County allows more time for criminal diversion fees to be paid

Criminal defendants who want to participate in a diversion program that allows them to avoid conviction or sentencing will no longer have to pay a $75 fee upfront, under an ordinance change approved by the county board last week.

Defendants will still have to pay the $75 fee – plus all contracted service fees needed to manage their case – but they will be able to do so over time through a payment plan.

The change was recommended by the Public Safety Committee, which discussed the issue with county officials at its Aug. 8 meeting.

Ruth Heinzl, supervisor of the county’s diversion programs, said requiring defendants to pay the $75 entry fee upfront often leads to costly delays in the judicial process, because court hearings need to be postponed when the fee isn’t paid right away.

At a previous committee meeting, Heinzl had suggested getting rid of the $75 fee altogether, but after speaking with district attorney Theresa Wetzsteon, she developed additional options for supervisors to consider.

Both Heinzl and Wetzston spoke highly of the diversion programs, pointing out the cost savings in the court process and the expedited restitution to victims, while acknowledging that each of them comes at the issue from a different perspective.

Wetzsteon said the diversion programs could be considered a privilege for defendants, since they can avoid paying other fines and court costs if they preempt a conviction.

“It’s an option we provide to offenders that we don’t have to provide,” she said. “It’s certainly not mandatory.”

Diversion programs are offered either before a defendant is officially charged – usually a first-time offender – or after a charge has been filed. If the program is successfully completed, the defendant can avoid a criminal conviction and any penalties that come with it.

Heinzel said diversion programs offer many benefits to the court system, including a significantly reduced rate of recidivism among those who participate – about two-thirds of people who use the diversion programs do not reoffend in the future.

Diverted cases also prevent bottlenecks and backlogs in the court system, with a 9 percent decrease in the county’s caseload last year due to the programs, Heinzl said.

One of the biggest benefits goes toward victims, who often receive any restitution they are owed much faster than if the defendant had to go through the full court process. Since the diversion programs were started in 2017, Heinzl said they have collected $1.1 million in restitution.

The $75 fee generates an average of $24,420 per year in revenue for the court system, but Heinzl was quick to point out that it does not fully cover the cost to collect the fees or compensate for the lost time when hearings have to be rescheduled due to a defendant’s inability to pay it right away. She noted that a typical 15-minute court hearing costs $175 to pay the judge, attorneys and court staff, and that does not include other rescheduling costs.

Besides the $75 participation fee, defendants also pay between $60 and $120 in case management fees to third-party groups that oversee the diversion programs. Under the proposal passed by the board, these contractual fees would also be collected by the county through a payment agreement. Heinzl said these fees would likely increase as a result.

The county currently collects an average of $14,615 per year in case management fees, but that only covers a fraction of the nearly $250,000 cost for those contractual services.

Supervisor Jason Wilhelm asked Heinzl what percentage of people are unable to pay the $75 fee, but Heinzl said that’s not “super clear.”

“Most people end up paying it,” she said, but not always right away.

Wetzsteon said the decision about the $75 fee is more of a “philosophical” one, since the criminal justice system is not a “money-maker,” and its costs will never be covered by user fees. She said supervisors need to decide if they still want defendants to “pay for what they’re getting” – an opportunity to not pay potentially hundreds in fines and court costs if they are convicted.

At the same time, Wetzsteon said she doesn’t want to do anything to jeopardize the diversion programs, since they do save money and time for the court system.

“We’re very grateful for this program,” she said. “I think it’s been a very rewarding program for our prosecutors. We see a tangible difference in lowering recidivism rates.”

However, Wetzsteon said the county has no data on how many defendants actually can’t afford the $75 fee based on their income. Heinzl said, from her experience with the program, affordability is a real issue, especially for those with drug addictions and other problems.

Ultimately, the committee voted to keep the $75 fee in place, but allow defendants to pay it and other contractual fees back over time. Supervisor Bruce Lamont voted against the motion after pointing out that the county has no data on how much court time is actually wasted when defendants don’t pay the fee upfront.

Heinzen said “diversion” is practiced in a lot of ways, including when someone gets pulled over for speeding and the police officer lets them off with a warning.

“I think a lot of residents in Marathon County appreciate warnings, right?” she said. “Being told ‘What you did was wrong. Don’t do it again.’”