Palmer council contemplates forgoing drug-related funding

PALMER - Approving the city budget in smaller cities is generally not fraught with as many high-profile decisions as in larger metropolitan areas. But sometimes, budgetary proceedings bring a few surprises.

The Palmer City Council, at its Tuesday meeting, approved the city's 2001 budget, but it nearly was approved without two funding sources some cities have come to think of as integral to funding their police departments - drug enforcement funds obtained from the seizure and sale of property belonging to people convicted of drug-related offenses, and a narcotics grant funded primarily through the federal government with a matching portion from the local government.

Councilman Joe Lawton, citing beliefs that drug-enforcement funds and the narcotics grant program are for profit and have adverse effects on the communities which take part in them, proposed at the council's Dec. 12 meeting to strike both revenue sources from the city's budget.

"I just think it's a bad program and it doesn't work," Lawton said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "I don't want one more reason to lock our teen-agers up."

Palmer Finance Director Allan Ossakow said Wednesday that drug- seizure funds vary substantially, but the city has around $50,000 accumulated - some of which has been carried over from previous years.

That money, he said, generally goes toward equipment purchases which are not generally covered by general fund dollars, and toward the 25-percent matching portion of the narcotics grant.

The narcotics grant, he said, provides funding for the position of an officer who works with the Mat-Su Drug Team. The total grant budgeted for 2001 is just over $30,000, including the local match portion.

Lawton's motion was seconded by councilman Tony Pippel, who, in previous council meetings, has encouraged the city of Palmer to abstain from involvement with the Mat-Su Drug Team, specifically in cases of marijuana violations.

At the Dec. 12 meeting, Pippel spoke in favor of Lawton's motion, and stated that the rate of drug use in the United States has increased since the war on drugs began.

A lively discussion ensued, with other council members speaking against the motion. Councilman Jim Cooper charged that council meetings were not the appropriate forum for personal opinions, and said council members are elected to represent the people of Palmer and uphold the law, which includes laws pertaining to the illegality of misusing controlled substances.

Councilman John Combs said he spoke with a member of the Palmer Police Department, who said one officer's position is 80-percent funded by the narcotics grant. That officer, he explained, spends part of his time with the drug-enforcement team and part of it on regular community patrol.

Losing that funding, Combs said, would mean the city would not take part in the activities of the Mat-Su Drug Team.

Palmer City Manager Tom Healy said Wednesday that the city would be affected in other ways by rejecting participation on the drug-enforcement team.

"There's a benefit in participating, in that we have access to additional resources . . . in [drug-related] cases that we wouldn't have if we were not participating," Healy said.

Healy said refusing the funding would also mean the salary of the officer who takes part in the drug-enforcement team would be paid by the city, not by a grant.

"One of our positions is essentially paid for by the program," he said, "and we would have to bring the funding for that back into the department."

That is, if the city were to maintain its current number of officers.

Lawton said he didn't feel that was a big issue, since the officer paid for under that grant is not actually monitoring the city anyway - his duties take him all over the borough, not just inside the city limits. Lawton said Palmer could use the extra personnel within the city limits.

"We've got plenty to take care of right here," he said.

Palmer Police Sgt. Thomas Remaley was not pleased that the issue had even come up before the council. He lauded the program and what it did for the police department, noting that officers who participate gain a lot of expertise in drug-enforcement issues, which, in turn, helps make the force more effective.

"There's a problem with drugs in this Valley," he said, "and to take the grant position away so we don't have the manpower to deal with it and the expertise to deal with it - that's a tragedy."

Remaley added that money from the seizure fund also comes in handy.

"We get seizure money back," he said, "and that helps us offset our budget so we can buy equipment."

When the matter went to a vote, it failed narrowly, with Lawton, Pippel and councilwoman Diana Long in favor of removing the two funds from the budget, and Combs, councilman Brad Hanson, Mayor Henry Guinotte and councilman Jim Cooper against removing the funding.

Lawton, when asked whether the issue would come before the council again, said simply: "Look at the vote."