BOARD BALKS AT REVERSING DARE CUTS

Despite criticism by some law enforcement officials, a state board that
voted to cut hundreds of thousands of dollars in DARE anti-drug education
funding stuck by its decision Friday.

Oklahoma's need for a statewide criminal history computer network takes
priority over helping cities and counties start DARE -- Drug Abuse
Resistance Education -- programs, several board members said.

"We made a hard decision, and now we need to move forward," said board
Chairman Malcom Atwood, director of the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and
Dangerous Drugs Control.

The 18-member Drug and Violent Crime Grant Board, which has $6 million in
federal grant money to award, received applications from local and state
agencies seeking more than $13 million.

Atwood said it's frustrating that the board can't fund all worthwhile
endeavors, but the board felt compelled to deal with technology and
communication needs next year.

"If we do that, we can't fund something," he said.

Atwood's comments came after Stillwater Police Chief Norman McNickle, a
board member who missed the DARE vote, questioned the decision.

McNickle complained that the board was taking money generally given to
communities and pumping it into state agencies.

But nonvoting board member Richard Kirby, deputy counsel in Gov. Frank
Keating's office, said all law enforcement agencies would benefit from the
change in priorities.

Oklahoma's criminal history computer network is "so far behind the curve ...
of other states' that it's getting pretty scary," Kirby said.

When police, sheriff's deputies and district attorneys come in contact with
an offender, they often don't get a complete picture of the person's
background because of inadequate computer records, he said.

"Right now, the Legislature is not in the mood to fund computer systems ...
so we have to look to other means."

For more than a decade, the board has awarded communities grants to pay DARE
officers who teach children about the dangers of drugs, gangs and violence.
Nearly $700,000 was awarded to more than 20 police and sheriff's departments
this fiscal year.

But next year, the board plans to cut DARE funding, except for up to
$155,000 to keep the state DARE training center open.

The training center is critical because it will serve police and sheriff's
departments that find alternative DARE funding, said board member Jerry
Regier, director of the state Office of Juvenile Affairs.

Part of the board's thinking is that communities can fund DARE programs
through other grant programs, such as education funds earmarked for drug-
and violence-free schools, Atwood said.

However, board member Gayle Jones, the state Education Department's safe and
drug-free schools coordinator, said such funds are scarce, particularly for
a program like DARE.

"Right now, schools are more concerned about security devices and safety,"
Jones said.

McNickle voiced concern about DARE programs threatened by a lack of money.

"Is there no provision made for continuation of programs that we already
started?" he asked. "Are we just going to cut them all?"

While chopping DARE funding, the board has committed to spend $1.8 million,
or 30 percent of its grant funds, on the criminal history network.

Five state bodies -- the Criminal Justice Resource Center, the Office of
Juvenile Affairs, the Corrections Department, the Public Safety Department
and the District Attorneys Council -- have submitted computer system grant
applications totaling $2.3 million.

Rusty Featherstone, the OSBI's director of information systems, outlined the
network's benefits for police agencies:

Rather than making five paper copies of a suspect's fingerprints and mailing
them to state and federal agencies, an officer will take the print
electronically and immediately make it available over the network,
Featherstone said.

At the same time, the network should provide more complete criminal history
records.

Whereas now, an arrest might show up on someone's state record -- with no
hint of the disposition -- the new system should give a complete accounting
of how the case turned out, he said. For example, if a noncustodial parent
were arrested on a kidnapping complaint but never charged or convicted, it
would be recorded.

"That final disposition is sitting in a courthouse somewhere," Featherstone
said, "but we're going to share all that information so everybody knows the
complete, accurate and timely story."