Georgia committee probes DA pay, county supplements and staffing gaps

A state legislative oversight committee heard testimony on disparities in funding and staffing across Georgia’s district attorney offices, with prosecutors and staff pointing to county supplements and local budgets as the main drivers of pay differences.

Joe Mulholland, district attorney for the South Georgia Circuit and president of the District Attorneys Association, told the committee that state law provides one assistant district attorney per superior court judge plus a chief assistant, a drug prosecutor, juvenile prosecutors where applicable, two administrative positions and one investigator per circuit. "So for my particular circuit...we have 7 assistant DAs," Mulholland said, describing his office as having about 13 state-funded positions overall and additional locally funded posts.

The issue matters because local supplements vary widely, Mulholland and members said. Mulholland described his circuit’s annual county portion budget at about $238,000 for operations, travel and equipment, and said his personal county supplement had grown over 22 years to about $13,000. "That's where that difference comes in the salary discrepancies between the DAs," he said, referring to wealthier counties that can offer much larger local supplements.

Committee members reviewed state pay ranges cited by witnesses: assistant DAs were described as starting around $72,000, with state salary steps and a top scale in the mid-$130,000s. Mulholland said the recent boost in starting pay produced a measurable increase in applicants, but he and members warned that rural circuits still struggle to recruit and retain prosecutors. "It is so difficult to fill all our positions," Mulholland said, noting that offices near metropolitan areas or private practice can offer much higher pay and that experience often leads staff to leave for better-paying jobs.

The chair said he wants data to quantify disparities across the 51 circuits and asked the Prosecuting Attorney's Council and the DA Association to compile information on total spending per circuit (state, federal and local sources). The Prosecuting Attorney's Council offered to supply state-appropriated position numbers and to survey DAs for local supplement information. The committee also asked Mulholland and staff to review whether certain prosecutorial misconduct items should be given clearer statutory language in a proposed code of conduct and to report back promptly.

Next steps: the committee expectsto receive circuit-level budget breakdowns from PAC and the DA Association and to continue the oversight discussion at its next scheduled meeting.