County and Monticello discuss interlocal justice-court agreement; commissioners ask attorneys to revise revenue split to 30/70
Summary
Monticello city and San Juan County officials reviewed case counts and revenues and discussed a proposed interlocal agreement to transfer Monticello city court matters to the county justice court; commissioners asked staff to change a proposed 35/65 net split to a 30/70 split and remit payments quarterly, then return the updated contract for legal review and approval.
Monticello city and San Juan County officials reviewed a proposed interlocal agreement Dec. 16 that would move Monticello City Justice Court matters into the San Juan County Justice Court and set a revenue-sharing arrangement.
Caden, Monticello's city manager, presented statewide court-system data and municipal figures showing Monticello handles a high proportion of traffic cases and contributes roughly one-third of the combined justice-court caseload and revenue in recent reporting periods. County counsel corroborated the state-reported comparison and noted the Monticello share varies by case type and year.
The draft interlocal agreement in staff notes proposes that the county provide court services for Monticello city ordinance and state-misdemeanor cases in accordance with state law, and recommends a five-year automatic-renewal term with 180 days' notice for termination.
On finances, Caden initially proposed remitting 35% of net revenue to the city after state fees and operational expenses, with 65% retained by the county. Commissioners expressed a preference for a near one-third split and to reduce administrative burden by remitting payments quarterly. A commissioner proposed adjusting the share to 30/70; staff instructed attorneys to revise the draft accordingly and return it for formal review.
Other draft terms discussed include continuation of the city's prosecution of ordinance cases without additional cost, county responsibility for court administration and counsel to eligible defendants, and periodic reporting access for the city. Commissioners and staff discussed whether existing active cases should remain with the Monticello court until closure or transfer on a clean January 1 cutover; they favored a Jan. 1 transfer subject to state procedures.
County counsel said the office will start a master-case spreadsheet on Jan. 1 to track case types, basic demographic metrics, outcomes and to improve oversight. Staff said they would consult the Monticello mayor and council about next steps and, if feasible, seek a special meeting to finalize the interlocal agreement before January; otherwise the revised contract will return in January for approval.
No formal interlocal agreement was executed at the work session; the commission asked attorneys to make the 30/70 split and quarterly-remittance changes and to prepare a legal draft for the January meeting.
