LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
CPCA Legislative Update
By Chief Jennifer Tejada, Chair of the Law and Legislative Committee
When I took the position as Chair of the Cal Chiefs Law and Legislative Committee last fall, nothing Chief Swing could have said would have prepared me for the capricious road ahead. As the new Chair, I have the pleasure of working with our legislative team in Sacramento and together, we work to preserve our interests at the Capitol, on the ballot, and in the media. Now, over six months into my new position, I can easily describe the legislative process with one word: unpredictable.
Take for example, asset forfeiture, an action opposed by certain voices on both the left and the right of the political spectrum. The law enforcement community was quick to celebrate a hard-fought victory last fall when SB 443 suffered a crippling defeat on the Assembly Floor. By requiring a conviction prior to the forfeiting of assets, SB 443 would have placed California law enforcement agencies out of compliance with the Federal Government’ s timeline for equitable sharing. Consequently, many of our state task forces would have been left unfunded. Our win, however, was short-lived. Just a few months later, in December, the U. S. DOJ announced that the 2016 Congressional budget bill stripped the U. S. DOJ of the necessary funds to continue the equitable sharing program, thus rendering the policy discussions being had in California a moot point.
For a few short months, we believed this would be the end of legislative discussions on equitable sharing at the State Capitol. However, as soon as we heard the U. S. DOJ was bringing the program back this spring, we knew that SB 443 and the policy discussions around the bill would be back before we could say“ asset forfeiture”.
And just as predicted, the bill’ s proponents began to hold press conferences and write op-eds chastising asset forfeiture and making promises to revitalize SB 443. But Cal Chiefs did not fall into the same defensive position that we found ourselves in last year. Instead, we held multiple meetings with our colleagues in law enforcement to develop a united proactive approach that would protect the process under which we seize assets. Our approach increases transparency and provides a public defender for low-income residents contesting a seizure. Our proactivity allows us to be on the offense, and allows us to contribute to the media dialogue.
Asset forfeiture policy is a reminder that we never know what bill will be introduced, what policy changes we
10 California Police Chief | www. californiapolicechiefs. org