Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lexington County Solicitor requests support staff to speed front‑end case processing; council approves positions and asks administration to find funding
Summary
Solicitor Rick Hubbard requested additional support staff — two case manager positions, a victim services provider and a business‑analyst/troubleshooter — to work with recently added state-funded attorneys and speed early case processing. Council voted to approve the request and directed administration to identify funding.
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lexington County Council voted to approve a multi‑position request from Solicitor Rick Hubbard on Wednesday, endorsing additional support staff intended to pair with recently funded state attorneys and to accelerate early case processing that staff said would reduce jail crowding and improve case outcomes.
Hubbard outlined a personnel request that emphasized support roles: two “case manager 2” positions (experienced paralegal‑level staff the solicitor described as ‘all but attorneys’ for managing complex cases), a victim services provider to expand victim notifications and services, and a business‑analyst/troubleshooter to assist with the office’s specialized case-management and court software. Hubbard said the state had funded eight new attorneys for the county but had limited that money to attorney salaries; that left the solicitor’s office short on the support staff needed to realize the benefit of the added prosecutors.
Hubbard told council the office’s current docket is “front‑end heavy,” with many recent arrests in early stages; he argued that getting cases into prosecutor hands sooner enables earlier pleas, diversion screening and bond decisions, which in turn reduces nonviolent jail population pressure. He said that—based on a recent three‑month slice of data—46% of General Sessions cases had been in the system for three months or less, and 64.46% for six months or less, demonstrating the front‑end concentration.
Council action: Members moved to approve the solicitor’s staffing request as submitted and asked administration to identify the best funding source. Council recorded a unanimous affirmative vote on the motion. During the discussion, councilmembers also discussed ongoing coordination with county IT and potential consolidation of IT services to support the solicitor’s software environment; Hubbard clarified he sought a day‑to‑day troubleshooter tied to the solicitor’s case‑management system rather than an enterprise IT hire.
Budget note: During the meeting a recurring cost figure of approximately $480,506 annually was referenced for the solicitor’s package. Council asked administration to review funding and potential IT collaboration and return with implementation details.
Next steps: Administration to identify funding approach and report back; the solicitor’s office will work with HR to finalize classifications and hiring timelines if funding is secured.
