Pittsburgh police urged to further improve handling of money seized in drug busts
Pittsburgh's police department has made improvements but needs to correct several problems in the administration of money confiscated during drug busts, City Controller Michael E. Lamb said on Wednesday.
Auditors found that travel and training expenses from the Pittsburgh Police Confiscated Narcotics Proceeds Trust Fund were not always supported with receipts and that the responsibilities for the fund are not clearly defined, Lamb said.
Auditors also found a lack of documentation to support expenditures reported on the annual report submitted to the Department of Justice, he said.
The Confiscated Narcotics Proceeds Trust Fund was established in 1987 to account for the deposit of cash and proceeds derived from the seizure of narcotics and related items. The fund restricts resources deposited into it for any expenses associated with investigations of narcotics violations.
It is administered by detectives within the police department's Narcotics and Vice Squad.
“Since our audit in 2010, significant improvements have been made by the bureau in the administration of the Confiscated Narcotics Trust Fund,” Lamb said. “However, improvements still need to be made with regard to adequate documentation and reporting of revenues and expenditures of the fund.”
Pittsburgh police Chief Nate Harper said he has not seen the audit, which examined fund documents dated Jan. 1, 2011, through June 30, 2012.
“We will take his recommendations under advisement and make the necessary changes,” Harper said.
Michael Hasch is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7820 or email@example.com.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.