VOTERS PASS MEASURE REQUIRING CONVICTIONS FOR PROPERTY SEIZURE

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) -- Oregonians on Tuesday decided to ban law officials
from permanently seizing a suspect's money or property without a conviction.

With 59 percent of the vote counted, 66 percent were in favor of Measure 3
and 34 percent were opposed.

"This is another clear indication that the voters of Oregon aren't willing
to give unbridled power to law enforcement agencies," said Geoff Sugerman,
who ran the campaign for the measure.

"This was really an issue of fairness and of how we're going to conduct our
affairs in Oregon when it comes to property forfeiture."

Foes of the measure said it was deceptively well-written -- and that the
public had no idea about the flaws it contained.

John Bradley, an assistant Multnomah County district attorney, predicted
several court challenges to the law. The 2001 Legislature likely will spend
significant time trying to correct the measure's flaws, he said.

"It's an unfortunate thing. This really is going to be a mess," Bradley
said. "The things that people said weren't there -- they're there."

Measure 3 amends the state Constitution to require that authorities prove
the property they want to seize was associated with a crime. If no charges
are filed and no conviction occurs, the cash or property must be returned.

The measure also prevents police agencies or local governments from
benefitting from forfeiture proceeds. Seventy-five percent of the proceeds
from seized property are to go toward treatment, education and prevention
programs.

Christine Kirk, who fought the measure with the group Citizens for Safe
Streets and Neighborhoods, said Tuesday's vote was "based on money and
theory -- not fact." The group fears Measure 3 will hamper officers'
ability to confiscate cars from drunken drivers.

"Loss of lives are an unfortunate consequence, especially when (Measure 3
supporters) couldn't find problems with forfeiture laws in the state of
Oregon," she said.

Sugerman said flaws identified by foes of the measure don't have merit.

"Time and time again the arguments they brought forward didn't hold water,
and the voters of Oregon saw through that," he said.