This column is a week late.
Hindsight is always 20/20, and I realize now, of course, I should have delayed publishing my thoughts last week about Lookout Mountain's residential zoning misadventures. That column could have waited til today.
Columnist David MartinI also realize I'm probably arguing a very unpopular position with my take on the Victims Assistance Assessment, which Wednesday got the thumbs-up from the Hamilton County Commission by a 5-2 margin (Tim Boyd and Randy Fairbanks were absent for the vote). Because, let's be honest, who doesn't want to help the Partnership for Families, Children and Adults and the Children's Advocacy Center?
After the idea had been tossed around for a few years, county commissioners voted to give local judges the ability to impose an additional $45 fee on criminal defendants who have already racked up fines and court costs equaling more than $500.
What's another $45, right?
And while County Mayor Jim Coppinger said the fee isn't automatic - it's up to individual judges to levy it - he argued its value by stating the beneficiary organizations "fill a void that we (the county) are not able to fund."
He's certainly correct about their worth. As a former social worker I can attest to the great work both outfits perform. Between the two of them they provide a rape crisis center and a domestic violence shelter while also supervising visitation between noncustodial parents and children who've been removed from their homes. Additionally, they complete forensic interviews, medical examinations and therapy for child victims.
Incredible stuff. However, if the nonprofits "fill a void" (and a big one at that), why is the county passing the buck to criminals instead of picking up the tab itself? I mean, I get the easy-to-sell optics of it: "bad" people footing the bill for people in need. Still, that's a faulty way to go about funding programs, providing services or sustaining void-filling organizations.
Why? Well, first off because we don't need incentives to make more arrests. Commissioner Greg Beck (one of the two "nay" votes) spoke to this point when he lamented on Wednesday that the criminal justice system is often used "as a money-maker, and here we go again."
When budgets are supplemented by arrest and conviction fees, it can introduce the wrongheaded notion that it's okay to put more people in handcuffs since it helps pay for needed line items. If you want to know how detrimental this thinking can be for a community, just consider that some of the more well-known examples of the practice have taken place in Ferguson, Mo., where ticket-writing increased to make up for sales tax shortfalls in 2010 and some 9,000 arrest warrants were issued in 2013 for unpaid traffic and parking tickets and housing-code violations.
I'm going to guess that no one reading thinks following the Ferguson model is a good idea.
But let's get back to the question from a few paragraphs back: Why, if the services of these nonprofits are so vital to the people in this area, haven't they made their way into an annual budget yet? That seems like the best place for them.
The Times Free Press' Paul Leach reported that as of now, neither agency has revenue projections for what the new fee will yield because they're unsure if criminals will pay or judges if will assess it.
Perhaps judges should hold off for a while, and maybe these organizations might find their ways into future county budgets.
Contact David Allen Martin at davidallenmartin423@gmail.com and follow him on Twitter @DMart423.