZENS CANNOT AFFORD BASIC NECESSITIES YET ALONE AT 299 MEDICAL CARD FEE
[1. Conduct a public hearing in accordance with Article IV, Section 1 of the City of Lubbock Charter regarding creating “Freedom Act Lubbock” including measures to reduce enforcement of low-level marijuana offenses.]
THROUGH THE STATE OF TEXAS SO THEY UTILIZE THEIR OWN RESOURCES TO HELP ALLEVIATE WHATEVER BATTLES THEY ARE FIGHTING BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.TEXAS HAS A COMPASSIONATE USE PROGRAM WRITTEN BY THE STATE FOR CARD HOLDERS.
CHAPTER 169 AT THE TEXAS OCCUPATIONS CODE ALLOW QUALIFIED PHYSICIANS TO PRESCRIBE A LOW THC CANNABIS TO PATIENTS WITH CERTAIN CONDITIONS UNDER THE TEXAS COMPASSIONATE USE PROGRAM.
ACCORDING TO THE TEXAS PENAL CODE, CHAPTER 487, SECTION 487.201, COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALS MAY NOT PROHIBIT LOW THC CANNABIS UNDER ENFORCE A RULE ORDER RESOLUTION OR OTHER REGULATION THAT PROHIBITS PRODUCTION, DISPENSING POSSESSION OF LOW THC AS AUTHORIZED BY THAT CHAPTER.
WHILE WE ALL KNOW WHERE MOST OF YOU STANDS AND YOUR OPINIONS ARE RESPECTED, FACTUAL MEDICAL SCIENCE AND STUDIES HAVE IN EVIDENCE OUTWEIGHED PERSONAL OPINIONS EVERY SINGLE TIME.
THIS CITY'S JOB IS UPHOLD THE NEEDS AND WANTS OF ITS CITIZENS, WHETHER YOU AGREE OR NOT, 10,540 PEOPLE AND EVEN MORE NOW AS WE CONTINUE TO REGISTER PEOPLE TO VOTE WILL BE AT THE POLLS IN 2024 TO VOTE THIS IN.
VERIFYING THE NEEDED AMOUNT OF SIGNATURES, I WOULD SAY THE PEOPLE, YOUR PEOPLE AND OUR PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN LOUD AND CLEAR. THANK YOU.
>> HELLO, COUNCIL MEMBERS, I'M CHRISTOPHER PARSON.
A TOTAL OF 10,000 PLUS SIGNATURES WAS RECEIVED WITH THIS PETITION, BUT THE PETITION ONLY NEEDED 4,800 TO GET PASSED ON TO THIS COMMITTEE.
MR. MCBRIER HAS ALREADY SAID HE WOULD VOTE AGAINST IT, WHICH IS AN ODD THING TO SAY BEFORE HE MEETS WITH HIS CONSTITUENCY IN THIS PUBLIC MEETING.
IN MY CORRESPONDENCE WITH HIM, HE REFERENCES THAT THE CITY OF LUBBOCK WAS CREATED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS, IGNORING THE FACT THAT IT WAS THE EARLY CITIZENS WHO PETITIONED FOR THE INCORPORATION OF LUBBOCK.
HE DOESN'T MENTION THAT THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS DELEGATED CERTAIN POWERS TO THE CITY OF LUBBOCK AND WITH THAT DELEGATION COMES TO CERTAIN AUTONOMY AND WITH THAT AUTONOMY COMES THE ABILITY OF LUBBOCK TO DECRIMINALIZE LOW-LEVEL AMOUNTS OF MARIJUANA.
THE CITY OF LUBBOCK HAS BEEN CHOOSING WHEN OR WHEN NOT TO ENFORCE MARIJUANA LAWS ALREADY.
I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL POLICE OFFICERS WHO SAY THEIR SUPERIORS CHOOSE WHEN OR WHEN NOT TO ENFORCE MARIJUANA LAWS.
MR. MCBRIER IGNORES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEGALIZATION AND DECRIMINALIZATION. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN CLASSIFICATION BETWEEN WHAT IS LEGAL AND WHAT IS DECRIMINALIZED IN OUR LEGAL SYSTEM HERE IN THE STATE AND IN THE NATION.
THE DECRIMINALIZATION OF MARIJUANA DROPS CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR THE USE AND POSSESSION UNDER A CERTAIN AMOUNT.
THE DECRIMINALIZED DRUG IS STILL ILLEGAL, BUT THE PUNISHMENT WOULD NOT BE A CRIMINAL SANCTION LIKE ARREST OR INCARCERATION.
OFFENDERS MAY STILL FACE IS SILVER FINE OR REQUIRE DRUG EDUCATION AND OUR TREATMENT.
THE PRODUCTION AND SALE OF A DECRIMINALIZED DRUG IS STILL PROSECUTABLE BY LAW.
DRUG POSSESSION THAT IS DECRIMINALIZED BY A STATE STILL ALLOWS THE DRUG TO REMAIN FEDERALLY CONTROLLED AND REGULATED AND ALSO, STATE CONTROLLED AND REGULATED.
ALL THAT MEANS TO DECRIMINALIZATION DOESN'T CONTRAVENE STATE LAW LIKE MR. MCBRIER THINKS.
THIS ARGUMENT IS AN OLD ARGUMENT THAT GOES BACK TO THE MID '70S WHEN ALASKA IN '75 DECRIMINALIZED MARIJUANA.
IT GOES BACK TO '91 WHEN THE FIRST CITY IN THE NATION DID IT.
MR. MCBRIER HAS ALREADY GONE PUBLIC WITH HIS INTENTION NOT TO FOLLOW HIS CONSTITUENCY.
I'M TALKING TO THE MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL WHO DID NOT COME OUT PUBLICLY WITH THAT OPINION.
THIS PETITION FOR THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY, REMEMBER, THIS IS AN OLD ARGUMENT FROM THE MID '70S.
IT HAS BEEN PASSED TO THIS NATION'S COURTS SYSTEM AND STATE COURTS SYSTEMS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
ONE OF THE CLOSEST CITIES, BIG CITIES NEAR US ALBUQUERQUE HAD THE VERY SAME ARGUMENT GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS, EXCEPT THE COUNCIL MEMBERS PASSED IT ON TO THE MAYOR WHO VETOED IT.
THAT MAYOR AND ALL THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO VOTED AGAINST IT ARE NO LONGER IN THEIR POSITION BECAUSE OF THEIR VOTE AGAINST IT AND THE VOTERS DID END UP PASSING THIS THROUGH STATE LAW.
THERE IS A LEGAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEGAL AND DECRIMINALIZATION.
IF THIS WAS A LAW TO LEGALIZE WEED, THE OPPONENTS TO IT, WOULD HAVE A POINT.
THEY WOULD HAVE A RECOURSE TOWARD IT,
[00:05:02]
BUT THE CITY OF LUBBOCK IS A SEPARATE ENTITY THAN THE STATE OF TEXAS.THE LUBBOCK POLICE DEPARTMENT IS A SEPARATE ENTITY FROM THE TEXAS STATE POLICE.
THE CITY OF LUBBOCK HAS AUTHORITY OVER CERTAIN DECISIONS.
LET'S MAKE SURE THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY VOICES ARE HEARD. THANK YOU.
>> MR. PARSON, WOULD YOU MIND GIVING ME YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE?
>> YEAH, 1604 AVENUE W, APARTMENT 4, LUBBOCK, TEXAS 79401. THANK YOU.
I LIVE AT 2215 32ND STREET IN LUBBOCK, TEXAS.
MY SON CLINT, WAS FIVE YEARS OLD IN 1981 WHEN HE BEGAN HAVING PETIT MAL SEIZURES.
THESE SEIZURES OCCURRED MULTIPLE TIMES DURING THE DAY AND NIGHT.
WE TOOK CLINT TO AND THE ONLY PEDIATRIC NEUROLOGIST IN LUBBOCK, DR. RICHARD KUTNICK.
DR. KUTNICK PRESCRIBED A COCKTAIL OF BARBITURATES INCLUDING PHENOBARBITAL, DILANTIN, AND DEPAKENE, TO JUST MENTION A FEW.
AFTER MONTHS OF TRYING DIFFERENT DRUGS AND COMBINATIONS OF DRUGS, THE SEIZURES WERE KEPT UNDER CONTROL.
THE COST OF CONTROLLING THE SEIZURES MY SON WAS TURNED INTO A SLOW THINKING, SLOW MOVING CHILD WHO COULD NOT FIT WITH THE NORMAL CHILDREN'S LEARNING ABILITIES OR MOTOR SKILLS.
WE WATCHED THE DOWNWARD SPIRAL CONTINUE AS WE WERE UNABLE TO KEEP CLINT IN REGULAR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, BUT RATHER HAD TO PLACE HIM IN A SPECIAL LEARNING SCHOOL.
FINALLY, WE GOT HIM INTO THE LUBBOCK INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT LATE IN HIS ELEMENTARY LEARNING YEARS, AND HE WAS PLACED IN SPECIAL EDUCATION THROUGHOUT HIS CAREER.
AFTER HIGH SCHOOL, CLINT COULD NOT FIND EMPLOYMENT, BUT WAS GIVEN A FEW JOBS WITH FRIENDS OF MINE IN DIFFERENT LINES OF WORK.
CLINT FAILED AT EACH AND EVERY ATTEMPT TO SECURE AND KEEP EMPLOYMENT.
CLINT NEVER MOVED FROM MY HOME, HE WAS MY DEPENDENT UNTIL HE DIED IN 2012 ON DECEMBER 15TH AT THE AGE OF 36.
I TELL YOU THIS BECAUSE IN 1971, MEDICAL WORLD REPORTS THAT MARIJUANA IS PROBABLY THE MOST POTENT ANTI EPILEPTIC KNOWN IN MEDICINE.
IT IS REPORTED THAT CANNABIS EXTRACT IS MORE EFFECTIVE THAN DILANTIN, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE DRUGS THAT MY SON WAS TAKING TO CONTROL HIS SEIZURES.
WHEN I LEARNED OF THIS STUDY, I FELT AS THOUGH WE AS A NATION HAD BEEN BETRAYED BY OUR GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS ENTRUSTED WITH OUR WELFARE.
WHY WERE MY SON AND MILLIONS OF OTHER CHILDREN DENIED THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE A NON-LETHAL DRUG TO CONTROL THEIR SEIZURES? WHY HAVE AMERICANS BEEN DENIED THE RIGHT TO USE CANNABIS AS MEDICINE FOR THE PAST 85 YEARS? IN 1937, THE COMMISSION OF FEDERAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS, THE COMMISSIONER HARRY ANSLINGER, PERSUADED A NAIVE CONGRESS AND AN UNINFORMED POPULATION TO BAN THE USE OF CANNABIS.
THEN PEOPLE WITH MONEY AND INFLUENCE PULLED THEIR SUPPORT FOR CANNABIS PROHIBITION.
PEOPLE LIKE THE DUPONT'S, RANDOLPH HEARST WE'RE INTERESTED IN ELIMINATING COMPETITION IN THE PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY AND PAPER INDUSTRY.
THEY SIDED WITH THE CANNABIS PROHIBITIONS IN ORDER TO DEMONIZE CANNABIS AND IT'S USERS AND QUICKLY CRUSH THE COMPETITION.
HARRY ANSLINGER USED THE ARGUMENT FOR A PROHIBITION OF CANNABIS BY SAYING BIGOTED THINGS LIKE, AND I QUOTE, "THERE ARE 10,000 TOTAL MARIJUANA SMOKERS IN THE UNITED STATES AND MOST OF THEM ARE NEGROES, HISPANICS, FILIPINOS, AND ENTERTAINERS.
THEIR SATANIC, JAZZ AND SWING RESULTS IN MARIJUANA USE.
THIS MARIJUANA CAUSES WHITE WOMEN TO SEEK SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH NEGROES AND ENTERTAINERS AND OTHERS. " HARRY ANSLINGER ALSO REFERRED MARIJUANA MAKES DARKIES THINK THEY ARE AS GOOD AS WHITE MEN
[00:10:02]
AND MARIJUANA IS AN ADDICTIVE DRUG WHICH PRODUCES IN ITS USERS INSANITY, CRIMINALITY, AND DEATH.HIS REFERENCES TO VIOLENCE BEHAVIOR INCLUDED SUCH QUOTES AS," YOU SMOKE A JOINT AND YOU ARE LIKELY TO KILL YOUR BROTHER" AND "MARIJUANA IS THE MOST VIOLENCE CAUSING DRUG IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND." IN FACT, THE CONGRESS DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC FOR TWO YEARS BEFORE PASSING THE 1937 MARIJUANA TAX ACT, AND THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION WAS NEVER INVITED TO TESTIFY TO THE MEDICAL VALUE OF THE DRUG, WHICH AT THE TIME WAS THE MOST WIDELY USED INGREDIENT IN MEDICINE OF THE DAY.
THERE'S YET ANOTHER INDICATION THAT THE LAWS WERE BASED ON BIGOTRY AND IGNORANCE.
THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS PLAYED A MAJOR ROLE IN SUPPRESSING AND ALTERING THE TRUTH ABOUT CANNABIS.
EVEN RICHARD NIXON'S TOP ADVISOR, JOHN EHRLIC, EHRILCMAN SAID YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? WE KNEW WE COULDN'T MAKE IT ILLEGAL TO BE AGAINST THE WAR OR BLACK, BUT BY GETTING THE PUBLIC TO ASSOCIATE THE HIPPIES WITH MARIJUANA AND THE BLACKS WITH HEROIN, AND THEN CRIMINALIZING BOTH HEAVILY, WE COULD DISRUPT THEIR COMMUNITIES, WE COULD ARREST THEIR LEADERS, RAID THEIR HOMES, BREAK UP THEIR MEETINGS, AND VILIFY THEM NIGHT AFTER NIGHT ON EVENING NEWS.
WE, DID WE KNOW, WE WERE LYING ABOUT THE DRUGS, OF COURSE WE DID.
OUR GOVERNMENT HAS USED THESE DEFEATS, DECEITFUL LAWS FOR 85 YEARS TO PUNISH AND PERSECUTE CERTAIN SEGMENTS OF AMERICAN SOCIETY.
WE HAVE BEEN STRIPPED OF THEIR RIGHTS THAT WERE WRONGFULLY TAKEN FROM US IN 1937.
THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS KNOWN SINCE 1974, THAT CANNABIS CURES CANCER.
IN 1972, RICHARD NIXON WANTED A LARGER BUDGET FOR THE WAR ON DRUGS.
HE THOUGHT IF HE PROVED CANNABIS CAUSE LUNG CANCER LIKE CIGARETTES DO, HE WOULD GET THE SUPPORT HE NEEDED.
HE GAVE THEM THE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF VIRGINIA TWO YEARS TO STUDY THE EFFECTS OF THC ON THE HUMAN BODY.
IN 1974, THE STUDY WAS COMPLETED.
IT TURNS OUT THAT THC, WHEN INGESTED AND HIGHLY CONCENTRATED FORMS SUCH AS EATING CANNABIS OIL, WILL ATTACK AND MUTATE CELLS IN THE BODY WHILE STRENGTHENING AND REJUVENATING HEALTHY CELLS.
THEY FOUND THE PERFECT CURE FOR CANCER.
IT WORKED FAST, IT WORKED WELL, IT WORKED ON MANY DIFFERENT FORMS OF CANCER IN ALL STAGES AND IT HAD ZERO HARMFUL SIDE EFFECTS, UNLIKE CHEMO, WHICH DETERIORATES THE ENTIRE BODY AND KILLS ONE IN FIVE PATIENTS.
WHEN RICHARD NIXON SAW THE RESULTS OF THIS STUDY, OF THE REPORT, HE WAS SAID TO BE FURIOUS AND THREW THE STUDY IN THE TRASH AND ALL PUBLIC CANNABIS RESEARCH AND GRANTS, EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS TO MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES WHO SET UP TO DEVELOP SYNTHETIC FORMS OF THC.
IN FACT, THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HOLDS PATENTS 6630507, WHICH IS THE PATENT ON SYNTHETIC CANNABIS.
WHAT KIND OF MAN ARE THESE THAT WOULD HIDE THIS INFORMATION FROM THE VERY PEOPLE THEY HAVE PLEDGED TO PROTECT AND GOVERN OVER FAIRLY? HOW MANY AMERICANS HAVE DIED BECAUSE OF THESE HEARTLESS MEN? THIS IS NOTHING SHORT OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
WE HAVE SUFFERED AS A NATION BECAUSE OF THE LAWS PUT IN PLACE IN 1937 BY BIGOTS AND GREEDY INDUSTRIALISTS.
MILLIONS HAVE BEEN JAILED, MILLIONS MORE PUNISHED IN MONETARY AND PROHIBITIONARY SYSTEMS THAT HAVE ONLY HURT OUR CITIZENS RATHER THAN HELP THEM.
SINCE THE DEMISE OF MY FIVE-YEAR-OLD SON'S HEALTH, I HAVE STUDIED THE MEDICAL BENEFITS OF CANNABIS AND CONTINUED TO ASK MYSELF WHY A GOVERNMENT WOULD BE SO CRUEL AS TO THE PRIVATE CITIZENS OF A PLANT BASED MEDICINE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN USED FOR NOW FOR 3,000 YEARS BY PEOPLE WORLDWIDE WITHOUT EVEN A SINGLE DEATH DUE TO ITS OWN OVERDOSE.
WHY WOULD THEY OUTLAW A PLANT-BASED MEDICINE THAT'S NOW BEING USED FOR COUNTLESS ILLNESSES, MENTAL HEALTH, AND MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS. FOR ALMOST A CENTURY, OUR GOVERNMENT HAS TRIED UNSUCCESSFULLY TO BURY THE PLANT AND ITS VALUE AWAY FROM THE SITE OF ITS PEOPLE.
[00:15:02]
SHAME ON THEM FOR WHAT THEY HAVE CAUSED IN HUMAN LIFE AND SUFFERING.BECAUSE I HAVE FOUGHT AGAINST THIS UNRIGHTEOUS WAR ON DRUGS AND NONVIOLENT CANNABIS USE, I AM CONSIDERED AN OUTCAST, NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF MY BELIEFS, BUT BECAUSE OF IGNORANCE.
THIS IS AN UNANSWERED MYSTERY AND A BURDEN OF CONSCIENCE THAT I WILL LIVE FOREVER BECAUSE MY SON WAS GIVEN DRUGS THAT TOOK HIS SENSIBILITY AWAY FROM HIM.
WHAT CAN WE DO WHEN OUR REPRESENTATIVES REFUSE TO EVEN EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE? EVEN WHEN THE EVIDENCE IS UNDENIABLE, THE TRUTH IS DENIED BY POWERFUL MEN AND WOMEN, AND LIES TAKE HOLD AND CAUSE HORRIBLE DESTRUCTION.
IT SEEMS OUR ONLY OPTION IS FOR MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TO REFUSE TO OBEY UNJUST LAWS AND CREATE CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, WHICH TAKES ROOT.
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS HAVE BEEN SPENT AND WASTED AND MILLIONS OF PEACEFUL PEOPLE PUNISHED BECAUSE OF A POWERFUL PEOPLE IN HIGH PLACES THAT CARE NOT FOR THE TRUTH OR THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE THEY GOVERN.
NOW, AROUND 70% OF AMERICAN PEOPLE FAVOR AN END TO CANNABIS PROHIBITION.
BUT OUR POLITICIANS REFUSED TO HONOR THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, SO AMERICANS WILL CONTINUE TO BE SUBJECTED TO UNJUST LAWS HELD UP BY WILLING ACCOMPLICES.
SOMEDAY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE WILL RULE THE DAY, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, FOR NOW, AMERICAN CITIZENS WILL BE PUNISHED BY LAWS THAT TAKE AWAY THEIR LIFE, THEIR LIBERTIES, THEIR PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
WE ARE RULED BY LAWS THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ENACTED IN THE FIRST PLACE. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING COUNCIL. IS THIS CLOSE ENOUGH? SOUNDS LIKE, THIS MORNING.
JOSH SHANKLES, 2604 47TH STREET.
THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE THIS MORNING.
I AS YOU KNOW, AM A BOARD MEMBER AND MANAGING DIRECTOR OF LUBBOCK COMPACT AND ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT BROUGHT THIS PETITION BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING.
MANY OF OUR PEERS HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN.
I WOULD ASSOCIATE MYSELF TOO MANY OF THEIR REMARKS IN THE INTEREST OF TIME.
I ALSO KNOW THAT OUR ORGANIZATION HAS ALREADY PUT FORWARD AN OFFICIAL POSITION THAT WE THINK THIS ISSUE IS OF A MAGNITUDE AND SUBSTANCE, THAT IT PROBABLY SHOULDN'T JUST GO FORWARD TO A VOTE.
I WOULD REINDORSE THAT POSITION AND FEEL CONFIDENT ABOUT THAT.
BUT TODAY THE DECISION IS YOURS, SO I HOPE YOU WILL FOREBEAR ME TO PUT A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION IN FRONT OF YOU AND ADD SOME CONTEXT TO WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN.
FIRST, I'D LIKE TO MAKE NOTE THAT WE DIDN'T WRITE THIS ORDINANCE.
ATTORNEY WROTE THIS ORDINANCE, A GROUP OF ATTORNEYS ACTUALLY, AND ONE OF WHOM IS A FORMER CITY ATTORNEY.
THIS WAS CRAFTED TO BE IN ACCORD WITH THE STATE CONSTITUTION, WITH THE TEXAS CRIMINAL CODE, AND IT WAS ALSO CRAFTED TO BE IN ACCORD WITH OUR OWN CITY CODE, WHICH WAS STUDIED IN THE CREATION OF THIS.
I WOULD ALSO WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT OUR CONSULTING ATTORNEYS WENT THROUGH SEVERAL DRAFTS VERSIONS OF THIS BECAUSE WE SYNTHASE BACK FOR CHANGES MANY TIMES.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HOPE THAT YOU WOULD NOTICE ABOUT THE ORDINANCE, AND I WOULD SUGGEST ANYBODY WHO HASN'T READ IT IN ITS ENTIRETY TO READ IT.
IS THAT THIS ISN'T AN AUSTIN ORDINANCE BROUGHT TO LUBBOCK.
THIS IS ORDINANCE CRAFTED FOR LUBBOCK WITH MANY PROVISIONS WITHIN IT MEANT TO ALIGN TO OUR OWN CITIES POLICIES, THE CHARACTER AND NATURE OF OUR CITY, AND ALSO TO GIVE A LOT OF OPTIONS TO GO ROUND THIS SO THAT ENFORCEMENT CAN BE CONDUCTED WHEN IT'S NECESSARY.
[00:20:02]
WHICH IS TO SAY THAT, IN MY OPINION, IN OUR ORGANIZATIONS OPINIONS, IF THIS IS A VERY WELL CALIBRATED ORDINANCE FOR OUR CITY.I SAY THAT NOW TO GET ME TO THE THING THAT I REALLY WANTED YOU TO KNOW ABOUT THIS AND THE CONTEXTS THAT I REALLY WANTED TO GET AROUND THIS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, IS THAT I'D LIKE YOU TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE SIGNATORIES TO IT AND WHAT OUR EXPERIENCE WAS WITH THEM IN OUR FIELD WORK BETWEEN OURSELVES AND OUR MORE THAN 40 ORGANIZERS THAT WE'RE HELPING DO THIS.
THE FIRST IS THAT WE HEARD SO MANY STORIES FROM THE PUBLIC.
IT DOESN'T REALLY FIT IN THE DELIVERY OF THIS SPEECH, BUT THE ONE THAT CONNECTS TO HOW WELL CALIBRATED THE ORDINANCE IS IS THAT WE HEARD SO MANY STORIES OF CAPRICIOUS ENFORCEMENT OF THIS LAW WITHIN OUR OWN CITY.
ALMOST EVERY PERSON THAT CAME FORWARD THAT HAD SOME PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH THIS WAS EITHER BRINGING FORWARD STORIES TO US ABOUT BEING LET OFF THE HOOK FOR THIS ISSUE BECAUSE IN FACT, THERE'S A TON OF LEGAL PRODUCTS THAT LOOK AND SMELL EXACTLY LIKE CANNABIS AND THEY ALREADY KNOW THAT THE POLICE ARE ENFORCING THIS DIFFERENTLY ON THE STREETS AND OTHER PEOPLE WITH SIMILAR MINOR INFRACTIONS HAVING THEIR LIVES MESSED UP OVER THE SAME EXACT CIRCUMSTANCES.
ONE THING THAT WE HOPE YOU WOULD NOTE IN AS BRINGING THIS ORDINANCE FORWARD TO YOU IS THAT WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO DO HERE IS SLIDE A FLOOR UNDER THIS AND CREATE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW.
AN EQUAL APPLICATION OF THE LAW IN OUR CITY IN A WAY THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY NOT SEEING AND EXPERIENCING OR AT LEAST IS THE TESTIMONY OF THE MANY PEOPLE THAT WE INTERACTED WITH.
I WANT YOU TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THE COMMON PUBLIC RECEPTION OF THIS.
WE WERE AT MAYBE HUNDREDS OF EVENTS IN THE COURSE OF THIS 60 DAY PERIOD.
THE 10,000 SIGNATURES THAT WERE DELIVERED TO YOU IS NOT ACTUALLY A REPRESENTATION OF LIKE 40,000 CASUAL PASSING INTERACTIONS AND THREE OUT OF FOUR PEOPLE SAYING NO TO US.
IT'S ACTUALLY A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF A DETAILED INTERACTION WITH PROBABLY MORE LIKE 13,000 PEOPLE, THE VAST MAJORITY OF WHICH BECOMING SIGNATORIES TO THIS PETITION.
COUNSEL, WE HEARD SO MANY STORIES OF PEOPLE'S PAIN AND TRAUMA, THINGS THAT THEY WERE DEALING WITH IN THEIR LIFE AND HAVING TO COPE WITH SO MANY MOVING STORIES THAT PEOPLE HAD TO TELL US ABOUT HOW THEY WERE HELPED BY THIS PRODUCT.
MY OWN WAS A GUY THAT HAD A DEGENERATIVE DISEASE.
I FORGET WHAT IT WAS RIGHT NOW, BUT HIS LIMBS WERE LIKE LOCKED UP.
THIS WAS ONE OF THE ONLY THINGS THAT HE WOULD EXPERIENCE A RELIEF FROM.
IS THAT SOMEBODY WE WANT TO BE CRIMINALIZING. I DON'T THINK IT IS.
COUNSEL WE ALSO HEARD SOME STORIES OF PEOPLE'S JOY AND PLEASURE.
THE WAY THAT THEY BOND WITH OTHERS IN THEIR LIVES, THE WAY THAT THEY ENJOY THEMSELVES AND HAVE FUN.
I THINK EVERYBODY CAN INTRINSICALLY UNDERSTAND THE VALUE IN THAT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THAT'S YOUR CUP OF TEA OR NOT.
BUT WHAT I'D WANT YOU TO KNOW IS PROBABLY THE BIGGER BUCKET OF SIGNATORIES ON HERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH MARIJUANA OR ANY CANNABIS PRODUCT WHATSOEVER.
THEY'RE JUST PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT THEIR NEIGHBORS TO GO TO JAIL OVER SOMETHING THAT NOBODY GIVES A HOOT ABOUT ANYMORE.
IF THEY'RE OTHERWISE NON-CRIMINAL PEOPLE, THAT'S PROBABLY THE BIGGEST BUCKET OF SIGNATORIES ON HERE ARE PEOPLE WHO IT'S NO SKIN OFF THEIR NOSE EITHER WAY.
THEY JUST DON'T WANT THEIR MONEY AND RESOURCES AND POLICE TIME WASTED ON SOMETHING THAT IS NOT A BOTHER.
TODAY, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS ABOUT PEOPLE'S HOPES AND DREAMS, THEIR MEDICINE, THINGS, THEY FEAR, THINGS THAT HAVE WRECKED SOME OF THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS LIVES.
THINGS THAT HAVE HELPED THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS LIVES.
DECISIONS THAT WILL AFFECT THEIR FAMILIES, THEIR FRIENDS, AND WE'LL CERTAINLY HAVE IMPLICATIONS FOR THEIR PAIN AND THEIR JOY.
I HOPE IN YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS THAT YOU TAKE THAT IN MIND.
[00:25:04]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, COUNCIL.
ADAM HERNANDEZ, 7401 AVENUE X, AND I AM THE COMMUNICATIONS CHAIR FOR GLOBAL COMPACT.
I WILL FIRST AND FOREMOST START OUT MY STATEMENT TODAY BY ONCE AGAIN CALLING OUT THE FACT THAT THIS PUBLIC HEARING MAYOR IS HAPPENING AT 09:00 AM ON A WEEKDAY WHEN WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT MANY PEOPLE CAN NOT SHOW UP.
I HATE TO SOUND LIKE A BROKEN RECORD EVERY TIME I COME UP HERE, BUT YOU DO IT EVERY TIME WE COME UP HERE WHEN IT'S SOMETHING THAT A LARGE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WANT THAT WE FEEL LIKE YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO HEAR FROM A BUNCH OF THEM.
IT'S SO FAIR ENOUGH BUT I AM GOING TO CALL IT OUT.
>> MR. HERNANDEZ, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO KEEP YOUR [OVERLAPPING] COMMENTS AND MAKE SURE YOUR PHONE IS SILENCE AND KEEP YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS TO WHAT IS HERE FOR THE PUBLIC.
>> THAT WAS THE ONLY DISCLAIMER I NEEDED. THANK YOU MAYOR
>> I THINK DISCLAIMER IS KEEP YOUR COMMENTS.
>> SURE. DO WHAT IT'S IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL TODAY.
>> WE'VE HEARD FROM SOME PASSIONATE PEOPLE HERE THIS MORNING.
I'M NOT GOING TO REHASH ALL OF THE THINGS.
I DIDN'T COME HERE TO KEEP YOU ALL FOR A WHOLE LONG TIME.
I JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP WHEN IT CONCERNS THE LEGALITY OF THIS ORDINANCE AND THE AUTHORITY OF COUNCIL TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
PRETTY MUCH THROUGH ALL OF THE NEWS STORIES WE HEARD TIME AND AGAIN, COUNCIL HAD NO COMMENT.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THINGS SUCH AS SANCTUARY CITY WERE PERFECTLY FINE PASSING THINGS THAT ARE SO-CALLED AGAINST STATE LAW.
BUT ON THE STATE LAW, AS YOU'VE HEARD, WHERE A HOME RULE CITY, WE DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS.
THE HEART OF OUR ORDINANCE IS PRETTY SIMPLE.
WE JUST DON'T THINK PEOPLE SHOULD GO TO JAIL FOR PERSONAL USE OF MARIJUANA HERE IN LUBBOCK.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO IMPART TO YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL IS THAT WE WILL NOT GO ON A CAMPAIGN TO TELL EVERYBODY THAT YOU ALL WANT PEOPLE TO GET LOCKED UP FOR PERSONAL MARIJUANA USE IF YOU VOTE THIS DOWN TODAY.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT, BECAUSE AS I SAID IN MY LAST STATEMENT, WE FEEL THAT THIS ISSUE IS TOO COMPLEX, TOO NUANCED.
IT IMPACTS TOO MANY PEOPLE IN TOO MANY WAYS FOR THIS DECISION TO REST ON YOUR SHOULDERS.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR TO YOU AND I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO OUR PUBLIC.
YOU'VE HEARD THE NUMBERS OF HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED THIS, YOU'VE HEARD THE STORIES AND THAT'S ALL THERE REALLY IS TO IT.
I HOPE THAT YOU-ALL WILL VOTE THIS DOWN HERE TODAY FOR WHATEVER REASON YOU MAY WANT TO DO THAT OR NOT SO THAT WE CAN PUT THIS TO THE BALLOT SO THAT PEOPLE CAN MAKE THAT DECISION.
THAT'S MY ONLY APPEAL TO YOU ALL.
I DO WANT TO END BY SAYING I DO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I KNOW I HAVE CRITICISM FROM TIME TO TIME, BUT I ALSO HAVE PRAISE.
I'M THANKFUL FOR YOU ALL, EVEN ALLOWING THE PUBLIC TO COME AND TALK AND THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAD TO SAY. THANK YOU ALL.
>> THANK YOU, MR. HERNANDEZ. WE'RE STILL ON THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE.
>> MORNING COUNCIL. NEW [INAUDIBLE] 1921 61ST STREET.
AS A PROFESSOR OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, I LOOK AT THINGS FROM THE ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH SIDE, DECIDES THE DISPARITIES IN RACE AND ARRESTS, WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN ADDRESSED, THE FACT ALSO EXISTS AT LOW LEVEL MARIJUANA ARRESTS TAKE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME AWAY FROM OFFICERS THAT CAN BE USED WORKING ON A MUCH MORE SERIOUS CRIMES.
A TYPICAL ARREST TAKES AN OFFICER OFF THE STREETS FOR AN AVERAGE OF ABOUT EIGHT HOURS.
IT'S OFTEN CLAIMED THAT CRIME INCREASES AFTER DECRIMINALIZATION POLICY IS PASSED.
THIS CAN LIKELY BE EXPLAINED BY THE FACT THAT THESE OFFICERS ARE NOW FREED UP TO WORK ON MORE SERIOUS CRIMES AND OTHER THINGS OTHER THAN A SMALL MARIJUANA IN FRACTION.
IT IS WELL-KNOWN THAT MARIJUANA USERS ARE RARELY VIOLENT CRIME OFFENDERS OR CRIME OFFENDERS AT ALL.
OVERALL, THE COST SAVINGS, WHILE SOME STUDIES SAY THAT IT IS NEGLIGIBLE, CANNOT BE IGNORED.
MANY OF THESE STUDIES DO IGNORE THE FACT THAT THESE OFFICERS TIME TAKEN AWAY OFF THE STREETS FOR OTHER SERIOUS CRIMES AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS ALSO FIXED COSTS IN THE COMMUNITY AS FAR AS PROBATION AND PAROLE AND THINGS UNRELATED TO THE ACTUAL INITIAL ARREST.
ALL I ASK OF YOU TODAY IS THAT YOU VOTE FOR THIS ORDINANCE TO REDUCE THE BURDEN ON THE MARGINALIZED GROUPS IN THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDE
[00:30:02]
A MUCH NEEDED RELIEF TO OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND THE COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.MY ADDRESS IS 6107 103RD STREET.
THANK YOU GUYS FOR LISTENING TO THIS TODAY.
I DON'T WANT TO REPEAT ANYTHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN SAID.
THE HISTORY OF CANNABIS PROHIBITION IS QUITE SCARY AND FILLED WITH RACISM AND I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE.
BUT I'M JUST GOING TO SKIP TO THE THINGS THAT I HAVEN'T HEARD YET.
I KNOW THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS A VERY BIG CONCERN FOR THE CURRENT COUNCIL AS IT SHOULD BE.
WITHOUT OUR SAFETY, WE REALLY HAVE NOTHING ELSE.
THIS PETITION CAN STRENGTHEN THE RELATIONSHIP THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS WITH ITS LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS IF WE CAN ALLOW OUR OFFICERS TO FOCUS ON ACTUAL CRIME RATHER THAN TRIVIAL POSSESSION, THAT CREATES A RIFT BETWEEN OFFICERS AND THOSE WHO MAY USE.
THE CURRENT LAWS TURN NONVIOLENT CITIZENS INTO POTENTIAL THREATS AND CRIMINALS.
IT WOULD ALLOW OUR ENTIRE FORCE TO PRIORITIZE ACTUAL VIOLENT CRIMES AND REAL CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONS, RATHER THAN WASTE TIME AND RESOURCES ON NON-VIOLENT OFFENDERS WHO POSSESS A SMALL AMOUNT OF WEED.
PROHIBITION EMPOWERS THE ACTUAL CRIMINALS AND THE DRUG CARTELS.
THIS PETITION WOULD ALSO ALLEVIATE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RESOURCES THAT GO INTO WRITING REPORTS, BOOKING, CHARGING, HOLDING, AND PROSECUTING OFFENDERS.
AS OF SEPTEMBER 2023, THE LUBBOCK COUNTY DETENTION CENTER WAS OPERATING AT FULL CAPACITY WITH 209 INMATES STAYING OUTSIDE OF THE LUBBOCK COUNTY WHICH WAS AN ADDITIONAL 4.8 MILLION INCREASE TO THE BUDGET I DO BELIEVE.
ALSO THE LOCAL PROSECUTORS SHORTAGE IS LEAVING LUBBOCK COUNTY UNABLE TO EFFECTIVELY PROSECUTE CRIME.
FOR THOSE REASONS, I THINK IT'S MOST DIRE IMPORTANCE TO PRIORITIZE REAL CRIME AND VIOLENT OFFENDERS.
THE DISPROPORTIONAL EFFECTS TO OUR BLACK AND LATINO COMMUNITIES WOULD ALSO BE ALLEVIATED, ALLOWING FAMILY UNITS TO OPERATE AT A HIGHER CAPACITY.
WE MUST MAKE EFFORTS TO HEAL THOSE COMMUNITIES WHO ARE ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED, RATHER THAN CRIMINALIZE THEM FOR NONVIOLENT OFFENSES FURTHERING THE CYCLE OF INJUSTICE.
THESE OFFENSES ALSO AFFECT OUR LOCAL JOB MARKET, AS YOUNG PEOPLE ARE CHARGED WITH MISDEMEANORS BEFORE THEY CAN EVEN REALLY GET STARTED, SETTING BACK THEIR POTENTIAL AND DENYING OUR COMMUNITY OF THEIR WOULD-BE CONTRIBUTIONS.
COVID HIGHLIGHTED THE IMPORTANCE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
AS SOME STATES FIGHT TO GAIN MORE CONTROL AND POWER, IT BECOMES OBVIOUS THAT A FREE POPULATION IS A SIGN OF A HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND ITS CONSTITUENTS.
I THINK LEGALIZATION IS INEVITABLE WITH 25 STATES ALREADY THERE.
THE QUESTION IS, HOW MUCH LONGER ARE WE GOING TO DEMONIZE THIS PLANT, CRIMINALIZE NONVIOLENT USERS AND DELAY THE BENEFITS FROM ADDITIONAL TAX REVENUE.
DECRIMINALIZING IS THE FIRST STEP.
WE NEED REASONABLE LAWS THAT MAKE SENSE.
WE NEED TO BE ADVOCATES OF RATIONALITY AND VOW TO CREATE A BRIGHTER FUTURE.
WHETHER THAT MEANS CREATING NEW LAWS THAT CONFRONT FUTURE PROBLEMS OR RE-EXAMINING OLD LAWS THAT NO LONGER HOLD WEIGHT IN THESE CHANGING TIMES.
THAT'S ALL I GOT. BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS.
>> GOOD MORNING. I AM SURPRISING MYSELF.
I DIDN'T THINK I WAS GOING TO SAY ANYTHING.
I AM A RETIRED SCHOOL TEACHER.
I'M A BORDERLINE ELDERLY LADY.
I'M NOT BLACK, I'M NOT BROWN, AND I'M NOT A MARIJUANA USER.
BUT I DO AGREE WITH SOME STATEMENTS THAT WE HAVE ALL HEARD, WHICH IS, I DO NOT WANT MY FAMILY AND FRIENDS WHO MAY HAPPEN TO BE MARIJUANA USERS TO BE CRIMINALIZED BECAUSE OF THEIR PERSONAL USE OF MARIJUANA.
PARDON ME IF I SLIP INTO TEACHER DISCIPLINE MODE, IT'S EASY TO DO WHEN PEOPLE ARE TALKING WHILE I'M TALKING.
[00:35:03]
>> WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS? > YES. SARAH STENNETT, S-T-E-N-N-E-T-T. MY ADDRESS IS 3508-77 DRIVE.
I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE FOR THIS THAT LOOK JUST LIKE ME AND JUST LIKE SOME OF YOU BECAUSE YOU MIGHT NOT BE AWARE OF THAT.
I KNOW YOU GUYS AND LADIES HAVE A REPUTATION TO UPHOLD.
YOU MAY NOT BE TALKING ABOUT THIS WITH YOUR GROUP.
BUT I DECIDED TO AND I WAS VERY SURPRISED BY WHAT I FOUND.
I EVEN PRINTED OFF SEVERAL COPIES OF THE PETITION SO I COULD TAKE IT AROUND WITH ME.
I ONLY HAD ONE PERSON DECLINE TO SIGN BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T AGREE WITH IT.
EVERYBODY ELSE SIGNED AND THEY LOOK JUST LIKE ME.
FAMILY, FRIENDS, MY FAMILY PRACTICE DOCTOR SIGNED IT.
THEY ALL WANTED TO SIGN AND THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA.
IF YOU'RE NOT ASKING YOUR CONSTITUENTS WHAT THEY THINK BECAUSE THEY LOOK LIKE ME, LET ME TELL YOU THE BUBBLE I LIVE IN.
YOU KNOW I'M WHITE, YOU KNOW I'M OLD.
I COME FROM A VERY CONSERVATIVE BACKGROUND.
CHURCH OF CHRIST FOR HEAVEN'S SAKES.
I HAD TO BE COURAGEOUS AND BRAVE WHEN I DECIDED TO BREAK OUT OF MY BUBBLE AND START TALKING TO PEOPLE AND ASK THEM WHAT THEY THOUGHT.
I WAS SO ENCOURAGED BY WHAT THEY DID THINK.
I HAVE FOUND PEOPLE THAT ARE REGULAR PEOPLE JUST LIKE ME WHO THINK THIS IS THE THING TO DO.
I JUST WANT YOU TO LOOK AT ME AND TRY TO SEE YOUR OWN CONSTITUENTS.
IF THEY LOOK LIKE ME, AND IF THEY LOOK LIKE YOU, TALK TO THEM BECAUSE CHANCES ARE THEY MAY NOT FEEL THE SAME WAY YOU DO. THANK YOU FOR THE CHANCE.
>> THANK YOU MRS. STENNETT. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ORDINANCE, YOU MAY STEP FORTH AT THIS TIME.
>> THANK YOU. I'M DON ANGER AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FREEDOM THIS MORNING.
I HAVE THE FREEDOM TO DRIVE DOWN THE STREET IN LUBBOCK AND HOPE THAT THERE'S NOT ANYBODY HIGH ON MARIJUANA HEADED IN MY DIRECTION FROM THE OTHER WAY.
I THINK THAT'S PLENTY TO WORRY ABOUT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SAFETY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FREEDOM.
WELL, I NEED THAT FREEDOM TOO.
I HAVE A LOT OF FAMILY, A LOT OF FRIENDS AND I DON'T WANT THEM KILLED BY SOMEBODY THAT WANTS TO TAKE MARIJUANA.
WE ALL KNOW THAT THE 4 OUNCES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S JUST A STAR.
IF YOU VOTE TO GO ALONG WITH THAT THEY WILL BE BACK IN NO TIME AT ALL SAYING WE NEED TO RAISE THAT OR DO COMPLETELY AWAY.
IN FACT, ONE OF THEM MENTIONED THAT THE GOAL IS TO MAKE MARIJUANA TOTALLY LEGAL.
YOU MIGHT AS WELL MAKE DRUNK DRIVING LEGAL TOO BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME THING.
>> LISTEN. SURE. I THINK MR. ANGER AND EVERYONE ELSE'S QUIET WHEN OTHERS ARE TALKING TO THE AUDIENCE SO LET'S REFRAIN FROM MAKING COMMENTS IN THE AUDIENCE PLEASE.
>> I'M A MEMBER OF ROTARY AS MARIA IS.
IN ROTARY WE STARTED A PROGRAM A FEW YEARS AGO TO HELP THE HUNGRY KIDS.
WE WERE TOLD THAT 50 PERCENT OF THE KIDS IN THE SCHOOL AT FRENCH ARE HUNGRY.
THAT SOUNDS LIKE A BIG NUMBER BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY TOLD US.
WE STARTED A BACKPACK PROGRAM IN WHICH WE BUY BACKPACKS AND WE FILL THEM UP WITH FOOD.
THE HEAD HAS GROWN TO SOMETHING THAT'S COSTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD I THINK THE TRAIL OF $34,000.
EVERY YEAR IT GETS BIGGER AND BIGGER.
WELL, I'M A GIDEON, WE PASS OUT BATTLES.
LAST WEEK WE WERE AT ALL WAY SLAYTON JUNIOR HIGH ON THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK AND WE WERE PASSING OUT BATTLES.
THE PRINCIPAL CAME OUT AND HE'S A REAL NICE FELLA AND WE HAD A GOOD CONVERSATION.
I SAID, LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING.
I SAID, "WHAT PERCENTAGE OF YOUR STUDENTS DO YOU THINK ARE HUNGRY?" HE SAID, "92 PERCENT." NINETY TWO PERCENT ARE HUNGRY?
[00:40:04]
THAT CAME FROM THE PRINCIPAL.WHAT I'M LEADING TO IS WE ALL KNOW THAT THE LESS RESTRICTIONS YOU HAVE ON MARIJUANA, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE PEOPLE SPENDING MORE MONEY ON MARIJUANA AND LESS MONEY ON THEIR FAMILY.
I THINK THAT'S A SHAME AND DISGRACE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU MR. ANGER. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ORDINANCE?
THERE ARE TWO ELEMENTS I'D LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT.
THE FIRST WOULD BE THE PERSONAL.
I THINK THERE HAS BEEN REFERENCED TO YOU NOT HEARING FROM YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND SO WE'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT CONSTITUENT VOICE IS HEARD AS WELL.
WHICH IS THAT MY FAMILY HISTORY IS IN COLORADO, SO YOU KNOW WHERE THIS IS GOING.
WE'VE LIVED THIS STORY FOR OVER 11 YEARS NOW IN COLORADO AND IT STARTED WITH A PROGRESSION SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
I'LL JUST TELL YOU TWO STORIES VERY CLOSE TO MY OWN FAMILY.
THE FIRST IS MY COUSIN WHO AT THE AGE OF NINE BEGAN USING MARIJUANA AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO SOME MEDICAL AND HEALTH BEHAVIORAL THINGS THAT SHE WAS FACING AND WE DIDN'T KNOW THEN WHAT WE KNOW NOW.
THAT PROGRESSED FOR HER INTO THE USE OF MANY OTHER SUBSTANCES AND SHE BECAME AN ABSOLUTE THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND EVOLVED INTO LOTS OF MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES.
MY FAMILY WOULD ALWAYS SAY, WE KNOW SHE'S GOING TO DIE, WE JUST DON'T KNOW HOW.
WE HOPE SHE DOESN'T KILL ANYONE ELSE WHEN IT HAPPENS.
IT WAS A GREAT CONCERN TO OUR FAMILY AND I HAVE REGRET TO TELL YOU SHE DID DIE.
SHE DIED BY BEING SHOT IN THE FACE BY HER BOYFRIEND WHILE THEY WERE DOING DRUGS.
ONLY A SHORT WHILE LATER MY NEPHEW WAS ON HIS WAY TO WORK ONE MORNING ON A BICYCLE BECAUSE HE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FOR A VEHICLE AND WAS RUN OVER BY AN 18-YEAR-OLD THAT WAS AT FIVE TIMES THE LEGAL LIMIT OF MARIJUANA IN THE STATE OF COLORADO.
I SHARE THOSE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE CONCERN FOR.
BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE TODAY ISN'T JUST PERSONAL OPINIONS ABOUT MARIJUANA, ITS MEDICAL USE, ITS IMPACT, AND ALL OF THAT.
BUT RATHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THIS IS A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS THAT'S BEAUTIFUL THAT WE CAN COME AND WE CAN SPEAK AND SHARE BUT REALLY THE TASK AT HAND IS THIS ORDINANCE LEGAL? CAN YOU PASS IT? CAN YOU VOTE YES OR NO TODAY? WHAT I WANT TO SAY IS THAT, I'M THANKFUL YOU ALL ARE WELL-INFORMED AND I KNOW THERE'S AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER SO I'M SURE THAT RESEARCH WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE QUESTIONS YOU STILL HAVE.
BUT A CITY CANNOT ISSUE A LAW OR AN ORDINANCE THAT COUNTERMANDS THE STATE'S PENAL CODE. IT CANNOT HAPPEN.
I AM THANKFUL THAT YOU ALL WILL LOOK AT THAT IN GREAT DETAIL AND AN UNDERSTANDING THAT WILL PLACE YOUR VOTES.
I ALSO HOPE THAT OUR CITY WOULD NOT RAISE IMPORTANT RESOURCES ON A VOTE FOR SOMETHING AGAIN THAT IS NOT ENFORCEABLE.
LASTLY, BECAUSE I WAS VERY INVOLVED IN THE SANCTUARY CITY FOR THE UNBORN ORDINANCE, I DO WANT TO ANSWER SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE JUST TO CLARIFY THAT THAT ORDINANCE DID NOT ASK FOR THE SAME THING THIS ORDINANCE IS ASKING FOR.
THIS ORDINANCE IS ASKING FOR THE CITY AND THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS TO NOT ENFORCE A LAW THAT'S ON THE BOOKS.
THAT WAS NOT WHAT THE ORDINANCE FOR THE SANCTUARY CITY FOR THE UNBORN DID, IT ASKED FOR A PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM BETWEEN CITIZENS.
THEY ARE NOT COMPARABLE, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.
WITH THAT I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING YOUR THOUGHTS.
>> THANK YOU MS. CLARK. ANYONE ELSE? WE WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, ITEM 1, AS PERTAINING TO THE ORDINANCE FIRST READING ON ITEM 2.
AT THIS TIME CITY COUNCIL WILL HOLD AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSULTING WITH CITY STAFF REGARDING THE PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND TO HOLD CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY UNDER SECTION 551.071 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE ON COMING BACK IN FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THEN WE WILL BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER 3, TAKING UP THAT VOTE AND THEN MOVING AGAIN TO CEREMONIAL ITEMS AND OUR CALL TO ORDER FOR THE REGULAR MEETING. WE ARE IN RECESS
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.