Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sheriff Budget Reimbursement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Merrimack County sheriff warns state budget cuts could cut bailiff reimbursements and strain court operations
Summary
Sheriff David Croft told county commissioners that proposed state budget cuts to Administrative Office of the Courts reimbursements could reduce payments for court security, potentially forcing counties to absorb roughly $4.5 million in costs statewide and jeopardize courtroom operations beginning July 1.
Sheriff David Croft told the Merrimack County Board of Commissioners that proposed cuts in the state budget could sharply reduce reimbursement for county court security and leave counties short of funds as early as July 1.
Croft said roughly $4,500,000 is allocated to reimburse the 10 counties for bailiff and court-security costs and that “the house cut it by 2,200,000” while the governor’s proposal reduced the amount by about $200,000. “We bring in just shy of $600,000 a year in reimbursement for our bailiffs,” Croft said, noting that if the House version of the budget stands “that could be 6 months of non reimbursement this year.”
The sheriff cited RSA 104 as the statutory source for the reimbursements and quoted its practical limitation: when funds are insufficient. “When there’s enough funds to do so,” he said, is effectively the caveat used to justify cuts. Croft called the loss of funding an “unfunded mandate” that would shift court security costs to county budgets already set for the fiscal year.
Croft warned commissioners that reduced reimbursements could force reductions in court coverage or courtroom closures. He said Merrimack County is running “almost 3 courtrooms a day” for grand jury and jury trials and that reductions could increase the risk of delays or violations of defendants’ speedy‑trial rights. “If we have to close down courtrooms,” he said, “we’re not ready to close down courtrooms” and that would risk more cases being dismissed or civil lawsuits over rights violations.
He described ongoing advocacy efforts: sheriffs have raised the issue with the Judicial Chief Justice and with legislative leaders and are watching the Senate budget deliberations. “If it doesn’t go our way… we’ll probably end up having a meeting with the governor,” Croft said. He also told commissioners that the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) has hired a national contractor to study court efficiencies and that sheriffs are meeting with that consultant.
During follow-up, an unidentified commissioner asked whether the sheriff’s association had considered filing a civil suit over the funding shift; Croft replied, “I don’t think we’re there yet,” and said the association is pursuing legislative and administrative remedies and is in contact with county lobbyists and Senate finance members. He named local stakeholders and lobbyist Beth Sargent and said county officials had been speaking with senators and the chief justice.
Croft asked commissioners to expect further updates and cautioned they might see a revenue shortfall in October if the House cuts remain in the final budget. He described the potential shortfall as a timing problem: county budgets begin July 1 and cannot easily absorb mid‑year reductions in expected state reimbursements.
The report was presented as information; no formal action or vote on county policy was taken by the commissioners during the meeting.
