POPLARVILLE — On Tuesday a Picayune attorney, saying the county Justice Court system has no way of collecting and is not tracking delinquent fines, proposed to supervisors implementing a Justice Court probation system.

However, supervisors took no action on attorney Kevin R. Roberts’ proposal after the attorney for the board of supervisors, Joe Montgomery, advised the board not to enter an agreement with Roberts.

“You can look at the number of fines not paid,” Roberts told supervisors, “and the number is quite substantial. Court officials were unable to give me a figure on how high it is, and they could not easily retrieve that figure.”

He claimed that estimates are as much as 30 percent of fines levied by the Justice Court system go uncollected.

During a June board meeting, supervisors said that a report for the previous month’s collections on Justice Court unpaid fines totaled $600. The outstanding fines are estimated to be approximately $800,000, supervisors have said in previous meetings. A Hattiesburg collection agency is trying to collect the unpaid fines.

Board president and supervisor Anthony Hales, Sr., has said that the delinquent fines are hard to collect since many of them are owed by out-of-state violators. Some officials have said, off-the-record, that if the late fines could be collected, it would help close budget gaps as the county prepares to hammer out its 2011-2012 new budget by the October 1 deadline.

Roberts said a violator who is fined and unable to pay the fine would be placed on probation and tracked by his probation service company, would be subject to a drug screen and paying off his fine on a monthly basis for as long as the probation is required. Or he could pay it off all at one time.

He said if the person fails any aspect of his probation requirements, he would be picked up and jailed once a warrant is issued. Right now, Roberts told supervisors, the violator is released and the courts have no way of tracking him. Many do not pay their fines, and unless they are picked up on another violation, the court has no contact with them, said Roberts.

The violator would pay a probation fee to Roberts’ company and the service would be rendered to the county at no cost, but violators would be tracked and accounted for, said Roberts. The attorney said the system would benefit the county through collection of  fines, court costs and restitution being paid and offenders being punished in accordance with court rulings.

Claimed Roberts, “Right now, there is nobody tracking that; no one who says in three months, ‘Hey, John Doe did not pay his fine;’ there’s nothing right now tracking that, nothing. If this system I am proposing, at no cost to the county, would be implemented, I would be tracking that.”

Roberts said all the information on each person would be entered into a computer and the county would have instant access to any information on any individual. “Not only would this be done at no cost to the county, but it would save the county money by removing some of the heavy workload off the clerks in trying to keep up with this,” he said.

“Not only would you have additional income from fines being tracked and paid, but the actual costs of collecting the fines would go down for the county,” said Roberts.

Roberts said he was before the board because the state law states that supervisors are obligated to approve any contract for a Justice Court probation service.

Montgomery told supervisors he had researched the statute and that supervisors have authority to contract with Roberts, and that Harrison County has a similar system. Harrison County pays for indigent violators use of the system, he said and that if the county wants a probation service, it should contract with the Mississippi Department of Corrections, which provides a Justice Court system service.

Montgomery also said that the county could hire additional clerks in the Justice Court system to handle the tracking of violators and payment of fines, “so it would all be in-house.” He said they would be doing the same thing as Roberts proposes doing.

Supervisors took no action on Roberts’ proposal and did not say whether or not they would pursue other alternatives, either.

Supervisors have of times discussed how to collect the outstanding Justice Court fines a number and have mentioned on several times hiring someone who would be specifically in charge of that process only, but nothing has so far transpired on the issue.

Supervisor Hudson Holliday has twice told fellow supervisors, concerning the collection of late fines, that nothing will be done about it or the problem solved, unless someone is specifically directed to solve and handle the problem and given a time frame under which to make the collections and held responsible for solving the problem.

“Nothing gets done unless someone is specifically placed in charge of the process,” Holliday told fellow supervisors.

Supervisors plan to meet again on July 25 at 9 a.m.