Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Defender Office topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Duchesne County formalizes public defender representation policy, eyes additional hires and flat-rate conflict contracts
Summary
The Duchesne County Commission approved a policy to formalize county-provided criminal defense for county employees and discussed hiring another public defender and negotiating flat-rate conflict-counsel contracts to control budget overruns.
Get email alerts on the Public Defender Office topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Duchesne County Commission on Aug. 18 approved a policy (to be numbered 745) formalizing how county-provided criminal defense counsel is offered to county employees and discussed staffing and budget pressures in the newly centralized public defender’s office.
County Attorney Grant Charles told commissioners the policy would let county employees choose an attorney provided by the county but would require a waiver of certain rights if they accept that representation. Commissioners asked clarifying questions about eligibility and timing; the commission moved to adopt the policy during the meeting.
In a separate report the county’s public defender (speaker not named in the transcript) said the office had been appointed to 255 district court cases since January 2025, including juvenile delinquency and adult criminal matters, and described efforts to centralize attorneys at the Irene Hanson Building so clients in Duchesne City can meet locally. The defender said two in‑house attorneys have reduced reliance on outside contract counsel but that the office has already exceeded its criminal conflict budget because some outside conflict counsel invoice at high hourly rates.
To address cost risk, the defender and County Attorney Grant Charles proposed negotiating a flat-rate contract with one or more conflict counsel. Charles said the county could put a flat‑rate conflict contract in place to limit fiscal exposure for the remainder of the year and directed staff to begin negotiations with a conflict counsel candidate referenced in the meeting (Nathan Rawlings). Commissioners asked staff to post a contract and return with details.
Budget and staffing were central to the discussion. The defender urged hiring an additional attorney (to cover district court, juvenile court and justice court as the office expands), and asked the commission to add line items for experts and investigators in the next budget cycle. Commissioners and staff agreed to begin budget-planning work sessions in September.
The commission’s actions at the meeting: approval of the county policy to formalize in‑house criminal defense representation options for county employees, and direction to county staff to pursue a flat-rate conflict-counsel contract and to consider additional public defender hiring in the upcoming budget process.
What’s next: staff will post and begin negotiations on a flat-rate conflict-counsel agreement and include recommended FTEs and investigator/expert line items in the September budget materials.
