HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08011989 - 1.61 1-®61
I , BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
�
FROM; Gary T. Yancey, District Attorney Contra
Richard K. Rainey, Sheriff-Coroner Costa
DATE; July 17 , 1989 Coi�/
SUBJECT: Accounting for Narcotics Forfeitures �� ��••11
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S ) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDED ACTION•
I . Direct the Auditor-Controller to establish two separate Special Revenue
Funds for narcotics assets forfeitures - one to be used by the District
Attorney and one to be used by the Sheriff-Coroner.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION:
Federal and State law, prior Board action and a local Memorandum of
Understanding, specify how narcotics forfeitures should be used by Contra
Costa County. On April 30 , 1986, the Board of Supervisors authorized the
County to participate `in the Federal Seiziad and Forfeited Property Program,
pursuant to the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. In compliance with
the U.S. Attorney General' s Guidelines, /your Boa`rd. adopted the policy that
federal narcotics forfeitures will be distributed according to federal law
and would be credited for use by the }district Attorney' s Office and Sheriff' s
Office to enhance law enforcement resources for the specific agency.
Assembly Bill 4162 (Chapter 1492, Statues of 1988) revised and delineated
State law regarding the seizure of assets involved in certain controlled.
substance offenses, their disbursement upon an order of forfeiture, and the
allowable uses of forfeited funds. The statue mandates that,. "All the funds
distributed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) shall not supplant
any state or local funds that would, in the absence of this subdivision, be
made available to support the law enforcement and prosecutorial. efforts of
these agencies. Funds so distributed shall be used by the law enforcement
and prosecutorial agencies exclusively to support law enforcement and
prosecutorial efforts of those agencies. The court shall order the
forfeiture proceeds distributed to the state, local, or state and local
government entities as provided in this section. For the purposes of this
section, ' :local governmental entity' means any city, county, or city and
county in this state. " (Emphasis added)
/ r
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: x YES SIGNATURE: /
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMME41DATION OF B ARD CO ITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE S :
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER _
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT; ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON-THE DATE SHOWN,
CC: CAO-Justice System Programs ATTESTED AUG 1 1989_
Sheriff-Coroner PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
District Attorney SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
County Auditor-Controller
V Y .f
BY
M382/7-83 � ' DEPUTY
�
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECONPdENDATION - continued
Currently, forfeiture distributions to County agencies are deposited in
revenue accounts that are not segregated from other funds. However, as noted
above, AB 4162 requires that all the funds distributed shall not supplant any
State or local funds, and funds so distributed must be used by the law .
enforcement and prosecutorial agencies exclusively to support law enforcement
and prosecutorial efforts of those agencies.
The Sheriff-Coroner and the District Attorney are jointly requesting approval
of the above recommendation. It has been discussed with the
Auditor-Controller' s Office, which concurs that the recommendation will
enhance compliance with the law.
CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County' s method of accounting for forfeited funds does not insure that
the forfeitures will be used only for purposes authorized by law. Without
separate revenue funds, unused 'forfeiture funds will not automatically be
carried over into the next year. There is greater likelihood that narcotics
forfeitures would be commingled with other monies (e.g. , the general fund) ,
so that their use would be contrary to law. Without the safeguards of
separate forfeiture Revenue funds, the County is increasing its liability in
federal and state audits for forfeiture funds. Failure to approve the Funds
and improve fiscal accountability will also undermine the agreement made with
the cities, which now gives the County part of their forfeitures guaranteed
by statute, for very specific County drug enforcement and prosecution
purposes.
ANSF2.ORD