WHAT DOES MARK SIDRAN HAVE AGAINST THE MCCOYS?

"UTTER nonsense."

In a KOMO-TV interview aired last Friday, Seattle City Attorney Mark Sidran
dismissed the concerns of beleaguered business owners Oscar and Barbara
McCoy. Sidran's words were punctuated by an impatient smirk and the
preening indignation of a tough-on-crime commissar.

What does Sidran have against the McCoys, anyway?

The McCoys are struggling to fend off a civil drug-abatement action that
would effectively shut down their 22-year-old family tavern. They want
other entrepreneurs to know that government agencies responsible for
protecting law-abiding citizens sometimes work against them.

Rather than protect the McCoys, the city removed police protection from
their neighborhood and conducted a two-year undercover narcotics operations
at their soul-food restaurant, Oscar's II, on 2051 E. Madison Ave. This
cruelly cost-effective detective work became the foundation of the city's
case for closure.

The police department paid anonymous informants (with charming code names
such as "Bright Eyes") for their service. But not a single drug dealer was
arrested nor a single search warrant issued at Oscar's II as a result.

Sidran told KOMO: "It's not acceptable to simply say `Well, yes, there's
drug trafficking on my property but that's not my problem. That's for the
police to deal with.' " The McCoys, however, never said any such thing.
Indeed, even police witnesses who testified against the McCoys acknowledged
that the McCoys worked hard to reduce crime on and around their property.
And King County Superior Court Judge Joseph Wesley, who recently ruled in
the city's favor, nonetheless determined that "the McCoys have responsibly
if not successfully combated the ongoing problem for many years . . . The
McCoys have not in any sense `permitted' the existence of a nuisance in the
sense of having allowed it, furthered it, or condoned it."

Sidran blamed the McCoys for not implementing all the components of the
police department's supposedly non-binding "Drug Elimination Plan." But
take a closer look at that "plan" - an informal, unsigned, makeshift list
handed to the McCoys by drug-abatement officer Linda Diaz in 1994:

- -- Seattle Police Department record check of all employees. Employees
required to have good identification.
- -- No violations of state liquor codes.
- -- Bathrooms locked with the bartender in control of the keys. Only one
person in the bathroom at a time.
- -- Security on duty on weekends and evenings. The security should not only
keep control of the inside but also the area directly outside the tavern
and all parking areas. The security should wear clothing that clearly
identified them. Security should check all customers for weapons . . .
- -- An `86' list should be maintained behind the counter and with security
so that the bartender and security can keep track of unauthorized persons.
The `86' list should be posted for Seattle Police Officers(') review.
- -- Inside and outside lighting should be such that the bartender and
security can observe actions of customers.
- -- A video camera installed in the tavern with the police able to remove
the tape and review it at any time.
- -- Post signs on the front door that state: "No loitering, No drug activity
allowed - 911 will be called."
- -- Inside pay phone should be removed. No incoming calls accepted for
customers. Any behind-the-counter phone should be for employee use only.
- -- All customers required to have and show I.D.
- -- A criminal trespass agreement should be initiated with the Community
Police Team to stop non-customers from loitering on the property.
- -- An entry fee should be charge (sic) at the front door. Customers that
leave should be charged again for re-admittance . . .
- -- The Precinct Anti-Crime Team, Community Police team or 911 should be
contacted anytime anyone is suspected of selling narcotics on the property.
- -- The back door should be exit only, with an alarmed emergency exit bar
installed.
- -- Install a dress code and do not allow any gang attire.

The McCoys had already taken several of these common-sense steps - signs,
security, no-trespass list, IDs - before the 15- point plan was concocted.
They took several additional steps - more security, a metal detector,
better lighting, modified pay phone - after receiving the list. But the
McCoys could not afford a video camera. The bathroom policy was
impractical. Nor could they impose a re-entry charge without deterring many
of their customers. Now those minor failures are being used as a
justification for closing Oscar's II down.

How many other institutions and establishments where drug activity
invariably occurs could meet such unforgiving standards? This city's high
schools? The Kingdome? Key Arena? UW?

The goal of the city's 15-point list is all-too-transparent: It is a
selective business elimination plan, not a drug elimination plan.

While Sidran and the city continue to vilify the McCoys, scores of
individuals have sent notes of encouragement and donations to the McCoy
Justice Fund totaling over $2,500. Supporters see in the McCoys' plight
what Seattle's blinded city authorities cannot: Utter arrogance. Utter
injustice.

Utter nonsense indeed.

Donations to the McCoy Justice Fund can be mailed to 605 First Ave., Suite
350, Seattle WA 98104.