Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Da Grant Courtroom Tech topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DA’s office to contribute $120,000 and accepts $744,299 Aid-to-Prosecution grant for courtroom tech and prosecution costs
Summary
The committee approved a memorandum of understanding to contribute $120,000 (four-year, $30,000-per-year cap) toward courtroom technology upgrades using DA grant funds, and separately accepted $744,299 in Aid to Prosecution funds for FY2025–2026 with a budget amendment to record the revenue and expense lines.
The Public Safety Committee approved a memorandum of understanding with the New York State Unified Court System for courtroom technology upgrades and accepted a separate Aid to Prosecution grant award for the district attorney’s office.
Madeline Contagulia of the DA’s office described a statewide initiative to modernize county courtrooms with upgraded speakers, cameras and audiovisual systems to improve presentation of audio and visual evidence. She told the committee the DA’s office agreed to contribute $120,000 over four years ($30,000 per year) for the upgrades and said the contribution will be funded from the DA’s "aid to prosecution" grant funds, not local county tax dollars. She stated, "It will not cost the county any local share. It will be utilization of our grant funds for this." The committee confirmed installation is included and that procurement will generally use state contracts.
Separately, Madeline reported the DA’s office was awarded $744,299 in aid to prosecution funds for FY2025–2026 to offset expenses incurred during felony prosecutions, particularly violent felonies, and asked the committee to accept the funding and approve a budget amendment to increase both equipment/contractual expense lines and state aid revenue. A committee member asked whether a previously discussed $30,000 yearly contribution was included in the budget and whether a $45,000 specialized camera purchase was part of equipment; Madeline said the camera cost was included in contractual expenses and confirmed the $30,000-per-year contribution was part of that planning.
The committee carried both the memorandum of understanding and the grant-acceptance resolution by voice vote.
Committee members asked for follow-up on whether purchases could be made locally under state contracts and for clarification of trade-offs in grant spending (e.g., witness and transcript fees). The DA's presenter offered to ask a staff member not present and report back to the committee.
