Panel hears court-fine collection proposal

PINE BLUFF — The City Council is considering using a collection agency to go after people who have been fined in Jefferson County District Court Division 2 but have not paid up.

Maxie Kizer, a Pine Bluff attorney representing White Hall-based Receivables Management Corp. of America, told the City Council that since the company — owned by Bea Cheesman, who also attended the meeting — contracted with Jefferson County in October, it has collected over $185,000 in fines owed to the county that had been assessed in District Court Division 1.

He said he was initially contacted by Judge Kim Bridgforth, who presides over Division 1, and asked if he could find a solution to the problem of unpaid fines.

“She brought to my attention several years ago that [there] were a vast number of past due fines, fees, and costs that had been imposed by her court but never collected,” Kizer said. “I did some research and discovered that there is a mechanism by which the court can enter into a contract for the collection of past due fines and costs.”

Kizer said Division 1 Court, which hears traffic and misdemeanor cases for Jefferson County, initially had over $1.3 million in fines dating back at least 15 years that had never been collected. He said he did not have an estimate on the amount of outstanding fines owed in Division 2 Court, which hears traffic and misdemeanor cases for the city, but he said the records filled at least five full-sized filing cabinets documenting unpaid fines going back as far as 2008.

“I would estimate there are at least a million dollars, if not 2 million, in overdue fines in those filing cabinets,”

Kizer told the council. “And unlike consumer debt, there is no statute of limitations on fines owed to the court.”

Kizer said typically that when unpaid fine collection is relegated to law enforcement, an arrest warrant is issued for the individual owing the fine, which requires that person to be located, arrested and often incarcerated.

“The problem is, that takes manpower,” he said. “You have to go out and arrest the individual and then go out and incarcerate them, which is an expense and a burden on the political subdivision. And, ironically, those individuals incarcerated for nonpayment of fines get a credit for every day they are incarcerated.”

Kizer said under that system, some people could wind up being jailed long enough to wipe out their fines while the jurisdiction that incarcerates them winds up with the expense of their upkeep while they are in jail.

“It’s a very inefficient way of collecting these debts,” he said.

Under the agreement reached with Bridgforth for Division 1, Receivables Management Corp. entered into a five-year contract with the county in which it collects a 30% commission on all gross past due fines, fees, and costs it recovers, as well as out-ofpocket expenses, such as service of process fees and writs of garnishment. In addition, Jefferson County waives all filing fees for writs of garnishment and the recording of judgments filed to create a property lien.

Kizer said he had discussed the proposal with District Judge John Kearney, who presides over Division 2, and said Kearney was amenable to the proposal.

“He is willing to write a letter to the City Council to that effect,” he said.

Not all council members received Kizer’s presentation favorably. Ivan Whitfield expressed concern that too many details were not known and the proposal should be fleshed out by going through the proper committee before coming to the full council.

“I did not know he was coming here tonight,” Whitfield said. “We’ve got someone standing here before us who is not on the agenda.”

Whitfield said the matter had been brought up in a Zoom meeting during one of the committees, but he said he was surprised by the presentation being brought to the council before it had been fully vetted.

“I said that day that I had an issue with the percentage, with the garnishment of some kind of property, I don’t recall all of it tonight,” he said. “But we talked about this on a Zoom meeting, and we said we would have it come to [the] Public Safety [committee], and I said to Alderman [Win] Trafford that I thought he was going to come to Public Safety so we could clear it up and clean it up before it came to the full council.”

Trafford responded that before any action can be taken on the proposal, it would have to be vetted before the committee, but he said he and Mayor Shirley Washington had agreed earlier that the presentation could be presented to the full council beforehand.

“My understanding was that this is just to be an introduction for all the council members,” Washington agreed. “There will be no decision made here tonight and there will be further discussion in the committee meeting.”

Alderman Steven Mays also objected, saying that he was not prepared to ask questions at the meeting.

“I would love to ask attorney Kizer a couple of questions, but because I was not prepared tonight, it’s like if I’m in his courtroom, he’s going to say let’s delay it until we address the issue,” Mays said. “I was not prepared for this tonight.”

Mays commented that if the city does contract with Receivables Management Corp. to collect fines, it would be “another tax or burden on our citizens.”

“That is money they owe,” said Alderman Joni Alexander.

Kizer pointed out that because the company is already collecting fines for Division 1, it has access to the database showing fines owed to Division 2 as well.

“Division 2 is just sitting there,” he said.

Cheesman, who has owned the debt collection company since 1996, told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that the contract with Division 1 was the company’s first foray into fine collections, that since it was founded in 1941, it had focused only on consumer debt. But, she said, by using the tools already at the disposal of the company, it made sense to branch out, and she said it makes sense for the courts as well.

“When you look at our feds as opposed to someone who is salaried with benefits, we’re a bargain,” Cheesman said. “That money is just sitting there and has been for years. We’re not only returning money to the economy, we’re doing it without filling up the jails.”

“Unlike consumer debt, there is no statute of limitations on fines owed to the court.” — Maxie Kizer, Pine Bluff attorney