Alameda County officials have taken a major step toward abolishing what some called “crippling” criminal justice fines and fees that low-income defendants have to pay, a move that was cheered by reformists — and, if passed, would probably make the county only the second in the nation to do so.

Representatives from the Probation Department, Sheriff’s Office and public defender’s office asked the Board of Supervisors on Thursday to exempt criminal defendants from a wide range of assessments and to make up the difference with state funding.

Each described what advocates call a “high-pain-low-gain” model that goes like this: Department charges criminal defendant with a fee or fine for its programming. Defendant either can’t pay the tab or it causes a significant burden. Department recoups only a fraction of its budget anyway.

“It is clear from our clients ... that based on their income and resources they cannot afford counsel,” Public Defender Brendon Woods told supervisors Thursday at a public protection committee meeting. “We should be providing them with representation at no cost.”

Thursday’s presentations seemed to persuade the supervisors on the committee, who pushed the matter forward to a full future board hearing.

“This to me is a no-brainer,” Supervisor Scott Haggerty said. He added that people shouldn’t be “saddled with a debt to the county after (they’ve) repaid your debt to society.”

The proposal comes as reform activists around the state push to lower the barriers that ex-criminals face when attempting to re-enter society.

A recent study showed that, even after years of a crime-free life, millions of Californians struggle to find housing and jobs or pay off criminal-justice fees. Elected officials, including San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón and Assemblyman David Chiu, D-San Francisco, are now backing legislation that would make it easier for those with a rap sheet to find gainful employment.

Reform advocates believe removing burdensome fines and fees is another part of the equation.

This year, San Francisco became the first county in the nation to approve a similar reform, officials said. A unanimous vote by the Board of Supervisors wiped away what used to be charges for booking, probation, electronic monitoring, issuing warrants and collecting restitution.

If Alameda County moves forward on all of the requests, it would absorb the costs for probation supervision, public defender services and a sheriff’s program that allows criminals to work in lieu of incarceration.

Chief Probation Officer Wendy Still said about 34,000 adult probationers owed outstanding charges, totaling about $21.3 million, to her department. Agency officials collected just under $800,000 the previous year.

The public defender’s office collects about $269,000 annually — about the cost of one attorney, Woods said. The Sheriff’s Office took in about $327,000 from the work program last year, but those fees were paid up front. Advocates at the meeting expressed concern that the Sheriff’s Office costs were shutting out potential candidates for the work program.

But while the costs do little for the agencies’ bottom line, Still said they were causing undue harm to the county’s poorest defendants. Unpaid fees can follow a person for more than a decade, tarnishing credit and making it more difficult to get a driver’s license or housing, she said.

“It’s adding indebtedness to individuals already struggling,” Still said. “This is just adding one more significant barrier to them.”

Still additionally asked that the county forgive all outstanding fees to her department.

If all of the proposals pass, they would leave a $1.5 million hole in the county budget. Still and other officials suggested filling the gap with state funding that’s distributed among California counties for public safety purposes.

The Thursday morning meeting drew a few dozen reform-minded advocates and attorneys to support the measure.

One of them, Leo Mercer, said he’d struggled to pay off his own criminal justice fees.

“You sometimes have to choose: Rent and PG&E, or pay the court off,” said Mercer, who is a youth advocate for the Urban Peace Movement. Eliminating this burden, he said, “would help me move forward and would help people like me move forward.”

The Sheriff’s Office portion of the measure nearly stalled after suggestions that participants could pay on a sliding scale rather than eliminating the fees altogether. But the supervisors ultimately moved all three forward when attorneys from the East Bay Community Law Center argued that ability-to-pay assessments were often inconsistent.

Brandon Greene, a staff attorney for the center, said the measure is the culmination of two years of public records requests and meetings with county officials.

“We’d been meeting with (Still) for over a year, and we’re very happy with her support of the proposal,” Greene said, adding that her support was key to getting the measure in front of the full board.

“We are confident that ... the board will take the step to bring equity and fairness to Alameda County,” he said.

Megan Cassidy is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: megan.cassidy@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @meganrcassidy