Public Defender warns Maryland office is in crisis as vacancies and caseloads strain services

Leaders, staff and union representatives from the Maryland Office of the Public Defender told the Public Safety and Administration Subcommittee that the office requires the full fiscal 2026 governor'recommended funding to address critical vacancies, heavy caseloads and technology shortfalls that undermine representation for indigent clients.

"OPD is in crisis," Public Defender Natasha Dartig told the committee, urging lawmakers to "concur with the governor's allowance and approve the FY26 budget as presented." Dartig described vacancies across attorneys and core staff, and said the governor's allowance partially phases in additional positions the office needs to reduce workloads.

DLS analysis noted the FY26 budget totals about $166.2 million and includes 51 new positions: 16 assistant public defenders and a mix of secretaries, paralegals, social workers and intake staff. DLS warned, however, that panel attorney funding has historically been underbudgeted and that recent actual panel attorney expenses exceeded the amounts proposed in FY25'FY26, leaving risk of future deficiencies.

Public defender senior staff and several core'staff speakers described how administrative and support roles keep attorneys able to work in court. "Without us, the system breaks," said Robin Nolan, an office manager in Harford County. Union leaders and staff said excessive workloads cause turnover and harm morale; AFSCME Local 423 representative Steven Musselman said the Jenga metaphor used in testimony was apt: removing key staff risks collapse of operations.

Dartig and panelists also described technology shortfalls. She compared OPD's IT staffing to the judiciary: the judiciary had roughly 173 IT positions supporting 4,165 employees while OPD has about 20 IT positions supporting roughly 1,050 employees. She said uneven courthouse connectivity and varying local software make statewide discovery access and courtroom work inconsistent, sometimes forcing attorneys to rely on phones during proceedings.

DLS recommended reductions to $1.697 million and deletion of certain newly requested office clerk and secretarial positions to better focus resources on attorneys and high'priority roles; OPD urged the committee not to cut. Staff and union representatives pressed for full funding, arguing that recruitment, retention and adequate core staff are essential to fulfilling the constitutional right to counsel and to reducing long'term costs through successful post'conviction and reentry work.

Ending: The committee received accounts from public defenders, support staff and union representatives and asked for continued follow'up; no formal votes on OPD's budget were recorded during the hearing.