LAW MAKES FORFEITURES A HOT POTATO

Utah's State Treasurer Knows Money, How To Transfer, Liquidate And Account
For It. But Cars?

Ready or not, the state is about to receive a quarter of a million in cash,
automobiles and other property seized by police in connection with crimes.
Along with those proceeds, says Salt Lake County Attorney David Yocom, the
state can carry the burden of prosecuting forfeiture cases.

"Our agencies have nothing to gain by doing forfeitures," Yocom says. "In
fact there is a disincentive for doing them when you consider costs we
suffer and can no longer recoup under the law."

Police and prosecutors have held on to forfeiture profits, waiting for a
court ruling on how to interpret conflicting state laws. But what started
as a "friendly" legal battle has turned into a test of wills between Yocom
and Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff.

Tired of being painted as having broken the law, Yocom has opted against
appealing a district judge's decision to uphold Initiative B, a
voter-approved act that prohibits police and prosecutors from pocketing
forfeiture profits. In addition, he has agreed to hand over about $30,000
worth of seized property awarded law enforcement agencies in Salt Lake
City, Midvale and West Valley City since March 2001, when Initiative B went
into effect.

"We didn't break the law, we tested it. I'm just the spear catcher," says
Yocom, who is washing his hands of forfeiture cases and suggests the
Attorney General pick up the work of investigating and prosecuting them.
The Statewide Prosecutors Association will discuss the matter at its next
board meeting, he says.

Shurtleff, who defended Initiative B in court, wasn't available for comment
Thursday.

But news that prosecutors want to delegate their duties doesn't sit well
with Kirk Torgensen, Chief Deputy Attorney General. "They haven't called me
or had one bit of discussion about that. Are they going to kick in money?
How's the AG's office going to be able to afford to do forfeiture work if
they can't?"

Torgensen says the "whole mess" illustrates what's wrong with the citizens'
initiative, which Shurtleff is lobbying to amend.

The law was intended to remove the profit incentive from forfeitures and
prevent police from zealously impounding the cars or seizing the property
of innocent third parties in criminal cases. Now, forfeiture proceeds go to
crime victims and schools.

Torgensen and Yocom do agree on something: not allowing police and
prosecutors to at least recoup the cost of investigating these cases is
like handing the cash-strapped agencies an unfunded mandate. And
forfeitures are an important crime-fighting tool. Without it "Utah will
fast become a state where crime pays," says Torgensen.

A prime example of the district attorneys' dilemma is the cost associated
with impounding seized cars on private lots. "Cars are a tough, expensive
item to store," says Yocom. "So rather than subject agencies to the
liability, it's probably better that the state store them."

State Treasurer Ed Alter welcomes the "old junkers."

Beaver County dropped off three seized cars earlier this month and Alter
had them towed to Surplus Property, which sold them. The proceeds, $8,500,
will go into the Uniform School Fund.

"These procedures have been in place since Initiative B passed," says
Alter. "Money is real easy for us, and Surplus Property can handle any
oddball thing that shows up, even defunct road graters."