Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Attorney Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County and district attorney clash over proposed DA budget cuts and oversight of Child Advocacy Center
Summary
County administration proposed $10.8 million in DA reductions while preserving core prosecutorial capacity; the DA and community partners warned proposed moves to move the Child Advocacy Center (CAC) and South County Youth Task Force out of the DA’s office would disrupt trust‑based, multidisciplinary services for child victims.
County administration presented a pared‑down package May 12 that trims recommended reductions to the District Attorney’s (DA) office to roughly $10.8 million from an earlier internal target of $18.5 million, citing concerns about eliminating filled support positions that have limited transfer options and about preserving investigator/attorney support ratios.
Administration said it favored deleting a small number of vacant attorney positions and a few investigator and communications posts rather than the DA’s proposed cuts that would have significantly reduced para‑legal and support staffing and proposed eliminating the South County Youth Task Force.
District Attorney Jeff Rosen and his staff pushed back during the workshop and in public comment, arguing that the DA’s holistic approach—prevention, investigation and prosecution—depends on preserving prosecutors, investigators and communications capacity. Rosen said several non‑mandated programs (South County Youth Task Force and the Child Advocacy Center) are already proposed for preservation in the administration’s recommended budget but warned against deeper cuts that would remove multidisciplinary capacity.
The most contentious issue raised by public comment and DA staff was a separate administration proposal to fold several prevention and reentry programs, including functions now in the DA’s victim services unit (the CAC) into a new Justice Services & Support (JS&S) department administratively anchored to the County Executive. DA staff and many partner organizations (law enforcement partners, hospitals, non‑profits) argued the CAC’s multidisciplinary model depends on the DA office’s role as a neutral convener and that relocating the center risks undermining referral patterns and collaborative trust that built the program.
Administration replied that the JS&S proposal is an attempt to preserve programs that were otherwise slated for deep reductions in multiple home departments by consolidating them under a single budget unit (the existing pretrial services unit). Staff said the change is meant to maintain program continuity, improve contract monitoring consistency and achieve modest staffing efficiencies while keeping the DA as lead for criminal investigations and prosecution.
Board members requested more data, org charts, and community engagement before deciding; several supervisors recommended that policy questions about the CAC and the South County Youth Task Force be considered in committee so the board can balance operational impacts, community trust and budget realities ahead of the June hearings.
Ending: County staff agreed to refine the recommendation and return with alternative options, org charts and more detailed impact analyses before final action in June.
