The D.C. Council is poised to vote on a massive crime bill that would stiffen penalties for carjackings, retail theft and some gun charges.
District officials have been trying to find ways to reduce the wave of violent crime that's put the city on edge. Over the past few months, the Council approved several pieces of temporary legislation and held hearings on other proposals.
Judiciary Committee Chair Brooke Pinto announced Wednesday she’s combining all those proposals into an overarching omnibus crime bill known as Secure DC, which she hopes the Council will approve later this month.
"It's going to make residents and businesses and visitors feel safer and actually be safer in our communities," Pinto said. "Whether that's ensuring that we can prevent crime before it happens, with our access to cameras, ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable when they do violate the law, and that we're better coordinating within our government to better respond and ensure these retaliatory shootings and incidents are not as prevalent."
We've got the news you need to know to start your day. Sign up for the First & 4Most morning newsletter — delivered to your inbox daily. >Sign up here.
One of the most controversial parts of the legislation, which would allow for stop-and-frisks in some cases, has been removed.
There are more than 100 provisions in the bill, including:
- stiffening gun penalties
- expanding the definition of carjacking
- adding more retail theft penalties
- making it easier for judges to detain defendants waiting for trial
- requiring DNA samples to be collected when a suspect is arrested and charged with a felony
- expanding D.C.'s security camera rebate program
- allowing police to engage in vehicle pursuits in limited circumstances
However, Pinto removed one of the most controversial proposals. It would have required defendants who were charged with violent crimes, and released pending trial or on parole or probation, to submit to searches by police without cause or warrants.
Local
Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia local news, events and information
"I heard concerns from returning citizens who talked about what it would feel like after serving time, always looking over your shoulder, that you could be searched," Pinto said. "I heard from advocacy groups who had challenges about how we could define it. I met with the police and we were unclear of how this could be administered in a way that we could all be confident would not lead to harassment. And that's what the legislative process is for. We heard ideas; we heard opposition and feedback. And ultimately, I wasn't comfortable moving forward with something that I wasn't confident could not be misused. And so I took it out."
The District's top prosecutor, U.S. Attorney Matt Graves, supports the legislation as does Mayor Muriel Bowser.
"I am confident that this is the right package for this time now that will make District residents safer," Pinto said. "And I think the Council needs to support and vote for this package, and the mayor needs to fund it as soon as possible."
One of the questions remaining is whether Bowser and the Council will approve funding for all provisions in the legislation. So far, there’s no estimate of the cost.
In a statement, Bowser said in part, "We know that driving down crime requires us to send a clear message that if you make our city less safe, if you bring violence to our community, you will be held accountable."
"In 2023, we saw pieces of this legislation move our city in the right direction," Bowser said. "Now we can make those provisions permanent and focus on strategies and policies that will continue to make our city safer. I look forward to signing this bill into law and urge the Council to move with urgency to unanimously pass this legislation.”
But Melissa Wasser of ACLU-DC released a statement Wednesday criticizing the bill, saying in part, "We deserve to be safe from crime and from abuse of power. Allowing officers to escape accountability and to harass people in designated zones will not make D.C. safer. Locking more people up before they are found guilty will not make D.C. safer. These types of provisions in the Secure DC Act are not ‘public safety’ solutions; they are measures that open the door for abuse of power."
"We urge the D.C. Council to reject these and other provisions that put both our safety and our rights at risk," Wasser's statement said. "Instead, District leaders should build a comprehensive public safety system that focuses on prevention, effectiveness, and accountability." (The ACLU-DC's full statement can be viewed here.)
