AAC
COUNTY LAW UPDATE ‘Prisoners of Municipalities’ finally defined by state Supreme Court
C
ities have a duty to pay the county for housing “Prisoners of Municipalities,” an undefined term until the recent victory for Mississippi County in a lawsuit filed by the City of Blytheville. Definition of “Prisoners of Municipalities”: The Arkansas Supreme Court has now said, “[W]e agree with the County that the term ‘prisoners of municipalities’ as used in section 12-41-506 includes those offenders who are arrested by municipal law enforcement officers and delivered to the county jail for incarceration, from the point of intake until (a) charging on a felony offense; (b) sentencing on a misdemeanor offense; and (c) release on a municipalordinance violation. Mississippi County v. City of Blytheville, 2018 Ark. 40, at 16. No Jail Tax Offset: The City of Blytheville also asserted that it was entitled to an offset of the jail fees it owed on account of the amounts its residents had paid toward the county’s jail tax. The Supreme Court rejected that argument: “The circuit court’s finding that the City can be given credit for a countywide jail tax paid by its residents, who are also residents of the County itself, is illogical and is not authorized by the provisions in section 12-41-506.” Mississippi County v. City of Blytheville, 2018 Ark. 40, at 17. Ark. Code Ann. §12-41-506 Controls: The Supreme Court’s opinion reaffirms and clarifies that Ark. Code Ann. §12-41-506, entitled “Expenses of Municipal Prisoners Held in County Jails,” controls. “That code section allows counties to choose one of several arrangements with the local cities. Contract Option: A city and a county have the freedom to enter into “an agreement on jail costs” whereby the county houses the city’s prisoners on a “per inmate day” basis or for a flat monthly rate. See also Ark. AG Opinion No. 2009-043. A county may permissibly enter into a separate and distinct agreement for housing prisoners with each city that wishes to share its jail. See Ark. AG Opinion No. 2009-043. Per Diem Fee Ordinance Option: The county is
under no duty to enter into an agreement with local cities and may, instead, pass an ordinance setting a daily fee for housing prisoners of municipalities. See Ark. Code Ann. § 12Jason Owens 41-506 (a)(1) stating that the Risk Management county quorum court “may by Legal Counsel ordinance establish a daily fee.” If the quorum court chooses to set a daily fee by ordinance, it then has a statutory duty to base that fee upon “the reasonable expenses which the county incurs in keeping such prisoners in the county jail.” Ark. Code Ann. § 12-41-506(a)(2); Ark. AG Opinion No. 2009-043. In Mississippi County v. City of Blytheville, the Circuit Judge said the County’s “method of calculating a reasonable jail fee — dividing total actual expenses [which included capital costs/depreciation] by total inmate days to arrive at a “per inmate day” fee amount — is reasonable and appropriate.” Recommendation Not to Seek Unbilled Arrearages: The Mississippi County v. City of Blytheville decision eliminates — by statutory clarification — one of the nagging disputes between counties and cities and is a watershed moment in the jail funding arena. Our recommendation is to apply this decision prospectively. In other words, we recommend you not all-of-a-sudden seek payment for arrearages that have historically not been billed. On the other hand, this new decision provides the opportunity to decide, anew, how the county wants to proceed from this point forward. We recommend that the county try to come to a working agreement with the local cities. If no agreement can be reached, then a per diem ordinance can be enforced — using the definition now finally provided by the Arkansas Supreme Court.
Jason Owens is an attorney with the Rainwater, Holt & Sexton law firm. Owens represented Mississippi County in the Mississippi County v. City of Blytheville law suit.
www.arcounties.org 24
COUNTY LINES, SPRING 2018
