In the aftermath of the Metro Gang Strike Force scandal, the Legislature is swirling with proposals to dramatically change the rules governing forfeiture -- the process by which the government takes possession of property and cash seized by police.
Some of the proposals are being written with an eye toward curbing what some see as a "treasure hunt mentality" that they say the law has fostered within too many law enforcement agencies.
Meanwhile, another draft bill would immediately shut down the Strike Force advisory board, which has continued to meet and incur significant legal expenses, five months after the force was disbanded.
The debate by lawmakers over forfeitures is likely to center on whether the misconduct of Strike Force officers was an aberration or indicative of systemic problems allowed by a flawed law.
The proposals, if they advance to become bills, also would likely spark debate over how cities and counties will continue to fund law enforcement agencies, since forfeited funds can be an important source of revenue.
One proposal would allow cash and property to be seized for evidence but not to be forfeited unless prosecutors get a criminal conviction.
With majorities in the state House and Senate, DFLers have the political muscle to pass significant changes, assuming they can coalesce. But they're also aware of the need to pass measures that will not be vetoed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty. Early signs are that some proposals could get at least some GOP support.
Brian McClung, Pawlenty's deputy chief of staff, said the governor supports state Department of Public Safety Commissioner Michael Campion's proposal to increase oversight and accountability over drug and gang task forces. In an e-mail to the Star Tribune, McClung added, "We are willing to consider other proposals that may be drafted by legislators, but we would need to see bill language before weighing in on those ideas."