GOV. VETOS BILL TO LOG RACE DURING TRAFFIC STOPS

Gov. Gray Davis vetoed a bill Tuesday that
would have required California law enforcement officers to collect
data on the race and ethnicity of the motorists they stop.

Davis instead directed the California Highway Patrol to establish a
three-year program to record and analyze data from its officers'
traffic stops and report the results to the Legislature annually,
beginning in January 2001. Backers of the bill -- tagged the "Driving
While Black or Brown Bill" by proponents -- say the effort to get
local police to collect the same information is far from over.

"For the governor of the state of California to claim at this time
that there is no evidence that this practice is taking place
statewide' shows how stunningly out of touch that this governor is,"
said John Crew, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's
Police Practices Project.

In a veto message released late Tuesday, the governor said cases of
racial profiling -- stopping and searching motorists because of their
skin color or apparent nationality -- may sometimes occur and are
"abhorrent."

But state government should not put an additional burden on law
enforcement officials during traffic stops, Davis' message said --
especially when collecting and analyzing the data would "cost tens of
millions of dollars" without providing "any more meaningful
information than is currently available."

Both the governor's analysis of the law and the probable cost are
hotly contested by the bill's proponents. The CHP has been sued by the
American Civil Liberties Union for allegedly using racial profiling in
an anti-drug operation called "Operation Pipeline." The operation has
been the subject of a report by the Joint Legislative Task Force on
Government Oversight, but the report is in draft form and has not yet
been released.

Davis also instructed the highway patrol to collect data from other
law enforcement agencies that voluntarily collect racial data on the
motorists they stop, and encouraged local officials to urge their
local police to cooperate. Several law enforcement organizations,
including police in San Jose, San Diego and San Francisco, already
have begun collecting such data. Members of the Alameda County Police
Chiefs and Sheriff's Association voted in July to do so, beginning
Oct. 1.

Association President and Alameda Police Chief Burnham Matthews said
it would be up to the county's independent agencies to decide whether
they would continue to gather the information without the pending
legislation, but said his own agency would go ahead as planned.
Oakland police said the same.

"There are a lot of things we do that are not state law that we do to
demonstrate to the community that we serve them and to gain their
confidence," he said. "I would assume that the Alameda County
organizations are going to continue on for a period of time and
analyze the data and see what happens."

Such voluntary cooperation is not enough for the bill's author, Sen.
Kevin Murray, D-Culver City, who promised to reintroduce the bill in
the next session.

"The irony of that is that this bill, this piece of legislation, was
supported by a broad coalition," he said, noting that the state
Assembly passed his bill 61-16 and the Senate by 29-0. "Republicans
were for it. The only people against it were police organizations --
some of whose members are going to do it voluntarily."

But El Dorado County Sheriff Hal Barker, president of the California
Peace Officers' Association, reiterated his group's opposition to
Murray's bill, which he said would give officers a paperwork
"nightmare" and turn every traffic stop into a racial debate.

"We're willing to work with the governor and the Legislature in any
direction we can to deal with issues like this. But this just wasn't
the right approach," he said. "I really salute the governor for having
the courage to look at the issue and say there's just got to be
another way to do it."