ALAMOSA — District Judge Michael Gonzales on Monday afternoon sentenced Amanda McDonald, 41, to probation with 30 days in the county jail and $68,767 restitution on charges related to thefts from the City of Alamosa during McDonald’s employment as finance director.

McDonald must report to the county jail by 5 p.m. on Friday to begin her 30-day sentence.

McDonald had pleaded guilty to misdemeanor theft and felony unauthorized use of a transaction device for which she was granted a three-year deferred sentence.

Her attorney Deputy State Public Defender James Valenti and District Attorney Crista Newmyer-Olsen informed the judge of the new restitution figure, $68,767, of which $54,650 will go to the City of Alamosa and $14,117 to Zurich Insurance North America.

Newmyer-Olsen said the initial restitution was quite a bit higher, but she understood the city found other means of recovering the medical insurance costs.

McDonald was initially accused of misappropriating about $65,000 in public funds and providing health insurance through the city to an unauthorized family member, which resulted in the city being charged approximately $400,000 in unauthorized premiums and insurance benefits being paid out.

Newmyer-Olsen said she understood McDonald has a plan for paying the restitution within the time frame, and Valenti said she plans to pay every dollar of the restitution during the probationary period.

Newmyer-Olsen said she believed Alamosa City Manager Heather Brooks had put it best in the pre-sentence report, namely that McDonald had not just stolen from her employer. She stole from the entire community. The DA said that during 2012 and 2013, which was a portion of the time McDonald was finance director for the city, she took money from the city and might have kept doing it if somebody had not told on her.

“It is unclear if she had not been caught how much longer this would have gone on,” Newmyer-Olsen said. “That’s particularly troubling.”

However, she added, McDonald has a limited criminal history, and she appeared to take accountability for her actions and show some remorse for what she did.  The DA asked the judge to accept the deferred sentence agreement on the felony and place McDonald on two years supervised probation on the misdemeanor charge.

Valenti said McDonald’s criminal history was minimal, with a 1996 DUI and driving under restraint when she was only 20. She has had no crimes between then and the current case, he said.

He added that her score on a risk assessment test was very low, indicating minimal chance of recidivism. Valenti said McDonald has four children between the ages of 5 and 23, and the most important motivations for her to be successful on probation are remaining out of custody for her children, making the city whole in restitution and keeping the felony off her record, which will occur when she successfully completes the deferred sentence.

Valenti said McDonald has been a nurse, administrative assistant and accountant and has numerous applications out for a job but because of this case has had trouble getting a job. He said once the case is over and the deferred sentence is in place, he hoped that would change. He said he expected her to be successful on probation.

Judge Gonzales referred to McDonald’s past, which he said indicated she had been a fairly productive member of the community up to this point. That coupled with her low score on the assessment for re-offending indicated a criminal was not the kind of person she is.

“I don’t really know the kind of person that you are,” Gonzales told her. He said that she took money from the city, and the pre-sentence report indicated that she did not necessarily accept full responsibility for what happened.

“You put a lot of blame on your ex-husband for what happened,” the judge told her.

He said it appeared there were two sides to McDonald, the one who took advantage of her position in city government and stole money from the citizens of the community and the one with no significant criminal history who has done everything she could to raise her family.

“I don’t know any more than that about who you are or where you came from, but I do know these kinds of behavior cannot be tolerated,” the judge told her.

Judge Gonzales said there are many reasons why people do this type of crime, perhaps because the opportunity was there and the defendant took some money and then did it again and again “and before you know it, it becomes second nature.” He said he did not know if that was the case here, but McDonald pleaded guilty, and there is a large amount of restitution owed the city and insurance company.

“No matter how you look at it, you used your position to gain a benefit … to take advantage of the community,” the judge said. “That’s behavior that can in no respect be tolerated.”

Judge Gonzales said his goal is to make sure the community is paid back through restitution and community service. He ordered the $68,767 restitution, plus interest, and 300 hours community service. He imposed fines on both the felony ($5,000) and misdemeanor ($500) but suspended them because he said he would rather McDonald paid the restitution.

“Money needs to come back to the city coffers,” he said.

He added that he also needed to send a message “we can’t have people in our community taking advantage of our taxpayers,” and “given the fact that you abused a position of trust,” he imposed 30 days in jail. He gave McDonald until Friday, May 25, however, to report to the jail since he said she probably did not anticipate a jail sentence and needed to make arrangements for the care of her children.

Valenti said McDonald has two children under age 6 and her ex-husband passed away so she had no one else to watch her children. He asked for 90 days on an ankle monitor instead of 30 days in jail.

Newmyer-Olsen said she did not know enough about McDonald’s family to know whether she had someone to watch her children.

Judge Gonzales said, “I don’t impose 30 days lightly, but I think it’s an absolutely necessary sentence given, again, your position in the community, your position within city government and the fact you did what you did. I don’t want to cause harm to your children. That’s why I am giving you the opportunity to get something arranged for them. I am certain there’s someone you can rely on.”

Normally he would have sent her to jail immediately, he added, but he was giving her time to make arrangements because she probably was not anticipating a jail sentence.