Spalding County sentence-enforcement director warns state law limiting fee collection will cut revenue; offers new 30-for-30 diversion option

Director Marty Matthews, who leads Spalding County’s sentence-enforcement office, told the Board of Commissioners on April 21 that a state audit and interpretation of Official Code of Georgia Annotated § 42-8-103 means the county can legally collect only three months of probation supervision fees per case. Matthews said the change will affect roughly 200 cases each month and could reduce collections by about $9,000 per month unless alternative arrangements are implemented.

Matthews said the office’s adopted budget is about $650,000 annually, of which roughly $600,000 pays staff salaries; the remainder covers operations and security for court-report dates. She told commissioners the office originally planned to be budget-neutral, but the statutory limitation has created a shortfall. Matthews said she is working with the county manager and the state’s municipal probation oversight unit (MPOU) to identify acceptable alternatives and to pre-clear proposed changes.

Judge Stacker explained the background: the statute and guidance stem from the state’s prohibition on placing people on probation solely to extract long-term fee payments. Under the auditor’s interpretation, if a person could have simply paid a fine up front instead of being placed on probation, the court cannot collect beyond three months of supervision fees. The ruling affects some magistrate and state-court practices that previously conditioned supervision on fee schedules or driver’s-license requirements.

Matthews and the judges described programmatic responses already in place. Matthews said she created a program called “30 for 30,” a pretrial/pre-sentence option in which defendants can pay $30 to delay closure for 30 days; if they complete the period, the case can close without probation and with no additional supervision fees. Judge Stacker and Matthews said the 30-for-30 program has had early success and was reviewed favorably by auditors.

The office and judges discussed other options previously used elsewhere, including converting fee obligations to community service or tying rehabilitation activities (GED, driver’s license courses, job-readiness training) to case resolution. Matthews said state rules restrict some of those alternatives and that the office is seeking ways to scale alternatives that reduce recidivism without relying on supervision-fee revenue.

Commissioners asked how the budget gap would be handled; Matthews said she and the county manager are reconciling different estimates and will submit a formal request if needed. County staff flagged the potential financial impact and noted that the county is pursuing internal adjustments and program innovations to limit additional county funding requirements. Matthews reported the department’s caseload is manageable and that most of her budget pays staff, not discretionary program spending.

Commissioners and judges also noted a separate development: the General Assembly approved an additional state court judge for Spalding County to take effect after gubernatorial appointment; county leaders estimated the local cost for implementing that new judgeship and associated staffing at roughly $2,100,000 (county estimate for initial implementation and related expenses). Commissioners asked to see the revised budget figures from Matthews and the county manager; Matthews said she would provide updated numbers and that discussions with the MPOU and auditors are ongoing.