Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Asset Forfeiture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah Senate tightens civil forfeiture rules but rejects broader amendment
Summary
After extended floor debate, the Senate passed Senate Bill 87 to raise standards and add notice/return procedures in many forfeiture cases; an amendment to expand a $10,000 return provision to noncash property failed on the floor.
The Utah Senate passed Senate Bill 87 on a recorded vote after an extended debate over civil asset forfeiture and a failed amendment to broaden the bill’s alternative-return threshold.
Senator Thatcher, the bill sponsor, said the measure raises protections for property owners by guaranteeing a return process in most cases and creating an early objection and notice process. “My bill handles 88% of all cases where there is a guarantee of a return of property within 60 days if there are not criminal charges filed,” Thatcher said during floor remarks, adding that the bill creates a day-one opportunity for relief.
Senator Andrei, who offered the amendment, said the amendment would allow owners to seek return of any seized noncash property valued under $10,000 through the alternative process rather than a full forfeiture proceeding. Andrei said prosecutors currently have “broad latitude” and that opening the alternative pathway to noncash property would help people who cannot afford the time or cost of contested forfeiture proceedings.
Opponents warned the proposed change would create valuation burdens and complicate proceedings. A sponsor of the original compromise said the current language was the product of negotiation and that changing it without broad agreement could unravel the coalition supporting reform.
Senators Hilliard and Stevenson both spoke in favor of the compromise bill; Hilliard urged caution about reopening the negotiated deal, and Stevenson cited prior legislative work documenting the predominance of civil forfeitures and the typical types of property taken.
The motion to adopt the amendment failed on the floor. The Senate then voted to pass SB 87; the journal recorded 27 yea votes, 0 nay votes and 2 absent. The bill will be transmitted to the House.
What’s next: Sponsors said they expect ongoing work on forfeiture law in future sessions and described SB 87 as an incremental but significant step to increase notice and return protections in Utah’s forfeiture system.
