Historically, Oklahoma has relied heavily on fines and fees imposed on criminal defendants to fund its courts, law enforcement, and public services. This funding model is particularly unfair to rural communities, where economic disadvantages are more pronounced, and the burden of these financial penalties falls disproportionately on those least able to pay. This year, Governor Stitt and state leaders have prioritized reducing the burden of court fines and fees on Oklahoma families. While these fees are an economic drain statewide, this funding model is particularly unfair to rural communities, where economic disadvantages are more pronounced, and the burden of these financial penalties falls disproportionately on those least able to pay. The consequences of this system are far-reaching: underfunded crime prevention and victim’s services, law enforcement agencies diverting time and resources to act as debt collectors, and uneven funding to our Executive agencies. In rural Oklahoma, these issues are exacerbated by systemic poverty, higher incarceration rates, and racial disparities, creating a cycle of financial hardship and legal entanglement that undermines community stability.
What are Fines & Fees?
When a person is convicted of a crime they are generally assessed monetary penalties in the form of fines. These fines are designed as punishment and theoretically create a deterrent effect to keep others from committing crimes. Fines are usually defined by statute - for example, the offense of criminal trespass carries a fine “not to exceed …. $250.00.” On the other hand, fees are assessed to help cover the cost of operation for the criminal legal system. Things such as transcript fees, clerk fees, and lab fees are assessed to defendants in order to keep these operations running. Importantly, fines and fees do not include restitution - which are payments directly to the victim of the crime assessed by courts to make victims whole.
Fines & Fees in Rural Oklahoma
Statistically, 80% of all criminal defendants are indigent, meaning they cannot afford to obtain a lawyer to defend them. Defendants who cannot afford a lawyer are unlikely to be able to pay the assessed fines and fees as well. One study “meta-analysis” found that anywhere from 50% to 90% of all criminal defendants are behind on their fines and fees payments. In Oklahoma County, a vast majority of criminal defendants could not make a single payment and the average amount paid was a mere $43. Meanwhile, failure to pay fines and fees could result in further jail time, with one study finding around 20% of all those who are behind in their payments are incarcerated specifically due to their nonpayment.
The consequences of this system are dire for rural Oklahoma. The continual cycle of debt and incarceration destroys communities by forcing individuals to make payments that they cannot afford. Excessive fines and fees force families to make impossible choices between feeding their families and repaying court debt, all the while dealing with significant barriers to employment that come with a criminal record.
The USDA categorizes counties based on how rural they are, with category 9 being the most rural. In Oklahoma, category 9 counties are some of the poorest counties in our State, with the median annual household income nearly 12% lower than the State average. In fact, the top 8 most impoverished counties are classified as rural, while rural Oklahomans have much lower access to quality jobs. As fines and fees are not responsive to income, for families in Atoka County, that $250 dollar fine is more expensive in practice than in Tulsa County.
Additionally, criminal legal system contact—and the resulting fines and fees associated with it—are not felt equally across the state. Poverty is a significant predictor of criminal legal involvement, and this link disproportionately impacts the poorest areas of Oklahoma, creating a vicious cycle of financial instability and legal entanglement. For instance, Atoka County has a per capita jail incarceration rate more than 2.5 times higher than Tulsa County. Arrest rates mirror these disparities, further burdening rural communities that are already struggling economically. Ultimately, fines and fees assessments are consistently higher in rural counties. This means that rural counties bear a disproportionately high burden of fines and fees, even though their residents are less able to afford them. Low income rural families should not be forced to subsidize the cost of courts in urban communities like Tulsa and Oklahoma City.
Even within rural Oklahoma, the burden of fines and fees is not evenly distributed. In Love County, African Americans make up just 2.8% of the total population but account for 28% of those incarcerated in the county jail. This disparity predictably carries over to arrests as well. Studies have shown that the racial makeup of an area can predict fines and fees issuances, with the practice being utilized more dramatically in areas characterized by concentrations of politically powerless minorities. Likewise, it has been documented that municipal governments with higher black populations rely more heavily on fines and fees for revenue. In rural Oklahoma, African Americans and Native Americans bear a disproportionate share of this financial burden. Since 2012, these groups have contributed significantly to the nearly $700 million in fines and fees levied across the state, despite having higher poverty rates, lower income, and less access to quality employment.
A Call for Reform
Oklahoma’s reliance on fines and fees as a funding mechanism is both inequitable and unsustainable. Reforming this system would require diversifying revenue sources for courts and public services to ensure these essential functions are not funded on the backs of the most vulnerable. Policy changes such as alternatives to incarceration for nonpayment, and increased investment in crime prevention and victim’s services could alleviate the cycle of debt and incarceration that devastates rural communities. By addressing these systemic inequities, Oklahoma can create a fairer, more just system that prioritizes community well-being over punitive revenue generation.
