Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administration Of Justice Funds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Miller County committee approves amendment to reallocate administration of justice funds under Act 371 of 2025 and forwards ordinance to full court
Summary
The Miller County committee amended an appropriation ordinance under Act 371 of 2025 to reduce law library monthly distributions (to about $1,000/month) and shift funds toward the public defender and other justice-related line items; the committee added an annual review requirement and forwarded the amended ordinance to the full quorum court.
Miller County committee members amended and approved an appropriation ordinance to update how administration of justice funds are distributed under Act 371 of 2025, then voted to forward the amended ordinance to the full quorum court.
Carla explained that Act 371 of 2025 changed how counties distribute court fees and fines and that the county could now adjust percentages among line items including the law library, public defender, case coordinator (prosecuting attorney's office), jail, and routine court costs. She proposed reversing the current split so the law library would receive roughly $1,000 per month (about $12,000 per year) while additional funds would go to the public defender and enforcement-related line items.
Committee members questioned the law library's current balances and spending. Carla said the law library and city combined receive roughly $25,000–$26,000 annually and reported the library held approximately $128,000 in reserve, having spent relatively little in recent years. Members noted this context supported shifting some distribution to the public defender and other operational needs.
Justice East moved an amendment requiring annual review of the distribution for potential rebalancing; Justice Adler Smith seconded and the amendment passed. The committee then voted to forward the amended appropriation ordinance to the full quorum court for a final vote.
The committee did not provide a numeric roll-call tally in the transcript; outcomes were recorded by voice vote and referred to as passing and forwarded to the full court.
