House debates bill to let governments seek emergency-response cost reimbursement after conviction

Representative Brent Goodfellow presented House Bill 62 and described drafting corrections to the text. He said the measure would permit government entities to seek civil reimbursement for emergency response costs that result from criminal conduct once the responsible person is convicted. "This would require the person that chose to commit the scribe [sic], and then after he's convicted, it would provide a civil remedy for the police department or the fire department to recoup the costs that they incurred," the sponsor said.

Members asked practical and constitutional questions. Representative Christiansen asked whether the civil claim could affect plea bargaining; the sponsor said the reimbursement action is independent and pursued after criminal proceedings conclude. Representatives also asked how juvenile cases would be handled; the sponsor and other members said the remedy could apply following conviction and that reasonable costs would be sought. Representative McCartney and others framed the bill as a potential revenue source for strained law‑enforcement budgets, while opponents asked whether the measure would be applied only in serious cases that justify pursuit after conviction.

Floor discussion clarified that the bill targets recoveries after conviction (not routine traffic tickets), and that the sponsor intended the remedy to be reasonable and limited to incidents where emergency services were utilized because of criminal conduct (for example, DUI with injury). The transcript records extensive questioning and clarification but does not include a final recorded vote in the provided excerpt.