DPS to charge local police for crime lab use

By Jon Johnson
Assistant Editor
Published on Sunday, August 10, 2008 4:59 PM MST

A new Department of Public Safety Crime Lab fee schedule may cause investigators to have to make economic decisions regarding crime, according to Safford Police Chief John Griffin.

Recently, the Arizona Legislature, in an attempt to offset a $2 billion deficit, cut approximately $7.8 million from the DPS crime lab budget. The figure is roughly half the DPS crime lab’s previous budget.

The move forced the department to begin charging other law enforcement agencies for use of its crime lab.

According to an e-mail from Cheyenne Walsh, legislative associate for the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, the DPS has proposed three types of payment. The first type would divide the crime lab bill by county; the second would divide it by the 150-plus jurisdictions, and the third would be a “pay as you go” fee schedule for each service used by each jurisdiction. Walsh wrote that while the DPS has not decided how and when the jurisdictions will be billed, they are likely to receive official billing statements prior to Sept. 26. She added that the DPS does not have the statutory authority to collect the charges until after that date.

The DPS Crime Lab fee schedule itemizes different tests and gives a separate price for each. The schedule lists a toxicology determination on a specimen of blood or urine for DUI purposes will cost $220.50 each while biological screening for DNA analysis ranges from $125 per small case (one to five items) to $500 per large case (21 to 40 ite).

According to a DPS Crime Lab cost summary, based on case submissions from the 2007/08 fiscal year, local agencies will owe the following:

• Safford Police Department: $40,440.93.

• Thatcher Police Depart-ment: $28,783.36.

• Pima Police Depart-ment: $4,950.77.

• Graham County Sher-iff’s Office: $13,070.62.

Chief Griffin said the decision will not only cause a hardship on law enforcement agencies, but it affects his 2008/09 fiscal year budget that was done in July.

“We’ve already adopted our budget,” he said. “This $40,000 is over half of my patrol operating budget. I’m going to get billed for this, and I have no way to even budget for it.”

Ken Strobeck, executive director of the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, said the decision could have a negative impact on the general public’s safety if police agencies cannot afford to have testing performed.

Griffin said his investigators will be forced to make economic decisions about crime.

“If we have to do a rape kit or something, what do I do?” he said.

“Do I go to the victim and say, ‘Gee I’d like to send this out, but we can’t afford the DPS lab costs’? How do I explain that to victims?”

Print this story Email this story Post A Comment

Comments

8 comment(s)

To Concerned wrote on Aug 19, 2008 9:41 AM:

" I cant believe you would say that driving DUI is not a Potentially dangerous crime. Look up the stats. DUI is one of the largest killers. "

Politically Correct wrote on Aug 18, 2008 9:26 PM:

" We go through our everyday lives oblivious to what it costs to keep us safe. Be careful of what you wish for.....lower taxes, etc...it deprives something somewhere. In this case it would be law enforcement. What a shame, we scream protect me, help me, but don't let it to cost anything. Get the money from somewhere but not from me. Our County attorney has developed plans to help alleviate this very serious situation, by addressing processing of evidence. Kudos to Mr. Angle & his team & the agencies that attended, SPD, Thatcher, Pima. County Sheriff Hughes did not attend. "

Concerned wrote on Aug 13, 2008 11:32 AM:

" I could not agree with you more "Stupid". If they can't pay lock them up there by ensuring they won't pay and overloading our jail there by increasing our tax burden by housing people in the jail who can't pay their bills, while other even more potentially dangerous criminals can go free because guess what? They can pay their bills! Darn freeloaders! "

Stupid Criminal wrote on Aug 13, 2008 10:06 AM:

" When they dont pay they sit their tails in JAIL. Haha right where most of them need to be anyways. "

Concerned wrote on Aug 11, 2008 2:43 PM:

" What are you going to do if they don't pay? That is one of the biggest problems Graham County Probation has is collecting court ordered fines, fees and restitution. Somebody still has to pay even if the criminal does not. "

Did you know wrote on Aug 11, 2008 2:26 PM:

" Did you know the legislature wouldn't fund raises for DPS officers instead (3 years ago) they added a $500 surcharge on to every DUI fine in the state to pay for raises for DPS Officers. So when a Pima PD officer arrests a drunk driver, DPS gets $500. Don't get me wrong the raises were needed but it is yet another example of the legislature not properly funding the agency. "

Just a thought wrote on Aug 11, 2008 10:28 AM:

" Maybe as a detterence to lower crime, why not make the suspect pay their own fees? If they get a DUI make them pay for their own blood getting sent to the lab and so on? "

DPS the Legislature wrote on Aug 11, 2008 7:39 AM:

" In case the state legislature doesn't understand, all of this is taxpayer money. They are just robbing Peter to pay Paul. There is a reason why DPS has always provided these services for smaller agencies. Now bean counters will be telling police officers what can and can't be investigated. Not smart. Where are our representatives on this, aren't they supposed to look out for agencies in their area? they just need to provide DPS with the funding they need to run the crime labs. "

WRITE A COMMENT

READER COMMENTS
* Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

* Be relevant. Keep your comments pertinent to the story that is being discussed.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All reader comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Eastern Arizona Courier is not liable for messages from third parties. IP addresses can be subpoenaed and your identity established by individuals who have been hurt by your comments.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity: You can be prosecuted for identity theft.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in www.eacourier.com reader comments represent the individual's own views and not those of the Eastern Arizona Courier. The Courier does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than Eastern Arizona Courier spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!