Seattle close to junking its controversial impound law

By Bob Young
Seattle Times staff reporter

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most e-mailed articles

Six out of nine City Council members expressed their desire to dump the impound law, which disproportionately affects African Americans, in a key committee vote yesterday.

Councilman Nick Licata led the repeal drive, which gained momentum with the election last year of three new council members who made campaign pledges to curtail impounds and co-sponsored Licata's proposal.

Richard McIver and Peter Steinbrueck delivered the fifth and sixth votes, saying they thought the law was too burdensome on poor people.

McIver likened the law to a "debtors' prison" and said impounding a person's car for failing to pay a traffic ticket was akin to "taking someone's shoes for jaywalking."

The law allows the city to tow, hold and auction cars driven by people who have third-degree license suspensions. Such drivers have not been convicted of drunken driving or injuring others in accidents. Rather, they have lost their licenses because of unpaid traffic tickets, mainly due to violations such as speeding and failing to obey traffic signals. To get their cars back, they often must pay fines and fees that can exceed $500.

Of the almost 5,000 cars impounded by the city in 2002, 36 percent were driven by African Americans, who make up 8 percent of Seattle's population.

How the law would change Existing law: If police stop someone accused of driving with a suspended license in the third degree, officers can impound the vehicle, arrest the driver, or do both or neither. Nine times out of 10, Seattle police impound the vehicle, even if it does not belong to the offending driver. Proposal: Under the plan passed by a council committee yesterday, Seattle police would not have the option of impounding such vehicles, although they could still impound the cars of vehicle owners with suspended licenses who had been cited for more serious offenses. The proposal also would allow a driver to regain the vehicle once all penalties owed to Seattle have been paid, even if the driver owes money to other jurisdictions. And it would let Seattle police impound vehicles because of drunken driving, a new option granted by the state. Next step: The full council is scheduled to vote Monday on the proposed ordinance.

Impound-law opponents, who chanted "shame" at the council when it voted 5-4 to uphold the law four years go, said the law amounts to economic injustice because it treats violators who pay tickets better than those who do not, regardless of the public danger posed by both groups of drivers.

A $100,000 study commissioned by the city found that drivers with suspended licenses were 2.5 times more likely to get in auto accidents than drivers who hadn't lost their driving privileges. But the study did not conclude that impounding cars deterred people from driving with suspended licenses.

Making case for current law

City Attorney Tom Carr has fought hard to keep the impound law, arguing it makes city streets safer.

"I believe if we get rid of impound, we will have more people hurt in accidents," Carr said recently.

Carr also has argued that sanctions are needed to get drivers to pay fines, and that impounding is cheaper for taxpayers and less punitive than jailing people who drive with a suspended license, which is a misdemeanor.

After yesterday's vote, Carr declined interview requests and released a terse statement saying that he was "deeply troubled" by the vote, and that it would likely lead to more jailed drivers. He said the threat of jail would likely be what the city uses to get offenders to pay tickets.

Pete Rogerson, a Broadview neighborhood activist, urged the council yesterday not to drop the impound law because some police officers may engage in racial profiling and are stopping a disproportionate number of African-American drivers on Seattle streets. As Rogerson noted, impounding itself appears to be color-blind. The Seattle Police Department reports that 90 percent of the drivers stopped and found to have suspended licenses have their cars impounded, regardless of the driver's race.

"Attack profiling, but don't change this law because of it," Rogerson said.

But council members maintained the law was unfair.

"It's become too much of a symbol that justice is not delivered to those who are of color, or those who are poor," said Councilwoman Jean Godden, who joined fellow rookies David Della and Tom Rasmussen in sponsoring the repeal.

Licata has pointed to individuals such as Eric McDonald as an example of the law's flaws. McDonald suffers from diabetes and kidney failure. In 2002, the state Department of Licensing suspended his driver's license for failing to pay a 10-year-old speeding ticket in Lewis County. McDonald offered to make payments because he couldn't afford to cover the entire amount. While driving in Seattle, he was stopped by police, who impounded his car. Unable to pay the tow and storage fees, McDonald saw his car auctioned. Without transportation, he then lost his place on a priority list for kidney transplants.

Call for relicensing program

Licata also said repealing the impound law might shield the city against damages from a pending class-action suit over the issue, by limiting the number of people who could join the suit. "I think we would want to limit the city's exposure," Licata said.

Yesterday's vote brought cheers and pumping fists from impound-law foes.

"What a long time coming. It's a good day for communities of color," said Dorry Elias Garcia, who heads a coalition of nonprofit King County groups that advocate for minorities.

Licata's legislation calls for the city to create a program, much like King County has, that would help suspended drivers get relicensed. King County's relicensing program offers people the chance to create a payment plan for traffic fines or pay them through community service or a work program.

Roughly half of those stopped by county law officers have taken advantage of the program, according to a King County Council staff analysis. Most others are prosecuted by the county, and some spend time in jail.

If the full council repeals the impound law on Monday, the city will face the question of what leverage it has to force scofflaws to pay tickets. The likely answer is jail, Carr has said, the cost of which could create problems for his budget.

McIver said Carr and the council will have to tackle that issue.

"How aggressively we'll prosecute (without impound) is another matter. Either the city will have to find money, find offsetting savings or not prosecute," he said.

Bob Young: 206-464-2174 or byoung@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company

E-mail this article

Print this article

Search archive

More local news headlines...