COUNCILORS WANT MORE CONTROL OVER DRUG FUND

Reports Asked On Use Of Money Seized In Raids

LOWELL --The state law regarding drug forfeiture accounts run by
Lowell's police superintendent should be changed to allow for more
public control of the money, city councilors said this week.

Following a report by The Sun that found $500,000 from two accounts
controlled by Police Superintendent Edward F. Davis III has been used
to buy everything from food to new cruisers since 1995, city
councilors said they should have more input in how the money is spent.

"I'm upset that there is little to no accountability. That law was
loosely written," said Councilor Richard Howe. "Too much money was
spent on travel, and too little money was spent on equipment."

The council last night voted unanimously to ask for more oversight and
accountability over the use of the money. The council will get monthly
reports from City Auditor James Kennedy on how money from the Law
Enforcement Trust fund is used.

Davis, by law, controls two funds that hold cash received by the
Police Department by seizing assets from drug raids. The city receives
80 percent of the money from federal operations, and Davis needs
approval to use money from that fund. But when the money comes from a
state investigation, Lowell receives half of the assets, and Davis
does not need approval to use that fund.

The chief said he has no problem with the increased oversight voted by
the city council.

"Everyone is acting like this is some big secret fund, it isn't,"
Davis said. "For the past three years I've given the council annual
reports on the fund."

Councilors interviewed this week said they want more checks on
spending the money.

"The minute funds become public funds, there has to be some public
scrutiny," said Councilor Armand Mercier. "I don't think any public
funds should be at the discretion solely of one individual."

Since 1995, Davis has spent $311,000 from the state fund. He told The
Sun that all expenditures from the fund (which currently holds
$62,000) are reported to the city auditor.

Councilor Rodney Elliott, like many of his colleagues, said that is
not enough oversight.

"I think the legislation needs to be changed," Elliott said. "It's all
taxpayers' money that's used to generate these forfeitures and
seizures, and we as an elected body should represent the issues of the
taxpayers who fund the Police Department."

The sponsor of the motion passed last night providing for increased
oversight over the expendutures, Councilor Edward "Bud" Caulfield,
said Davis wasn't "frugal" enough with the money in the accounts.

"He could go out and have a catered meal of Chinese food or whatever
he wants at any local establishment," Caulfield said. "I think that
local elected officials should be kept abreast of the level of police
funds the city has."

Some councilors said in interviews that they want direct control over
the fund.

"We have to look to see if there is any way the city side can have a
better way to manage the fund," said Councilor Rithy Uong. "It would
be a great asset to the city, but we have to refer to the law."

Current state law gives the police chief sole authority over the fund.
Most city councilors say they should have approval of
expenditures.

"I think the elected body should always have oversight of the
expenditure of public monies," said Councilor Bill Martin.

By having final approval on expenditures, a strong-willed City Council
could essentially take over the fund by rejecting requests is sees as
unsuitable. Many councilors, for example, are upset with they consider
to be a high amount of out-of-state travel by police officials.

Councilor Rita Mercier said if the chief came before the council and
asked to use money from the fund to send five officers to Seattle for
a five-day conference, she'd shoot down the request.

"What's wrong with that? Why do they have to be there five days? Why
is it always the chief that goes?" Mercier said. "We have nine people
to deal with. Maybe he won't spend it so frivolously. This is another
layer of bureaucracy."

Martin said a change in the law to allow council approval wouldn't
necessarily usurp the chief's authority, but it would place attention
on an important area of city government.

"I don't know if it's a power grab, but we've seen large increases in
the police budget over the last few years, so naturally there's going
to be more sensitivity in that department," Martin said.

"I don't think we would be micromanaging the police department. It's
just an issue of accountability, and where will the money be better
spent," Elliott said.

Councilor Dan Tenczar said he would like to see the money used for a
new crime lab, for example, but he has even broader ideas for the
funds. He said he would like to see the money available for all of
city government.

"Why shouldn't the city benefit from things that effect the community,
instead of just one department," Tenczar said. "I think it should be
changed so the community would benefit."

For the council to change any current facet of the use of the state
fund, it would need to have the law amended on the state level. Lowell
legislators said they would support changing the law.

"I wouldn't have any problem with that at all. You're talking a lot of
money here, and you have to have oversight and accountability," said
Rep. David Nangle. "I don't think anybody should have the
responsibility to have that sort of money in accounts without having
to go to somebody."

Sen. Steven Panagiotakos said he would also favor a change in the law.
"I don't think anybody should have any opposition to more local
oversight," he said.

Panagiotakos said instead of making a wholesale amendment to the
current law, the city's best bet may be to try getting an exception
through a home-rule petition. He said he isn't entirely sure such
legislation is legal, but if so it would be the easiest route to passage.

"If the substance of it is allowable to be a home-rule petition,
that's always easier. I don't see where the legalities would be where
you couldn't do that, but I'd wait for a legal opinion," Panagiotakos
said.

Davis, who attended the council meeting, said he supports the motions
calling for additional oversight.

"Everyone is acting like this is some big secret fund, it isn't,"
Davis said. "For the past three years I've given the council annual
reports on the fund."

Christopher Scott of The Sun staff contributed to this report.