Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the County Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Strafford County delegation adds $12,730 for inmate underwear and approves amended budget

2525934 · March 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a Strafford County delegation budget meeting, members approved an amendment to add $12,730 for issuing new underwear to people booked into the county jail and then voted to approve the amended departmental budgets after presentations from the county attorney, sheriff, community corrections and the Department of Corrections.

Strafford County delegation members voted to add $12,730 to the county corrections clothing line item for issuing new underwear to people booked into the county jail and then approved the amended budget during a budget subcommittee meeting.

The amendment grew out of a Department of Corrections (DOC) budget briefing in which the DOC director said the overall DOC budget is about $66,000 lower than last year but noted specific increases, including a $322,000 boost for food tied to a larger population and higher food costs. The director also presented a per-item cost analysis showing that issuing one new pair of underwear to every detainee would cost $12,730, while replacing all undergarments (underwear, socks, bras) would total about $34,030 based on February 2024 population figures.

Why it matters: The amendment responds to sanitary and dignity concerns raised by delegation members and increases the corrections clothing budget line so the jail can issue new underwear on intake. Members discussed how the county offsets several sheriff's office costs with outside revenues and how corrections operations and transitional housing programs are funded.

During department presentations, the county attorney described the attorney's office budget as “essentially the same as last year,” noting one victim-witness advocate line was moved and a county attorney position inadvertently omitted last year was restored for a half-year of funding. The sheriff explained that several sheriff's office expenses are offset by boarding revenues from U.S. Marshals and, tentatively, an agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that would raise the boarding rate by 50 percent; the sheriff said negotiators were working on the start date and hoped to make the increase retroactive to January. “We only hold criminals...served their time, and now are awaiting deportation,” the sheriff said when describing the detainee population tied to those contracts.

Budget questions focused on staffing and timing of expenditures. The sheriff told the delegation that an $80,000 proposed increase in overtime reflects anticipated additional transports tied to ICE and U.S. Marshals work. Members asked about an apparent unexpended balance for special deputies (about $138,000 through the third quarter on the materials shown); staff said the reported unexpended balance reflected third-quarter figures and that special-deputy spending and vehicle-purchase payments are lumpy and expected to increase in the fourth quarter.

The community corrections director said those programs supervise fewer than 600 people across transitional housing, drug court, mental health court and bail supervision. Transitional housing spending rose slightly because of recent salary increases; drug court receives nearly $563,000 in state revenue, the director said. The director described the county’s transitional housing as begun with a Second Chance Act federal grant and said residents typically contribute toward rent after 30 days.

The amendment to add $12,730 for underwear was moved and seconded during the session. On the amendment vote delegation members recorded explicit votes as follows: Representative Burton — yes; Representative Harrington — no; Representative Schmidt — yes; Representative Selig — yes; Representative Smith — yes; Chair — yes. The amendment carried. After the amendment passed, the delegation voted to approve the amended budget; recorded votes on the final approval matched the amendment vote pattern (yes: Burton, Schmidt, Selig, Smith, Chair; no: Harrington). Delegation members noted the sheriff is new to the office and that some line-item details will be clearer after the revenue session later in the day.

Looking ahead, staff said some sheriff's office line items will be clarified at the revenue portion of the meeting and that county leaders plan to track overtime and special-deputy spending during the coming year. The delegation adjourned with about 50 seconds remaining on the scheduled time.