Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Juvenile court asks for $190,000 boost to indigent defense and expanded family treatment services
Summary
Presiding juvenile court judge Leslie Miller Terry asked the county for an increase to indigent defense funding to comply with OCGA requirements and to hire courtroom-dedicated attorneys and pro tem judges, while also seeking resources to expand family treatment courts and behavioral health services.
Juvenile court officials told Clayton County budget reviewers that statutory duties and heavy caseloads require higher spending for indigent defense and related services.
"The section OCGA 15-11-103 requires the appointment of attorneys to parties in dependency cases," Presiding Judge Leslie Miller Terry said as she laid out a request to raise the indigent defense line from $305,000 to $495,000. The increase, she said, would fund three full‑time parent attorneys and three full‑time child attorneys — one parent attorney per courtroom — to meet statutory appointment requirements and reduce the reliance on higher-cost panel attorneys and continuances.
Judge Miller Terry and board administrator Colin Slag explained that when contract rates are too low, fewer attorneys sign on and the court must rely on panel appointments, often causing continuances that extend the period a child remains in protective custody. The juvenile court asked also for higher payments for pro tem judges (to be available for emergency and delinquency hearings) and additional funding for family treatment courts, including behavioral health court expansions supported in part by a grant from the Council of Accountability Court Judges.
Court officials warned that reporting requirements and strict statutory timelines (preliminary protective hearings within 72 hours; adjudication within 10 days for detained youth; 75‑day reviews and other milestones) make timely representation essential to avoid procedural and child‑welfare harms. The requests will be considered as part of the county’s ongoing FY2027 budget deliberations; no vote was taken at this meeting.
