My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
74-120
Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
1952 - 1999
>
1974
>
74-120
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 12:35:02 PM
Creation date
6/26/2003 10:46:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Resolution
Doc #
74-120
Date
8/5/1974
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Approaches <br /> <br />A. Considered ~nd rejected <br /> <br />l) <br /> <br />To divide the grant among all law enforcement agencies <br />in Orange County on a per capita basis. Rejected because <br />of lack of control on purposes for which the money would <br />be used and lack of impact on nsrcotic.problem to diffused <br />efforts. <br /> <br />2) <br /> <br />To divide the grant among the <br />impact area of Oranoe County. <br />reasons as approach number 1. <br /> <br />five agencies within the <br />Rejected for the same <br /> <br />To use the entire grant for a public education campaign <br />against drug abuse in Orange County. Rejected because, <br />while public education campaigns can be effective, they <br />are basically short term and '[he approach would do nothing <br />to alleviate 'the over-burdening of the criminal justice <br />system in Orange County. <br /> <br />To use the grant strictly to provide support services <br />for the law enforcement agencies in Orange County; Rejected <br />because although highly needed, the approach would do <br />nothing to impact the line functions of, the law enforce- <br />ment agencies and would provide only a partial solution <br />to the problem. <br /> <br />5) <br /> <br />To use the grant to create a "super Task Force" of desig- <br />nated officers.in Orange County that would have orisJ.nal <br />jurisdiction o~?r all or selected mr~jor narcotic invest:[- <br />gations. Rejected because of the le,gal~ political and <br />philosophical questions and restrictions involved. Also <br />rejected because it defea~s.'the existing r~pport already <br />established between Task Force members.. <br /> <br />B. Proposed Approach <br /> <br />l) <br /> <br />To provide a centre! inc]e× for the submission~ analyzation., <br />evaluation and dJ. ssJmin~-tion of narcot:lc intelligence <br />formation to rasP, bare of the Orange County Dr'ug E~n~J NaPcotJc <br />Task Force and Associates. <br /> <br />To develop an(] present instruction '1:o Task ~orce m <br />that :i'~ designed top~-o,'~.~ a~e~ +~h~,~ basic :~nz o.~' ~ -~- ..... ~'t.~o~'" lleCeSsary <br />to invcstigetc viola <br /> ~loh.~ o~. the state narcot:ic laws. <br /> <br />3) <br /> <br />4) To as:-::i~:i lo,::~1 ~}[:ler '::Jes throu:sh coo:qdJ, no:l;io:,l o[' ef£k z'l' to <br /> obtafi]l the max:'[mu:;t ben::f:it from th',:: source3 dra',~n upon. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.