Follow-up review. Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund

Follow-Up Review
Prepared For The Budgetary Responsibility Oversight Committee
Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund
October 2003

Russell W. Hinton, State Auditor Performance Audit Operations Division 254 Washington St. S.W.

Department of Audits and Accounts

Atlanta, GA 30334-8400

Purpose and Background
The Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund (POPTF) Act (the Act) of 1983 was enacted by the Georgia General Assembly for the purpose of providing funds for the training of law enforcement and prosecutorial officers. The Act imposes an additional fee of 10%, up to $50, on all criminal and traffic cases (except failure to wear seatbelt violations) in which a fine is imposed or a bond is required. For example, if a person were fined $100, the person would be required to pay $110. The additional $10 would be designated for the POPTF. Clerks (or another court officer) of all courts except juvenile courts are required to assess, collect, and remit the POPTF fee to the state.
The Georgia Department of Revenue (DOR) is responsible for collecting the POPTF fee from the courts. DOR has contracted with the Police Officers' Annuity and Benefit Fund (POABF) to process the courts' remittances of the POPTF fee. POABF processes the POPTF payments from approximately 850 courts that submit POPTF fees. POABF makes daily deposits into a DOR bank account and provides daily, monthly, and quarterly reports of the court payments to DOR. DOR transfers the fee collections into the state's general fund monthly and is required to provide the Office of Planning and Budget and the Legislative Budget Office with quarterly collection reports.
Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training
The POPTF fee is intended to offset the cost of training individuals certified, or working toward certification, by the Peace Officer Standards and Training Council (POST) and employed by a law enforcement agency in Georgia, as well as the prosecuting attorneys working for state and local governments. POST reported that over 51,000 certified individuals were employed by a law enforcement agency in fiscal year 2002. By the end of FY 2002, approximately 28,000 individuals were working for county or local law enforcement agencies, approximately 18,400 for state agencies, and approximately 4,400 for other organizations. It should be noted that not all POSTcertified individuals are considered peace officers or law enforcement officers. POST also certifies jail and communications officers, though neither is a peace officer. These two positions are considered law enforcement support personnel and the costs of training law enforcement support personnel are included in this report.

The Georgia public safety training delivery system is responsible for providing training that meets the POST-established minimum training and certification requirements. The delivery system consists of several components, including the Georgia Public Safety Training Center (GPSTC), 10 regional police academies, and four local departmental academies. A more complete discussion of the training delivery system and the types of training offered through these units can be found in the Program Evaluation of the POPTF released in August 2001.
Issues Addressed
Specific objectives of the original program evaluation were to: Identify how much has been collected by POPTF both annually and cumulatively; Determine how law enforcement training is funded in general and the amount funded by
POPTF; Determine if funds have been expended according to the POPTF law; Determine if there are ways to improve the allocation of funds to the regional academies; and Determine the financial impact on training costs resulting from the creation of the Department
of Motor Vehicle Safety.

Status of Findings and Recommendations

Finding (as reported in 2001): The Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund collected more than $222 million from fiscal year 1984 to fiscal year 2000. Current Status: As shown in Exhibit 1, $21.8 million in state revenues were collected in fiscal year 2003 under POPTF. Since POPTF fees were first collected in fiscal year 1984, DOR has collected approximately $286 million from the state's courts. The amount of revenue collected has increased at an annual rate of 5.9% since fiscal year 1985.

Exhibit 1 Annual Collections of the POPTF

Fiscal Year
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993

Amount $ Change - % Change Collected(1) Previous Year Previous Year

$5,540,281

$7,705,929

$8,572,995

$867,066

11.3%

$9,295,389

$722,395

8.4%

$9,995,675

$700,286

7.5%

$10,217,664

$221,989

2.2%

$11,576,921

$1,359,257

13.3%

$12,386,210

$809,288

7.0%

$13,500,313

$1,114,104

9.0%

$13,770,580

$270,267

2.0%

Fiscal Year
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002(2) 2003

Amount $ Change - % Change Collected(1) Previous Year Previous Year

$14,488,137

$717,557

5.2%

$14,781,440

$293,302

2.0%

$15,729,096

$947,656

6.4%

$17,034,274

$1,305,178

8.3%

$18,074,447

$1,040,173

6.1%

$19,344,731

$1,270,284

7.0%

$20,214,158

$869,427

4.5%

$20,637,764

$423,606

2.1%

$22,025,463

$1,387,699

6.7%

$21,760,674

-$264,790

-1.2%

TOTAL COLLECTIONS Annual Growth Rate, 1985-2003

$286,652,141

5.9%

Source: Department of Revenue records

(1) FY84 collections include only 11 months; therefore FY84 and FY85 collections are not comparable.
(2) The fiscal year 2002 Management Report of DOR prepared by the Department of Audits indicates $29.7 million in POPTF fees were collected. The amount should have been reported as $22.0 million, a difference of about $7.7 million. It was determined that the majority of the difference ($6.9 million) was due to a data entry error at the Office of Treasury and Fiscal Services.

Page 2

Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund

Finding (as reported in 2001): It is not feasible to determine the amount of Peace Officer

and Prosecutor Training Fund fees that should be collected because of numerous weaknesses

in its assessment, collection, and remittance.

Current Status: There continue to be weaknesses in the

assessment, collection, and remittance of POPTF fees. As a result, the amount of POPTF fees that should have been collected was not determined. POABF officials said the situation remains the same regarding the assessment, collection, and remittance of POPTF fees as it was in 2001. Although,

As a result of specific issues discovered during the 2001 POPTF evaluation, the State Auditor requested clarification from the Attorney General (AG). The AG responded with

according to POABF, some courts have improved, other courts continue to be problematic. For example:

Official Opinion 03-4, as summarized below:

Court clerks are required to
According to POABF, the City of Atlanta Traffic Court assess the POPTF fee on

stopped remitting POPTF fees beginning in August 2002. As of June 2003, it was estimated Atlanta owed approximately $790,000 in delinquent POPTF fees. The City of Atlanta, however, stated it was aware that the Traffic Court was not remitting the fee due to a software problem. In September 2003, the City of Atlanta started remitting POPTF collections again.

violations of criminal and traffic violations even when the sentencing judge does not specifically refer to POPTF when sentence is pronounced.
Court costs are to be included in calculating the original fine amount, upon which the

additional POPTF fee is

Due to a disagreement with DOR on which cases the calculated.

POPTF fee should be assessed, the City of Douglasville has not remitted any POPTF fees to the state since September 1999. In September 2001, the Douglasville city clerk estimated the total POPTF fees due to the state as approximately $275,000.

OCGA 15-6-95 established the superior court partial payment distribution priority list for POPTF collections. This list requires a higher priority recipient to be paid in its

entirety before distribution is

The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) has recognized the misunderstanding among courts on assessing court fees. POPTF is one of numerous court fees that may be assessed on a fine (refer to the Court Fees Performance Audit Report published in October 2001). In FY 2003, AOC began offering a class to train court clerks and other court personnel on how to

made to a lower priority recipient.
Clarified previous AG opinion U96-8 that partial payments collected by a probate court should be paid to each fund in a proportional amount to the

assess court fees properly. AOC plans to continue to offer this class indefinitely.

sums collected as each payment is received.

Further clarified AG opinion

U96-8 that a proportional or pro

Finding (as reported in 2001): The Department of Revenue (DOR) should take steps to offer reasonable assurance that courts are assessing, collecting, and remitting the proper

rata distribution system is appropriate for any court collecting fines.

amount of POPTF fees. DOR should also notify juvenile

courts that they are improperly remitting the POPTF fee.

Current Status: In response to the original evaluation, DOR stated it would "explore, with

[POABF], a more systematic way of dealing with questions and following up on collection

issues." However, DOR has not taken steps to offer reasonable assurance that courts are assessing,

Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund

Page 3

collecting, and remitting the proper amount of POPTF fees. DOR officials have stated that the law does not provide either the authority or funding to pursue collections. Also, DOR has taken no action to notify juvenile courts that they are improperly remitting the POPTF fee and, according to POABF, juvenile courts continue to remit POPTF fees to the state.
It should be noted that in October 2001, after the POPTF Program Evaluation was released, the State Auditor sent a letter to the Commissioner of DOR concerning the collection of the delinquent fees owed by the City of Douglasville and recommended that DOR pursue a resolution of this case. Both DOR and City of Douglasville officials stated that DOR has not followed up on this matter, and the City of Douglasville has still not remitted POPTF fees since September 1999. Officials from the City of Douglasville have stated that they are willing to resolve the problem.
As recommended in the original evaluation, DOR should take steps to offer reasonable assurance that courts are assessing, collecting, and remitting the proper amount of POPTF fees. Likewise, DOR should also notify juvenile courts that they are improperly remitting the POPTF fee. It is also recommended that the General Assembly clarify the language in the POPTF law to specify what agency is authorized to audit, collect, and enforce the collection of POPTF fees.
In its response for the follow-up, DOR stated "the Department [of Revenue] continues to contract with the Peace Officer's Annuity and Benefit Fund for computer processing services required by the Senate Bill. It is our contention that `the statue which authorizes the collection of this penalty and earmarks it for providing training to law enforcement officers and prosecuting officials does not authorize the Department of Revenue to audit for, assess, or collect moneys that should have been collected by the various courts but simply to receive the sums that are collected...'
"The Department of Revenue continues to receive, deposit and account for the moneys that were collected by the court officers. Within the next 30 days, DOR will notify Juvenile Courts improperly remitting Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Funds to cease such actions. DOR will determine the feasibility of returning remittances received from the juvenile courts, as these funds were transferred to the Office of Treasury and Fiscal Services...
"The Department will notify the City of Douglasville within the next 30 days of their noncompliance. We will request immediate compliance, to include the filing of all delinquent reports and the remittance of all delinquent payments."
Finding (as reported in 2001): State and local funds were identified as the primary source of training funds. While many of the facilities and organizations that provide training are largely state funded, local law enforcement agencies do expend local funds for training. Current Status: According to GPSTC officials, state and local funds continue to be the primary source of funding for POST certified law enforcement training. According to Georgia Emergency Management Agency officials, grants from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Office of Domestic Preparedness have increased since September 11, 2001 but these grants are not specific to law enforcement training programs.

Page 4

Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund

Finding (as reported in 2001): It is not possible to track the appropriation of POPTF funds because funds are not appropriated to a single training fund or state agency. However, the evaluation team did identify approximately $21.1 million in state funds spent on law enforcement and prosecutor training in fiscal year 2000, compared to collections of $19.3 million in the previous year. Current Status: Since POPTF funds are deposited into the state's General Treasury and are not appropriated to a single agency or purpose, it is not possible to track their appropriation. However, the evaluation team was able to determine that more than $20.6 million in state funds were expended by state agencies and other entities on law enforcement training in FY 2003 as shown in Exhibit 2 below. These law enforcement training expenditures approximate the POPTF revenues of $22 million collected in FY 2002 (Exhibit 1 on page 2).

Exhibit 2 State Fund Expenditures for Training
Fiscal Year 2003

Organization State Agencies with Law Enforcement Officers(1) GPSTC Regional Academies Prosecuting Attorneys' Council Georgia Police Chiefs' Association Georgia Sheriffs' Association Departmental Academies GPSTC Debt Service POST Department of Law TOTAL STATE FUNDS

Total State Fund Expenditures $8,602,927 $6,093,419 $3,299,256 $768,299 $309,233 $387,832 $140,985 $886,526 $117,631 $975 $20,607,083

Source: Agency survey and records
(1) While all state entities with law enforcement personnel were surveyed for the original evaluation, only the top six state agencies employing certified law enforcement officers, in terms of law enforcement training expenditures, were surveyed for the follow-up. These six accounted for 86% of the fiscal year 2000 law enforcement training expenditures spent by state agencies employing law enforcement officers.

It should be noted that two pieces of POPTF-related legislation were introduced in the General Assembly's 2003 session, although neither was passed into law. Senate Bill 46 would designate POPTF collections "solely" for peace officer and prosecutor training uses. House Bill 869 would repeal the original POPTF law and consolidate the POPTF fee with other court fees. The bill would designate 42.2% of collections (up to $20,125,000) generated from this consolidated fee for peace officer and law enforcement training each year. The bill would also have given AOC the responsibility for collections.

Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund

Page 5

Finding (as reported in 2001): The allocation of state contract funds to the regional academies is based on contract amounts that were in effect prior to May 1996. The allocation should be based on a variety of factors, such as the region's law enforcement population, the demand for training, and the fixed costs of operating a facility. Current Status: A regional academy may operate under a contract between GPSTC and a sponsoring agency or it may be under the direct control of GPSTC. There are currently three regional academies under contract with GPSTC. GPSTC officials indicate that the allocation method for these three academies has not changed. The allocation method for these contracts continues to be based on contract amounts that were in effect prior to May 1996.
The allocation method for the seven regional academies operating directly under GPSTC, however, has changed. GPSTC allocates an initial budget to each of these seven academies but adjusts the funds to each throughout the year based on the need for more training at a particular academy. According to GPSTC, this makes the allocation of funds to these regional academies more flexible so that GPSTC can direct funds when and where they are needed.
Finding (as reported in 2001): The creation of the Department of Motor Vehicle Safety (DMVS) should not have a significant impact on law enforcement training costs. Current Status: Upon its creation in April 2000, DMVS assumed a portion of the responsibilities of various state entities including the Department of Transportation, Public Service Commission, Department of Public Safety, and the Department of Revenue. Three hundred sixty-three POSTcertified positions attached to these entities were transferred to DMVS at that time, and this number has remained unchanged under DMVS. Since the number of certified personnel employed is a significant factor related to training costs, there has been no significant change in training costs as a result of the consolidation of POST-certified personnel under DMVS.

For additional information or to request a copy of the program evaluation, contact Paul E. Bernard, Director, Performance Audit Operations Division, at 404-657-5220 or go to
our website: www.audits.state.ga.us/internet/pao/index.html.

Page 6

Peace Officer and Prosecutor Training Fund