KANSAS LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS OPPOSE REFORM FORFEITURE BILL

TOPEKA -- Kansas law enforcement officials on Monday strongly opposed a
reform forfeiture bill that would send money seized in drug cases to education.

Currently, law enforcement agencies can keep most of the money once it is
legally confiscated.

Law enforcement officials told the House Judiciary Committee that if their
agencies were not allowed to keep drug money, forfeitures could become
extinct in Kansas.

"The question becomes, why would a local law enforcement agency seize
property for forfeiture, subject themselves to additional investigations,
hearings, and possible civil liability when they do not receive any of the
proceeds?" asked Dan Dunbar, Douglas County assistant district attorney.
"The answer is, they will not."

About 25 persons attended the hearing on the bill sponsored by Rep. Ralph
Tanner, a Baldwin City Republican. Most were affiliated with law enforcement.

Tanner and Richard Hayes, representing the Kansas Bar Association,
testified in support of the bill, which also would require a conviction
before property or money could be forfeited.

Tanner and Hayes raised concerns that a person's property can be taken
under the current law even though the person is never convicted of a crime.

"It is immaterial whether the property owner is ever convicted, charged or
even accused of committing a criminal act," Hayes said. "It is immaterial
whether the property owner is, in fact, found innocent of the very criminal
conduct which is said to justify seizure."

Lawmakers raised concerns that if such a bill passed, law enforcement would
bypass state law and turn seized property over to the federal government.
Rep. Mike O'Neal, a Hutchinson Republican and committee chairman,
questioned how often law enforcement currently uses the federal government.

Written testimony from the Kansas Highway Patrol showed that the agency
received back more than $4.5 million from the federal government over three
recent years.

That could mean a loss of $900,000 or more to Kansas taxpayers, because
when the federal government takes a seizure from a state or local law
enforcement agency, it keeps at least 20 percent for processing.

Highway Patrol officials have said they routinely use the federal
government because it is easier to forfeit property under federal law. In
fact, only $96,000 was forfeited by the patrol under state law during the
same period.

"Why are we giving this money away?" Rep. Joe Shriver, an Arkansas City
Democrat, asked after the meeting. "It concerns me."

Shriver, who is on the appropriations committee, said he also is
questioning how drug money is being spent by state agencies.

For example, he said the attorney general's office had spent $87,000 in
drug money before the Legislature reviewed and approved it. Part of the
money was used to help pay the salaries of two attorneys who work on death
penalty cases for the attorney general.

Kyle Smith, director of public and governmental affairs for the Kansas
Bureau of Investigation, testified that law enforcement had done nothing
wrong in the way it handled and spent drug money.

Smith was asked about a case in which the KBI sent a letter to the attorney
of a drug offender requesting a payment of $63,000. If the offender refused
to pay the money, the letter promised that his home would be turned over to
the federal government for forfeiture.

Smith said the KBI has not attempted to forfeit a home in the last two years.