Miami County attorney outlines budget, diversion fee changes and higher expert witness and IT costs

Kent Harding, Miami County attorney, presented his first departmental budget to the Board of County Commissioners and highlighted several revenue and expense items that could affect county finances.

Harding said he altered few line items but flagged three issues he expects will affect costs going forward: diversion program revenue, increased expert witness needs, and IT costs tied to a new managed‑service provider and potential cloud migration.

On diversion fees Harding told commissioners he initially budgeted $20,000 but now expects collections to be higher, citing about $9,000 collected by May and projecting "27 to 30,000 in diversion fees" for the year and suggesting a longer‑term ceiling of “30 to 40,000.” Harding described an operational change intended to reduce loss: "Since I've taken over, I've changed that policy to where we get paid in full upfront on all diversions before a diversion is offered. So we should have 0 slippage in terms of what I bring and what I don't." He noted, however, that diversion revenue depends on the caseload mix and that higher fees typically come from lower‑level felonies and higher‑level misdemeanors rather than traffic citations.

Harding also requested an increase in the office’s expert witness fund from $2,000 to $5,000 (and said even $5,000 may be insufficient for some witnesses). He noted recent experience in which an opposing expert charged a $3,500 retainer plus hourly fees, and he told the board he has already considered needing experts in three or four cases.

On prosecution costs Harding described several active and recently inherited cases, including an animal‑related prosecution and a boarding‑related case where he expects the county’s exposure to be resolved within weeks. He also said his office has handled homicide‑level matters and a juvenile prosecution that could reach a June 9 determination. Harding said he will request assistance from the Kansas attorney general’s office only if he is conflicted or if a case exceeds the office’s capacity.

Harding reported an IT vendor change from a lower‑cost firm (referred to as “Purple Guys”) to a more expensive managed‑service vendor, NetStandard, which he said provides better service. He also warned the board that a future decision about moving from server‑based storage to cloud storage could create additional costs in 2027: "we may very well be removing the server that's currently storing all of our stuff, and so that may that may be its own cost in 2027." He asked for a modest increase in his food budget to fund working lunches with law enforcement to improve coordination.

Commissioners asked questions about staffing and personnel costs; Harding said his office is fully staffed now and that prior years’ lower personnel actuals reflected vacancies. Commissioners did not adopt any changes at the meeting; Harding answered questions and asked to return if additional details were requested.

Ending: The board heard Harding’s budget presentation and instructed staff to continue reviewing anticipated diversion revenue, expert witness needs, and potential future IT/cloud costs so those items can be considered in the county’s overall budget process.