CRIME FUNDS WILL BE REVIVED IN NEXT SESSION, LAWMAKERS SAY

JEFFERSON CITY -- Legislators will try again in the next session to reinstate crime reduction funds used by many rural counties to supplement law enforcement budgets.

An amendment authorizing such funds was part of an omnibus crime bill approved by the Missouri General Assembly last spring but vetoed by Gov. Mel Carnahan.

The Senate voted Sept. 15 to override the veto, but the effort died in the House of Representatives.

"I predict we will be able to pass the crime reduction fund as a stand alone bill next session," said Rep. Mark Richardson, R-Poplar Bluff.

Prior to last year, many rural counties had such funds. Judges could order criminal defendants to pay into the funds as part of sentencing.

However, the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges ruled no legal authorization existed for counties to create the funds.

While some counties simply used the funds to support additional crime-fighting programs, many poorer counties relied on the money for basic operations.

The governor cited the fund provision as his reason for vetoing the bill. He said it could give the appearance that defendants could purchase probation.

Rep. Phillip Britt, D-Kennett, said he will file a modified crime reduction fund bill.

"We anticipate talking to the governor's office over the next few weeks about what they can live with," Britt said. "I think we can reach a compromise."

Britt filed the original crime reduction fund bill in the House last year, where it passed. However, the legislation got bogged down in the Senate and was added to the overall crime bill.

Sen. Harold Caskey, D-Butler, led the Senate override effort , which passed 24-8. Caskey, a power in the Capitol, was livid when no House member made a motion to consider the override.

"They insulted the Senate and I can't get back at them because in two years they'll all be gone," Caskey said during floor debate last Thursday, referring to the mandatory term limits soon to take effect.

Caskey accused the bill's House handler, Rep. Kelly Parker, D-Salem, of going back on an agreement to make a motion on the veto in exchange for a promised judicial appointment from Carnahan. Both Parker and the governor's staff denied the allegation.

Britt said neither he, Parker nor any other bill supporter made the motion to override because it was clear the votes weren't there for the effort to be successful.

"By our best count we were about 20 votes short," Britt said. "Without the votes there was no sense in making a motion, voting again and wasting our time."

The failed measure included a variety of provisions, including those which would have allowed former police officers, judges and prosecutors to carry concealed weapons; broadened the scope of the charge of felony stealing; allowed for the names of habitual sex offenders to be posted on a state Web site; banned smoking in prisons; increased oversight of local law enforcement agencies involved in federal forfeitures; and required exotic dancers to be at least 21 years old.

Richardson said because of the wide scope of the overall bill many legislators didn't like it for different reasons.

While those concerns might not have been great enough to keep them from supporting it the first time, overriding a veto was another story, particularly for Carnahan's fellow Democrats, he said.

"Typically, such a complex bill would not be overridden," Richardson said.