The prospect of state funding for a regional forensic lab appears shaky as the House bonding bill moves toward a vote today without Anoka County's $6 million request for the project.
Although the Senate allocated $4 million for the forensic lab in its $1.1 billion bonding bill that passed Tuesday, it is unlikely that a funding request not already in the House package will be included at this point, House bonding negotiator Alice Hausman, DFL-St. Paul, said Wednesday.
The two legislative bodies have to work out their differences before sending the bill to Gov. Tim Pawlenty for approval. But given the current economic climate and the governor's desire to keep taxes down, Hausman said the $4 million the Senate has allocated is a "best case scenario" for the forensic lab project.
Rep. Jim Abeler, R-Anoka, chief author of the original House proposal for the Anoka County forensic lab, lamented its absence from the House bonding bill.
"In a bill as big as the House is going to do, which is oversized based on our capacity to pay, they certainly should've put that project in," Abeler said.
The project faced fierce competition for funding, he noted.
"There's a lot of pressure to do everything. There's $3 billion in the request and $1 billion of capacity -- a little less actually. But that's the legislative process; it's very much a sausage."
The forensic lab was planned as part of Anoka County's larger public safety campus, slated to be built in Andover. The lab would allow sheriff's offices in the region to perform in-house fingerprint identification and drug chemistry analysis, along with DNA, trace evidence and toxicology tests. Anoka, Sherburne and Wright counties planned to share in the operating costs of the lab.
Anoka County will proceed with construction on the $23 million main public safety campus building, expected to be completed in 2010, but plans for the lab will have to be reevaluated depending on the funding situation, Anoka County officials said.
Dan Erhart, an Anoka County commissioner, said he was disappointed the House bill doesn't provide any funding for the lab, adding that it increases the difficulty of getting the project off the ground.
"It still could be done," he said, "but this makes it difficult."
"If the bonding committee does not come out with any money, I'm not sure what the county will do," Erhart said. "We need to be looking at a lot of things."
The public safety campus will combine most of the Anoka County Sheriff's Office's activities under one roof, housing operations currently scattered throughout the county. "Right now, every facility we're in is bursting at the seams," said Capt. James Stuart, spokesman for the Anoka County Sheriff's Office.
By localizing basic forensic tests, a regional lab would ease the workload on the state's Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), Stuart said.
But even if funding isn't an issue, making a forensic lab fully operational can be a challenge, said Frank Dolejsi, lab director of the BCA.
High startup and operational costs, a lengthy accreditation process, and finding workers with the necessary education and skills to conduct DNA testing can all be problematic.
"I don't fault them for wanting to start the lab," he said, "but what I've always presented to them is if they're going to do it, do it right."
Although the planned lab would help with evidence analysis, a regional forensic lab would still make only a small dent in an overwhelming caseload, Dolejsi said.
For example, he noted that of the approximately 3,000 DNA samples the BCA processed last year, 256 came from Anoka, Wright and Sherburne counties.
Maybe Anoka County is the right place for a lab, but state officials want to know with more certainty that the lab would be the best use of state money, Hausman said.
"We have to be extremely cautious about draining resources," she said.
Staff writer Paul Levy contributed to this report.
Mitch Anderson is a University of Minnesota student reporter on assignment for the Star Tribune.
