Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.2 Fines and Forfeitures Agreement with County (2) • & oo-40 CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: August 13 , 1984 SUBJECT Fines and Forfeitures Agreement between City and County EXHIBITS ATTACHED Agreement ; Resolution; Memorandum from City Attorney of San Leandro dated June 26 , 1984 RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution approving Agreement FINANCIAL STATEMENT: A greater amount of fines and forfeitures will be from received from County Central Collections . The exact - amount_ i-a-_undetermi-ned at this time. DESCRIPTION : Sometime ago, Staff discussed with the City Council the County of Alameda ' s procedure as it related to the collection of fines and forfeitures for cities . At that time it was noted that the County and Municipal Courts established a procedure, some time ago, of permitting fines to be paid through Central Collections on an installment basis instead of to. the Municipal Court . . one lump amount . The Municipal Court in turn 1�,jaced convicted defendants un probation, even though probation did not provide supervision by a probation officer . This procedure allowed the County to retain all fines and forfeitures under the authority of Section 1203 . 1 of the Penal Code. This resulted in cities receiving less fines and forfeitures revenue than they were entitled. It 's important to note that after some investigation it was determined that this procedure has been seldom practiced by the Livermore-Pleasanton Municipal Court. Over the last three ( 3 ) years, only slightly more than $3 , 000 for the entire District has not reached the Cities . During the last six months , the County City Attorney's and City Manager 's groups have negotiated with the County over the proper accounting and distribution of each City ' s fine and forfeiture revenues . These negotiations have resulted in an agreement ( see attached) , which provides that the County will distribute to the City the City ' s share of fines and forfeitures collected by County Central Collections . In return the City will pay the County a 5%. Fadm, r; Fee of those fines -and returned to the City unde:1- the �appl:�.caple Section of the Penal 'C 3.zf, Assuming that the C f 1;1.1.L1in cencrat es approx.imat.ely 15 z?nd forfeitures wit.i:_ , ,dicial x:. :{' r. ci_ , For the 1ast . Y could have r cE . . t t:}li_ n' s Ci.t 4 �') y llf c.pprC)) .iifc tE .iV C. l:C)u:, .' r Gl'il_'_n_..st'rc.t:_..C , t_ . ddi i. ',.. !7 es r?r:C �C:?"1 . ?.i.._'.i at a -d resolution f c `, nc it i.s ` .:ti- ' s re::omm0r,dat_:�� C-* ' Y' 't`.. {... 'i NO. �- AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF , THE CITY OF AND THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA RELATING TO THE COLLECTION, ALLOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF MUNICIPALY COURT FINES This is an agreement entered into on , 1984, by and between the City of Dublin, the City of Pleasanton and the City of Livermore ( referred to herein collectively as "city" or "cities" ) and the County of Alameda ( "County" ) relating to the collection, allocation and distribution of certain defined revenues . 1 . Purpose. The purpose of this agreemnt is to resolve any and all disputes between the parties with respect to the collection, all:;.7ation and distribution of Municipal Court fines as described in Section 2 below. This agreement shall not be construed as an admission or concession, express or implied, between or by the parties that the method of collection, allocation and distribution of Municipal Court fines, in effect as of the date hereof, is improper or not in conformance with the law. 2 . Subject of Agreement . This agreement is applicable to all fines imposed by the Municipal. Court in the Livermore-Pleasanton Judicial District which are collected by the County. This agreement is not applicable to ( 1 ) fines and forfeitures collected by Municipal Court pF�r onr.e . ; ( 2 Af`Lnes and forfeitures collectec, from a defendant Fines & Forfeitures Ac,;rPe Page 1 who has been placed on formal , supervised probation, as those terms are defined in Penal Code § 1202. 8 and § 1203 (a) ; or (3) parking fines and forfeitures. 3. Distribution of Fines as of July 1, 1984. - Commencing July 1, 1984, County will distribute all fines imposed on defendants convicted on or after July 1, 1984, pursuant to the provisions of Penal Code § 1463. The transfer of funds each calendar month required by Penal Code § ' 14063 (c) and (d) shall occur simultaneously with respect to each payment received and shall be completed from month to month thereafter prior to any other statutory distribution excepting --rr)- �r�-astr, bucion-of-the installment fee provided by Penal Code § 1205 (c) shall occur before the transfer pursuant to Penal Code § 1463 (c) and (d) ; and (2) any distribution required by law to be made prior to the transfer pursuant to Penal Code § 1463 (c) and (d) . 4. Distribution of Fines Imposed Prior to July 1, 1984. All fines imposed on defendants convicted prior to July 1, 1984, (referred to herein as "prior fines" ) shall be distributed as provided herein. On or before the 31st of August, 1984, and thereafter on the last day of each succeeding calendar month, County will compute for the month of July, 1984, and thereafter for each succeeding calendar month respectively, a percentage as set forth below, which shall be used to .determine the appropriate distribution of 2:F_'. "p -I.c% collected by County durinc ;_-he month. -:.f July; >.G i , zurca E.& Fine 8: Forfeitures Agree Page 2.. succeeding calendar month thereafter. The percentage shall be determined by taking the total number of defendants referred to County' s Central Collections Office during July, 1984, and of that total , determining the percentage of such defendants who were arrested by each city' s police officers and/or by a state officer within the limits of such city. The percentage arrived at for each city of the total shall be used to determine the percentage of "prior fines" collected during July, 1984, which shall be assumed were imposed upon conviction following arrests made by that city' s police officers and/or state officers within the limits of that city. The revenue from these---p-;.or fines col-lected by County during July, 1984, shall r then be distributed as provided in paragraph 3 above. . The procedure provided in this paragraph for determining the percentage of monies collected attributable to each jurisdiction shall be followed for each calendar month for a period of six (6) months, after which, the monthly collection of prior fines shall be distributed in the same ratio as the average ratio for fines on convictions for the period of six (6) months after July 1, 1984. 5. County Collection Fee. As reimbursement for its administrative costs, County shall receive a payment of five percent ( 5%) of the funds distributed to each city pursuant to Penal Code § 1463 (d) as a fee for its collection sere i ce.�7.. The �::..ve percent ( 5%) payment shall be deducted by Couny froil, at the time :paid. funds are transmitted to eac C;f fee Fine -. Forfeitures Agree Page 3 referred to in this paragraph shall be in addition to the fee for processing of installment accounts collected by County as provided in Penal Code § 1205 (c) . It is not the intention of the parties to adjust the percentages contained in Penal Code § 1463 (c) by payment of the collection fee to the County. 6. Legislative Changes. In the event that Penal Code § 1463 is amended in substantive form, the parties agree to renegotiate this agreement. A failure to come to a new agreement constitutes. a termination of this agreement at the option of any party. As used herein, "substantive" includes any change in the percentages_contaired -i n_ :S-ubsection (c) of § 1463 for the County of Alameda or any of the cities in Alameda County. "Substantive" does not include minor procedural and accounting changes. 7. Collection Effort. The collection efforts of the County, including the County' s Central Collections Office, shall be maintained at least substantially equal to the level of collection effort and quality during the period July 1, 1982, to June 30, 1983. If the County ceases to collect fines this agreement shall terminate. 8. Accounting; Auditinq. At 1{asL z:onthly, County shall. Yrovi.df: to cities, in, written form, ca; to he fines which T.Y15.S LC7"P.ETileTlt 1S applicable izI1C'_ wl+.lr s for the artounL. distributed byy County to cities as p7'Q:. Pine Fc:rF^ .tunes, Agree resonable advance notice the respective cities shall have the right to inspect relevant County records .to determine the accuracy of the amount of funds disbursed pursuant to this agreement . County agrees to maintain its records in such a manner as to enable cities to perform such an audit . All such records shall be maintained for four ( 4 ) years . 9 . Termination. In addition to the provisions for termination in paragraph 6 , commencing after a period of five ( 5 ) years has elapsed from the date of this agreement either, County or the cities (acting together and not separately) may terminate this agreement by giving the other party a written notice of termination. That notice shall specify the termination date, which shall be at least six ( 6 ) months from the date of the notice. 10 . Modification. This agreement may be modified only by a written instrument executed by all parties hereto. CITY OF DUBLIN, a municipal corporation By: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City At.t orney ['-J nes & ForfE;4tui"es Agree 5 CITY OF PLEASANTON, a municipal corporation By. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney CITY OF LIVERMORE a municipal corporation By: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, By. Chairman, Board of Supervisors ATTEST : Countv ( lez-k APPROVED AS O FORM : RICHARD J . MC'ORE, COUNTY COUNSEL By-. - — A` i i F.:fai" Cour1iL-.y C"otor—e 1. Fines & Forfeitures Agree ,I7age 6 RESOLUTION NO. 83 - 84 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ------------------------------------------------------------- APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF ALA14EDA RELATING TO THE COLLECTION, ALLOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF MUNICIPAL COURT FINES WHEREAS, Alameda County has for a number of years retained the revenues from fines paid for certain traffic violations; _and . WHEREAS, Alameda County has agreed to apportion future revenues from fines pursuant to Penal Code Section 1463; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Dublin to enter into an agreement with Alameda County in order to receive a portion of said revenues; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council does hereby approve the agreement with the County of Alameda relating to the collection, allocation and distribution of municipal court fines and does hereby authorize the Mayor of the City of Dublin to sign the agreement on behalf of the City. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of August, 1984. AYES: Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Vonh ed Mayo ATTEST: City Clerk 'J RESOLUTION NO. 83 - 84 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ---------------------------------------------------------------- APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA RELATING TO THE COLLECTION, ALLOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF MUNICIPAL COURT FINES WHEREAS, Alameda County has for a number of years retained the revenues from fines paid for certain traffic violations; and WHEREAS, Alameda County has agreed to apportion future revenues from fines pursuant to Penal Code Section 1463 ; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Dublin to enter into an agreement with Alameda County in order to receive a portion of said revenues; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council does hereby approve the agreement with the County of Alameda relating to the collection, allocation and distribution of municipal court fines and does hereby authorize the Mayor of the City of Dublin to sign the agreement on behalf of the City. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of August, 1984. AYES: Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Vonh ed Mayo ATTEST2� � 1" _ c City Clerk C JUL 3 0 1984 City f San Leandro y Civic Center, 835 E.14th Street San Leandro, California 94577 Office of City Attorney 415-577-3361 MEMORANDUM TO: All City Attorneys in Alameda County DATE: 7/26/84 p FROM: Steven R. Meyers, City Attorney, City of San Leandro - --RE: Fines and Forfeitures Please find attached a copy of a form agreement between each city and the County of Alameda for each judicial district within the County. This agreement represents the culmination of lengthy and difficult negotiations with the County over the proper accounting and distribution of your City' s fine and forfeiture revenues. Briefly stated, the issue has been whether fines paid through the County Central Collections Office as a condition of a.rdlormal or " sumw,ary" probation as opposed to fines paid to a proration officer as a condition of formal probation were subject to apportionment pursuant to § 1463 of the Penal Code. Under § 1463 of the Penal Code, fine and forfeiture revenue resulting from arrests within your respective jurisdictions is split between the arresting city and the county in accordance with the formula set forth in subdivision (c) of § 1463. Section 1203. 1 of the Penal Code provides, however, that the County may retain all such revenue whenever it is collected by a county probation officer as a condition of probation. Some years ago, the County and Municipal Courts started a practice of permitting fines to be paid through Central Collections on an installment basis instead of to the Municipal Court in one lump sum. The purpose was to increase the collection rate and to have a better cash handling system. The Municipal Courts in turn cooperated by placing convicted defendants on "summary" or "court" probation. ' Even though "summary" probation did not include supervision by a Probation officer, nor were the fines paid to probation officer, the County of Alameda retained such on the authority of i.'0 .. 1 of the Penal Code. v F I:c)w called "conditional sentence".. c;3t: . SAN f `�•o eaNa All City Attorneys in Alameda County *Re: Fines and Forfeitures July 26, 1984 Page 2 This -matter was brought to the attention of my Council and City Manager some time ago and then referred to all the City Managers in Alameda County through their informal organization. A Committee representing the City Managers of Hayward, San Leandro, Livermore and Oakland proceeded to negotiate a settlement with the County. The agreement which V prepared represents the culmination of that negotiation. It includes all amendments made by the County aouns61--tea has---the recommendation of the County Administrator. While not perfect, I believe that it represents the most favorable treatment of our clients. No attempt is made to recover past revenues diverted by the County 2. However, the County will make the proper allocations for defendants already sentenced who are currently making payments to Central Collections. For all future .revenues paid through Central Collections, the allocations required by § 1463 will be made. In recognition of its collection service, the County is given a 5% fee. This agreement does not cover parking fines since several cities in Alameda County collect their own fines and retain all the revenue. We have estimated that we will receive an additional $30, 000 - $60,000 per year as a consequence of this agreement. The results in your jurisdiction will depend upon (i) your § 1463 split, ( ii) your arrests, (iii) your conviction rate, and (iv) the percentage of defendants who are placed on "summary" probation and make their payments. If your client is favorably disposed to approving this agreement, I urge you to do so as soon as possible. There are a number of other "political" issues pending with the County and it' s desirable to put this matter behind us. If you have any questions about this matter, please call me at 577-3363. ' Ve truly yours, teve Meyers City Attorney SRM/cda Attachment 21 The statute of limitations is three :Mare_ on Lac-, recover.: c:i revenues.