FORFEITURE RECORDS OFTEN DIFFICULT, COSTLY TO OBTAIN

(New Bedford) -- Gaining access to records on how much drug forfeiture
money flows into law enforcement coffers and how it is spent can be
difficult.

The Standard-Times has tracked down information about state and
federal forfeitures in an effort to understand how the law works, how
much money it diverts into law enforcement coffers and how that money
is expended.

Last spring, after the Bristol County district attorney refused to
detail how much money his office received, The Standard-Times filed a
request under the state's Freedom of Information Act with the state
treasurer's office for records detailing the flow of money in and out
of all the state's district attorney's offices.

But the treasurer's office did not have records showing specifically
how that money was spent.

State law requires district attorneys to file reports with the House
and Senate committees on ways and means on the percentage of drug
forfeiture funds spent on rehabilitation, treatment and other
anti-drug or neighborhood crime watch programs. But both the House and
Senate committees refused to release those reports to the newspaper.

Owen Eagen, a spokesman in the office of state Sen. Mark C.W.
Montigny, D-New Bedford, chairman of the Senate Ways and Means
Committee, said the committee was exempt from the Freedom of
Information Act.

Kim Rezendes, communications director for the House Ways and Means
Committee, said individuals seeking that information would have to get
it from their local district attorneys. Even lawmakers not on the
committee would not be granted access to the report, she asserted.

"I'm not going to get into that with you," she said, when asked about
details in the filings.

Ms. Rezendes said the committee's budget analysts look over the
reports, but do not spend much time with them.

"We're not talking a lot of money here," she said.

Both Ms. Rezendes and Mr. Eagen said decisions about whether to
release information about the reports should come from individual
district attorney's offices.

The Standard-Times then filed requests under the Freedom of
Information Act with all 11 district attorneys in the state. Although
some offices took longer than the 10 days outlined in the public
access law to comply, all said they would. However, Bristol, Worcester
and Middlesex district attorneys cited state statues allowing them to
charge for their time. Bristol presented the newspaper with a $554
bill along with the requested information.

Middlesex and Worcester asked for payment up front -- Middlesex asked
for $844 and Worcester County District Attorney John Conti's office
asked for $126. Mr. Conti's office took two months to reply, despite
six telephone calls from the newspaper.

Bristol County District Attorney Paul F. Walsh Jr. said his chief
financial officer spent 17 hours compiling the information, while
newly elected Middlesex District Attorney Martha Coakley said the
request would take at least 24 hours of her chief financial officer's
time at a billing rate of $34.15 an hour.

Taking over the office midway through the fiscal year was hectic, she
said. That, combined with the hundreds of requests from the press and
public for information, left the office feeling swamped.

"I do not get a budget from the Statehouse to respond to these
things," she added.