Pubdate: Mon, 11 Aug 2014
Source: Washington Times (DC)
Copyright: 2014 The Washington Times, LLC.
Contact:  http://www.washingtontimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/492
Author: Andrea Noble
Page: A1

D.C.'S LAX ENFORCEMENT OF LITTER LAW BODES ILL FOR MARIJUANA

Police Can't Verify IDs of Violators

D.C. police say four out of five violators simply ignore citations 
for littering - a possible indicator of the difficulty the District 
will have collecting fines on tickets for marijuana possession, which 
use the same enforcement mechanism and are off to a similarly slow 
rate of compliance.

Marijuana decriminalization took effect July 17. As of Friday, police 
had issued 35 civil tickets for marijuana possession. Although 
violators have 14 days to respond to the tickets, no one issued a 
citation had either paid the $25 fine or contested a ticket, 
according to the Office of Administrative Hearings.

Littering enforcement has been only slightly more effective.

Of 91 littering tickets issued since the start of last year, 14 
people paid the fines, according to data provided by the Office of 
Administrative Hearings, which adjudicates tickets for both offenses. 
Police issued 70 littering tickets in 2012, but only six fines were paid.

The police union says the poor compliance rates are the results of a 
system that was broken from the outset.

Laws spelling out the civil penalties for littering and marijuana 
violations prohibit officers from requiring any form of 
identification - even if officers suspect violators of lying about 
their identities.

"I could stop someone for littering and they could tell me 'I'm 
Vincent Gray' and could give me his home address. Then the mayor 
could later get a notice," said Delroy Burton, chairman of the 
Metropolitan Police Department's Fraternal Order of Police. "And 
there is nothing I can do to prove that he's not Vincent Gray. The 
law is flawed."

Lawmakers attempted to compensate by making it a criminal offense for 
violators to refuse to provide their names and addresses or to give 
false information to officers issuing tickets.

Police have noted the agency's ongoing struggle to collect fines. The 
department's annual report last year said four out of five violators 
ignored littering citations. Officials openly worried about the way 
the civil enforcement scheme would translate to marijuana ticket scofflaws.

"Without repercussions for an offense, the government's ability to 
hold violators accountable for this civil offense is limited and the 
tickets may not be enough of an incentive to motivate people to 
change their behavior," police wrote in the annual littering report. 
"This is important to recognize because the Council used the same 
enforcement scheme as the model for the Marijuana Possession 
Decriminalization Amendment Act of 2014."

The law says fines can double for violators who default on their 
tickets. In reality, however, unpaid tickets essentially fall into a 
black hole.

The Office of Administrative Hearings does not pursue any form of 
collections to recoup the fines, staff attorney Marya Torrez said.

Police also appear to have no plan in place to enforce payments of 
civil fines. Asked about their plan to hold accountable violators who 
don't satisfy their tickets, police spokeswoman Gwendolyn Crump said 
the department remains in discussions with the city's chief financial 
officer and the Office of Administrative Hearings.

Ms. Crump said the department raised its enforcement concerns when 
marijuana decriminalization was debated before passage, with city 
officials encouraging lawmakers to include the penalties that stem 
from giving false information to an officer, hoping that would give 
teeth to the law. They noted that motorists are compelled to pay 
fines for parking tickets and citations from automated enforcement 
cameras because the city can boot their cars or block their vehicle 
reregistrations if the tickets remain unsatisfied.

"Most civil violations are only effective because they are tied to 
property interests or a privilege that people value," Deputy Attorney 
General Andrew Fois testified at a hearing on the marijuana bill. "In 
this instance, however, there are no such compliance incentives for 
people to comply with the civil sanctions."

D.C. Council member Tommy Wells, the Ward 6 Democrat who authored the 
decriminalization bill, said he modeled it on legislation from 
Massachusetts, one of 16 states that approved decriminalization. But 
officials in Massachusetts, where it is illegal to ask for 
identification to enforce civil infractions, expressed the same 
concerns about effective enforcement.

Wayne Sampson, executive director of the Massachusetts Chiefs of 
Police Association, told The New York Times shortly after the law 
passed in 2008 that he anticipated lies about violators' identities.

"You can tell us that you're Mickey Mouse of One Disneyland Way," Mr. 
Sampson said, "and we have to assume that's true."

Mr. Wells did not return a call seeking comment about his D.C. 
legislation, which ultimately included the penalty for refusing to 
provide valid identity.

According to figures obtained from the Office of Administrative 
Hearings, out of the 91 littering tickets issued since 2013, 52 have 
gone into default and the fines have doubled to $150. Nine people 
successfully challenged their tickets, and the agency threw out 
another 14 tickets.

The low number of littering tickets issued overall - police officers 
have written a total of 174 since 2011 - is partly because the 
department debuted the ticketing as a pilot program in only two of 
the city's seven police districts.

Until this month, police were actively enforcing litter laws in 
District 4, mostly in Northwest, and District 6, mostly in Southeast, 
to test how civil violations would be handled in conjunction with the 
Office of Administrative Hearings, Ms. Crump said. The department 
expanded the program citywide as the similar enforcement plan for 
marijuana decriminalization took effect.

"We are expanding littering enforcement at this time because the 
civil marijuana tickets are using the same process and ticket books 
that were piloted for the littering enforcement," Ms. Crump said in 
an email. "Since the ticket books are now in use citywide for 
marijuana enforcement, it makes sense to expand the littering enforcement."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom