County has for the past 2+ years charged municipalities a $50.00 "booking fee" for each person booked in on a city warrant or arrest.

I have not found a state statute that specifically provides what costs can be charged to a city by a jail for the maintenance of a prisoner.

I have found that if a sheriff confines a violator of only a municipal ordinance, then the city is responsible for the maintenance of the prisoner. Op. Atty. Gen. JM-1009 (1989) at 2-3. This responsibility arises when (a) the prisoner is not incarcerated for violating a state criminal law, and (b) the city ordinance involves the regulation of purely city affairs and does not cover the same ground as a criminal state law. But if the city ordinance incorporates some state law (such as speeding when the speed limit is set by the city) then the county is liable for the cost.

What fee, if any, can the county charge a municipality for accepting their prisoners?

Thanks in advance.

In Bell County, we contract with the individual cities as to a daily rate for housing their municipal offenders.

Rick,

Thanks for replying... what do you mean by municipal offenders? Is there a fee assessed for all defendants brought in by city officers(class B's and higher) or is the fee only on those arrested solely for violation of municipal ordinances?

If the cities are charged for everyone brought in, does anyone have a statute available that allows counties to assess this fee?

We contract with some cities to house their Class C offenders, and they do not maiintain a city jail. The county bears the cost for Class B and up prisoners. Of course, until our new jail is finished in about a year, we contract with some other counties to house our overflow.

As far as I know, there isn't a statute that specifically authorizes counties to charge municipalities fees for accepting and housing their arrestees/prisoners. I think counties that charge such fees generally do so pursuant to interlocal agreements. Attorney General Opinion JM-151 (1984) suggests that a county may not charge a city a fee for housing its prisoners unless the county and the city have contracted for that purpose.

Thanks Jim;

Read that opinion as well, all though the issue appeared to be costs associated with an inmate
-before- the inmate was magistrated. I believe our county cannot charge the cities and have recommended to the comm. court that they terminate this program.

Now all I have to do is worry about the cities seeking reimbursement for the past 3 years of fees... If the cities' paid the fee without protest can they seek reimbursement under Sec. 118.131 of the Local Gov't. Code?

Assuming that the county has been charging the booking fee for "municipal" prisoners (pure municipal ordinance violators or state law violators who have not yet been magistrated), they wouldn't necessarily have to terminate the program. If this booking fee arrangement benefits both parties, it could be continued by entering into interlocal agreements between the county and the municipalities. If you would like to discuss this further, feel free to give me a call at the Travis County Attorney's Office 512-854-9513.

I think you have several defenses to any city claim for fee reimbursement. Immunity comes to mind. Also, I do not think the legal underpinning of the AG opinions is that secure. The concept of "immediately" is actually a very elastic word. It merely appears immediate.

[This message was edited by Ray on 01-23-08 at .]