Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Legislators debate assigned‑counsel mileage, billing and conflict‑defender capacity
Loading...
Summary
Montgomery County legislators and staff debated whether assigned counsel should be reimbursed for mileage and tolls or for time in the car, and heard that some assigned counsel told the county they would not continue taking cases if mileage reimbursement changed. Members discussed tracking invoices, conflict‑defender staffing and meeting with the public defender to address systemic issues.
During committee meetings, the legislature took up questions about the county’s assigned counsel program and reimbursement policy. Chair Papp reported that Montgomery County attorney Manion told him some assigned counsel indicated they would stop handling cases if they were not reimbursed for mileage and tolls as previously expected. "Some of these assigned counsel people...said they're not gonna handle the cases anymore," Chair Papp said, citing Manion's outreach.
Members debated the intent of the reimbursement language: whether the $158‑per‑hour rate meant payment for driving time or only for court time. "I thought it pertained to mileage and tolls, not time in the car," one legislator said, noting the auditor had flagged the resolution's wording as susceptible to differing interpretations.
Lawmakers discussed whether to continue reimbursing attorneys for cases already in progress until those matters close and how to track when a case is finished. Committee members also raised capacity issues: county staff outlined a hybrid structure including an assigned‑counsel administrator and a conflict defender to triage cases, and discussed the feasibility of internal solutions and protections for file access (for example, technical safeguards in cloud systems) intended to reduce conflicts and costly outside assignments.
The committee agreed further discussions and coordination are needed among the county executive, public defender and system administrators to clarify billing practices and to explore ways to reduce conflict‑panel costs. Several members recommended a meeting between the county executive and public‑defender leadership to review case assignments and billing practices; no formal policy change was adopted in the committee record on the transcript.
The transcript does not include a numeric vote tally for any related committee action; it records recommendations and direction for follow up.
