Fenty Loath To Extend Emergency Crime Bill

Ramsey Describes Advances to Council

D.C. Council member Adrian M. Fenty yesterday criticized a proposal for permanent emergency crime legislation in the District, setting the stage for a showdown with outgoing Mayor Anthony A. Williams and D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey.

In July, Fenty (D-Ward 4) cast the lone vote against a temporary measure that established a 10 p.m. curfew for teenagers and surveillance cameras in residential neighborhoods. But Fenty won the Democratic mayoral nomination this month and is widely expected to win the election Nov. 7.

"I don't think there's any big-city mayor who would say this is the way to solve crime," Fenty said yesterday in an interview. "The recipe for having a successful big-city police department is about having an energetic, well-managed police department."

Ramsey testified in favor of the emergency measures yesterday at a council hearing, saying that overall crime has dropped by 14 percent since July. "I firmly believe that we need to continue these initiatives in order to give our longer-range efforts a chance to develop and take root," Ramsey said.

The temporary crime emergency bill will expire Oct. 19, but Williams wants to make the laws permanent.

Despite the slayings of three teenagers this week, Ramsey said robberies, homicides and overall crime are down since the measures took effect. The teenagers were found dead in a 24-hour span Sunday and Monday. There have been 15 slayings this year in which the victims were under 18 years old, compared with 12 for all of last year.

The temporary emergency legislation authorized the cameras and the curfew and gave police immediate access to juvenile court records. It also expanded the circumstances under which a judge can deny bail and detain adults and juveniles charged with robbery.

Fenty did not attend yesterday's hearing, which was convened by Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), who heads the judiciary committee. Mendelson said he was trying to determine the effectiveness and support for the emergency measures.

"The crime statistics are way down since the beginning of July," Mendelson said in an interview. "That strongly suggests that something is working. Having said that, it is not clear what . . . is working."

Fenty said he could be flexible on some of the measures. He said he still questions whether the earlier curfew and the increased access to juvenile records are reducing crime, but he added that he would like to hear more debate about the bail denial and now sees the benefits of cameras.

The resurgent crime issue comes as Fenty is meeting with city officials about who will remain if he takes office in January. He met earlier this month with Ramsey, who has said he would serve if the new mayor wants him to stay.

Although Fenty voted against the curfew, cameras and other measures, he voted in favor of a separate measure for $8 million to pay for police overtime. The money placed more police on the street, and Ramsey said that money has already been spent. During the emergency, the department received an extra $2.6 million for the same purpose, and almost all of that is gone, he said. Several people testified yesterday that increased police activity was a prime reason for the decreased crime.

Ramsey said he plans to ask the council for additional funds to continue the overtime. Currently, officers work six-day weeks twice a month.

Community leaders, including Sandra Seegars and Mary Cuthbert of Ward 8 and Kathy Henderson of Ward 5, testified yesterday that residents love the cameras. Kristen Mahoney, who heads Baltimore's surveillance camera program, said there has been a 16 percent decline in violent crime in that city's neighborhoods where cameras have been installed.

In the District's crime-ridden neighborhoods, residents gave the temporary policies mixed reviews.

Ray Jackson, 62, said that there are surveillance cameras near his Congress Heights home in Ward 8 but that he doesn't believe they have deterred crime. In fact, he said he doesn't like the crime emergency legislation and added that Fenty did the right thing by opposing it.

"It stinks," he said. "It's a waste of money putting those cameras on the streets. Who cares about a camera? Criminals don't care about a camera. . . . It doesn't make any difference."

Yvonne Johnson, 64, questioned the curfew's effectiveness. "It's not working, because you still see the kids unsupervised," said Johnson, a Deanwood resident who said that in May, she crawled for cover after she saw a man waving a gun in her neighborhood.

At the same time, she said: "Go ahead and extend it. Don't sit back and do nothing."

On any given day, Johnson said she can see a group of youths loitering on the corner not far from her home, selling drugs in broad daylight.

Like many residents who live in neighborhoods plagued by violence, Johnson said she doesn't know the answer to reducing juvenile crime, but she knows something must be done.

Yesterday at the hearing, youth advocates said that curfews encourage harassment of teenagers, who need more recreation programs, jobs and better education. The previous youth curfew was 11 p.m. weeknights and midnight on weekends.

Members of the Justice for D.C. Youth! Coalition wore T-shirts reading, "Stop the War on D.C. Youth" on the front and "No More: Curfews, Cops, Confidentiality Records and Cameras" on the back.

Staff writer Allison Klein contributed to this report.