Empathy List Archives

LA

Lou Ann Moudy

Mon, Dec 6, 2021 10:42 PM

We are at a loss as to how to effectively collect outstanding fines, costs and warrants. Our local jail wants to charge way too much and we can't collect those jail fees when the offenders won't even pay their fines or warrants. What are some solutions to collections? We already use a warrant collection service (AMS). We have done warrant sweeps with little success. Any other alternatives?

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy the message and contact the sender to report the email error. The message an its attachments may not be copied, shared, distributed, or used in any manner by anyone other than the intended recipient. The receipt of this email does not create an attorney client relationship, unless that relationship already exists independent of this email.

If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by reply e-mail at cityattorney@okmcity.net or by telephone at 918 758 1132 or 918 652 3328 and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them to disk. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is legally privileged.

Lou Ann Moudy
City Attorney for Okmulgee, OK.
111 E. 4th St.
Okmulgee, OK 74447
918 758 1132 or 918 652-3328

We are at a loss as to how to effectively collect outstanding fines, costs and warrants. Our local jail wants to charge way too much and we can't collect those jail fees when the offenders won't even pay their fines or warrants. What are some solutions to collections? We already use a warrant collection service (AMS). We have done warrant sweeps with little success. Any other alternatives? CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy the message and contact the sender to report the email error. The message an its attachments may not be copied, shared, distributed, or used in any manner by anyone other than the intended recipient. The receipt of this email does not create an attorney client relationship, unless that relationship already exists independent of this email. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by reply e-mail at cityattorney@okmcity.net or by telephone at 918 758 1132 or 918 652 3328 and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them to disk. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is legally privileged. Lou Ann Moudy City Attorney for Okmulgee, OK. 111 E. 4th St. Okmulgee, OK 74447 918 758 1132 or 918 652-3328

ML

Matt Love

Tue, Dec 7, 2021 3:59 PM

I think this is a common issue for all cities and towns. Where I'm
prosecutor, we had stacks upon stacks of open cases going back decades
where a person either FTA'ed for arraignment or had a judgment that they
hadn't made a payment on for decades. Long time Judge and Prosecutor had
left within a year or two of each other and the new Judge and I looked into
the issue and the Judge made the decision to clear the tickets off the
books by dismissing the ones that had no judgment (FTAs on arraignments)
and modifying the judgments for the old judgments that had never and would
never be paid.

For more current citations, my experience has been that people with traffic
charges/judgments only come in to see us if they get picked up on our
warrant or when they want to get their license reinstated. I know most
Court Clerks (but not all) understand and follow the process for suspending
DLs. But that's about the only "stick" we have to enforce judgments beyond
the bench warrant.

I've never done this, but there is 11 O.S. 27-122(B) which allows the Judge
to certify the amount owed to the District Court for entry on the judgment
docket. You then have the ability to use the remedies available for
collecting civil judgments. Issue there, of course, is whether it would be
cost effective to do that since there is a cost to pursuing that and it may
cost more than you could realistically collect.

There's also the Rule 8 / Constitutional issue on ability to pay that has
to be taken into account. The way the question was asked, I get the
impression that we are talking about people who ghost us rather than those
who will show up but don't have the ability to pay. But I at least wanted
to note that as there are several class action lawsuits across the Country,
including at least 1 against an Oklahoma Municipality right now alleging
the Constitutional claim that they refer to as a running debtors prisons.
Short version is that you cannot jail a person for failing to pay unless
you have found that they have the ability to pay but are wilfully choosing
not to pay.

Matt

On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 4:42 PM Lou Ann Moudy louann@moudylaw.com wrote:

We are at a loss as to how to effectively collect outstanding fines, costs
and warrants. Our local jail wants to charge way too much and we can’t
collect those jail fees when the offenders won’t even pay their fines or
warrants. What are some solutions to collections? We already use a
warrant collection service (AMS). We have done warrant sweeps with little
success. Any other alternatives?

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files
or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential
information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, please destroy the message and contact the sender to report the
email error. The message an its attachments may not be copied, shared,
distributed, or used in any manner by anyone other than the intended
recipient. The receipt of this email does not create an attorney client
relationship, unless that relationship already exists independent of this
email.

If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for
delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you
have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by
reply e-mail at cityattorney@okmcity.net or by telephone at 918 758 1132
or 918 652 3328 and destroy the original transmission and its attachments
without reading them or saving them to disk. This email is covered by the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is legally
privileged.

Lou Ann Moudy

City Attorney for Okmulgee, OK.

111 E. 4th St.

Okmulgee, OK 74447

918 758 1132 or 918 652-3328

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org

I think this is a common issue for all cities and towns. Where I'm prosecutor, we had stacks upon stacks of open cases going back decades where a person either FTA'ed for arraignment or had a judgment that they hadn't made a payment on for decades. Long time Judge and Prosecutor had left within a year or two of each other and the new Judge and I looked into the issue and the Judge made the decision to clear the tickets off the books by dismissing the ones that had no judgment (FTAs on arraignments) and modifying the judgments for the old judgments that had never and would never be paid. For more current citations, my experience has been that people with traffic charges/judgments only come in to see us if they get picked up on our warrant or when they want to get their license reinstated. I know most Court Clerks (but not all) understand and follow the process for suspending DLs. But that's about the only "stick" we have to enforce judgments beyond the bench warrant. I've never done this, but there is 11 O.S. 27-122(B) which allows the Judge to certify the amount owed to the District Court for entry on the judgment docket. You then have the ability to use the remedies available for collecting civil judgments. Issue there, of course, is whether it would be cost effective to do that since there is a cost to pursuing that and it may cost more than you could realistically collect. There's also the Rule 8 / Constitutional issue on ability to pay that has to be taken into account. The way the question was asked, I get the impression that we are talking about people who ghost us rather than those who will show up but don't have the ability to pay. But I at least wanted to note that as there are several class action lawsuits across the Country, including at least 1 against an Oklahoma Municipality right now alleging the Constitutional claim that they refer to as a running debtors prisons. Short version is that you cannot jail a person for failing to pay unless you have found that they have the ability to pay but are wilfully choosing not to pay. Matt On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 4:42 PM Lou Ann Moudy <louann@moudylaw.com> wrote: > We are at a loss as to how to effectively collect outstanding fines, costs > and warrants. Our local jail wants to charge way too much and we can’t > collect those jail fees when the offenders won’t even pay their fines or > warrants. What are some solutions to collections? We already use a > warrant collection service (AMS). We have done warrant sweeps with little > success. Any other alternatives? > > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files > or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential > information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, please destroy the message and contact the sender to report the > email error. The message an its attachments may not be copied, shared, > distributed, or used in any manner by anyone other than the intended > recipient. The receipt of this email does not create an attorney client > relationship, unless that relationship already exists independent of this > email. > > > > If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for > delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information > contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you > have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by > reply e-mail at cityattorney@okmcity.net or by telephone at 918 758 1132 > or 918 652 3328 and destroy the original transmission and its attachments > without reading them or saving them to disk. This email is covered by the > Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is legally > privileged. > > > > Lou Ann Moudy > > City Attorney for Okmulgee, OK. > > 111 E. 4th St. > > Okmulgee, OK 74447 > > 918 758 1132 or 918 652-3328 > > > > > -- > Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org > To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org >

DD

david davis

Tue, Dec 7, 2021 4:12 PM

Several of my clients use the collection law firm below and have had good results.
They capture state tax refunds and use other methods.

Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins & Mott, L.L.P.
Attn: Tony Fidelie, Partner
3401 N.W. 63rd Street, Suite 601
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73116
Telephone Number: (800) 525-2481
Email: tfidelie@pbfcm.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This transmission is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521 and intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) This e-mail message is intended only for the personal use of the recipient(s) named above. This message is or may be an attorney-client communication and as such privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message.

s/ David A. Davis
LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A. DAVIS
4312 N. Classen Blvd.
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73118
405 840-6353
405 557-0777 (FAX)
ddavislaw@live.com mailto:ddavislaw@live.com

From: Matt Love matt.love@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 7, 2021 9:59 AM
To: Lou Ann Moudy louann@moudylaw.com
Cc: OAMA@lists.imla.org OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Re: collection of court fines, costs, warrants

I think this is a common issue for all cities and towns. Where I'm prosecutor, we had stacks upon stacks of open cases going back decades where a person either FTA'ed for arraignment or had a judgment that they hadn't made a payment on for decades. Long time Judge and Prosecutor had left within a year or two of each other and the new Judge and I looked into the issue and the Judge made the decision to clear the tickets off the books by dismissing the ones that had no judgment (FTAs on arraignments) and modifying the judgments for the old judgments that had never and would never be paid.

For more current citations, my experience has been that people with traffic charges/judgments only come in to see us if they get picked up on our warrant or when they want to get their license reinstated. I know most Court Clerks (but not all) understand and follow the process for suspending DLs. But that's about the only "stick" we have to enforce judgments beyond the bench warrant.

I've never done this, but there is 11 O.S. 27-122(B) which allows the Judge to certify the amount owed to the District Court for entry on the judgment docket. You then have the ability to use the remedies available for collecting civil judgments. Issue there, of course, is whether it would be cost effective to do that since there is a cost to pursuing that and it may cost more than you could realistically collect.

There's also the Rule 8 / Constitutional issue on ability to pay that has to be taken into account. The way the question was asked, I get the impression that we are talking about people who ghost us rather than those who will show up but don't have the ability to pay. But I at least wanted to note that as there are several class action lawsuits across the Country, including at least 1 against an Oklahoma Municipality right now alleging the Constitutional claim that they refer to as a running debtors prisons. Short version is that you cannot jail a person for failing to pay unless you have found that they have the ability to pay but are wilfully choosing not to pay.

Matt

On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 4:42 PM Lou Ann Moudy <louann@moudylaw.com mailto:louann@moudylaw.com> wrote:

We are at a loss as to how to effectively collect outstanding fines, costs and warrants. Our local jail wants to charge way too much and we can’t collect those jail fees when the offenders won’t even pay their fines or warrants. What are some solutions to collections? We already use a warrant collection service (AMS). We have done warrant sweeps with little success. Any other alternatives?

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy the message and contact the sender to report the email error. The message an its attachments may not be copied, shared, distributed, or used in any manner by anyone other than the intended recipient. The receipt of this email does not create an attorney client relationship, unless that relationship already exists independent of this email.

If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by reply e-mail at cityattorney@okmcity.net mailto:cityattorney@okmcity.net or by telephone at 918 758 1132 or 918 652 3328 and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them to disk. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is legally privileged.

Lou Ann Moudy

City Attorney for Okmulgee, OK.

111 E. 4th St.

Okmulgee, OK 74447

918 758 1132 or 918 652-3328

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org mailto:oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org mailto:oama-leave@lists.imla.org

Several of my clients use the collection law firm below and have had good results. They capture state tax refunds and use other methods. Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins & Mott, L.L.P. Attn: Tony Fidelie, Partner 3401 N.W. 63rd Street, Suite 601 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73116 Telephone Number: (800) 525-2481 Email: tfidelie@pbfcm.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This transmission is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521 and intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) This e-mail message is intended only for the personal use of the recipient(s) named above. This message is or may be an attorney-client communication and as such privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. s/ David A. Davis LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A. DAVIS 4312 N. Classen Blvd. OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73118 405 840-6353 405 557-0777 (FAX) ddavislaw@live.com<mailto:ddavislaw@live.com> ________________________________ From: Matt Love <matt.love@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 7, 2021 9:59 AM To: Lou Ann Moudy <louann@moudylaw.com> Cc: OAMA@lists.imla.org <OAMA@lists.imla.org> Subject: [Oama] Re: collection of court fines, costs, warrants I think this is a common issue for all cities and towns. Where I'm prosecutor, we had stacks upon stacks of open cases going back decades where a person either FTA'ed for arraignment or had a judgment that they hadn't made a payment on for decades. Long time Judge and Prosecutor had left within a year or two of each other and the new Judge and I looked into the issue and the Judge made the decision to clear the tickets off the books by dismissing the ones that had no judgment (FTAs on arraignments) and modifying the judgments for the old judgments that had never and would never be paid. For more current citations, my experience has been that people with traffic charges/judgments only come in to see us if they get picked up on our warrant or when they want to get their license reinstated. I know most Court Clerks (but not all) understand and follow the process for suspending DLs. But that's about the only "stick" we have to enforce judgments beyond the bench warrant. I've never done this, but there is 11 O.S. 27-122(B) which allows the Judge to certify the amount owed to the District Court for entry on the judgment docket. You then have the ability to use the remedies available for collecting civil judgments. Issue there, of course, is whether it would be cost effective to do that since there is a cost to pursuing that and it may cost more than you could realistically collect. There's also the Rule 8 / Constitutional issue on ability to pay that has to be taken into account. The way the question was asked, I get the impression that we are talking about people who ghost us rather than those who will show up but don't have the ability to pay. But I at least wanted to note that as there are several class action lawsuits across the Country, including at least 1 against an Oklahoma Municipality right now alleging the Constitutional claim that they refer to as a running debtors prisons. Short version is that you cannot jail a person for failing to pay unless you have found that they have the ability to pay but are wilfully choosing not to pay. Matt On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 4:42 PM Lou Ann Moudy <louann@moudylaw.com<mailto:louann@moudylaw.com>> wrote: We are at a loss as to how to effectively collect outstanding fines, costs and warrants. Our local jail wants to charge way too much and we can’t collect those jail fees when the offenders won’t even pay their fines or warrants. What are some solutions to collections? We already use a warrant collection service (AMS). We have done warrant sweeps with little success. Any other alternatives? CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy the message and contact the sender to report the email error. The message an its attachments may not be copied, shared, distributed, or used in any manner by anyone other than the intended recipient. The receipt of this email does not create an attorney client relationship, unless that relationship already exists independent of this email. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by reply e-mail at cityattorney@okmcity.net<mailto:cityattorney@okmcity.net> or by telephone at 918 758 1132 or 918 652 3328 and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them to disk. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is legally privileged. Lou Ann Moudy City Attorney for Okmulgee, OK. 111 E. 4th St. Okmulgee, OK 74447 918 758 1132 or 918 652-3328 -- Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org<mailto:oama@lists.imla.org> To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org<mailto:oama-leave@lists.imla.org>

AM

Amanda Mullins

Thu, Jan 27, 2022 8:39 PM

I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts?

Thank you,

Amanda

Amanda Mullins

The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC

401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533

Chickasha, OK 73023

T (405) 224-0237

amanda@amullinslaw.com

This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address listed above. Thank you.

I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts? Thank you, Amanda Amanda Mullins The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC 401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533 Chickasha, OK 73023 T (405) 224-0237 amanda@amullinslaw.com This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address listed above. Thank you. ________________________________

JM

Jon Miller

Thu, Jan 27, 2022 8:48 PM

I would be concerned that this "beautification fee" could arguably be a tax. See, City of Tulsa v. Air Tulsa, Inc., attached, and 68 O.S. §2705.

Jonathan E. Miller
City Attorney
City of Mustang
1501 N. Mustang Road
Mustang, Oklahoma 73064
Telephone: (405) 376-7746
Facsimile: (405) 376-7721

This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments. If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you should not share this email with others. Sharing this email may result in a loss of the attorney-client privilege.

From: Amanda Mullins Amanda@amullinslaw.com
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:40 PM
To: OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Beautification Fee

I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts?

Thank you,

Amanda

Amanda Mullins

The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC

401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533

Chickasha, OK 73023

T (405) 224-0237

amanda@amullinslaw.com mailto:amanda@amullinslaw.com

This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address listed above. Thank you.

I would be concerned that this "beautification fee" could arguably be a tax. See, City of Tulsa v. Air Tulsa, Inc., attached, and 68 O.S. §2705. Jonathan E. Miller City Attorney City of Mustang 1501 N. Mustang Road Mustang, Oklahoma 73064 Telephone: (405) 376-7746 Facsimile: (405) 376-7721 This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments. If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you should not share this email with others. Sharing this email may result in a loss of the attorney-client privilege. From: Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:40 PM To: OAMA@lists.imla.org Subject: [Oama] Beautification Fee I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts? Thank you, Amanda Amanda Mullins The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC 401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533 Chickasha, OK 73023 T (405) 224-0237 amanda@amullinslaw.com<mailto:amanda@amullinslaw.com> This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address listed above. Thank you. ________________________________

RD

Roy D. Tucker

Thu, Jan 27, 2022 10:03 PM

We'd requested this AG opinion back in 2012, because we wanted to add a police vehicle fee to our citations. Essentially, the AG said as long as the increase in the fine didn't exceed the statutory max it could be used for any lawful purpose. Although every situation is different, I hope you find this helpful.

https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?id=465539&hits=2195+2180+2168+

Roy D. Tucker
City Attorney
City of Muskogee
229 W. Okmulgee
Muskogee, Oklahoma 74401
(918) 684-6276
rtucker@muskogeeonline.org

From: Jon Miller JMiller@cityofmustang.org
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:49 PM
To: Amanda Mullins Amanda@amullinslaw.com; OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Re: Beautification Fee

I would be concerned that this "beautification fee" could arguably be a tax. See, City of Tulsa v. Air Tulsa, Inc., attached, and 68 O.S. §2705.

Jonathan E. Miller
City Attorney
City of Mustang
1501 N. Mustang Road
Mustang, Oklahoma 73064
Telephone: (405) 376-7746
Facsimile: (405) 376-7721

This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments. If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you should not share this email with others. Sharing this email may result in a loss of the attorney-client privilege.

From: Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com mailto:Amanda@amullinslaw.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:40 PM
To: OAMA@lists.imla.org mailto:OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Beautification Fee

I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts?

Thank you,

Amanda

Amanda Mullins

The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC

401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533

Chickasha, OK 73023

T (405) 224-0237

amanda@amullinslaw.com mailto:amanda@amullinslaw.com

This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address listed above. Thank you.

We'd requested this AG opinion back in 2012, because we wanted to add a police vehicle fee to our citations. Essentially, the AG said as long as the increase in the fine didn't exceed the statutory max it could be used for any lawful purpose. Although every situation is different, I hope you find this helpful. https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?id=465539&hits=2195+2180+2168+ Roy D. Tucker City Attorney City of Muskogee 229 W. Okmulgee Muskogee, Oklahoma 74401 (918) 684-6276 rtucker@muskogeeonline.org From: Jon Miller <JMiller@cityofmustang.org> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:49 PM To: Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com>; OAMA@lists.imla.org Subject: [Oama] Re: Beautification Fee I would be concerned that this "beautification fee" could arguably be a tax. See, City of Tulsa v. Air Tulsa, Inc., attached, and 68 O.S. §2705. Jonathan E. Miller City Attorney City of Mustang 1501 N. Mustang Road Mustang, Oklahoma 73064 Telephone: (405) 376-7746 Facsimile: (405) 376-7721 This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments. If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you should not share this email with others. Sharing this email may result in a loss of the attorney-client privilege. From: Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com<mailto:Amanda@amullinslaw.com>> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:40 PM To: OAMA@lists.imla.org<mailto:OAMA@lists.imla.org> Subject: [Oama] Beautification Fee I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts? Thank you, Amanda Amanda Mullins The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC 401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533 Chickasha, OK 73023 T (405) 224-0237 amanda@amullinslaw.com<mailto:amanda@amullinslaw.com> This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address listed above. Thank you. ________________________________

ML

Matt Love

Thu, Jan 27, 2022 10:29 PM

The statues distinguish between our maximum fines and maximum penalties on
citations, with penalties including fines and other costs and fees. A fine
is specific to the ordinance that was violated, while a flat fee would
apply to all or to a class of tickets (and, so, likely would not be found
to constitute a fine). The only concern I've had about these extra fees has
always been the statutory cap on Court Costs. If we are only empowered to
exercise specific powers (and those necessary to exercise those powers or
incidental to being a City), and the Court has limited our powers vis-a-vis
citations to $30 courts costs, no fines in excess of X and no penalty that
exceeds the penalty for the State law violation, then have we been given
the power to impose a non-court cost fee? AG says yes, so long as the
penalty does not exceed the same penalty for the State violation. I know a
lot of cities have tacked on fees to citations, and I've never heard of a
challenge (other than generic challenges to total fines or penalties). I've
not taken the position that a City can't do it - I just have that lingering
question/concern.

On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:03 PM Roy D. Tucker RTucker@muskogeeonline.org
wrote:

We’d requested this AG opinion back in 2012, because we wanted to add a
police vehicle fee to our citations. Essentially, the AG said as long as
the increase in the fine didn’t exceed the statutory max it could be used
for any lawful purpose. Although every situation is different, I hope you
find this helpful.

https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?id=465539&hits=2195+2180+2168
+

Roy D. Tucker

City Attorney

City of Muskogee

229 W. Okmulgee

Muskogee, Oklahoma 74401

(918) 684-6276

rtucker@muskogeeonline.org

From: Jon Miller JMiller@cityofmustang.org
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:49 PM
To: Amanda Mullins Amanda@amullinslaw.com; OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Re: Beautification Fee

I would be concerned that this “beautification fee” could arguably be a
tax. See, City of Tulsa v. Air Tulsa, Inc., attached, and 68 O.S.
§2705.

Jonathan E. Miller

City Attorney

City of Mustang

1501 N. Mustang Road

Mustang, Oklahoma 73064

Telephone: (405) 376-7746

Facsimile: (405) 376-7721

This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that
is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please
notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments.
If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you
should not share this email with others. Sharing this email may result in
a loss of the attorney-client privilege.

From: Amanda Mullins Amanda@amullinslaw.com
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:40 PM
To: OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Beautification Fee

I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on
municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service
fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts?

Thank you,

Amanda

*Amanda Mullins *

The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC

401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533

Chickasha, OK 73023

T (405) 224-0237

amanda@amullinslaw.com amanda@amullinslaw.com

This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it
is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not
intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This
message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or
attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you
received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without
copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling
(405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please
shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address
listed above. Thank you.

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org

The statues distinguish between our maximum fines and maximum penalties on citations, with penalties including fines and other costs and fees. A fine is specific to the ordinance that was violated, while a flat fee would apply to all or to a class of tickets (and, so, likely would not be found to constitute a fine). The only concern I've had about these extra fees has always been the statutory cap on Court Costs. If we are only empowered to exercise specific powers (and those necessary to exercise those powers or incidental to being a City), and the Court has limited our powers vis-a-vis citations to $30 courts costs, no fines in excess of X and no penalty that exceeds the penalty for the State law violation, then have we been given the power to impose a non-court cost fee? AG says yes, so long as the penalty does not exceed the same penalty for the State violation. I know a lot of cities have tacked on fees to citations, and I've never heard of a challenge (other than generic challenges to total fines or penalties). I've not taken the position that a City can't do it - I just have that lingering question/concern. On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:03 PM Roy D. Tucker <RTucker@muskogeeonline.org> wrote: > We’d requested this AG opinion back in 2012, because we wanted to add a > police vehicle fee to our citations. Essentially, the AG said as long as > the increase in the fine didn’t exceed the statutory max it could be used > for any lawful purpose. Although every situation is different, I hope you > find this helpful. > > > > > https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?id=465539&hits=2195+2180+2168 > + > > > > > > Roy D. Tucker > > City Attorney > > City of Muskogee > > 229 W. Okmulgee > > Muskogee, Oklahoma 74401 > > (918) 684-6276 > > rtucker@muskogeeonline.org > > > > > > > > *From:* Jon Miller <JMiller@cityofmustang.org> > *Sent:* Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:49 PM > *To:* Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com>; OAMA@lists.imla.org > *Subject:* [Oama] Re: Beautification Fee > > > > I would be concerned that this “beautification fee” could arguably be a > tax. *See, City of Tulsa v. Air Tulsa, Inc*., attached, and 68 O.S. > §2705. > > > > Jonathan E. Miller > > City Attorney > > City of Mustang > > 1501 N. Mustang Road > > Mustang, Oklahoma 73064 > > Telephone: (405) 376-7746 > > Facsimile: (405) 376-7721 > > > > > > This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that > is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please > notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments. > If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you > should not share this email with others. Sharing this email may result in > a loss of the attorney-client privilege. > > > > > > > > *From:* Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:40 PM > *To:* OAMA@lists.imla.org > *Subject:* [Oama] Beautification Fee > > > > I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on > municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service > fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts? > > > > Thank you, > > > > Amanda > > > > *Amanda Mullins * > > > > The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC > > 401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533 > > Chickasha, OK 73023 > > > > T (405) 224-0237 > > *amanda@amullinslaw.com <amanda@amullinslaw.com>* > > > > This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it > is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not > intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This > message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or > attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you > received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without > copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling > (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please > shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address > listed above. Thank you. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > -- > Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org > To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org >

RK

Rick Knighton

Thu, Jan 27, 2022 11:05 PM

Section 27-126 of Title 11 states:

Except as provided in Section 14-111 of this title and subject to other limitations or exceptions imposed by law, the municipal governing body shall determine by ordinance the court costs and fees that may be charged and collected by the clerk of the court. Court costs shall not exceed the sum of Thirty Dollars ($30.00) plus the fees and mileage of jurors and witnesses. The clerk of the court is authorized to charge and collect the fees as determined by the municipal body.

We have construed this provision to permit the governing body of a municipality to authorize a court to collect a maximum of $30 as “court costs” and “fees” that are reasonably related to criminal prosecution. We used this construction to justify charging criminal defendants a technology fee. Because a “beautification fee” is not related to criminal prosecution, I belive its more likely to be considered a tax instead of a fee.

This e-mail is the property of the City Attorney’s office, City of Norman, Oklahoma, and the information contained in this e-mail is protected by the attorney-client and/or the attorney work product privilege. It is intended only for the use of the individual named above and the privileges are not waived by virtue of this having been sent by e-mail. If the person actually receiving this message or any other reader of the message is not the named recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us and return the original message.

From: Matt Love matt.love@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 4:29 PM
To: Roy D. Tucker RTucker@muskogeeonline.org
Cc: Jon Miller JMiller@cityofmustang.org; Amanda Mullins Amanda@amullinslaw.com; OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: EXTERNAL EMAIL : [Oama] Re: Beautification Fee

The statues distinguish between our maximum fines and maximum penalties on citations, with penalties including fines and other costs and fees. A fine is specific to the ordinance that was violated, while a flat fee would apply to all or to a class of tickets (and, so, likely would not be found to constitute a fine). The only concern I've had about these extra fees has always been the statutory cap on Court Costs. If we are only empowered to exercise specific powers (and those necessary to exercise those powers or incidental to being a City), and the Court has limited our powers vis-a-vis citations to $30 courts costs, no fines in excess of X and no penalty that exceeds the penalty for the State law violation, then have we been given the power to impose a non-court cost fee? AG says yes, so long as the penalty does not exceed the same penalty for the State violation. I know a lot of cities have tacked on fees to citations, and I've never heard of a challenge (other than generic challenges to total fines or penalties). I've not taken the position that a City can't do it - I just have that lingering question/concern.

On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:03 PM Roy D. Tucker <RTucker@muskogeeonline.org mailto:RTucker@muskogeeonline.org> wrote:
We’d requested this AG opinion back in 2012, because we wanted to add a police vehicle fee to our citations. Essentially, the AG said as long as the increase in the fine didn’t exceed the statutory max it could be used for any lawful purpose. Although every situation is different, I hope you find this helpful.

https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?id=465539&hits=2195+2180+2168+

Roy D. Tucker
City Attorney
City of Muskogee
229 W. Okmulgee
Muskogee, Oklahoma 74401
(918) 684-6276
rtucker@muskogeeonline.org mailto:rtucker@muskogeeonline.org

From: Jon Miller <JMiller@cityofmustang.org mailto:JMiller@cityofmustang.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:49 PM
To: Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com mailto:Amanda@amullinslaw.com>; OAMA@lists.imla.org mailto:OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Re: Beautification Fee

I would be concerned that this “beautification fee” could arguably be a tax. See, City of Tulsa v. Air Tulsa, Inc., attached, and 68 O.S. §2705.

Jonathan E. Miller
City Attorney
City of Mustang
1501 N. Mustang Road
Mustang, Oklahoma 73064
Telephone: (405) 376-7746
Facsimile: (405) 376-7721

This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments. If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you should not share this email with others. Sharing this email may result in a loss of the attorney-client privilege.

From: Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com mailto:Amanda@amullinslaw.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:40 PM
To: OAMA@lists.imla.org mailto:OAMA@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Beautification Fee

I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts?

Thank you,

Amanda

Amanda Mullins

The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC

401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533

Chickasha, OK 73023

T (405) 224-0237

amanda@amullinslaw.com mailto:amanda@amullinslaw.com

This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address listed above. Thank you.

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org mailto:oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org mailto:oama-leave@lists.imla.org

Section 27-126 of Title 11 states: Except as provided in Section 14-111 of this title and subject to other limitations or exceptions imposed by law, the municipal governing body shall determine by ordinance the court costs and fees that may be charged and collected by the clerk of the court. Court costs shall not exceed the sum of Thirty Dollars ($30.00) plus the fees and mileage of jurors and witnesses. The clerk of the court is authorized to charge and collect the fees as determined by the municipal body. We have construed this provision to permit the governing body of a municipality to authorize a court to collect a maximum of $30 as “court costs” and “fees” that are reasonably related to criminal prosecution. We used this construction to justify charging criminal defendants a technology fee. Because a “beautification fee” is not related to criminal prosecution, I belive its more likely to be considered a tax instead of a fee. Rickey J. Knighton II | Assistant City Attorney | City of Norman 201 West Gray | P.O. Box 370 | Norman, Oklahoma 73070 ' 405.217.7700 | 6 405.366.5425 | • rick.knighton@normanok.gov<mailto:rick.knighton@normanok.gov> | þ www.normanok.gov<http://www.normanok.gov/> This e-mail is the property of the City Attorney’s office, City of Norman, Oklahoma, and the information contained in this e-mail is protected by the attorney-client and/or the attorney work product privilege. It is intended only for the use of the individual named above and the privileges are not waived by virtue of this having been sent by e-mail. If the person actually receiving this message or any other reader of the message is not the named recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us and return the original message. From: Matt Love <matt.love@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 4:29 PM To: Roy D. Tucker <RTucker@muskogeeonline.org> Cc: Jon Miller <JMiller@cityofmustang.org>; Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com>; OAMA@lists.imla.org Subject: EXTERNAL EMAIL : [Oama] Re: Beautification Fee The statues distinguish between our maximum fines and maximum penalties on citations, with penalties including fines and other costs and fees. A fine is specific to the ordinance that was violated, while a flat fee would apply to all or to a class of tickets (and, so, likely would not be found to constitute a fine). The only concern I've had about these extra fees has always been the statutory cap on Court Costs. If we are only empowered to exercise specific powers (and those necessary to exercise those powers or incidental to being a City), and the Court has limited our powers vis-a-vis citations to $30 courts costs, no fines in excess of X and no penalty that exceeds the penalty for the State law violation, then have we been given the power to impose a non-court cost fee? AG says yes, so long as the penalty does not exceed the same penalty for the State violation. I know a lot of cities have tacked on fees to citations, and I've never heard of a challenge (other than generic challenges to total fines or penalties). I've not taken the position that a City can't do it - I just have that lingering question/concern. On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:03 PM Roy D. Tucker <RTucker@muskogeeonline.org<mailto:RTucker@muskogeeonline.org>> wrote: We’d requested this AG opinion back in 2012, because we wanted to add a police vehicle fee to our citations. Essentially, the AG said as long as the increase in the fine didn’t exceed the statutory max it could be used for any lawful purpose. Although every situation is different, I hope you find this helpful. https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?id=465539&hits=2195+2180+2168+ Roy D. Tucker City Attorney City of Muskogee 229 W. Okmulgee Muskogee, Oklahoma 74401 (918) 684-6276 rtucker@muskogeeonline.org<mailto:rtucker@muskogeeonline.org> From: Jon Miller <JMiller@cityofmustang.org<mailto:JMiller@cityofmustang.org>> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:49 PM To: Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com<mailto:Amanda@amullinslaw.com>>; OAMA@lists.imla.org<mailto:OAMA@lists.imla.org> Subject: [Oama] Re: Beautification Fee I would be concerned that this “beautification fee” could arguably be a tax. See, City of Tulsa v. Air Tulsa, Inc., attached, and 68 O.S. §2705. Jonathan E. Miller City Attorney City of Mustang 1501 N. Mustang Road Mustang, Oklahoma 73064 Telephone: (405) 376-7746 Facsimile: (405) 376-7721 This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments. If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you should not share this email with others. Sharing this email may result in a loss of the attorney-client privilege. From: Amanda Mullins <Amanda@amullinslaw.com<mailto:Amanda@amullinslaw.com>> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 2:40 PM To: OAMA@lists.imla.org<mailto:OAMA@lists.imla.org> Subject: [Oama] Beautification Fee I have a City that is wanting to implement a "beautification fee" on municipal citations. I have some concerns about fees that are not service fees or statutorily mandated. Any thoughts? Thank you, Amanda Amanda Mullins The Law Firm of Amanda Mullins PLLC 401 W Chickasha Ave., Suite 405 | P.O. Box 533 Chickasha, OK 73023 T (405) 224-0237 amanda@amullinslaw.com<mailto:amanda@amullinslaw.com> This is a privileged and confidential electronic mail transmission and it is meant only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It is not intended for transmission or receipt by any unauthorized persons. This message may constitute a privileged attorney-client communication and/or attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient and you received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender by reply or by calling (405) 224-0237. If you have any hard copies of this transmission, please shred the same and mail the contents to Amanda Mullins at the address listed above. Thank you. ________________________________ -- Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org<mailto:oama@lists.imla.org> To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org<mailto:oama-leave@lists.imla.org>