Feral Jundi

In the past I have written about the effectiveness of offense industries, and specifically bounty hunting.  The strength of the private bail industry comes from the profit motive of the act and from them having incentive to get their bail money back if their client runs, and that is a good thing. These men and women work hard in this industry and earn every penny they make doing a dangerous service that benefits us all.

What Colorado is trying to do here is to ruin private enterprise, and expand the size of government through another means of capturing revenue. Meanwhile, if the bail industry is destroyed by this greedy government program, who will run after the criminals that run? The police? Hell, they can’t even keep up with the current warrants in that state.

At the bottom of these articles I posted the contact information for all the state Senators in Colorado. Take your pick, or write them all, but either way, tell them to vote no on Senate Bill 11-186.  –Matt

Dog The Bounty Hunter Fighting Bill That Would Free Criminals
Apr 26, 2011
Duane “Dog” Chapman isn’t just busy yanking criminals off the street — he’s fighting the politicians trying to put them back on the street!
Dog is leading the fight in Colorado against a state Senate bill he and the bill’s critics say will put bail bondsmen out of business — and flood society with criminals.
“This time I’m not barking. I’m here to take a real bite out of crime,” Dog told RadarOnline from Colorado. “I’m here to stop tax funded bonds ?and return bail bonds to the private sector where it belongs.”
Authorities in Colorado on Tuesday will convene to vote on the divisive Senate Bill 11-186,  sponsored by Democratic Sen. John Morse and Republican Rep. Mark Waller, both of Colorado Springs.
The bill would put into play a deposit bond, which would grant pre-trial services to offer bonds to incarcerated defendants.
Here’s how it works:
If the accused cannot can’t get bonded out by a private bail company, the court will make one available to them.  Once the judge sets bond, the defendant would be able to pay up to 15 percent of the amount.
Under this system, 50 percent of the revenue would go to the court fees for the service. If the defendant is found not guilty, the other 50 percent would be returned to them. If they are found guilty, whatever funds are left would be given back to them.
One former lawman who operates his bail bonds company out of Colorado Springs, told KRDO -TV that if the bill is passed into a law, hundreds of people in his industry will be out of work.
Not only that, but who is going to chase down the criminals who don’t show up to court. Dog the Bounty Hunter told RadarOnline.com: “This state has hundreds of thousands of warrants! no Bounty Hunters ?  Ha, not,” he scoffed in a warning.
Opponents of the bill said that the current system employed by bail bondsmen works better because there is an added level of accountability. Whoever posts bond has something to lose if the arrested person does not show.
Colorado’s state Legislature tried to pass a comparable bill in 2008, but it was later withdrawn.
Story here.
—————————————————————-
Wanted men
by Chet Hardin
Bills rarely attract a stronger group of supporters. Representatives from throughout the criminal justice world have lined up behind Senate Bill 11-186, the alternative bonding bill sponsored by Democratic Sen. John Morse and Republican Rep. Mark Waller, both of Colorado Springs.
Crafted from recommendations made in 2008 by the well-respected Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, the legislation would establish an alternative bonding option, known as a deposit bond, in Colorado. It would be similar to bonds that exist in 28 other states, as well as in Washington, D.C. and the federal system.
In it, a judge sets bail. The defendant then pays a percentage of that bail, up to 15 percent, to the court. If the defendant shows for trial, he’ll receive up to half of it back. (If convicted, he’ll receive whatever is left over after fines, fees and restitution costs have been paid.) The rest of the money will wind up going to a county pretrial service agency, which works closely with the courts.
The bill is scheduled to be brought up in the Senate Appropriations Committee today. (It was scheduled to be heard April 15, but Morse was a no-show.) And what happens should highlight the strength of the bail bonds lobby in Colorado.
Bondsmen have been putting up a fight to defend their monopoly on a large, and profitable, industry. And the last time the state Legislature attempted to pass a similar bill, in 2008, it was withdrawn.
Pretrial option
A pretrial service agency provides two unique services for the court. First, it gathers information about the defendant’s ties to the community and family, and also about any issues such as alcoholism that might make the defendant less likely to show up for trial. Agency reps present that information to a judge during the bail hearings — which 4th Judicial District Attorney Dan May says is of considerable help.
The second function of pretrial services is to provide monitoring that can become a condition of a defendant’s release on bond. This could mean a weekly urinalysis or drug test, curfews, even substance-abuse treatment and anger management classes, all paid for by the defendant.
Statewide, 10 jurisdictions have pretrial services programs. According to Sharon Winfree, president of Colorado Association of Pretrial Services, in those jurisdictions, fewer than 5 percent of defendants in the programs fail to appear for trial. In Larimer County, where she is located, it is fewer than 2 percent.
El Paso County eliminated its program in 2008 due to budget cuts, but Commissioner Sallie Clark, for one, says she would like to see the program reinstated.
State Public Defender Douglas Wilson supports the bill, and is a backer of pretrial services. As he puts it, “From the defense perspective, I don’t even like pretrial services. Because if my client could be on bond without urinalysis, great, that means I don’t have a new case [if the client tests positive].”
The “trade-off,” he says, is that when a defendant complies with a judge’s pretrial conditions, his lawyer has a great sentencing argument.
“The people who make it, it is going to help with their disposition in their case in front of the court,” he says. Plus, he adds, when defendants with at-risk behavior are put in treatment programs, “it is substantially safer for the public.”
An industry threatened
Posting bond is big business. According to the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, in 2010 there were 55,908 bonds posted to the tune of $338 million. The bondsmen collect a non-refundable premium of up to 15 percent, and can demand collateral to cover the full bond.
Steve Mares, vice-president of the Professional Bail Agents of Colorado, argues that the state benefits from a robust bail bond industry. Its nearly 500 bail agents pay about $500,000 in taxes a year, and license fees alone amount to $40,000 a year.
And then there’s the issue of what happens when someone skips bail. Currently, bondsmen cover those losses — to the tune of more than $2 million a year. In addition, Mares says, they hunt the runners down.
Except that many law enforcement personnel say that doesn’t really happen very much.
Arapahoe Sheriff J. Grayson Robinson, who sits on the Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, says the majority of people who have skipped out on their bail are apprehended through routine contacts with law enforcement, such as traffic stops: “It is a very rare situation that a bondsman brings a fugitive into our facility.”
A Jefferson County study has echoed Robinson’s claim.
For his part, Mares swears it flies in the face of logic; how would bondsmen stay in business if they didn’t track down those clients who ran? Regardless, he says what’s motivating government in this push for change is the same thing he’s accused of being motivated by: money.
“[Pretrial services] is a very helpful tool for the judges,” he says. “And since 50 percent of the money that is collected by the court goes to help pay for these agencies, it would give judges added incentive [to use deposit bonds].”
Waller disagrees. He says there will still be defendants that judges won’t trust to anything but a high-dollar bail. And he points out that while deposit bonds may have cost the industry some business in other states, they haven’t killed it.
“The bonding agents are trying to pitch this as a growing government bill at the expense of the private sector,” says Waller. “That is absolutely ridiculous and a complete bunk argument.”
Story here.
—————————————————————-
Proposed ‘Alternative Bond Program’ Threatens to Eliminate Colorado Bail Industry
March 14, 2011

by Collateral Staff
Colorado bail agents are gearing up to fight the proposed bill that threatens their industry.
Although the private bail industry in Colorado suspected that trouble was brewing, most everyone was still blindsided by the swift introduction of Senate Bill 11-186, a bill that could potentially do major damage to the livelihood of Colorado bail agents.
John Clarke, lobbyist for the Professional Bail Agents of Colorado (PBAC), said they had been aware that something could be on the horizon, but nobody heard any firm details until March 7 at noon. Then, they suddenly received word of a committee hearing scheduled for 1:30 p.m. March 9.
“It seems strange that a bill that had been in the works for so long would need to be brought to the Colorado General Assembly as a very, very late bill and then be pushed ahead with light-speed velocity,” Clarke said.
How might SB 11-186 affect the Colorado bail industry??Simply put, SB 11-186 would likely put around 485 Colorado bail agents out of business, as well as eliminate the need for the eight surety companies that insure the bail agents. Those numbers are according to a recent article in the Denver Post.
SB 11-186 would give judges the choice to recommend an alternative bond program for defendants instead of working with private bail agents. According to Clarke, the current language of SB 11-186 gives judges such strong incentive to recommend the alternative bond program instead of commercial surety that it could spell the end of private bail in Colorado.
“Senate Bill 11-186 is being touted as another ‘alternative’ to commercial surety,” Clarke said. “In reality it is written in such a way that the judges can decide which process they will use, and since 50 percent of the deposit bail that is collected can be used to fund pre-trial services, and the other half for court costs, fines, restitution and – maybe – if anything is left it will be refunded to the defendant, it seems obvious that the judges will choose to require deposit bail.”
Some of the key points of SB 11-186 include:
•    The pre-trial services program will be allowed to retain up to 50 percent of funds posted through the alternative bond program. The funds will be used for securing the appearance of defendants who fail to appear in court, developing and administering pre-trial treatment services, and any other costs associated with a pre-trial release program.
•    If the defendant appears in court and fulfills all terms and conditions of the alternative bond, the remaining money will be returned to the defendant at the conclusion of the case. If the defendant is convicted, the remaining money will go toward any fines, fees, costs, surcharges, and restitution assessed against the defendant. The balance of the defendant’s money after these financial obligations, if any, will be returned to the defendant.
How did the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing go??Backers of commercial surety flocked to the March 9 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing to lend their support. Clarke said that so many people showed up in opposition to the bill that the hearing was moved to a larger room.
Steve Mares, PBAC vice president and AboutBail.com member, said he was impressed by the turnout of people who were there to support bail agents, but he wished that their opportunity to provide testimony had been set up differently.
“I believe the turnout was great. There were roughly 100 bail agents that attended. It started out in room 356, but there were clearly too many people. There were several people there opposing the bill because a lot of jobs are going to be lost from this thing, no doubt,” Mares said. “As far as testimony, the opportunity for the bail industry to go first was too bad. It would’ve been nice to go second and listen to our opponents first.”
After testimony first from the bill’s opposition and later the bill’s sponsors on March 9, the committee voted 6-2 in favor of sending SB 11-186 to an Appropriations Committee hearing. That hearing has not been scheduled as of March 11, but Clarke estimated that it would happen on Friday, March 18.
What is next for SB 11-186??Clarke filled AboutBail.com in on what to expect during the evaluation process of SB 11-186 over the coming months:
“The Appropriations Committee will not take testimony. However, if it passes from that committee, there will be debate on the floor of the Senate. The next opportunity for public input will be in the House Judiciary Committee – assuming it gets passed in the Senate,” he said.
In addition to the efforts from PBAC and RMBA, several bail insurance companies have joined in the fight and put their lobbyists to work. Mares said he has spoken with Dennis Bartlett, president of the American Bail Coalition, and is already receiving strong support from the organization. The American Bail Coalition is composed of approximately 12 of the nation’s leading surety companies, and Mares said they and their team of lobbyists have begun work on the campaign against SB 11-186.
“We are actively working like heck to lobby and get before legislators to convince them why this bill does not make sense,” Mares said.
How can you help fight the bill??Mares encourages people to express to Colorado senators and state representatives that SB 11-156 is going to “take food from people’s mouths and that people are going to be losing jobs.”
It’s also helpful to emphasize to lawmakers that private bail is more effective at ensuring court appearances by defendants – which protects the public’s safety – and at saving money for taxpayers.
Monetary contributions are also helpful to defray the cost of hiring lobbyists, Clarke said. To aid PBAC in their fight against SB 11-156, you can send checks to: Professional Bail Agents of Colorado, P.O. Box 7692, Loveland, CO 80537.
Story here.
—————————————————————-
Senator Pat Steadman
Cap: 303-866-4861
E-mail: pat.steadman.senate@state.co.us
Senator Mary Hodge
Cap: 303-866-4855
E-mail: mary.hodge.senate@state.co.us
Senator Bob Bacon
Cap: 303-866-4841
E-mail: bob.bacon.senate@state.co.us
Senator Angela Giron
Cap: 303-866-4878
E-mail: angela.giron.senate@state.co.us
Senator Kevin Grantham
Cap: 303-866-4877
E-mail: kevin.grantham.senate@state.co.us
Senator Ted Harvey
Cap: 303-866-4881
E-mail: ted.harvey.senate@state.co.us
Senator Rollie Heath
Cap: 303-866-4872
E-mail: rollie.heath.senate@state.co.us
Senator Keith King K.
Cap: 303-866-4880
E-mail: keith@keithking.org
Senator Kent Lambert
Cap: 303-866-4835
E-mail: senatorlambert@comcast.net
Senator Jeanne Nicholson
Cap: 303-866-4873
E-mail: jeanne.nicholson.senate@state.co.us