Judge asks commissioners to seed CASA program; Ohio CASA pledges start‑up funds

Judge Jeffrey Dunn asked the Medina County Board of Commissioners to approve seed funding to establish a CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates) program in the county, saying the statewide CASA organization has pledged start‑up support and the child advocacy center will assist with initial administration.

The program would recruit and train community volunteers to serve as guardians ad litem for children in delinquency, unruly and abuse/neglect/dependency cases. “CASA stands for Court Appointed Special Advocates,” Judge Dunn said, explaining volunteers “research, investigate, and report all the child circumstances to the court.” He told commissioners the county currently relies on a small pool of attorneys for guardian‑ad‑litem work and that operating costs for GAL work in recent years have been substantial.

Judge Dunn presented case and cost figures: in 2023–2024 the court had 343 delinquency filings, 95 unruly filings and 80 abuse/neglect/dependency filings; he reported 19 GAL appointments for delinquency/unruly cases and 91 in abuse/neglect/dependency cases for a two‑year span, and said the county paid roughly $166,967 in GAL fees in that period. He described the CASA model as a volunteer‑driven alternative that provides pre‑service training (30 hours) and continuing education and can reduce attorney workload and long‑term costs.

Judge Dunn said the CASA organization offered $75,000 in start‑up funding for year one and requested the commissioners contribute $25,000 in the first year “to negate some of the costs involved.” He described a plan to host the program’s initial payroll and benefits under the Child Advocacy Center (CAC) while a local 501(c)(3) is established; CAC representatives indicated they would house the back‑office finances and help with payroll until the new nonprofit is formed.

Commissioners asked for more detail on the executive‑director job description, reporting structure and whether one full‑time employee would provide sufficient capacity before approving a second staff position in year two. Commissioner discussion referenced a budget line showing a possible $50,000 county contribution in year two if the program expands and the commissioners asked for the CASA job description and additional financial details before finalizing a commitment.

Following discussion the board signaled support in principle but requested a formal resolution and more documentation (job description, selection committee composition and written start‑up agreement) to consider funding. Judge Dunn said CASA has indicated the state group would revisit additional funding based on progress and the hiring of an executive director.

The transcript records no formal vote to commit county dollars on the day of presentation; commissioners asked staff to return with the requested documents and the court asked for a formal resolution to authorize funding if the board decides to proceed.