A G E N D A. Dakota County Board of Commissioners General Government and Policy Committee of the Whole

Transcription

1 A G E N D A Dakota County Board of Commissioners General Government and Policy Committee of the Whole April 9, :30 AM (or following County Board meeting) Conference Room 3A, Administration Center, Government Center, Hastings, MN 1. Call To Order And Roll Call Note: Any action taken by this Committee of the Whole constitutes a recommendation to the County Board. 2. Audience Anyone in the audience wishing to address the Committee on an item not on the agenda or an item on the consent agenda may come forward at this time. Comments are limited to five minutes. 3. Approval Of Agenda (Additions/Corrections/Deletions) 4. Introduction Of New Employees CONSENT AGENDA 5. County Administration - Approval Of Minutes Of Meeting Held On March 12, 2019 And Special Meeting Held On March 19, County Board/County Administration 6.1 County Administration INFORMATION - Update On 2019 National Association Of Counties Achievement Award Applications 7. Operations, Management And Budget 7.1 Information Technology - Authorization To Execute Amendments To Contracts With Frontier Communications For Local And Long Distance Telephone And Faxing Services 8. County Board/County Administration REGULAR AGENDA 8.1 County Administration INFORMATION - Legislative Update 8.2 County Administration - Position On Legislation Amending Minnesota Forfeiture Law 9. County Manager's Report 10. Closed Session 10.1 Information Technology Closed Executive Session: Update On Information Security 11. Adjournment

2 April 9, 2019 Page 2 For more information, call Dakota County Board meeting agendas are available online at

3 DAKOTA COUNTY GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND POLICY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Meeting Minutes March 12, 2019 Conference Room 3A, Administration Center, Government Center, Hastings, MN 1. Call To Order And Roll Call Commissioner Mike Slavik Commissioner Kathleen A. Gaylord Commissioner Thomas A. Egan Commissioner Joe Atkins Commissioner Liz Workman Commissioner Mary Liz Holberg Commissioner Chris Gerlach Also in attendance: Matt Smith, County Manager; Jay Stassen, First Assistant County Attorney; and Jeni Reynolds, Sr. Administrative Coordinator to the Board. The meeting was called to order by Chair Gaylord at 10:54 a.m. 2. Audience Chair Gaylord asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to address the Committee of the Whole on an issue not on the agenda or to discuss an item on the consent agenda. No one came forward. 3. Approval Of Agenda (Additions/Corrections/Deletions) On a motion by Commissioner Liz Workman, seconded by Commissioner Chris Gerlach, the agenda was unanimously approved. 4. Introduction Of New Employees County Manager Matt Smith introduced John Thorson as the Assistant to the County Manager. CONSENT AGENDA On a motion by Commissioner Thomas A. Egan, seconded by Commissioner Mike Slavik, the consent agenda was unanimously approved as follows: 5. Approval Of Minutes Of Meeting Held On February 5, Operations, Management And Budget 6.1 Report On Budget Amendments, Contracts, And Year-End Estimates For Operations This item was on the agenda for informational purposes only. REGULAR AGENDA

4 March 12, 2019 Page 2 7. County Board/County Administration 7.1 Legislative Update Representatives from Stinson Leonard Street, County Manager Matt Smith, Commissioner Joe Atkins, Director of Community Services Kelly Harder, and Director of Transportation/County Engineer Mark Krebsbach briefed this item and responded to questions. Updates were provided to the Board on the following legislative topics: February Economic Forecast Legislative Schedule and Deadlines Governor s Bonding Bill National Association of Counties Legislative Conference Federal Update and Activities Progress of Dakota County Legislative Priorities Other Topics of Interest to Dakota County currently under discussion In addition, staff asked for direction on the prioritization of transportation projects for state and federal funding support. This item was on the agenda for informational purposes only. 8. Physical Development 8.1 Authorization To Add 1.0 Full-Time Employee Byllesby Dam Operator Position And Amend 2019 Byllesby Dam Operations Budget Water Resources Engineer Josh Petersen briefed this item and responded to questions. Josh gave a brief overview of the staffing plan for the Byllesby Dam. Motion: Mary Liz Holberg Second: Liz Workman WHEREAS, Dakota County owns the Lake Byllesby Dam and operates its hydroelectric facility under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission safety regulations; and WHEREAS, the County has been contracting dam operations through a formal operating agreement with Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, LLC (Eagle Creek); and WHEREAS, due to the scheduled installation of new turbines, staff has initiated discussion regarding transition from contractor-run operations to County staff-run operations; and WHEREAS, Eagle Creek provided a proposal for future operations at a rate of $415,000 per year, with annual inflationary increases; and WHEREAS, a cost analysis determined a transition to County staff-run operations would save $249,000 per year, and provide additional staff time devoted to the dam to complete maintenance and punch list items that have historically been deferred; and WHEREAS, a preliminary staffing plan developed to accommodate this transition included hiring 1.0 County fulltime equivalent (FTE) in 2019 to provide the necessary on-site supervision of the turbine installation process and to gain first-hand insight into turbine operations; and WHEREAS, this 1.0 County FTE was approved by the County Board as part of the 2019 County budget process, and the position was hired in February 2019; and

5 March 12, 2019 Page 3 WHEREAS, the original staffing plan anticipated Eagle Creek would continue to provide supplementary operational support to the County until the turbines were taken off-line, an additional 1.0 County FTE would be addressed as part of the 2020 County budget process once Eagle Creek s Operating Agreement was terminated, and additional hours would be supplemented by existing County staff; and WHEREAS, Eagle Creek no longer has the staff required to continue to adequately provide operational support, and the plan to hire this position needed to be advanced to fully address the operational needs of the dam. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Board of Commissioners hereby authorizes the creation of an additional 1.0 full-time equivalent Dam Operator position, effective March 12, 2019, to provide operational services at the Byllesby Dam; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the 2019 Byllesby Dam Operating Adopted Budget is hereby amended as follows: Expense Salary/Benefits (Based on 9 months) $65,823 Reduction of Contract ($55,000) Total Expense: $10,823 Revenue Use of Fund Balance $10,823 Total Revenue: $10,823 Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 9. Public Services And Revenue 9.1 Authorization To Execute Memorandum Of Understanding With City Of South St. Paul Regarding Library Study Director of Public Services and Revenue Tom Novak briefed this item and responded to questions. City of South St. Paul City Administrator Joel Hanson also responded to questions. Staff was directed by the Committee to continue to work with the City of South St. Paul and seek to answer more questions before signing a memorandum of understanding. This item was not voted upon and further discussion will be held at a future meeting. 10. County Manager's Report No manager's update. 11. Closed Executive Session No closed executive session was held. The item on Information Security was tabled to the April 9, 2019, General Government and Policy Committee due to meeting time constraints Update On Information Security 12. Adjournment On a motion by Commissioner Mike Slavik, seconded by Commissioner Thomas A. Egan, the meeting was adjourned at 1:00 p.m.

6 March 12, 2019 Page 4 Respectfully submitted, Jeni Reynolds Sr. Administrative Coordinator to the Board

7 DAKOTA COUNTY GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND POLICY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 1. Call To Order And Roll Call Commissioner Mike Slavik Commissioner Kathleen A. Gaylord Commissioner Thomas A. Egan Commissioner Joe Atkins Commissioner Liz Workman Commissioner Mary Liz Holberg Commissioner Chris Gerlach Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019 Conference Room L139, Western Service Center, Apple Valley, MN Also in attendance: Matt Smith, County Manager; Jay Stassen, First Assistant County Attorney; and Jeni Reynolds, Sr. Administrative Coordinator to the Board. The meeting was called to order by Chair Gaylord at 11:32 a.m. 2. Audience Chair Gaylord asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to address the Committee of the Whole on an issue not on the agenda or to discuss an item on the consent agenda. No one came forward. 3. Approval Of Agenda (Additions/Corrections/Deletions) On a motion by Commissioner Thomas A. Egan, seconded by Commissioner Mike Slavik, the agenda was unanimously approved. 4. County Board/County Administration 4.1 Legislative Update REGULAR AGENDA Commissioner Joe Atkins gave an overview of current legislative items and Commissioner Mike Slavik gave an overview of The Great River Rail Capital Funding Proposal. A capital funding request would support a number of rail projects, including the Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago Second Train. The Committee of the Whole chose to remain silent on this issue. No vote was taken. Physical Development Division Director Steve Mielke and Soil and Water District Manager Brian Watson gave information and requested feedback regarding a bill providing soil and water conservation districts with taxing authority that is before the legislature. The Soil and Water Conservation District Board has chosen not to take a position on this bill. The bill is opposed by both Association of Minnesota Counties and the League of Minnesota Cities. Feedback in the form of a motion was provided to staff. Resolution Of Opposition To Extending Levy Authority To Soil And Water Conservation Districts Motion: Thomas A. Egan Second: Liz Workman

8 March 19, 2019 Page 2 BE IT RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Board of Commissioners hereby oppose extending levy authority to Soil and Water Conservation Districts. Ayes: 6 Nays: 1 Mary Liz Holberg 4.2 Scheduling Of Special Dakota County General Government And Policy Committee Of The Whole Meetings Per the General Government and Policy Committee of the Whole this item was amended and moved to the County Board meeting on March 26, No vote was taken on this item. 5. County Manager's Report No manager's update. 6. Adjournment On a motion by Commissioner Mike Slavik, seconded by Commissioner Thomas A. Egan, the meeting was adjourned at 12:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jeni Reynolds Sr. Administrative Coordinator to the Board

9 DAKOTA COUNTY GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND POLICY COMMITTEE Update On 2019 National Association Of Counties Achievement Award Applications Meeting Date: 4/9/2019 Fiscal/FTE Impact: Item Type: Consent-Information None Other Division: County Administration/County Board Current budget Amendment requested Department: County Administration New FTE(s) requested Contact: Smith, Matt Board Goal: Excellence in public service Contact Phone: (651) Public Engagement Level: N/A Prepared by: Reynolds, Jennifer PURPOSE/ACTION REQUESTED Update the Committee on County programs which were submitted for 2019 National Association Of Counties (NACo) Achievement Awards. SUMMARY The annual Achievement Award Program is a non-competitive awards program which seeks to recognize innovative county government programs. Only county governments and state associations of counties are eligible to submit applications. By Resolution No (February 6, 1996), the County Board delegated the authority to approve NACo Achievement Award Applications to the County Manager. The following programs were submitted for 2019 NACo Achievement Awards: Video Directly Observed Therapy (VDOT) Volunteer and Intern Program Application abstracts are attached. RECOMMENDATION None; this item is for information only. EXPLANATION OF FISCAL/FTE IMPACTS None.

10 Supporting Documents: Previous Board Action(s): Attachment A: VDOT Abstract ; 2/6/96 Attachment B: Volunteer and Intern Program Abstract RESOLUTION Information only; no action requested. County Manager s Comments: Reviewed by (if required): Recommend Action County Attorney s Office Do Not Recommend Action Financial Services Reviewed---No Recommendation Risk Management Reviewed---Information Only Employee Relations Submitted at Commissioner Request Information Technology Facilities Management County Manager 4/4/2019 9:32 AM Page 2

11 NACO AWARD APPLICATION VIDEO DIRECTLY OBSERVED THERAPY (VDOT) PROGRAM TITLE: Video Directly Observed Therapy (VDOT) PROGRAM CATEGORY: Health ABSTRACT Protecting residents from communicable diseases is a core public health function and one that takes considerable time and resources. Dakota County Public Health Disease Prevention and Control developed an innovative program to use telemedicine to treat tuberculosis (TB) clients, saving time and money. This was the first program of its kind in Minnesota. The standard TB treatment is directly observed therapy (DOT) which is a daily visit by a nurse to monitor clients for side effects and ensure successful treatment of the TB. The use of telemedicine to deliver DOT was approved by Minnesota Department of Health in Dakota County researched and developed protocols to utilize this new technology. A comprehensive cost analysis study was conducted to estimate cost savings from implementing this program. Video DOT (VDOT) was estimated to save Dakota County more than $1,500 per client. Through collaboration with the Minnesota Department of Human Services, a telemedicine platform called Vidyo was adapted to be able to deliver VDOT for TB clients. County IT utilized OneDrive to set-up an alternative VDOT platform for saving and sharing videos. Public Health purchased two IPads to be used by clients without a personal device. Billing codes were added to the electronic medical record system and efforts to register as a telemedicine provider were successful. Public Health began a pilot program in early 2018 with great success. In the first six months, participation climbed to 55% (6 of 11 clients). Estimated cost savings of $1,750 per client for the initial three month pilot were found based on actual client data. This extrapolates to a conservative estimate of $7,000 in savings for the first year of the program. After one year into the program, 13 clients have participated and a one year cost analysis is currently being conducted. Feedback from staff and clients has been extremely positive and ongoing analysis has demonstrated significant savings in costs for staff time and mileage.

12 NACO AWARD APPLICATION VOLUNTEER AND INTERN PROGRAM PROGRAM TITLE: Volunteer and Intern Program PROGRAM CATEGORY: Volunteer ABSTRACT The Volunteer and Intern Program was launched in June 2015 to unite the county s efforts in maximizing the return on investment within our volunteering and internship opportunities and to create an easy access point for the public to get involved and to gather information about our programming. Prior to the formal program launch, information for volunteer and intern opportunities were communicated individually by each department leading to minimal public awareness, no set standards for reporting results, and little public engagement. The program works with more than ten departments in the county ranging from parks, libraries, environmental resources, community corrections, and public health. The volunteer program utilizes an online volunteer database to streamline all volunteer opportunities together and strategically place them in one program. This helps the county create unity and sets standards for each department to follow, while allowing for flexibility between each opportunity offered. By using an online database, county coordinators can stay in touch with any volunteer or intern in the county and it also provides a way for our volunteers and interns to stay connected to what the county is doing.

13 DAKOTA COUNTY GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND POLICY COMMITTEE Authorization To Execute Amendments To Contracts With Frontier Communications For Local And Long Distance Telephone And Faxing Services Meeting Date: 4/9/2019 Fiscal/FTE Impact: Item Type: Consent-Action None Other Division: Operations, Management and Budget Current budget Amendment requested Department: Information Technology New FTE(s) requested Contact: Agen, Mike Board Goal: Excellence in public service Contact Phone: (651) Public Engagement Level: N/A Prepared by: Agen, Mike PURPOSE/ACTION REQUESTED Authorize the Information Technology (IT) Director to execute amendments to two contracts with Frontier Communications Corporation (Frontier) for telephone and faxing services for Dakota County business units. SUMMARY The County is currently in the process of replacing the internal telephone system, a project which is due to complete later this year. The extension of the contracts allows staff to continue the replacement of the internal phone system with current telephone and faxing services remaining in place. A change in telephone and faxing service providers during this project could lead to delays and unscheduled disruptions of service, affecting staff and clients. The telephone and faxing services rendered from Frontier serve the majority of County facilities including the three main service centers, fleet, license centers, parks, historical locations and libraries. Executing the Frontier contracts will help keep this project on time and this is the most cost effective solution. In 2015, Dakota County entered into two contracts by Resolution No (May 5, 2015), with Frontier. The first was a three-year contract to lease connections for local and long distance telephone services. The second was a two-year contract to lease connections for faxing services. In 2017, the IT Director executed an amendment to the faxing services contract to extend the term to June 18, 2018, the same date the local and long distance telephone services contract would expire. In 2018, the County Board authorized the IT Director to amend both contracts to extend their terms to June 30, 2019 by Resolution No (March 27, 2018). Frontier is willing to extend both contracts with Dakota County for one additional year at the same cost of the previous year as there are no changes to services stated in contract. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board authorize the IT Director to execute amendments to the two contracts with Frontier to continue local and long distance telephone services and faxing services for Dakota County through June 30, EXPLANATION OF FISCAL/FTE IMPACTS Funds in the amount of $108, are contained in the 2019 IT Annual Budget for the telephone local and long distance services and faxing service contract amendments.

14 Supporting Documents: Previous Board Action(s): ; 3/27/ ; 5/5/15 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Dakota County entered into two contracts with Frontier Communications in 2015 for local and long distance telephone and faxing service; and WHEREAS, both contracts will expire June 30, 2019; and WHEREAS, there are no immediate plans to replace the need for local and long distance telephone and faxing service; and WHEREAS, there is a need to continue to provide County business units with the local and long distance telephone and faxing services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Dakota County Board of Commissioners hereby authorizes the Information Technology (IT) Director to execute contract amendments for local and long distance telephone and faxing services with Frontier Communications, for the period July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020, subject to approval as to form by the County Attorney s office, at a total cost not to exceed $108,304.80, plus any applicable taxes. Expense 2019 IT Annual Budget ($108,304.80) 2019 Frontier Communications Session Initiation Protocol Contract $ 76, Frontier Communications Primary Rate Interface Contract $ 32, Total Expense $0 County Manager s Comments: Reviewed by (if required): Recommend Action County Attorney s Office Do Not Recommend Action Financial Services Reviewed---No Recommendation Risk Management Reviewed---Information Only Employee Relations Submitted at Commissioner Request Information Technology Facilities Management County Manager 4/4/ :11 AM Page 2

15 DAKOTA COUNTY GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND POLICY COMMITTEE Legislative Update Meeting Date: 4/9/2019 Fiscal/FTE Impact: Item Type: Regular-Information None Other Division: County Administration/County Board Current budget Amendment requested Department: County Administration New FTE(s) requested Contact: Smith, Matt Board Goal: Excellence in public service Contact Phone: (651) Public Engagement Level: N/A Prepared by: Hanson, Nathan PURPOSE/ACTION REQUESTED Receive an update on the 2019 legislative session and the status of County priorities. SUMMARY This item will offer an opportunity for the Legislative Advisory Workgroup and staff to provide updates on the 2019 legislative session and County activities. Update topics may include the progress of Dakota County legislative priorities, and other topics of interest to Dakota County currently under discussion. RECOMMENDATION Information only; no action requested. EXPLANATION OF FISCAL/FTE IMPACTS None.

16 Supporting Documents: Previous Board Action(s): RESOLUTION Information only; no action requested. County Manager s Comments: Reviewed by (if required): Recommend Action County Attorney s Office Do Not Recommend Action Financial Services Reviewed---No Recommendation Risk Management Reviewed---Information Only Employee Relations Submitted at Commissioner Request Information Technology Facilities Management County Manager 4/3/2019 2:40 PM Page 2

17 DAKOTA COUNTY GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND POLICY COMMITTEE Position On Legislation Amending Minnesota Forfeiture Law Meeting Date: 4/9/2019 Fiscal/FTE Impact: Item Type: Regular-Action None Other Division: County Administration/County Board Current budget Amendment requested Department: County Administration New FTE(s) requested Contact: Smith, Matt Board Goal: Excellence in public service Contact Phone: (651) Public Engagement Level: N/A Prepared by: Hanson, Nathan PURPOSE/ACTION REQUESTED Consider a resolution of opposition to legislation amending Minnesota s forfeiture law. SUMMARY The 2019 Minnesota Legislature has introduced a bill, House File 1971/Senate File 2155, which makes broad changes to Minnesota s property forfeiture laws. The forfeiture of property used by persons to commit crimes, and the forfeiture of monies and other profits derived from criminal activity has long been recognized by the legislature and criminal justice professionals as a valuable means to enforce the law, deter crime, and reduce economic incentives for persons to engage in criminal activity. Last year, the Dakota County Attorney s Office opened 196 forfeiture files and expended over 1,355 hours processing forfeiture cases. In calendar year 2018, over $260,000 in cash or money from the sale of forfeited property, including motor vehicles, was forfeited. The vast majority of these cases involved crimes related to illegal drug activity, aggravated driving under the influence offenses, or fleeing a police officer in a motor vehicle. Net proceeds from forfeited property are distributed to the law enforcement agency that seized the property, the prosecuting office that handled the forfeiture, and the State of Minnesota general fund. The Dakota County Attorney s Office makes use of forfeiture funds to pay salary expenses, to offset costs associated with forfeiture, for crime prevention efforts, to provide training and educational opportunities to staff, and for other expenses related to prosecution. In addition to the above mentioned uses, approximately 53 percent of the overall budget of the Dakota County Drug Task Force is provided by forfeiture funds, used to combat drug activity throughout Dakota County. House File 1971/Senate File 2155 proposes significant changes to the current forfeiture process. These changes would significantly impact, and likely eliminate, the ability of law enforcement and prosecutors to use forfeiture as a means to combat criminal activity. Additional details regarding the impact of the proposed legislation are included in a letter of opposition from Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom, and Dakota County Sheriff Tim Leslie, included as Attachment A. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Dakota County Board of Commissioners consider a resolution of opposition to the proposed legislation. EXPLANATION OF FISCAL/FTE IMPACTS None.

18 Supporting Documents: Attachment A: Joint Forfeiture Letter Previous Board Action(s): RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a bill, House File 1971/Senate File 2155, has been introduced in the 2019 Minnesota Legislature to amend Minnesota s property forfeiture laws; and WHEREAS, the bill, as currently drafted, was developed without input from or consultation with prosecutors or law enforcement officials in the State; and WHEREAS, the bill, as currently drafted, would significantly impact, and likely eliminate, the ability of law enforcement and prosecutors to use forfeiture as a means to combat criminal activity; and WHEREAS, forfeiture funds are currently used to fund certain operations within the Dakota County Attorney s Office, and supply a significant percentage of the Dakota County Drug Task Force Budget; and WHEREAS, existing Minnesota law contains provisions to protect innocent owners from property forfeiture; and WHEREAS, Minnesota law was recently changed to fundamentally expand an innocent owner s right to contest property forfeiture; and WHEREAS, additional time is needed to examine the impact of recent changes to Minnesota s property forfeiture laws before making additional and significant changes to the law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Board of Commissioners hereby oppose the changes to Minnesota s forfeiture laws proposed in 2019 Minnesota Legislature House File 1971/Senate File 2155; and BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Board of Commissioners encourages the proponents of House File 1971/Senate File 2155 to consult with prosecutors and law enforcement officials in the State to evaluate current forfeiture practices and jointly recommend any appropriate due process changes, if necessary. County Manager s Comments: Reviewed by (if required): Recommend Action County Attorney s Office Do Not Recommend Action Financial Services Reviewed---No Recommendation Risk Management Reviewed---Information Only Employee Relations Submitted at Commissioner Request Information Technology Facilities Management County Manager 4/4/ :46 AM Page 2

19 D A K O T A C OUNTY James C. Backstrom County Attorney Tim Leslie County Sheriff SENT VIA DATE: March 8, 2019 TO: Dakota County Legislators FROM: James C. Backstrom, Dakota County Attorney Tim Leslie, Dakota County Sheriff SUBJECT: H.F and S.F (Amending Minnesota Forfeiture Law) The purpose of this memorandum is to express our strong opposition to H.F and S.F. 2155, which make broad changes to Minnesota s forfeiture laws. These bills were introduced in the Minnesota Legislature last week. We believe the proposed legislation will have a significant negative impact on public safety in our state. I. Background The forfeiture of property used by persons to commit crimes, and the forfeiture of monies and other profits derived from criminal activity has long been recognized by the legislature and criminal justice professionals as a valuable means to enforce the law, deter crime, and reduce economic incentives for persons to engage in criminal activity. Last year the Dakota County Attorney s Office opened 196 forfeiture files and expended over 1, hours processing forfeiture cases. In calendar year 2018, over $260,000 in cash or money from the sale of forfeited property, including motor vehicles was forfeited. The vast majority of these cases involved crimes related to illegal drug activity (139), aggravated driving under the influence offenses (36), or fleeing a police officer in a motor vehicle (20). 1 Under current forfeiture laws, once property is forfeited, the net proceeds are distributed as follows: A. Forfeitures related to designated offenses: 1. 70% to the law enforcement agency that seized the property to supplement the operating expenses of the agency or for other law enforcement purposes; 2. 20% to the prosecuting office that handled the forfeiture to be used to supplement the office operating budget or for other prosecution purposes; and 3. 10% to the State of Minnesota general fund. 1 There was also one unlawful detainer file.

20 Page 2 of 4 B. Forfeitures related to DWI offenses: 1. 70% to the law enforcement agency that seized the property to supplement the operating expenses of the agency for use in DWI related enforcement training and education; and 2. 30% to the prosecuting office that handled the forfeiture to be used to supplement the office operating budget or for other prosecution purposes. In 2018, the Dakota County Attorney s Office expended $106, of its forfeiture funds. In the County Attorney s Office, the majority of these funds were expended to pay salary expenses for several staff positions ($97,457.38). The remainder of expended forfeiture funds was spent by the County Attorney to offset costs associated with the forfeiture, crime prevention efforts, providing training and educational opportunities for staff, and other expenses related to prosecution. In the Sheriff s Office, forfeiture proceeds are used to fund purchases and training related to the drug sniffing K-9 units, the drone program, sending staff to leadership training, purchases of both tasers and firearms as well as purchases of crime prevention materials. All are legal uses of forfeiture funds under current law. Regarding other law enforcement activity throughout Dakota County, the majority of the forfeiture funds seized were distributed to the Dakota County Drug Task Force to supplement its operating budget. In 2018, the task force used $386,000 in forfeiture funds (approximately 53% of its overall budget) on task force expenditures to combat drug activity throughout Dakota County. Needless to say without this money the Task Force would be required to significantly reduce its efforts to address illegal drug activity or the County and cities will have to provide these additional funds to maintain the work of the Task Force through property tax levy dollars. Existing forfeiture law requires that a written notice of seizure and intent forfeit property be given to persons who have, or who law enforcement has reason to believe may have, a legal interest in the property subject to forfeiture. If the person objects to the forfeiture the matter is handled as a civil court proceeding with the person objecting to forfeiture being afforded all the legal processes and rights normally associated with a civil court case. Unlike other civil cases where the burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence, in a forfeiture case the property cannot be forfeited unless the County Attorney s Office meets the higher burden of clear and convincing evidence that the property was used in the commission of the crime or constitutes proceeds from the criminal activity. As in past years, in 2018, the Dakota County Attorney s Office returned property seized for forfeiture that did not meet this higher burden of proof, was subject to the claim of an innocent owner, where other statutory requirements were not met, or when in the interest of justice so dictated. II. Proposed Legislation Despite the protections provided to persons through the civil court process, H.F and S.F make significant changes to the forfeiture process which are not in the best interest of public safety. These changes to the forfeiture law will significantly impact, and likely eliminate, the ability of law enforcement and prosecutors to use forfeiture as a means to combat criminal activity. The proposed legislation specifically creates a presumption that forfeiture of property used in the commission of a crime or proceeds from criminal activity is disfavored despite its long recognized use as an effective means to combat and deter crime. The legislative designation to specifically disfavor forfeiture allows criminals to retain ill-gotten gain and the instrumentality of their crimes. While all agree improper forfeiture is disfavored and the procedural safe guards which exist in the current law should be preserved (and strengthened where needed to prevent improper forfeitures from innocent defendants or property owners), the proposed legislation goes well beyond that common consensus.

21 Page 3 of 4 The following is a list of major concerns with these bills. The proposed legislation: 1. Imposes a minimum market value of a $2,500 threshold for forfeiture of vehicles, including those related to drunk driving and fleeing a peace officer in a motor vehicle. This threshold is counterintuitive to the purpose of removing the instrumentality of the offense from the offender in drunk driving and fleeing a police officer cases. The public and law enforcement are put at risk by a fleeing vehicle no matter the value of the vehicle. Yet the proposed legislation carves out an exception for vehicle worth $0-$2,500. No sensible person would expect law enforcement to return a firearm used in the commission of a crime to a convicted criminal based on the value of the firearm. A vehicle used to commit a crime and puts the public at risk should be treated no differently after a conviction for the crime. Proportionality when forfeiting instruments used in commission of a crime ignores the remedial nature of forfeitures to prevent the property from being used to commit future crimes. The offender with the requisite prior DWI s or who is convicted of fleeing law enforcement should lose the instrument of the crime regardless of the value of the vehicle. The proposed legislation incentivizes repeat drunk driving by allowing potentially deadly criminal activity to continue as the repeat drunk driver will know vehicles under $2,500 are immune from forfeiture. 2. Requires the net proceeds from forfeiture to be transferred to the State s general fund, Board of Public Defense, and other State agencies to offset State general fund program costs. At present, the monies forfeited are being used directly to combat crime and pursue forfeiture. The Dakota County Attorney s Office and local law enforcement will no longer receive proceeds from forfeited property or monies to offset costs associated with combating criminal activities and will need to obtain additional funding from local government. The legislature will need to appropriate additional funding to reimburse county and city governments for costs associated with these investigations and prosecutions that were previously funded through forfeiture monies and for the costs to pursue forfeiture of property gotten by criminal activity. 3. Prohibits a local, county or state agency from accepting any distribution of forfeiture proceeds from the federal government. This eliminates the ability of state and local law enforcement agencies to receive property and money from forfeiture actions brought by the United States Attorney in criminal investigations that local law enforcement may have initiated or participated in. While the amount of money received by local law enforcement varies from year to year, it can amount to several thousands of dollars which come back to the communities overwhelmed by large scale drug operations and combating addiction. 4. Transfers the venue for forfeiture actions from the civil court process to the criminal court process that will result in additional hearings, inconsistency and delay to an already overburdened criminal court system. It also creates a right to a court appointed attorney in forfeiture actions at taxpayer expense. 5. Combines the criminal case and the in rem forfeiture of property setting up potential violations of constitutional rights including double jeopardy, excessive fine issues, and the right against self-incrimination. 6. Allows for prosecutors and defense attorneys to negotiate a settlement of the forfeiture action as part of plea negotiation on the underlying criminal prosecution. This practice will raise significant ethical concerns as it will give the appearance of criminal consequences being negotiated in exchange for money or property. It creates ethical concerns for public defenders because the Board of Public Defense will share equally in the distribution of funds from forfeitures.

22 Page 4 of 4 7. Eliminates alcohol related revocations as a prior/qualified offense for purposes of forfeiting a vehicle (i.e., license revocation for test refusal). We know DUI/DWI cases may not result in a conviction but do result in license revocation so those cases will not be considered when looking at the required number of prior qualified offenses needed to initiate forfeiture of the vehicle. 8. Subjects local agencies to liability for attorney fees, litigation costs and post judgment interest; while simultaneously fails to reimburse local agencies for attorney fees or litigation costs, and appropriates all proceeds to the State general fund or other State agencies to offset State general fund program costs. 9. Subjects local agencies to all costs related to the storage of property if it is returned. If this legislation passes, it will result in what amounts to an unfunded mandate for the County Attorney s Office and will significantly decrease funding needed to offset taxpayer levy dollars for operating the Sheriff s Office, the Dakota County Drug Task Force and local law enforcement agencies. It will allow those who break our laws, particularly those involved in the sale and distribution of illegal drugs, to retain proceeds of their criminal behavior, which will adversely impact public safety. As noted above, the vast majority of forfeiture actions in our state involve the sale, distribution and use of controlled substances. In a time when our county, state and nation are dealing with an opioid and heroin epidemic which is claiming too many lives every year, and we are struggling to keep up with huge increases of methamphetamine use (which remains by far the biggest illegal drug problem in Dakota County) and the sale and distribution of other controlled substances and synthetic drugs, it is bewildering that as a state we would adopt as public policy, through this legislation, measures to make it easier for drug dealers to profit from their criminal activity while at the same time increasing taxpayer dollars needed to combat crime. Please note this is not an exhaustive list of our concerns with this proposed legislation, as this legislation is lengthy and we have had limited time to fully analyze it. For your information, these bills were introduced without any input or consultation with prosecutors or law enforcement officials in our state. Please know that we both remain willing and committed to working with the bill s authors and all of you to assess and evaluate current forfeiture practices and make appropriate changes if necessary, but we strongly oppose this proposed legislation which may well eliminate most forfeitures associated with criminal activity in our state and significantly adversely impact public safety. We urge you not to support H.F and S.F Thank you for considering our views on this important matter. Both of us and our staff are happy to meet with you or answer any questions. c: Dakota County Board of Commissioners Matt Smith, Dakota County Manager

23 DAKOTA COUNTY GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND POLICY COMMITTEE Closed Executive Session: Update On Information Security Meeting Date: 4/9/2019 Fiscal/FTE Impact: Item Type: Regular-Action None Other Division: Operations, Management and Budget Current budget Amendment requested Department: Information Technology New FTE(s) requested Contact: Cater, Dan Board Goal: Excellence in public service Contact Phone: (651) Public Engagement Level: N/A Prepared by: Reynolds, Jennifer PURPOSE/ACTION REQUESTED Hold a closed executive session of the General Government and Policy Committee of the Whole to receive a briefing on information security and training. SUMMARY Security of information is a high priority for Dakota County. The security and reliability of the County s data and information systems are essential to the protection of the data/information of our clients, residents, and employees. Information Technology staff will provide a briefing on the County s information security systems and training on the use of revised information security procedures. The Dakota County Attorney has advised that prior to closing a County Board Committee of the Whole meeting, pursuant to the Open Meeting Law, Minn. Stat. 13D, the County Board must resolve by majority vote to close the meeting. RECOMMENDATION The County Manager has recommended that a closed executive session be held during the Dakota County General Government and Policy Committee of the Whole meeting on April 9, 2019, to discuss the following: A briefing and training on County information security systems and procedures. EXPLANATION OF FISCAL/FTE IMPACTS None.

24 Supporting Documents: Previous Board Action(s): RESOLUTION WHEREAS, upon adoption of a resolution by majority vote, the Dakota County Board, convening as the General Government and Policy Committee of the Whole, is authorized, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 13D.05 3(d), to hold a closed executive session to obtain a briefing and training on County information security systems and procedures; and WHEREAS, the Dakota County Board of Commissioners desires to meet and obtain a briefing and training on information security. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Board of Commissioners hereby closes the Dakota County General Government and Policy Committee of the Whole meeting on April 9, 2019, in Conference Room 3A, Administration Center, Hastings, Minnesota, to obtain a briefing and training on County information security systems and procedures. County Manager s Comments: Reviewed by (if required): Recommend Action County Attorney s Office Do Not Recommend Action Financial Services Reviewed---No Recommendation Risk Management Reviewed---Information Only Employee Relations Submitted at Commissioner Request Information Technology Facilities Management County Manager 4/3/2019 2:37 PM Page 2