The Institute for Justice has a damning report showing that Missouri has been using a loophole in their civil forfeiture laws in order to funnel away monies from education and into law enforcement coffers.
Under a civil forfeiture loophole, Missouri law enforcement agencies have diverted millions of dollars in seized assets away from a fund for public schools, instead retaining those funds for their own use. A new report by the Missouri State Auditor found that police had seized over $6.2 million worth of property in 2016. Of those seizures, $2.7 million, or nearly 45 percent, were transferred to a federal agency. Less than $100,000—a mere two percent—was transferred to the state to benefit public education, in accordance with Missouri state law. Auditors also reported that less than half of all seizures were accompanied by criminal charges.
Missouri is one of a handful of states that mandates forfeiture monies be used strictly for schools. It’s in the state’s Constitution.
Section 7. All real estate, loans, and investments now belonging to the various county and township school funds, except those invested as hereinafter provided, shall be liquidated without extension of time, and the proceeds thereof and the money on hand now belonging to said school funds of the several counties and the city of St. Louis, shall be reinvested in registered bonds of the United States, or in bonds of the state or in approved bonds of any city or school district thereof, or in bonds or other securities the payment of which are fully guaranteed by the United States, and sacredly preserved as a county school fund. Any county or the city of St. Louis by a majority vote of the qualified electors voting thereon may elect to distribute annually to its schools the proceeds of the liquidated school fund, at the time and in the manner prescribed by law. All interest accruing from investment of the county school fund, the clear proceeds of all penalties, forfeitures and fines collected hereafter for any breach of the penal laws of the state, the net proceeds from the sale of estrays, and all other moneys coming into said funds shall be distributed annually to the schools of the several counties according to law.
Seems pretty clear. However, that’s not how it’s been used for quite some time now. Here’s a Missouri Law Review from 1992 on the matter.
There are two types of forfeiture procedures provided for under the federal act. The type and amount of property involved determines which procedure applies. Either procedure is available to local law enforcement if they allow a federal agency like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) to adopt the forfeiture. Federal adoption of a state forfeiture allows state law enforcement to avoid state forfeiture laws. Missouri law mandates that the proceeds of forfeiture be directed to schools rather than law enforcement agencies.' By using federal adoption, local law enforcement agencies have been able to evade Missouri law and keep the forfeited funds for their own use rather than direct funds to schools.
The way it works is that local law enforcement seizes something: your car, cash, home. But, if they seize it as a state forfeiture, any potential proceeds must go to schools. So those local police find a federal agency (i.e. the DEA or FBI) to “adopt” the forfeiture. Now, both the federal agency and state agency can divvy up the proceeds between themselves and those schools can go panhandle for lunch money. There’s good and bad news here.
The good news is that there is a Republican with the unfortunate name Shamed Dogan who has proposed HB 231, a bill promising to curb the the equitable sharing between state and federal agencies on forfeitures under $100,000. The bad news is that bill seems a bit toothless.
On Tuesday, the Missouri House of Representatives is expected to hold a hearing on a bill that would curtail equitable sharing. Introduced by Rep. Shamed Dogan, HB 231would ban law enforcement from transferring or referring seized property to a federal agency, unless the property involves cash in amounts over $100,000. Dogan’s legislation would not prevent law enforcement from seizing contraband or property believed to be “the proceeds or instruments of a crime.”
While potentially cutting down some of the egregious funneling of potential school funds to law enforcement, this bill still leaves the basically corrupt practice of unregulated civil asset forfeiture in place.
