shelby county sheriff’s office – Page 2

Attention, motel owners: Allow people to sell sex or drugs at your motel and you might find the state selling your furniture. But don’t worry too much — the property could still be yours.

In a public auction last week, the state sold mattresses, TVs, and furnishings from the Garden Inn & Suites, the Royal Inn & Suites, the Bellevue Inn, and the Lamplighter Motor Inn. Once at auction, however, most of the items were purchased by the original owners.

All four motels were closed after a months-long investigation by the District Attorney’s Office found the motels tolerating prostitution and drug activity on their premises. The furnishings were auctioned after being forfeited to the state as a result of “public nuisance” closures. But the day after the auction, a judge ruled that the hotels would be allowed to reopen.

“The [property owners] were the built-in buyers. It was only natural for them to buy their own stuff back so they could get back into business,” said Ken Roebuck of Asset Recovery Auctions, who led auctions at each motel on Tuesday, May 6th.

Most items were sold by the room, and though people not affiliated with the motels purchased some miscellaneous items, such as tables and linens, the highest bidders tended to be the property owners themselves.

The furnishings from Garden Inn & Suites netted $18,500. The Royal Inn & Suites’ items brought in $20,500. Items from the Bellevue Inn and the Lamplighter Motor Inn earned $2,250 and $1,850, respectively.

Most of the money will go to cover the cost of the investigation at each motel. Any additional money will be given back to the property owners because the closures were civil, not criminal, proceedings.

“With a nuisance matter, we’re not allowed to seize the property,” said assistant district attorney John Campbell. “We’re only allowed to sell the items that were used to further the nuisance.”

Though it may seem strange that the property owners would ultimately receive the auction proceeds, Campbell said it’s unlikely that there will be money left after investigation costs are covered.

The District Attorney’s Office must use the funds to pay back the Memphis Police Department for use of undercover officers and the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office for inmate labor used to set up the materials for the auctions. The D.A.’s office has yet to determine how much money each agency will receive.

“For a couple of these motels, the money raised is nowhere near going to cover the cost of the investigation,” Campbell said. “I know the cost of the Bellevue’s investigation will cost way over the $2,250 [brought in at auction], and the same thing goes for the Lamplighter. The other two will probably get some money back.”

Campbell said the nuisance laws were set up so that taxpayers wouldn’t bear the burden of paying for the investigations into such matters. “If your property causes a problem and the police have to do an investigation, it makes sense from a taxpayer standpoint that the property owner should have to cover those kinds of costs. It’s a financial burden that will hopefully keep people from doing it again.”

When the Memphis Police Department (MPD) upgraded its multi-million-dollar communication system, the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office was added to the platform. By joining forces, the law enforcement agencies saved taxpayer money.

But don’t think that means the two departments are ready to share.

County commissioner Mike Carpenter presented a plan last week to the Law Enforcement Consolidation Task Force that would shift county law enforcement to MPD and make the jail the sheriff’s sole responsibility.

“Two weeks ago, task-force members said they weren’t sure what we were talking about. There were no specific proposals,” said Carpenter, the group’s chair. “We need a long-term view. This isn’t about the individuals running things today. It’s not about the mayor.”

Under the proposal, a five-member Public Safety Commission would guide a functional consolidation of the two entities. The commission would consist of five representatives: someone from MPD, someone from the sheriff’s office, a representative of the county mayor, a representative of the city mayor, and a chair, appointed jointly by the city and county mayors. All the mayoral appointments would be confirmed by the City Council and the County Commission.

The plan, which would ultimately require a change in the county charter, would give leaders a chance to reverse or opt out of consolidation agreements if things weren’t going well.

Carpenter called his 21-page proposal a “starting point.” Though several other members of the task force seemed to agree, Sheriff Mark Luttrell called it “premature,” “pre-emptive,” and “ill-timed.”

“One of the most polarizing issues facing the community is consolidation,” Luttrell said. “I feel the report pre-empts the committee process.”

Mike Heidingsfield, director of the Memphis Shelby County Crime Commission, the organization that suggested functional consolidation of the departments’ basic training, traffic, search and rescue, and internal affairs divisions in a 2003 report, felt similarly.

“This perspective assumes this group has decided that consolidation is the path to follow. I don’t think we’ve gotten there as an entity,” he said.

Just the word “consolidation” is controversial. Unfortunately, as Carpenter noted, there will never be an “apples to apples” comparison with another city or county. But the proposal makes a good case, citing the elimination of boundaries, a rising jail population, potential economies of scale, and an elimination of unnecessary duplication.

Representatives from three other consolidated police departments told the task force that their organizations were more efficient after consolidation.

Robert White of the Louisville Police Department said, “Everything there were two of, there is now one of, and people are getting the same type of service.”

As it is, MPD and the sheriff’s office rarely operate jointly. The Metro DUI unit, the Memphis Shelby Metropolitan Gang Unit and the Metro Narcotics Unit, once joint crime-fighting efforts, have all been disbanded.

“Joint efforts at attacking non-federal crimes and day-to-day policework appear to be virtually non-existent,” the report noted. “These kinds of differences in philosophy and mission and disputes between the departments are avoided to the benefit of citizens under one single law enforcement agency.”

But perhaps the strongest argument for a functional consolidation is that it will happen one day whether citizens vote on it or not.

In its 2003 report, the Crime Commission noted that, because of annexation, there will be fewer than 20,000 residents in unincorporated Shelby County by the year 2020.

“Continuing at the current staffing levels to provide law enforcement for the small area described above is impractical and effectively results in municipal taxpayers, who are also county taxpayers, subsidizing law enforcement services for a small portion of unincorporated Shelby County.”

Before its law enforcement divisions were consolidated, Charlotte, North Carolina, was in a similar situation.

“It was not going to be long before the county police did not have a jurisdiction to police,” Charlotte representative Russ McElwee told the task force. “One of the strongest arguments for consolidation was the city people were paying county police salaries without any of the benefits.”

Consolidated law enforcement may not save money, although it has in some places. But that’s probably not the main issue for citizens of a high-crime society.

The success of law enforcement isn’t measured in dollars and cents but in safety and security. And, as the report noted, law enforcement may see boundaries but criminals don’t.