Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Indigent Defense topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Courts seek added funding as Public Defender warns of staffing shortfall; supervisors reallocate conflict counsel savings
Summary
Superior Court asked for a $3.5M increase for conflict counsel as appointments surged; Public Defender said redirecting trial‑court funds would prevent declarations of unavailability. Committee voted to accept analyst recommendations and reallocate certain reductions to the Public Defender to reduce conflicts risk.
The Superior Court and the Public Defender told the Budget and Finance Committee on June 24 that funding for indigent defense and private conflict counsel has risen with caseloads. Michael Yew, CFO for the Superior Court, said appointments to the conflicts panel are projected to rise to about 8,800 cases and requested an additional $3.5 million to cover the panel’s current and anticipated obligations.
The court warned that many appointments made in the current fiscal year will generate bills in the next fiscal year and that redirecting funds among agencies alters who will carry costs now versus later. The trial court acknowledged it does not fully support the analyst’s policy redirection in principle but was willing to cooperate with a temporary reallocation if it would curb further declarations of unavailability by the Public Defender.
Public Defender response: Public Defender Jeff Adachi confirmed his office concurs with many of the budget analyst’s recommendations but said a shortfall would persist without additional transfers. Adachi said that if the committee reallocated approximately $1.265 million from the trial courts to his office (and redirected a smaller $236,749 analyst reduction within the Public Defender’s budget back into salaries), his office would avoid declaring unavailability for lack of staff and would not send cases to private counsel for capacity reasons.
Committee action and context: Following discussion, the committee voted on a trial‑court reduction (roll call recorded 4 ayes, 1 no) and moved to reallocate specified reductions to the Public Defender’s salary line so the office can maintain staffing without declaring new conflicts. Analysts advised that the court’s bills from current‑year appointments may still arrive next year and that supplementals are possible if caseloads and billings exceed the adopted appropriation.
Why it matters: Declared unavailability forces cases to the private panel and raises county conflict counsel costs later; the committee sought a short‑term reallocation to prevent immediate capacity gaps while asking analysts to monitor actual billings and caseload trajectories.
What’s next: The committee asked the Controller, Budget Analyst and the court to track outstanding bills and provide updated projections so the Board can assess supplemental needs before the new fiscal year.
