Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delta County approves stipend plan for magistrates to handle weekend, holiday on-call duties
Summary
The board approved a roughly $26,000 stipend plan to compensate two magistrates for added weekend and holiday on-call duties; the judge proposed a $20 court-fee increase to fund the cost, and commissioners raised staffing and equity concerns before approving the motion.
Delta County commissioners voted Oct. 8 to approve a stipend-based plan to compensate magistrates for increased weekend and holiday on-call responsibilities related to warrantless arrests and after-hours processing.
Judge Parks presented the plan and said the county’s two magistrates, Amanda Henderson and Gina LeCarte, currently juggle dual duties and that new after-hours demands had grown substantially. “Total cost would be about $26,000,” Parks said, and proposed raising court costs by $20 to fund the stipends so the county would not need to hire a costly full-time magistrate. Parks added that the stipend would not be applied against magistrates’ 401(k) accounts.
The proposal was framed as an alternative to hiring a full-time judicial appointment (which Parks said could cost in excess of $100,000). Parks described the duties the on-call magistrate would perform: reviewing police reports for probable cause, setting bond and bond conditions, entering information into the system for the next business day, and, when necessary, installing tethers at the jail.
Some commissioners expressed reservations about the plan’s cost, staffing impacts and long-term sustainability. One commissioner said the stipend approach felt “excessive compared to other jurisdictions” and urged exploring paid time off or hourly compensation instead of a stipend, noting concerns about workload and the county’s ability to retain sufficient court staff while adding responsibilities. Another commissioner thanked the magistrates for stepping up to avoid the need to recruit a new hire at a higher annual cost.
The motion to implement the stipend plan and fund it through the proposed $20 court-cost increase carried on a recorded vote. The board then proceeded to the next agenda items.
What’s next: The board approved the plan at the meeting and moved on to new business; implementation details and any formal ordinance or fee schedule amendment to impose the $20 court-cost increase were not specified in the transcript and would require follow-up action.
