OAKLAND [FORFEITURE] LAW THREATENED
"[Oakland] Mayor Jerry Brown asks [California governor] Davis to veto bill that would make conviction [of a crime] a prerequisite [for forfeiture]"
by Matthew Yi San Francisco Examiner, Sept 23, 1999
OAKLAND - Mayor Jerry Brown has fired off two letters to Gov. Davis urging him to veto a bill that could kill a local ordinance allowing police to confiscate cars used in alleged drug deals or prostitution solicitation.
The bill, by Assemblyman Herb Wesson, D-Culver City, would end Oakland's "Operation Beat Feet" law, which was adopted by the voters in 1997.
That controversial city ordinance allows police to seize vehicles if the drivers are suspected of crimes; they do not have to be charged with a crime. Owners can later reclaim their cars after negotiating a price with the city, or the city can sell them at a public auction. Proceeds are split 50-50 between the city and the Police Department.
Originally, Wesson's Assembly bill merely updated existing law regarding asset forfeiture for white-collar crimes, making it easier for prosecutors to pinpoint illegally obtained goods.
But an amendment added in the state Senate requires that defendants be found guilty before any property is seized, and that local ordinances be in line with state law.
"Basically, you cannot seize anyone's illegally obtained assets unless they are convicted," Wesson said.
Calling the amendment a "blatant and ideological attack on the people of Oakland," Mayor Brown has urged Gov. Davis to reject the bill. The governor has until Oct. 10 to either sign or veto it.
"I call upon you to veto AB662 and stop in its tracks the unconscionable undermining of home rule," Brown said in his letter dated Sept. 10.
In a second letter dated Sept. 15, Brown contended the bill was "highjacked in the state Senate at the 11th hour."
"Without a moment of public hearing, the measure was amended to include an unrelated preemption provision killing Oakland's "Beat Feet' program," he wrote.
Brown was out of town Wednesday and could not be reached for comment.
Wesson said he was not surprised by Brown's letters to Davis.
"I respect (Brown's) opinion," he said. "This was not a personal attack on Oakland ... I believe the amendment made it a better bill because it ensures that you can't take something from someone until they are convicted."
But Oakland officials argue that invalidating the local ordinance would violate the state Constitution, which reserves the right of charter cities to make and enforce local laws.
" 'Beat Feet' is a completely constituency driven, local ordinance," said deputy city attorney Marcia Meyers.
"It was an outcry from the community to deal with degradation with entire areas of this city. With drive-by drug dealers ... and rampant prostitution, random arrests by police officers just weren't getting the job done."
Since the program started in January 1998, the city has won all of the asset forfeiture hearings in Alameda County Superior Court, she said.
"We've seized more than 300 vehicles," Meyers said. "Our statistics show that 60 percent of the people arrested are from out of town, which indicates to us that people are using Oakland to do their dirty business and illegal activity."
This is not the first time Oakland's program has been under fire.
Critics from the beginning have argued that the ordinance is a draconian measure and violates civil rights.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against Oakland last year, contending the measure violates state law by seizing property without a conviction.
However, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Henry Needham Jr. ruled in favor of the city, and the ACLU has appealed the case.
"Oakland's ordinance is completely 100 percent enforced with sting operations," said ACLU managing attorney Alan Schlosser. "That's a legitimate law enforcement tool, but that's subject to abuse ... and subject to entrapment."
Despite such arguments, at least one other Bay Area city is thinking about adopting a similar city law.
San Francisco Supervisor Amos Brown* is planning to hold a public hearing Sunday at Bethel Christian Church in The City to get feedback on the issue.
"If we don't have measures in place in our society to legally deal with these kinds of criminal activity, we'll never solve the problem," Supervisor Brown said.
Supervisor Brown said he liked Oakland's program, but feared that drug dealers or people looking for prostitutes would take their business to San Francisco unless The City has a similar law.
"If we're not careful in San Francisco, Oakland will outdistance us ... and we'll become a dumping ground for these kinds of activities," he said.