Judge Allows Counties to Collect Jailing Fees : Superior Court: Ruling could mean cities must pay Ventura County $120 each time it books a prisoner. An appeal is expected.

A Sacramento Superior Court judge ruled on Friday that it is legal for Ventura County and other counties across the state to continue charging cities a processing fee for every prisoner booked into county jails.

The judge also ruled that counties could continue charging cities for property tax collected on behalf of school, fire and other special tax districts.

Judge James T. Ford’s ruling means that cities across Ventura County may be forced to pay a $120 jail-booking fee for every prisoner their individual police departments bring to one of the county’s holding facilities.

The 10 cities in Ventura County have refused to pay the booking fees since they were imposed in July, 1990, and county officials have retaliated by withholding more than $5.8 million in property taxes due to the cities.

California’s counties and cities have been waging legal battles over the jail-booking fees and the tax collection charges since the California Legislature approved them in 1990, to help counties make up for losses in state funding.

In Ventura County, law enforcement and city government officials have opposed the fees almost from the day they were adopted by by the Board of Supervisors. Opponents claim they are an illegal double tax, since city-dwellers already pay for county jails through their property taxes.

Law enforcement officials also say the jail-booking fees have endangered public safety by forcing police agencies to release criminals after their arrests rather than take them to the county jail.

City and county officials expect the ruling to be appealed to a higher court, given the contentious nature of the dispute and the millions of dollars involved.

“The next step for the cities is to decide whether we appeal this ruling to the higher court,” said Camarillo City Manager Bill Little. “Obviously, if we are required to pay what we are now being assessed, it will be a major impact on our city and all the cities in the county.”

The legal battle between Ventura County and its 10 cities led to a separate lawsuit over the withheld property taxes. That suit was resolved in December, 1991, when Ford ruled that counties could not hold property tax monies in lieu of the booking fees.

But county officials said they have not returned the confiscated tax revenue because all of the legal issues have yet to be resolved.

“Until the money is available and truly ours, we plan on keeping what we have already collected in a trust, until all the legal issues and appeals have been resolved,” said Thomas O. Mahon, Ventura County assistant auditor-controller.

Mahon said the jail booking fees amounted to a substantial source of revenue for the county. “I guess you could say the county won the first round,” Mahon said.

Budget-conscious city officials are not the only administrators angered by the charges enacted in 1990.

Oxnard Police Chief Robert P. Owens and other law enforcement officials said that the fees have pressured police agencies from holding as many suspected criminals in jail. A report issued last year by Supervisor Maggie Erickson Kildee backed up the assertion of law enforcement officials showing that jail bookings have decreased by 45% since the fees took effect in 1990.

“And over time, the police officers are going to take the offenses they are arresting people for less seriously because of this situation,” Owens said.

The booking fee issue was spawned when the state Legislature approved the charges in 1990 as a way for counties to make up for state funding cutbacks that year.

Owens characterized it as “a terrible way to do business. It has encouraged one level of government to cannibalize another level,” he said.

Ventura County supervisors have supported the booking charges from the beginning, however, and were pleased with Friday’s ruling.

“This is a real plus for the county,” Erickson Kildee said. “We are really struggling with how to keep from having to make further and further (budget) cuts.”

Times staff writer Tina Daunt contributed to this article.