File #: 12-0047    Version: 1
Type: Agenda Item Status: Approved
File created: 12/29/2011 In control: Board of Supervisors
On agenda: 1/24/2012 Final action: 1/24/2012
Title: Chief Administrative Office recommending that the Board adopt revised Board of Supervisors Policy B-4, Collections - Recovery of Public Funds.
Attachments: 1. A - Blue Route for B-4 Revision.pdf, 2. B - Revised BOS Policy B-4.pdf, 3. C - Summary of Policy B-4 Changes .pdf, 4. D - Current Policy B-4 .pdf
Title
Chief Administrative Office recommending that the Board adopt revised Board of Supervisors Policy B-4, Collections - Recovery of Public Funds.
Body
Fiscal Impact/Change to Net County Cost: No change to Net County Cost. Improved policies and procedures related to collection processes should result in increased revenues to the County.

Background: From 1988 to 2004, County Counsel had primary responsibility for the collection of county debts. In 2004 the Revenue Recovery Division (RRD) and the responsibility for collection of debts was transferred from County Counsel to the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s Office. Subsequently, in October 2008, the RRD was transferred to the Department of Child Support Services with the adoption of the FY 2008-09 Budget.

The RRD is responsible for collecting delinquent fines and fees owed to El Dorado County Departments and to the Superior Court. County departments and the Court initially attempt to collect their own debts and if they are unsuccessful, the accounts are then referred to RRD for collection.

Reason for Recommendation: The language in the current Board of Supervisors Policy B-4 is outdated and no longer accurate. Debt collection methods and business processes have improved significantly since Policy B-4 was last revised in 2002. Staff in Child Support Services, Revenue Recovery Division, initiated an update to the policy to reflect the current organizational assignment of the Revenue Recovery Division and to provide better guidelines for processes related to revenue recovery activities. This revision was developed in consultation with the Chief Administrative Office, County departments, the Superior Court and other counties.

Due to the number and nature of changes in the revised policy, it was not possible to provide a “strike-through” version of the policy document. A summary of the recommended changes has been provided as an attachment to this item. Significant revisions include:

· The current poli...

Click here for full text