Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 06/20/2000 - SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 62, 2000, APPROPRI ITEM NUMBER: AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: June 20, 2000 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Don Vagge SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 62, 2000, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Police Seizure Activity. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: State statutes specify that the proceeds from such seizures are to be used for law enforcement purposes, and require that the governing body (City Council) of the seizing agency (Police Services) appropriate these proceeds to supplement the seizing agency's budget or forfeit the proceeds to the general fund of the State of Colorado. The Colorado Supreme Court and United States Supreme Court have consistently upheld the constitutionality of these statutes. Ordinance No. 62, 2000, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 6, 2000. i f AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 13 DATE: June 6, 2000 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Don Vagge I SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance No. 62, 2000, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Police Seizure Activity. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption oCeOrdiapieadingy i FINANCIAL IMPACT: This Ordinance appropriates $33,686 into the Police Services budget. This amount represents money awarded by the courts in 1999 and held in a General Fund restricted reserve account awaiting appropriation. . Some of the funds will be use(byPo ' Se ' s r special chases of training, services, and commodities to enhance theo o ervice. a remainder will be used in partnership with a variety of community groups to fund prevention programs for youth, anti- violence, and diversity issues. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Nearly 100 years ago, Colorado law created a process for the seizure of illegal contraband used in or gained from criminal activity. The intent is to deter crime and to have criminals help defray the costs of policing. State statutes specify that th roceed om yebe used for law enforcement purposes, and require that gov b ity Cf the seizing agency (Police Services) appropriate these procee s to supplement the setztng agency's budget or forfeit the proceeds to the general fund of the State of Colorado. The Colorado Supreme Court and United I States Supreme Court have consistently upheld the constitutionality of these statutes. Checks and Balances: Colorado statutes also create a Forfeiture Committee consisting of the Mayor, District Attorney and Chief of Police. The Committee oversees and approves the seizure budget and spending decisions made by the Chief of Police. The local forfeiture Committee met on April 12, 2000 and approved the 2000 Seizure Fund budget. DATE: June 6, ITEM NUMBER: 13 All seizures are approved in advance by the Commander of the Investigations Division. Seizures are based upon articulated probable cause, not mere suspicion. They are reviewed by the District Attorney's asset forfeiture specialist, and are always accompanied by criminal charges. A judge approves each filing as demonstrating probable cause and being in compliance with the seizure statute. The defendant is served with a written notice, including an affidavit detailing the probable cause and a clear advisement of legal rights and procedures for exercising due process. The defendant is entitled to both a preliminary hearing on the criminal charges and a civil trial concerning the seizure and forfeiture action. Police Services maintains a detaile toy PiAY eizures, which requires close tracking and careful docume ntation iy Fort Collins Police Services Officer with authority to spend'the seio Chief of Police are approved by the Forfeiture Committee. Staff is confident that it demonstrates exceptional care, responsibility, and fairness in these matters. The Larimer County District Courts have consistently upheld the activities of Fort Collins Police Services in seizing crime-related property whenever such seizures have been challenged in civil court proceedings. Two documents are attached. The first is the "1999 Annual Seizure Fund Report", outlining the 1999 seizure fund expenditures and income. The second document shows the 2000 budget, which has been approved by th i d ent shows a breakdown of anticipated expenditures for 2 , 0, if ppro n ' pp Iu by Council.