The number of residents suing the city for what they claim are unconstitutional municipal fines policies has grown to six as the lawyers seek class action status that could potentially include 5 to 6 thousand plaintiffs.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs have stated an interest in resolving the case before it potentially expands its scope dramatically.

“There is no reason the city of Amarillo can’t improve its policy, save taxpayer money and settle this case,” said attorney Jeff Blackburn, who is representing the six plaintiffs along with attorney Chris Hoffman. “We are very interested in settling this because that is the reason we filed it in the first place: to fix the system.”

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in January, claims that the city’s policy prioritizes the collection of fines and fees over the Constitutional rights of citizens by jailing those that cannot afford to pay municipal fines for Class C misdemeanors. The suit states that the court did not make an effort to determine whether the defendants were indigent, or at poverty level. Instead, they were offered the choice of paying the fine or spending time in jail.

“None of the misdemeanors and offenses that these people are charged with in the beginning carried any jail time,” Hoffman said. “When they walk in, the only thing that can be levied against them is a fine and a fee. But it’s when they don’t pay these things that jail becomes the primary method that Amarillo and the city try to deal with it. The law says you must consider whether they are indigent, conduct an investigation into that and make a decision as to whether they can find another way to discharge their services”

Hoffman said that one of his recently added clients, Janet Cato, 49, was booked into Randall County jail in March of 2016 for $5,271 in outstanding fees stemming from 18 dog-related tickets, such as leash laws or barking, in 2013. Cato is an Army veteran, mother of three, former Pantex payroll clerk and Texas Department of Criminal Justice correctional officer. She had recently filed for disability for scoliosis and rheumatoid arthritis and could not pay her fines.

The court complaint states that Cato requested community service to pay off the fine or to serve her jail time on weekends. The judge told her that “In this court, there are two options: you can pay it or lay it.” Cato spent 52 consecutive days in jail.

“It could have been any of the judges, but the city has refused to give some of our client’s criminal files. It’s one of those things that I think most municipalities will turn over without an argument,” Hoffman said. “(Cato) was there by herself and the court has taken the position that they have no requirement to appoint (a lawyer) because it’s a civil fine. This becomes a question of access to justice and the Sixth Amendment right to a lawyer.”

In Texas, there are two lawsuits on this issue winding their way through courts, one in Amarillo and one in Austin.

Since 2003, Texas has had a law requiring counties of over 50,000 residents and cities with over 100,000 residents to improve municipal collections programs. In order to do that, the Office of Court Administration worked with jurisdictions to set up payment plans for defendants.

Recently, the Department of Justice sent out a letter clarifying their position to judges, lawmakers, prosecutors and defense attorneys. The DOJ urged courts to “review court rules and procedures within your jurisdiction to ensure that they comply with due process, equal protection, and sound public policy.” Sound public policy was requiring courts investigate whether the individual can pay the fines, consider alternatives, and provide meaningful notice of nonpayment when enforcing fines. The DOJ announced grants for states and courts to come into compliance with these rules.

Nathan Hecht, chief justice of Texas, and Scott Griffith, the director of research and court services with Texas’ OCA were both on the DOJ’s national task force looking at these issues.

“They are playing key roles in the national effort as well. Texas plans on applying for that funding from the DOJ,” said David Slayton, administrative director for the state’s Office of Court Administration and executive director of the state’s Judicial Council. “It will give judges more options than they have right now for developing tools to better determine indigence, partial indigence and expanding alternatives to monetary payment.”

Slayton said that the OCA and Judicial Council are working through a “full scale revision to the rules” for courts to determine indigence and offer alternatives, such as community service, before collections.

“To the degree that the rules change, we would be auditing (cities and counties) based on the new requirements,” Slayton said. “We would be checking if every defendant has the ability to pay and if the program failed the audit, they have 180 days to get back within compliance of the audit.”

Amarillo and Potter and Randall counties has never been audited by the OCA, but Slayton said they expect to get around to the area within the next year.

“If they fail to be within compliance they lose a significant ability to retain court revenue,” Slayton said. “They currently get 10 percent of court fees … for most jurisdictions of any size, that is a significant amount of revenue. There is significant incentive to comply. We have had several that fail their first audit, but we have never had a program fail a subsequent audit.”

Slayton said that the new revisions and recommendations will be sent to the Judicial Council on June 3.

The current deadline for a determination on the class action status of the lawsuit against Amarillo is Wednesday, Mar. 4, but additional filings for dismissal could push this date back.

City spokeswoman Sonja Gross declined to comment, saying the city does not discuss pending cases.

Mayor Paul Harpole said that he could not comment, but that the city council gets a review of legal issues every couple of months.

Blackburn and Hoffman have offered what they see to be an olive branch before the case potentially expands in size as a class action lawsuit and in scope, along with state legal revisions.

“What we’re ultimately interested in is changing the way this court system works and changing the policy of Amarillo,” Blackburn said. “We filed for class action certification and as this case continues on, it will become much more time consuming and expensive for everybody involved. There are lots of reasons to fix this problem now, and no reasons to keep delaying what will be inevitable change. We are willing to discuss how to do so at a minimum of expense for the city, right now.”