Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Prosecutor proposes using forfeiture/pretrial diversion funds to supplement deputy pay as public defender warns supplemental account is unsustainable
Summary
Prosecutor Diana Merce asked council to consider supplementing deputy prosecutor pay with pretrial diversion and forfeiture funds to retain courtroom deputies; the public defender warned that the supplemental fund for indigent defense has been drawn down and is not a sustainable long‑term solution.
Vanderburgh County Prosecutor Diana Merce asked council members to consider a targeted use of forfeiture and pretrial diversion funds to help retain and recruit deputy prosecutors who handle heavy trial workloads.
Merce said the office is continuing a multi‑year push to make salaries competitive with other counties to reduce attrition and described plans to convert two investigator positions (previously funded through a JAG grant) to payroll items. She suggested a capped stipend model paid from forfeiture or pretrial diversion funds—“an extra maybe $10,000 cap is what I'm thinking”—to provide incentives for deputies who work in court every day and to reduce turnover.
Steve Owens, chief public defender, told the council the public defender supplemental fund (primarily funded by bond forfeitures) has been used to cover excess appointments by contracting with out‑of‑county attorneys and is being depleted. Owens said the supplemental fund had roughly $500,000 at one point but has been drawn down by about $400,000 during the year, forcing the office to decline additional appointments and refer cases to the state public defender program. He cautioned that relying on forfeiture funds for ongoing payroll commitments is not sustainable.
Council members questioned where the forfeiture and pretrial diversion balances currently sit; Merce estimated an annual inflow of roughly $100,000 and a current balance above $120,000–$160,000, and agreed any supplement model would need guardrails to avoid long‑term dependency. Members asked for a separate, deeper conversation to review forfeiture governance, potential caps, and the unintended consequences of turning variable forfeiture income into recurring payroll obligations.
No formal appropriation was made at the hearing; Merce said she would follow up in a separate meeting to layout a proposal and legal guidance on forfeiture use plans.
