AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 55-10-419, relative to the electronic monitoring indigency fund.
Summary
SB1097 revises Tennessee’s electronic monitoring indigency fund law to clarify and expand how costs for ignition interlock devices and alternative monitoring devices are handled for people who are indigent. The bill defines “eligible costs” to include lease, purchase, installation, removal, maintenance, monitoring, and related fees for these devices when required by court order or other applicable law. It also updates the definition of “indigent” to mean a person without sufficient means to pay those costs.
The bill requires a person ordered to use an ignition interlock or alternative device to pay the costs unless the person is found indigent. For indigent persons, the bill sets a minimum monthly payment of $30, with the fund covering the remaining eligible costs up to $170 per month. It also requires a full court hearing to determine indigency for alternative devices and lists factors the court must consider, including income, expenses, household size, debts, assets, employment, education, and poverty guidelines. The bill further creates a presumption of indigency for people receiving SNAP, TANF, or Medicaid when ordered to use an ignition interlock device.
Impact
SB1097 amends Tennessee Code Annotated § 55-10-419, which governs the electronic monitoring indigency fund, and affects reimbursement procedures for ignition interlock and alternative device providers. It directs providers to submit claims and invoices to the state treasurer or local government within 90 days, with supporting court orders and attestations of accuracy, and requires clerks to provide proof of a person’s eligibility for certain public assistance programs. The bill also imposes documentation and affidavit requirements for indigency determinations and makes false statements in an indigency affidavit punishable as perjury.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been received favorably and passed with little opposition. The Senate Judiciary Committee recommended passage on a 9-0 vote, and the Senate floor adopted the measure 27-0. The available record shows no committee transcript debate, suggesting broad agreement on the need to clarify and streamline indigency-related monitoring cost procedures.
Contention
No major controversy is reflected in the available materials. The main policy issue is how to balance public safety and court-ordered monitoring requirements with affordability for low-income defendants. The bill’s specific indigency standards, the mandatory $30 monthly contribution, the cap on fund reimbursement, and the use of public assistance status as evidence of indigency are the most likely points of legal or administrative scrutiny, but no recorded opposition appears in the provided votes or discussion materials.