SUIT SAYS APPROVED MEASURE IS ILLEGAL The Lincoln County lawsuit is the first to target Measure 3, which disallows permanent confiscation before a conviction Lincoln County's regional narcotics team has become the first to file a lawsuit seeking to derail Measure 3, claiming its civil forfeiture restrictions are unconstitutional. The legal action comes as a legislative work group is meeting to draft a bill that would bring state statute into compliance with the measure's reforms, approved by voters in November. Measure 3, set to take effect Dec. 7, will amend the state constitution to require that a property owner be convicted of a crime before the government can permanently confiscate property that was used in a crime or is proceeds of a crime. It also forbids law enforcement from pocketing the proceeds from the confiscated property and instead redirects the proceeds to treatment and education, or other uses established by law. The lawsuit by Lincoln Interagency Narcotics Team, together with Lincoln County, was filed Nov. 24 in Marion County Circuit Court by Rob Bovett, Lincoln County assistant counsel. The lawsuit attacks the measure on technical grounds, contending it contains more than one subject -- a violation of state election law. It also argues that Measure 3 contains too many provisions, violating the requirement in the state constitution that two or more proposed constitutional amendments be voted on separately. The suit was filed against the state of Oregon, Secretary of State Bill Bradbury and Gov. John Kitzhaber. "We will fulfill our statutory obligation to defend the measure," said Kevin Neely, spokesman for the state attorney general's office. Measure 3 proponents said the lawsuit would thwart the will of Oregon voters and will not prevail. "We don't believe Measure 3 is more than one amendment. It only affects one portion of the state constitution," said David Fidanque, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon. "We think Measure 3 is going to be upheld against this challenge." The lawsuit also challenges a provision in the measure that restricts state and local police agencies from transferring forfeiture cases to the federal government, unless a state judge approves the transfer. Bovett argues in the lawsuit that the restriction conflicts with federal guidelines that allow the sharing of federally forfeited property with state and local police agencies. Measure 3 backers call the federal argument unfounded, saying that cities and counties are not bound to share federal revenues. "I certainly understand that law enforcement folks, and forfeiture counsel, who have been living high on the hog on these programs, are not happy, " Fidanque said. "But the reality is they were grossly out of touch with the majority of Oregon voters." Meanwhile, a legislative work group in Salem is discussing alternative funding for law enforcement agencies. For example, state Rep. Floyd Prozanski, a Eugene Democrat who will not be returning to the Legislature next month, said he is committed to working with state police to ensure there is continued funding for regional drug task forces.
No member comments available...
|