Residents, advocates press lawmakers to fund fines/fees reform bills amid $5M contingency in governor's proposal
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Public commenters urged the Joint Finance Committee to fund House Bills 132 and 133, arguing fines and fees disproportionately harm low‑income and Black residents; chair clarified the governor's recommended budget includes $5 million for HB133 and the fiscal note for HB132 was reported at $3.5 million and not included.
Dozens of residents and advocacy organizations told the Joint Finance Committee during the judicial branch hearing that House Bills 132 and 133 — which would eliminate or reduce certain court fees and require courts to consider ability to pay — should be funded in the FY26 budget.
Caitlin Richards, Mark Deshawn, staff from the Campaign to End Debtor's Prison and the Institute for Justice all said court fines and fees impose disproportionate burdens on low‑income and Black residents and can trigger warrants, license suspensions, and cycles of debt that hinder housing and employment.
Several speakers recounted personal or client experiences of fines pushing families into poverty. Rebecca Ash described her own recovery and the practical harm of unpaid fines on people trying to rebuild after substance use disorders and incarceration.
Chair and controller general staff clarified budgetary details in the hearing: the governor’s recommended budget includes $5,000,000 earmarked for House Bill 133; the fiscal note for HB133 was listed as indeterminable and the fiscal note for HB132 was reported to be approximately $3.5 million and was not included in the governor’s recommendation.
Advocates requested that the Joint Finance Committee consider the governor’s contingency and either preserve or increase funding to avoid shifting program costs to the poorest residents.