The following statement is true: The city must remit to the State for every arrest that a city officer makes.

• A. The city must remit to the State only when the officer is employed by the State.
• B. Remittance is required only in certain cases.
• C. The city must remit $1 of the arrest fee to the State for every arrest that a city officer makes.
• D. Remittance is never required.

Answer: (C)

The concept being tested is how municipalities contribute to state costs through a per-arrest fee assessed for arrests made by city officers. If a state statute requires a fixed amount per arrest, the city must remit that amount for every arrest carried out by its officers. The best answer reflects a precise, universal obligation: for every arrest by a city officer, the city must remit $1 to the state. This kind of fixed-per-arrest remittance creates a straightforward funding mechanism, applying no matter the case details or outcomes. For example, 25 arrests would mean a remittance of $25. The other statements don’t fit because the requirement is not contingent on the officer’s employment status with the state, not limited to certain cases, and not something that never happens.