Prosecutor says city
wants office’s fund

Carlisle complains that the
Budget Department aims to gain
control of asset forfeiture money

By Gordon Y.K. Pang
Star-Bulletin

City Prosecutor Peter Carlisle is accusing the city administration of attempting to seize control of his only financial discretionary fund.

A similar move is proposed for the Police Department.

Meanwhile, line employees with the Motor Vehicles and Licensing Division of the Finance Department have spearheaded a petition against a reorganization move placing their section in a new Customer Service Department.

Carlisle is upset over a proposal that would allow the Budget Department to gain control over asset forfeiture monies under a new special fund.

He said the bill would allow Budget Director Malcolm Tom to designate money from that fund, estimated at about $476,470, to whatever means he saw fit. Police receive about $1.34 million from the department's forfeiture fund.

"Unless I'm greatly mistaken, he wasn't elected to run this office -- I was," Carlisle said.

"After listening to the testimony of the budget director, I have grave concerns about whether his theories on how to use this money would be in compliance (with state statutes)," he said.

Carlisle said his greatest fear is that the administration will assign the money to a fixed expense and find reason to push for a reduction in funding in other areas of his budget. He accused Tom of playing "a shell game" with the prosecutor's office.

Administration spokeswoman Carol Costa said there are no plans to recommend that the City Council reduce Carlisle's budget.

Costa said attorneys with the corporation counsel's office have deemed the move legal. Nonetheless, the Council sent the measure back to city attorneys for clearer interpretation.

Councilman Mufi Hannemann said Harris' proposal violates federal forfeiture laws.

A state attorney has issued an opinion that state and federal forfeiture funds must be kept separate, Hannemann said.

"In addition, the proposal lack(s) safeguards to prevent the use of forfeiture funds to replace appropriations normally made for law enforcement activities," he said in a release.

Employees with the Motor Vehicle branch are questioning the legality of Harris' planned move of their division into Customer Services.

Employees, in a petition signed by nearly 50 people, said the proposed merger "would contradict all local and state laws that require any revenue-collecting agency to be placed under the director of finance."

Instead of merging Motor Vehicles with Customer Services, satellite city halls should move into the Finance Department, they said.

Harris' plan calls for satellite city halls, Motor Vehicles and all other customer-oriented services to come under the Customer Services Department.

Finance Director Roy Amemiya said he's waiting to hear from city attorneys. "I think it's a move that makes sense and is overdue because we've had staffers reporting to different directors, and that's made it very tough for them."