Last month, voters in numerous Texas cities approved decriminalization legislation, raising concerns among municipal authorities about potential violations of state law.
In November, voters in many Texas cities approved marijuana decriminalization ordinances, which many saw as a sign of the times, given that marijuana prohibitions had softened in many places throughout the country.
That has not been the case with Texas state regulations, which have shifted toward legalizing medicinal usage in certain cases. But, for the most part, marijuana remains illegal in Texas.
Because of the conflict between state law and these municipal regulations, some local officials have attempted to undermine voter-approved decriminalization legislation. Katharine Neill Harris, the Glassell fellow in drug policy at Rice University’s Baker Institute, spoke with the Texas Standard about what’s going on in Harker Heights, Killeen, and other parts of the state.
This transcript has been minimally altered for clarity:
Texas Standard: Let’s look at what’s going on in areas like San Marcos, Denton, Elgin, Killeen, and Harker Heights, which all voted to decrease criminal penalties for low-level marijuana possession, but we’re hearing that authorities haven’t applied those changes to local law in many of these cities. What exactly is going on?
Katharine Neill Harris: Yes, I believe several local councils have taken a step back and stated that they want to look at the legal difficulties around implementation. People are concerned about possible violations of state law, so that’s something going on. In terms of city council opposition, the two primary ones we’re following are Harker Heights and Killeen. Harker Heights effectively just voted – the city council chose to overturn the voter-approved measure entirely, while Killeen just passed it with minor changes.
I’d like to discuss what this implies for those who worked hard to get these regulations passed. Are we looking at legal issues here?
Certainly, I believe that voters, as well as the organization that helped organize the initiatives that are quite dissatisfied. I think it makes people feel like their vote didn’t count, especially when you look at the figures – you know, in some cases, 70%; I believe the lowest it passed by was 64%. So they are well-supported in these regions, and I believe the irritation is that their leaders aren’t doing what the voters have requested.
I believe certain municipal leaders are concerned about a possible conflict, and I believe some Denton officials have stated that the city is not permitted to instruct police to implement the policy change approved by voters. I suppose. How do you square that circle?
So I think it’s one of those situations where people have conflicting viewpoints because certain city councils — I believe Denton is one of them — have voiced worry that if they violate state law, the state would punish them by withholding grant funding or anything like that.
On the other hand, there are a few localities in Texas that have stopped arresting or ticketing people for marijuana possession, and the state has taken no action against them as a result.
The state Legislature will meet again in January. Is it possible that we will see any form of change or acknowledgment of the issue in the statehouse?
There will undoubtedly be numerous measures submitted to reduce penalties for possession; there have already been, I believe, a couple of bills introduced on the subject. The issue is, if anything like that happens, what shape will it take? Speaker of the House Dade Phelan has supported lowering possession fines. Governor Abbott, as far as I know, continues to oppose decriminalization. He would favor downgrading the possession charge from a Class B misdemeanor to a Class C misdemeanor.
So, with that stated, unless Abbott’s administration alters its messaging – if he expresses a readiness to decrease the punishment further to just a civil penalty, with no prospect of prison time or arrests – if he doesn’t support that, we won’t get it, even if it has Republican votes in the House and Senate.