Lucille
11-17-2014, 11:01 AM
D.C. police plan for future seizure proceeds years in advance in city budget documents
This is the sixth installment in the “Stop and Seize (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/collection/stop-and-seize-2/)” investigative series.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/dc-police-plan-for-future-seizure-proceeds-years-in-advance-in-city-budget-documents/2014/11/15/7025edd2-6b76-11e4-b053-65cea7903f2e_story.html
D.C. police have made plans for millions of dollars in anticipated proceeds from future civil seizures of cash and property, even though federal guidelines say “agencies may not commit” to such spending in advance, documents show.
The city’s proposed budget and financial plan for fiscal 2015 includes about $2.7 million for the District police department’s “special purpose fund” through 2018. The fund covers payments for informants and rewards.
The financial details emerged Wednesday, when the D.C. Council’s judiciary committee unanimously voted to forward a bill that would overhaul asset forfeiture laws in the nation’s capital. The bill would raise the threshold of proof required for a forfeiture, bolster the rights of individuals whose property has been taken and require that proceeds from seizures under federal law go into the city general fund, rather than directly to the police department. The full council is set to vote on the bill Tuesday.
Council member Tommy Wells, chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety, said police should not have a financial incentive to make seizures. He said the bill addresses problems that are common across the country.
“All across the nation, law enforcement agencies are directly benefiting from forfeiture,” said Wells (D-Ward 6), who is leading the effort to reform asset forfeiture in the District. “In those places, forfeiture proceeds go directly to the law enforcement entity, creating at best the appearance of a conflict of interest, and at worst, an unchecked incentive for slush funds.”
[...]
Civil forfeiture laws permit local and state police to take cash, cars, homes and other property from people suspected of involvement in drug trafficking or other wrongdoing without proving a crime has occurred. Police can make seizures under state or federal laws.
Since 2009, D.C. officers have made more than 12,000 seizures under city and federal laws, according to records and data obtained from the city by The Washington Post through the District’s open records law. Half of the more than $5.5 million in cash seizures were for $141 or less, with more than a thousand for less than $20. D.C. police have seized more than 1,000 cars, some for minor offenses allegedly committed by the children or friends of the vehicle owners, documents show.
[..]
Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr declined to discuss civil asset forfeiture practices in the District. He said police agencies can participate in the program only if they comply with its guidelines. Among other things, the guidelines say that agencies “should not ‘spend it before you get it’ or budget anticipated receipts. Receiving agencies may not commit to the spending of sharing monies for a certain purpose in advance.”
[...]
In a statement, D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said the department is not building its budget with the proceeds of civil seizures but is using them “to augment the reward pool of funding and confidential fund programs (witness protection, rewards for information in homicides).”
Lanier said the department’s focus is not on generating revenue but on “removing the profit gained from facilitating a crime. By forfeiting those assets, the expansion of criminal activities can also be reduced.”
[...]
But the bill has been opposed by law enforcement officials, partly for the same reason other reform efforts across the country have been stymied: money. The officials also said it would create an administrative burden. In addition to tightening oversight and the rules for civil seizures, the District proposal would cut back on revenue.
“Enacting this Bill would almost certainly decrease the number of successful forfeiture *cases, which would lead to a loss of significant forfeiture revenues,” D.C. Attorney General Irvin B. Nathan warned in a statement to the council last year.
[...]
Darpana Sheth, an attorney with the Institute for Justice, a nonprofit public interest law firm that advocates for seizure reform, said the District bill could have a wide impact.
“Short of eliminating civil forfeiture entirely, this bill is a good model to strengthen protections for property owners and remove the profit incentives that have been fueling the District’s aggressive seizing of people’s property,” she said.
I hadn't seen this series before today:
More from the “Stop and Seize” series:
Part 1: Aggressive police take hundreds of millions of dollars from motorists not charged with crimes
Part 2: Pollice intelligence targets cash
Part 3: They fought the law. Who won?
Part 4: Asset seizures fuel police spending
Part 5: Highway seizure in Iowa fuels debate about asset-forfeiture laws
This is the sixth installment in the “Stop and Seize (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/collection/stop-and-seize-2/)” investigative series.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/dc-police-plan-for-future-seizure-proceeds-years-in-advance-in-city-budget-documents/2014/11/15/7025edd2-6b76-11e4-b053-65cea7903f2e_story.html
D.C. police have made plans for millions of dollars in anticipated proceeds from future civil seizures of cash and property, even though federal guidelines say “agencies may not commit” to such spending in advance, documents show.
The city’s proposed budget and financial plan for fiscal 2015 includes about $2.7 million for the District police department’s “special purpose fund” through 2018. The fund covers payments for informants and rewards.
The financial details emerged Wednesday, when the D.C. Council’s judiciary committee unanimously voted to forward a bill that would overhaul asset forfeiture laws in the nation’s capital. The bill would raise the threshold of proof required for a forfeiture, bolster the rights of individuals whose property has been taken and require that proceeds from seizures under federal law go into the city general fund, rather than directly to the police department. The full council is set to vote on the bill Tuesday.
Council member Tommy Wells, chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety, said police should not have a financial incentive to make seizures. He said the bill addresses problems that are common across the country.
“All across the nation, law enforcement agencies are directly benefiting from forfeiture,” said Wells (D-Ward 6), who is leading the effort to reform asset forfeiture in the District. “In those places, forfeiture proceeds go directly to the law enforcement entity, creating at best the appearance of a conflict of interest, and at worst, an unchecked incentive for slush funds.”
[...]
Civil forfeiture laws permit local and state police to take cash, cars, homes and other property from people suspected of involvement in drug trafficking or other wrongdoing without proving a crime has occurred. Police can make seizures under state or federal laws.
Since 2009, D.C. officers have made more than 12,000 seizures under city and federal laws, according to records and data obtained from the city by The Washington Post through the District’s open records law. Half of the more than $5.5 million in cash seizures were for $141 or less, with more than a thousand for less than $20. D.C. police have seized more than 1,000 cars, some for minor offenses allegedly committed by the children or friends of the vehicle owners, documents show.
[..]
Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr declined to discuss civil asset forfeiture practices in the District. He said police agencies can participate in the program only if they comply with its guidelines. Among other things, the guidelines say that agencies “should not ‘spend it before you get it’ or budget anticipated receipts. Receiving agencies may not commit to the spending of sharing monies for a certain purpose in advance.”
[...]
In a statement, D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said the department is not building its budget with the proceeds of civil seizures but is using them “to augment the reward pool of funding and confidential fund programs (witness protection, rewards for information in homicides).”
Lanier said the department’s focus is not on generating revenue but on “removing the profit gained from facilitating a crime. By forfeiting those assets, the expansion of criminal activities can also be reduced.”
[...]
But the bill has been opposed by law enforcement officials, partly for the same reason other reform efforts across the country have been stymied: money. The officials also said it would create an administrative burden. In addition to tightening oversight and the rules for civil seizures, the District proposal would cut back on revenue.
“Enacting this Bill would almost certainly decrease the number of successful forfeiture *cases, which would lead to a loss of significant forfeiture revenues,” D.C. Attorney General Irvin B. Nathan warned in a statement to the council last year.
[...]
Darpana Sheth, an attorney with the Institute for Justice, a nonprofit public interest law firm that advocates for seizure reform, said the District bill could have a wide impact.
“Short of eliminating civil forfeiture entirely, this bill is a good model to strengthen protections for property owners and remove the profit incentives that have been fueling the District’s aggressive seizing of people’s property,” she said.
I hadn't seen this series before today:
More from the “Stop and Seize” series:
Part 1: Aggressive police take hundreds of millions of dollars from motorists not charged with crimes
Part 2: Pollice intelligence targets cash
Part 3: They fought the law. Who won?
Part 4: Asset seizures fuel police spending
Part 5: Highway seizure in Iowa fuels debate about asset-forfeiture laws