Judicial Council asks for additional budget lines; director cites public‑defender staffing and recruitment challenges

A representative of the Judicial Council explained to the Fiscal Committee that a late-added budget obligation was placed with the council by a law change and that the council is seeking additional funds to meet that new duty.

The council's representative (transcribed in the record as both "Jay buggy" and later as "Director Bucky") said the change shifted payment responsibility from the Judicial Branch to the Judicial Council and that the council did not previously carry that expense. "Essentially, the payment obligation went from the Judicial Branch to the Judicial Council," the representative said.

Committee members asked how often the council anticipated returning for additional funding. The representative said he expected to return at least twice for two different budget lines. Committee members requested that agencies cite the enacting legislation when a law creates a new budget obligation so the committee can track costs tied to statutes.

On staffing, the Judicial Council representative said the public-defender system faces recruitment problems, including competition from larger jurisdictions and difficulties recruiting private attorneys to take conflict cases. The representative said a prior office that attempted cost recovery was abolished at the end of the last fiscal year because recoveries did not cover the expense.

The committee approved the Judicial Council item at tab 9.

Next steps: the Judicial Council will work with the governor's office and select a broker for any property sale; agencies were asked to supply legislative citations and follow-up information on costs and staffing as requested by members.