House Journal: Page 56: Wednesday, January 10, 1996

A special team effort is in place in Sac County.  Magistrates
Warren Bush and Joseph Heidenreich and the clerk of court, Mary
Jo Herrig, and her staff are working together to collect unpaid
fines.  Defendants are sent a notice reminding them of their
unpaid fines and fees.  They are also informed that if the
amount is not paid by a certain date they must appear for a
contempt of court hearing.  Due to this extra effort, the Sac
County court has collected over $22,000 in three months.

We've also achieved remarkable success with the aid of our
computer system in the counties that have it.

We've collected over one million dollars from income tax refund
offsets since 1994.  Our computer system helped make this
possible.  It allows us to electronically send to the Department
of Revenue and Finance lists of people who have unpaid fines. 
'As we expand our computer system into more counties, the scope
of this program mall increase.

This year we start using the central collection unit of the
Department of Revenue and Finance to collect unpaid fines.  Our
computer system is crucial to this operation.  When fines are
not paid for sixty days, we'll send the information to the
central collection unit by computer.  The central collection
unit will then work on the case.  They'll make phone calls, send
notices, and take any further action necessary to enforce
payment.

In fiscal year 1995, our courts collected over $54 million. 
Currently our receipts are up 6 percent over last year.  At this
rate, there will be some enhanced court collection funds
available to use for expanding our computer system.  Expanding
our computer system is one of our budget recommendations for
you.  However, we plan to apply most of the enhanced court
collection funds to offset our budget request for the computer
system.  We'll work with you on the details.

We're proud of the extra efforts our judges and staff are making
to enforce fines.  However, it's not our intent to force people
to pay fines in cases of poverty.   But we have no intention of
taking second place in a fine of consumer choices.  There is a
difference between poverty and simply preferring to pay for
cable T.V. Those who are convicted of committing crimes must
expect to make some sacrifices as a consequence.  This is what
fines are all about.

We have other examples of our commitment to effective fine
enforcement.   However, now it's time for a dose of reality so
the visions of dollar signs don't cloud our collective good
judgment.  The types of procedures I mentioned earlier add to
the already heavy workload of our courts.  They take time away
from other priorities.

Furthermore, it would not be cost effective to spend our
valuable resources on cases in which the cost of collecting a
fine far exceeds the fine itself.  And finally, there are some
people who, no matter what steps are taken, just cannot be made
to pay off their debt.  I'm talking about transients; people
who, for whatever reasons, have no money; and people serving
time in prison.  For all these reasons, we must not view the
annual tally of unpaid fines and fees as an unlimited vein of
revenue just waiting to be ended.

Iowa General Assembly

Index: House Journal (76th General Assembly: Session 2)

© 1996 Cornell College and League of Women Voters of Iowa

Comments? hjourn@legis.iowa.gov.

Last update: Mon Jan 15 12:25:00 CST 1996
URL: /DOCS/GA/76GA/Session.2/HJournal/00000/00056.html
jhf