Gov. Kevin Stitt called on the Legislature to overhaul Oklahoma’s court fines and fees system this month, prompting praise from justice reform advocates and questions about how the change would be paid for and implemented.
“We know that high fees keep people trapped in this cycle and contribute to higher recidivism,” Stitt said during his Feb. 3 State of the State address. “That doesn’t make sense. I want to change that structure and make sure that a second chance is actually a second chance and get rid of fines, fees and court costs for good.”
Oklahoma’s court system and several state agencies are partially funded through fines and fees assessed to criminal defendants. Critics have long said the funding mechanism is inefficient, disproportionately affects the poor and ties up criminal justice resources in debt collection work.
A handful of reform measures filed this session, including bills to eliminate a $40 per month fee assessed to defendants and forbid courts from using private debt collectors, look to alleviate the financial burden on criminal defendants.
“It’s an incremental step towards eliminating the fees,” said Sarah Couture, a regional director for the Fines and Fees Justice Center. “We’re not able to eliminate them all this session, but this is a good start.”
Here’s what you need to know about court fines and fees reform in Oklahoma:
Q. How reliant are Oklahoma’s district courts on fines and fees?
A. About 25% of the Oklahoma Administrative Office of the Courts’ $82.32 million operating budget in fiscal 2024 came from court fines. That’s a significant decline from 2016, when state appropriations comprised less than one-quarter of the agency’s appropriations.
Court collections dropped significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic as district courts closed and the unemployment rate soared. Payments to the state’s judicial fund kept declining post-pandemic, dropping from $29.5 million in fiscal 2021 to $20.7 million in fiscal 2025.
Oklahoma court officials requested a $4.14 million special appropriation from the Legislature to offset continued declines in court collections. Diana O’Neal, the state’s administrative director of the courts, told lawmakers she expects just $15.5 million to be available in the Oklahoma Judicial Fund in fiscal 2026.
“From 2011 through 2019, collections were coming in very consistently,” O’Neal said. “It’s been all over the board since COVID.”
Q. What other state agencies are partially funded by court collections? And how much does that add up to for criminal defendants?
A. Several public safety agencies, including the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, Oklahoma District Attorney’s Council and Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training, are partially funded through fee assessments. The attorney general’s office receives a $3 fee per conviction to fund its victim’s advocacy and services unit.
The dozens of fees add up quickly. A person convicted of misdemeanor public intoxication will be assessed a minimum of $545 in fees, while someone convicted of feloniously pointing a firearm will face at least $965 in fees, according to an analysis by the Fines and Fees Justice Center.
Q. Can a debtor be arrested if they don’t pay?
A. Yes, but courts are directed to do so only if the defendant willfully neglects to establish a payment plan. Driver’s license suspension is a more common penalty.
Q. How much would it cost the state to eliminate court fines and fees?
A. Collections fluctuate and fine and fee assessments vary, making it difficult to pinpoint an exact number. However, cost estimates of targeted reforms suggest it would cost tens of millions of dollars.
The state would lose about $10 million per year by eliminating the district attorney’s supervision fee, according to House research staff. A bill proposed in 2022 to eliminate various agency fees had an estimated price tag of $9.3 million.
At an Oct. 21 interim study on fines and fees reform, Secretary of Public Safety Tricia Everest said it could take time to figure out how much agencies need from state appropriations to fund programs. She said several fees average just 10% to 20% collection rates.
“We don’t know how much, frankly, certain things cost,” Everest said. “But we’d be better off sending our money directly to agencies and not depending on people who most likely can’t even pay.”
Q. Is there support in the Legislature for fines and fees reform?
A. Yes, but it’s unclear whether the math will work out this session. Lawmakers will have about $120 million less to appropriate in the fiscal year 2026 budget than they did in 2025, according to numbers certified last week by the state Board of Equalization.
Senate Pro Tem Lonnie Paxton, R-Tuttle, said he’s talked with constituents at risk of losing their driver’s license because they’re unable to pay their debt. He said the Senate is interested in taking up reforms but it will have to be balanced with other priorities.
“I’ve got four years left in this building and the governor has two,” Paxton said. “I hope before he leaves we’re able to find a solution. This is a workforce issue, a fairness issue and a humanity issue when you burden someone with what the governor called basically a debtor’s prison. I totally agree that we need to find a better way to do that. People committed a crime and owe a debt to society, but we shouldn’t burden them forever.”
House Speaker Kyle Hilbert, R-Bristow, said the House is open to negotiations but that the governor’s budget proposal did not outline a clear plan to replace the lost fine and fee revenue.
“It absolutely would have a cost,” he said. “For our budget team, that’s a policy question as well as a fiscal question.”
House minority leader Cyndi Munson, D-Oklahoma City, and Senate minority leader Julia Kirt, D-Oklahoma City, said it would be very difficult to balance reducing fines and fees with the governor’s priority of cutting the state income tax.
“Unfortunately they (fines and fees) pay for the courts,” Munson said. “We can invest but we have to use our income tax dollars to do that.”
Q. What reform measures are up for consideration this year?
- Senate Bill 973 by Todd Gollihare, R-Kellyville: Prohibits courts from entering into contracts with private debt collection agencies, which tack a 30% collections fee onto what is initially owed.
- House Bill 2127 by Chris Kannady, R-Oklahoma City: Specifies that an individual should not be imprisoned for inability to pay.
- House Bill 1460 by Tammy West, R-Oklahoma City: Eliminates several fees, including the $40 per month supervision fee charged to defendants on district attorney’s probation.
- House Bill 1462 by Tammy West, R-Oklahoma City: Directs courts to prioritize restitution payments.
Those bills face a March 6 deadline to advance out of committee in their chamber of origin.
Keaton Ross covers democracy and criminal justice for Oklahoma Watch. Contact him at (405) 831-9753 or Kross@Oklahomawatch.org. Follow him on Twitter at @_KeatonRoss.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
