State's Attorneys and Sheriffs press lawmakers for budget fixes as caseloads rise

Tim Leers, presenting for the Department of State's Attorneys and Sheriffs, told the House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 13 that the department is facing mounting operational and staffing pressures tied to caseload and transportation demands. He said the department now has about 22,000 pending dockets statewide and urged lawmakers to remove vacancy‑savings targets and add operating dollars to avoid layoffs and preserve services.

Leers said the department has seen a reduction from a 2023 peak but still faces concentrated demand: "We are now at 22,000 cases," he told the committee, and "the 3 or more group takes up about 44% of all pending dockets." He highlighted increases in trial‑date utilization but warned that serious violent cases — including homicides — and high‑volume defendants continue to consume disproportionate resources.

Why it matters: the department said shortages and cost pressures are affecting prosecutors, victim advocates and the state transport program, with consequences for trial scheduling, victim services and timely case resolution. Leers told the committee that certain costs are unpredictable and sometimes enormous: "We will definitely spend over $30,000 in a single case, and, upwards to a $100,000," referring to expert witness expenses in complex homicide or competency matters.

Key requests and rationale

Leers said the top priority for the department is eliminating vacancy savings targets imposed on its budget, which he said would otherwise force staff reductions. "Eliminating vacancy savings is the number 1 priority for our department," he said, adding that targeted staff — particularly administrative professionals and victim advocates — move cases more efficiently than additional prosecutors alone. He asked the panel to consider a flexible pool of funds to deploy administrative staff and victim advocates to county 'hot spots' when needed.

On operating costs, staff described a multi‑year need for more training, transcription and a larger expert witness fund. Department staff and representatives said the governor's office proposed a modest expert‑witness increase, but the department believes additional operating funds (they cited roughly $100,000 beyond the governor's recommendation as helpful) are necessary to avoid case delays.

Transport program pressures and scheduling

Leers described the state transport program as understaffed and over‑overtime: 25 transport positions were authorized, about 24 funded and 21 filled at the time of the hearing. He warned that long courthouse‑to‑facility travel and reduced Department of Corrections support have raised overtime costs and constrained recruitment. "Our overtime costs are, basically inhaling the rest of our budget," he said, and urged better coordination with the judiciary on block scheduling (for example, 10 a.m.–2 p.m. hearing blocks) and wider use of virtual hearings to reduce unnecessary travel and overtime.

Accountability docket pilot and scaling questions

Leers and staff credited the Chittenden County accountability docket — which integrated human services partners such as the Howard Center into courtroom work — with moving hundreds of cases and freeing prosecutors to focus on serious crimes. Committee members pressed on scalability, and department staff said replication would require dedicated data staff, consistent court time, local human‑services presence and transport capacity, plus seed staffing (a prosecutor, victim advocate/legal assistant, and administrative support) in each pilot county.

Carry forward and grant underspend

Committee members asked about the department's reported $800,000 carry‑forward. Staff explained much of that balance came from unspent SIU (special investigation unit) grant allocations that were not expended because local law enforcement partners could not commit hours; the department said those funds rolled forward rather than reflect available new operating capacity.

What's next

Committee members asked for a budget memo and details on FTEs and specific line‑item numbers. The committee chair and staff said they would draft a memo and may seek follow‑ups with department staff. No formal votes occurred during the presentation.

Ending

The committee closed the session after additional member questions and directed staff to prepare budget recommendations and follow‑up queries for the department.