Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Defender Report topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kent County public defender outlines staffing, rising expert and investigator requests and seeks budget increase
Summary
Public Defender Julia Kelly told the Kent County Board of Commissioners the office handled 7,787 cases in 2025, is budgeted at about $17.6 million for FY26 (state share just over $15 million, local share about $2.5 million), and reported dramatic increases in investigator and expert requests, prompting a likely request for additional staff in the FY26 budget.
Julia Kelly, Kent County public defender, told the Board of Commissioners during the Office of the Public Defender annual performance review that the office is focused on providing “zealous representation to all adult indigent clients” and is meeting state MIDC standards while managing rapidly rising demand.
Kelly said the office’s FY26 budget sits at roughly $17.6 million, with the state portion “just over $15 million” and a local share of about $2.5 million. She gave a staffing snapshot: about 70 employees, including roughly 41 in‑house attorneys, 17 administrative staff and eight video arraignment attorneys; about 50 additional attorneys serve on the roster for conflict and overflow cases.
The defender highlighted steep increases in requests for outside assistance. “We had 169 investigator requests in 2022; we’re sitting right now at 358 in 2025,” she said. She reported expert approvals rising from about 34 in the earlier assessment period to roughly 240 now, covering services from polygraphs and forensic examinations to data review. Mitigation specialists likewise increased their output and reach, she said.
Kelly gave case volume figures and a cost comparison: OPD received 7,787 cases in 2025; after conflicts, the trial division handled 7,521 and the roster system took the remainder. She said 29 district‑court trials and 72 circuit‑court trials consumed about 247 trial days across the year. Using conservative cost assumptions, she presented illustrative totals for budgeting context and said the figures remain under the state funding the office receives.
Commissioners pressed for operational detail. Commissioner Lrand asked whether the office covers Grand Rapids misdemeanor cases; Kelly replied that the City of Grand Rapids covers misdemeanors in the 61st District Court while OPD handles felonies. On video arraignments, Kelly explained that a specialized set of eight attorneys conducts Zoom arraignments to free trial attorneys for other work.
Commissioner Stack questioned the balance between in‑house and roster counsel; Kelly said roster counsel handled about 20% of cases in 2025, that the office monitors workloads weekly, and that they will likely request additional staff in the FY26 budget, which is due on the 27th of the month. On client feedback, Commissioner Wack asked about comment cards; Kelly said there is no formal attendee comment card system now but management is considering ways to collect client input.
Kelly closed by noting ongoing improvements to case‑management systems, plans to enhance the office website for client communications, and interest in expanding juvenile representation and in‑house immigration expertise tied to Padilla advisals.
The board did not take an immediate vote on staffing; Kelly said she will present budget requests to the board as part of the normal FY26 budget process.
