Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Defense Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Proposal to shift contract attorneys into public defender ranks raises hiring and fiscal questions; committee tables SB151
Summary
Sen. Dennis Lens' bill (SB151) would establish a children's bureau inside the Office of Public Defender and transition up to 21 contract positions into 17 attorney FTEs and four staff; OPD said hiring 12—— FTEs in the next biennium is more realistic and the fiscal note assumes $1.9 million. The committee tabled SB151 after executive action amid hiring and reimbursement concerns.
Senator Dennis Lens opened the hearing on Senate Bill 151, which would transition certain contract attorneys into in-house public defender positions structured as a children's bureau: two units to address parents and one to address children. Lens framed the change as a way to create consistency in handling abuse-and-neglect cases and said the fiscal note assumes 21 new FTEs with a total cost around $1.9 million.
Brett Chandelson, director of the Office of State Public Defender, described the fiscal assumptions and hiring challenges. He said the fiscal note is conservative and assumes immediate hiring of 21 positions but acknowledged the agency's realistic hiring capacity is lower. "I think 12 to 15 in the entire next biennium is more likely," Chandelson told the committee, explaining the plan could combine moving experienced attorneys into the agency and hiring new attorneys with training to serve as abuse-and-neglect specialists.
Chandelson clarified federal reimbursement under Title IV-E: the Office of Public Defender captures reimbursement through the Department of Health and Human Services and that dedicating a bureau helps the agency recapture a higher percentage of operating costs for abuse-and-neglect work. He cautioned, however, that both FTE and contract expenditures could be affected if federal reimbursements change.
Committee members raised fiscal and operational concerns including whether the agency can recruit 21 specialized attorneys quickly, how the fiscal note accounts for travel or "windshield time" for rural representation, and whether retirement costs and benefits were fully reflected. Chandelson said the fiscal note includes salary and benefits (including the employer share for retirement) and that contractor travel is billed as marginal costs while FTE travel is embedded in fixed salary and benefits.
Several senators expressed skepticism about the speed and cost assumptions in the fiscal note; a subsequent roll-call during executive action returned 9 yes and 13 no on a motion to pass and the motion was reversed to table SB151 for further consideration.
The transcript records multiple follow-up directions and questions for staff and OPD leadership to clarify hiring timelines and fiscal assumptions; the committee did not take final passage and SB151 remains tabled for now.
