Resolution in Support of S.2671 An Act Relative to Forfeiture Reform and S.2105 An Act Relative to Civil Asset Forfeiture Data Reporting. President Flynn in the Chair. On motion of Councilor Mejia, Rule 12 was invoked to include Councilors Arroyo and Lara as a co-sponsor. On motion of Councilors Mejia, Arroyo and Lara, the rules were suspended; the resolution was adopted.
Numbers 059 for council and me here or for the following resolution in support of Senate 2671 An act relative to forfeiture reform and Senate 2105 enact relative to civil asset forfeiture data reporting. Thank you. The chair recognizes. Counsel me here. Counsel may hear you over the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to suspend Rule 12 and add Counselor Arroyo and Laura as original co-sponsors. Hearing no objection. Counselor Arroyo and Counsel Laura are so out of it. Thank you. In March, the Committee on Government Accountability and Transparency and Accessibility held its maiden hearing on Docket 0200 in order for a hearing on government accountability, transparency and accountability towards surveillance equipment. We learned a lot regarding the purchasing of the cell site simulator and how it's used and what the process is in regards to civil asset forfeiture dollars are in how they're used. We also walked away with a greater sense of knowledge about the current state of civil asset forfeiture across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. According to the Institute of Justice. Massachusetts earns an F for its civil forfeiture laws with the lowest bar to forfeiture, poor protections for the innocent and a large profit incentives. We have to do better. Fortunately, there is legislation at the state level that seeks to make an impact. An act relative to forfeiture reform will require the attorney general, each district attorney and each police department to file an annual report with the Executive Office of Administration and Finance and the House and Senate Committees on Ways and Means detailing all assets moneys proceeds from the assets seized pursuant to the Section. An Act relative to the relative to civil asset forfeiture data reporting will require the State Treasurer to establish and maintain a case tracking system and searchable public website. That includes, among other things, name of the law enforcement agency that seized the property, date of the seizure type of property, seize estimated value of the seizure, the outcome of the suspect's arrest and more. These are small changes that will by no means fix everything wrong with our civil asset forfeiture policies. But they are a start in the right direction that has a positive impact on the state of government accountability, transparency and accessibility. I'd like to thank Alex MATTHEWS for bringing these these pieces of legislation to our attention, as well as Fatima Muhammad Muhammad and Kate Crawford for their tireless work in seeking transparency and accountability. I move that we suspend the rules and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this resolution. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Here. The chair recognizes Counselor Arroyo. Counsel Arroyo. You have the floor. Thank you, President Flynn. At civil asset forfeiture in Massachusetts has the. Is the sole one in the entire country with 50 states where the only one in which you can seize assets just on the basis of probable cause, which is the lowest form and the lowest bar. And so, you know, civil asset forfeiture has a number of issues, including the fact that we can seize assets when there was no charges brought. We can seize assets even in cases that end up dismissed or where a jury ultimately finds them not guilty. And in the state that has occurred in multiple jurisdictions, this doesn't address that. This doesn't change the bar. This also doesn't create any restrictions on where and how that money is used. The only thing that this does is create transparency in the data of what assets are seized, when they are seized, and what cases are they seized and how they are spent. But it doesn't in any way, shape or form impact the bar to seize them or the process to seize them. Nor does it change in any way the decision making and the processes that allow that money to be spent in whatever way they they need to spend it. Obviously, those are reforms that I would support and look forward to seeing happen, but this doesn't do that. What this does is it says when and where we are seizing assets, when and how we are seizing assets should be transparent to the public. We should be able to see those things. We should be able to know what cases they come from. We should be able to know how they are spent. We should be able to know ultimately what the outcome of those charges, if there are charges are. And I think that transparency is a good thing for the Commonwealth, especially in light of the fact that we are the only state that allows those seizures at a probable cause standard. And so with that, I have I'm happy to sponsor this and look forward to seeing appropriate action and support of Senate Bill 2671. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel Arroyo. The Chair recognizes counsel avira counsel Lara U of the fore. Thank you, President Flynn, and thank you to my co-sponsors. I have very little to say for two reasons. One, because my colleagues have outlined the importance of this bill and this resolution so very clearly. And two, because I have been out since seven in the morning and I'm running out of steam. I am incredibly supportive of this matter. When we held our hearing on the purchase of the cell site simulator by the Boston Police Department. I had all of these questions and it became very obvious that there was policy changes that needed to happen at the state level in terms of what we could do to reform civil asset forfeiture. And so I'm excited to support this resolution. I'm excited to support this bill. And my counsel mentioned, I hope that it's gathering this data and having the information is only going to give us everything that we need to make sure that further reform comes down the line. Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Laura, the chair recognizes counsel. Florida counsel. Florida, you have the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you to the sponsors, and I appreciate the clarification from our colleague, Counsel Arroyo. Those are just the questions that I had. And I guess the question for the chair of the makers, would they consider having a hearing as opposed to sort of a suspension, an adoption, so we can kind of break that down? I know the way it works now is that the the procedures divided, I believe, have go to the law enforcement agency and the other half goes to the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office. I think that's the way that it was always broken down. I've made efforts on this floor to try to have those funds or at least have treatment or recovery, be it sort of the third leg of that school, particularly at school, and particularly in instances where there was a it was a result of a drug forfeiture. But and they would resist it vehemently. Clearly, Boston police had their thoughts and ideas as to where they wanted to spend their forfeiture money. The district attorney's office thought that they had their ideas, but we always were pushing from this body to get treatment and recovery into that equation if we're going to seize those assets. And as a result of of the case involved drugs and alcohol, we felt that it should go to treatment or recovery. So I would love an opportunity to bring the appropriate parties down and have that discussion in terms of clearly how the forfeiture happens and the mindset behind it, but whether or not it makes sense to potentially maybe inject treatment or recovery into that equation once again. But again, that's just for the makers. I do appreciate the clarification and I look forward to see whether or not hearing makes appropriate sense. Thank you counsel far to just want to respond to counsel clarity counsel here counsel Flaherty asked if. As the original sponsor, would you consider a hearing order, not a resolution. Just want to recognize you. Counsel me here. So I don't I solo I have my co-sponsors to help to weigh in. You know, the fact of the matter is that this is something that's happening in the Senate. Right. And this is a resolution on the council floor in support of it. Right. That's one. And number two. We did have a hearing in regards to this conversation. So I do think that I just want to honor that that conversation is still being held in my committee. So there might be opportunities in the future to unpack specifically what you're talking about. But I just want to be really clear that this is a resolution in support of something that is at the House right now. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman here. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? Would anyone else like to add their name? Please raise your hand. Mr. Kirk. Please add Councilor Bullock. Councilor Braydon. Console illusion. Councilmember here is seeking suspension of the rules and adoption of Docket 0594. All those in favor say aye. Aye, aye. Opposing. The ayes have it. The docket has been adopted. Mr. Clerk, please read docket 05950595.