BALLOT QUESTION WOULD DIVERT FORFEITURE

Drug abusers would get more treatment, while law enforcement would lose
money under a ballot initiative proposal aimed at reforming drug forfeiture
laws.

The measure, backed by billionaire philanthropist George Soros and others,
seeks to make it tougher for law enforcement officials to seize money and
property from alleged drug dealers and take away their direct claim to
those assets. ''There's obviously a perverse incentive that's created for
the police to seize property when they get to keep it,'' said Carl Valvo,
one of the lawyers representing the Committee for Forfeiture Reform.

Rob Stewart, campaign coordinator, called abuse in the current forfeiture
system ''policing for profit.'' He said the rights of innocent people are
being trampled as police seek to boost their budgets.

Stewart said the initiative is backed financially by Soros and Peter Lewis
of Cleveland and John Sperling of Phoenix. He said the three are
philanthropists interested in forfeiture law reform on the state and
federal levels.

Soros' Lindesmith Center, a drug policy think-tank, has been critical of
federal policies it says throws billions of dollars at law enforcement and
not enough on treatment and prevention.

A bill tightening federal forfeiture laws passed the U.S. House of
Representatives in June by a vote of 375-48. There's been no action in the
Senate.

Proponents of the Massachusetts ballot question turned in more than 75,000
signatures to the Secretary of State's office by Wednesday's deadline in
hopes of securing a place on the November 2000 ballot.

A total of 57,100 certified signatures are needed to move the measure forward.

Plymouth County District Attorney Michael Sullivan, who heads the
Massachusetts District Attorneys' Association, said he had not seen the
initiative, but didn't like what he heard.

''It immediately raises a number of concerns,'' Sullivan said. ''It would
have an adverse effect on our ability to investigate and prosecute drug
crimes.''

In the first four months of this year, his office spent more than $129,000
in drug forfeiture money on investigations and community education
programs, according to Sullivan's office.

Another $36,861 went to local police departments for such efforts.

And police officials statewide say they count on the money.

''We put many more people in jail because that money was available to us,''
said Lowell Police Superintendent Ed Davis.

Davis said he uses forfeiture money, which varies year to year but tends to
total in the tens of thousands, for community policing training and drug
investigations.

''Treatment is important, but there are no really proven programs that I've
seen that stop people from taking drugs, there are maintenance programs,
but it's still a problem,'' he said.

Sullivan said if advocates feel there is insufficient money for treatment
programs, they should take it up with lawmakers or Gov. Paul Cellucci.

''That's the more appropriate way,'' he said.

Valvo said the campaign believes law enforcers should look to town or city
leaders or the Legislature for more money.

''If the Legislature feels more money needs to go to the police, they will
appropriate that,'' he said. ''The system as it now stands it is pretty
much behind a screen, it's not subject to public oversight.''

Stewart said the committee is particularly concerned with reforming the
civil forfeiture laws, under which property can be seized even when no one
is convicted of a crime.

But the measure does call for all assets, from criminal and civil seizures,
to be turned over.