Ohio Public Defender seeks contract renewal with Trumbull County at lower net county share

The Trumbull County branch of the Ohio Public Defender presented its proposed contract for fiscal year 2026 (July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026), asking the Board of Commissioners to approve a renewal that would fund public-defense services while restructuring some staffing.

Laura Brzezinski, Trumbull County branch director for the Ohio Public Defender, and regional staff described a proposal that preserves core services while shifting four contract-attorney slots into two full-time public defenders and adding a social worker. The social-worker role is framed as a case-management and community-linkage position intended to reduce jail days by connecting defendants to treatment, housing and other services, which the presenters said would save jail costs and improve outcomes.

Why it matters: under the state's indigent-defense reimbursement program, a higher state reimbursement rate reduces the county's net cost. The presenters said the state's executive budget and House Bill 96 would likely increase reimbursement toward 88% for the coming fiscal year, and their proposed FY26 contract would lower the county's share to about $478,844 (a reduction from roughly $613,923 in FY25).

Details and discussion

Brzezinski said the office provides trial services to municipal courts, juvenile court and the common pleas court across Trumbull County. The office currently employs 19 full-time staff (director, supervisors, eight assistant public defenders, investigators and support staff) and uses about 24 contract attorneys assigned to local courts.

The proposed changes are intended to increase vertical representation (continuity from municipal court through felony proceedings) and to add the social-worker function, which the presenters argued would reduce jail days by facilitating treatment placements, court-ordered programs and community supervision arrangements.

Prosecutor's office perspective

Bill Danso, the county prosecutor, briefed the board after the presentation to note the prosecutor's separate budgetary constraints and to ask commissioners to keep funding balance in mind. Danso said prosecutorial and defense functions are not directly comparable but urged commissioners to consider both offices' needs as budgeting proceeds.

Municipal reimbursement and program details

Commissioners raised a long-standing issue: municipal ordinance agreements had in past years offset part of county indigent-defense costs, but townships and municipalities have not consistently paid under earlier agreements and some agreements were disputed. Staff said those municipal reimbursement agreements must be revisited, itemized and re-sent; the public defender noted contracting with the state OPD provides predictable quarterly billing and faster reimbursement than assigned-counsel billing.

Next steps and vote

Brzezinski and the public-defender team asked commissioners to approve the FY26 contract; the transcript records the presentation, questions and that the contract must be processed through the auditor's office, but no final recorded vote appears in the excerpt. Commissioners and staff agreed the contract move forward as a required county obligation under Ohio law and noted the county would pursue municipal reimbursements where possible.

Ending

Commissioners asked staff to continue negotiating municipal reimbursement agreements and to return any requested budget details; the public-defender office said the FY26 proposal will be sent as a contract for commissioners' consideration and that the higher expected state reimbursement reduces the county's share.