chatham commission presentation sept. 2015

8/20/2019 Chatham commission presentation Sept. 2015

1/15

September 3, 2015

SCMPD Agreement

Overview


2/15

SCMPD Framework recommended in May 2015

Framework approved by both City Council & CountyCommission

County provides Agreement to City staff July 13,

2015

City staff responded mid-August with changes

City Council approved SCMPD Agreement August 20,2015

Timeline


3/15

-for more info…List location or contact for specification (or other related documents)

Follows points of agreement in previous drafts

Includes provisions of the SCMPD Framework Agreement –2 year term

–Develop accountability standards

–Use of consultant

–Convene a staff committee monthly

–Strong Policy Committee

–Flat fee for County in Years 1 and 2

Provisions of the Agreement


4/15

County Staff will recommend minor changes to contractapproved by City in keeping with the Framework Agreement

–Use of Policy Committee prior to perform due diligenceon any service or cost increases

Section III C (5)

Section V C

Section VI B (2)

Minor Changes


5/15

RECORDER’S COURT OF

CHATHAM COUNTYPresentation by County staff of proposedfunding agreement

September 3, 2015


6/15

Then and Now

• History of successful operation since 1961

• Court considered a City department

• Each jurisdiction disburses $ for certain costs

• Annual reconciliation process

• Costs shared based on collected fines & fees

• 3 Judges

• Using 3 courtrooms at 133 Montgomery Street

• Expanded mandates for indigent defense


7/15

Recorder’s Court IGA

• Cost Sharing Agreement for Court’s operations

• City and County have been revising the IGA sinceJuly 2013

• Framework provisions incorporated

• City Council approved agreement August 20,2015

• County Commission will vote on Friday,September 11, 2015

• Agreement would be effective January 1, 2016


8/15

Basic Premises of Agreement

• Court treated like a stand-alone municipal court

• Establishes 3 Cost Centers for cost allocation

• Uses Caseload Data to allocate costs

• Defines Costs of Court

• Reinstates Annual Reconciliation Process

• One year term with automatic renewal


9/15

Section 3 - Costs of Court paid by City

• Salaries and benefits of Judges and Court staff• Unless otherwise noted in the agreement

• Operating costs of the court

• Pro-tem judges• Rent for Courtrooms and court operations area

• Internal service fund charges• Risk management

• Computer services


10/15

Section 4 - Costs of Court paid by County

• Indigent Defense – Felony

• Indigent Defense – Misdemeanor

• Pretrial services – Public Defender

• Telecommunications in courthouse• Sheriff Deputies in courtrooms

• District Attorney

• Victim Witness


11/15

Section 7 – Costs Centers Identified

• Felony

• Misdemeanor & Traffic

• Code Enforcement

• Court will tally caseload for each cost center by jurisdiction(prior year data)

• City/County Jurisdictional percentages for Felony

• City/County Jurisdictional percentages for Misdemeanor

• City/County Jurisdictional percentages for Code Enforcement


12/15

Section 7 – Cost Assignment to CostCenters• Felony – Section 7.2

• Misdemeanor – Section 7.3

• Code Enforcement – Section 7.4

• Costs allocated by percentage for:• Victim Witness

• Indigent Defense

• Sheriff

• Other costs of court (administrative)


13/15

Section 7.6 – Determine annual cost

• Divide Total Court Costs by calculating the cost for eachcost center:

CURRENT YEAR COST CENTER EXPENSES

x

JURISDICTIONAL PERCENTAGE

• Annual cost for each jurisdiction is the sum of this formulafor all three cost centers


14/15

Section 7 – Annual Reconciliation

• Agreement reinstates Annual Reconciliation Process

• Compare total amounts disbursed by a jurisdiction to the jurisdiction’s annual cost

• Pay difference• Annual credit to City of $250,000 per year in 2016 and

2017


15/15

Other Provisions in Section 3

• Judges pay to be agreed to and authorized byboth parties

• Confirmation process for Pro Tem judges outlined

• Nomination process for appointed judges• Take turns putting nominations forward

• Appointment requires consent of each governing body

chatham commission presentation sept. 2015

Documents