Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Attorney Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Limestone County commissioner urges $50,000 county allocation to district attorney's office
Summary
At a Limestone County Commission work session a commissioner asked the commission to consider a $50,000 general-fund allocation to the district attorney's office, citing statewide underfunding and comparative county funding levels; commissioners did not take a vote and agreed to put the item on a future agenda.
A Limestone County commissioner asked the Limestone County Commission during a work session to consider a $50,000 allocation from the county general fund to the district attorney's office, saying the office is underfunded and that the county is an outlier among peers.
The commissioner said the District Attorneys Association had requested more funding from the state but received only about $1,960,000 statewide — which he characterized as far short of what was requested — and that the county's D.A. still begins the year roughly $40,000 short. "The state of Alabama ought to fund the D.A.'s office sufficiently for them to run their office," the commissioner said. He added: "$50,000 from our office to them would be less than 50¢ per person per year."
Why it matters: The commissioner framed the request as a response to an operational shortfall that could affect the local criminal justice system. He said research showed roughly 65% of Alabama's 41 district attorneys receive county funding and that counties similar in population to Limestone typically provide about $65,580 annually to their D.A. offices; the highest comparable county in his review provided $75,000.
Details presented at the session were provided by the commissioner and framed as background for a future request rather than as a final action. He said he had expected to present the information before the county's budget was adopted but had not had the chance, and he asked that the commission put the topic on a future agenda for formal consideration. He recommended a $50,000 allocation as an amount in line with comparable counties.
The chairman opened the floor for discussion; no formal vote was recorded in the work-session transcript and commissioners did not adopt a funding allocation during the session. The commissioner said the county could not fully make up the state shortfall but suggested a county appropriation ‘‘in line with what other counties our size give.’’
Next steps: The commissioner asked that the matter be placed on a future commission agenda for formal consideration. No additional commitments or dates for that agenda placement were recorded in the transcript.
