At a county budget workshop, Montgomery County legislators and representatives of the public defender and conflict defender offices described a rapid rise in payments for assigned counsel and discussed options to control the expense.

Legislators said invoices submitted so far this year already exceed previously budgeted amounts and could push the county’s annual cost into seven figures. Chair Papp said the county had previously budgeted about $620,000 for assigned counsel but “we're already up to $656,175 with invoices that have been submitted to date,” and that projections show the total could exceed $1 million this year.

The discussion focused on why costs have jumped and what parts of the process local officials can control. Chair Papp and legislators stressed that state mandates and court practices are driving demand. Rosemarie, representing the conflict defender office, said the offices perform conflict checks according to Unified Court System and Office of Court Administration guidance and that the increase in cases is the main driver: “The frequency of cases, period,” Rosemarie said, and added that family-court and criminal-court dockets have both grown.

County staff member Sean described the payment and reimbursement math. “Most of the cases for [the claim form], we pay $158 an hour. The reimbursement rate is $41.58,” he said, summarizing the typical hourly payment to assigned counsel and the lower amount reimbursed through the state program. Legislators and office representatives said reimbursement rates vary by case type and that some family- and misdemeanor-level work does not get full state reimbursement.

Officials identified several causes for the growth in vouchers: expanded court representation at initial appearances, changes in bail and pretrial practices that lengthen criminal cases, and the structure of family-court cases in which two parties frequently require separate representation. Jeff, the other office representative present, described how family-court matters often produce multiple assignments because “by their very nature, it's individuals against individuals,” and that typically only one side can be handled internally, producing additional appointed counsel costs.

Legislators pressed on controls. Legislator Kelly asked whether time entries and vouchers are audited and whether the county could better verify claimed hours; Chair Papp said judges approve vouchers and the county reviews them when they arrive but acknowledged limits to second-guessing judicial approvals. The group also noted a prior legislative resolution that allowed payment for travel/transit time; legislators discussed whether that policy should be revisited to reduce payouts.

Participants discussed practical constraints on county action. Rosemarie and Jeff emphasized that they follow state-mandated conflict rules and that many drivers—bail reform, court directives to have counsel at multiple stages, and an overall increase in filings—are beyond county control. Legislator Sweet asked whether counties could share public defenders to ease pressure; officials said county boundaries and funding structures make that difficult without state-level changes.

The workshop ended with legislators saying they would consider a budget resolution to cover already-submitted invoices and that staff would work to get vouchers and supporting documents to the legislature more promptly so committee members can review them. Chair Papp said the legislature will also explore policy changes where it has authority, including revisiting local resolutions that expanded paid transit time for assigned counsel.

Ending: County and defense office leaders agreed there are no simple local fixes while state mandates and courtroom practices remain the chief drivers of rising appointed-counsel costs. Legislators asked for faster invoice delivery and indicated they will consider both short-term funding measures and policy adjustments for the next session.