ILNews

Financial picture worsens for Marion County courts

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

shortfall-factbox.jpgIndianapolis’ court system is used to making do with less, chipping away so far this year at a deficit of more than $2.6 million. Next year, money is expected to be substantially tighter.

“Ballpark … we’re looking at about $4.6 million in terms of shortfall” in the 2015 budget, said Sue Patterson, director of finance for Marion Superior Courts.

Some of the factors that will impact court funding in Marion County next year are likely to be felt in court systems around the state. An additional payroll period falls next year, health care costs are projected to rise, and probation officers are scheduled to receive a 2.2 percent salary increase.

Patterson and Marion Superior judges have been outspoken about needs they say that aren’t being met. The county’s probation department, for instance, addressed being shortchanged about $700,000 this year by simply not filling a couple dozen open positions in the department staff of roughly 200.

The courts also routinely deal with persistent shortfalls to support guardians ad litem appointed to represent juveniles in child in need of services cases.

“We’re seeing an increase in CHINS cases and an increase in criminal filings,” said Marion Superior Judge Heather Welch. At the same time, “Revenues in general are decreasing.”
 

welch-heather-2014mug Welch

Welch chairs the Marion Superior budget committee formed last year as the courts sought to find ways to save money and make their case amid chronic underfunding from state and local sources. The panel consists of eight judges and Patterson to ensure input from those with experience across all areas of court operations.

“One of the most important reasons we (formed the committee) is to develop a process that identifies the high priorities to be funded,” Welch said. “That’s our responsibility to taxpayers as elected officials.”

The courts received some good news June 23 from the City-County Council of Indianapolis and Marion County, which appropriated $900,000 to close the funding gap for guardians ad litem. But the money is only projected to last until September, when the courts will likely have to return to seek another appropriation.

Patterson had warned judges during prior meetings of the Marion Superior Executive Committee that budgeted funding for guardians ad litem would be exhausted in the summer without some relief.

“This funding crisis has been around for a while and they have been spending down their reserves,” said Democratic City-County Councilman Joe Simpson, who sits on the Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee. “Now they’re at the point where they won’t have any reserves.”

Simpson said the county needs to find a dedicated source of funding to support a worthy program.

Republican City-County Councilwoman Marilyn Pfisterer co-sponsored the increase for guardians ad litem. A former court-appointed special advocate, she said “there needs to be a stable source of funding and something that the system can depend on year to year.

“It has been a chronic situation that the guardian ad litem (program) does have a shortfall just about every year that I can remember,” Pfisterer said.

Guardian ad litem boost?

The cost of paying for guardians ad litem in CHINS cases is supposed to be shared between the state and county, but counties complain they’re picking up a greater share of the cost.

Leslie Dunn, director of the Indiana Office of Guardian Ad Litem/Court Appointed Special Advocates, said the office is performing a statewide needs assessment with the intent to go to the Legislature next year and seek an increase in the roughly $2.9 million in state funding budgeted annually for GALs.

“We want to make sure we’re not asking for too much or asking for too little,” Dunn said.

Marion County typically receives about 20 to 25 percent of the state funding for services, proportional to the number of children served. But Patterson said the state’s share only covers about 16 percent of the total cost to serve children in abuse and neglect cases, leaving the county to pick up the remainder.

Counties have little choice after the Court of Appeals’ 2009 ruling, In the Matters of N.S. & J.M. v. T.S. and S.B., and C.L. and B.M., 908 N.E. 2d 1176. There, the court concluded that under state law, “It is clear that the burden of paying for services rendered by GALs or CASAs should be attributed to and paid for by the county.”

But I.C. 33-24-6-4 spells out a funding role for the Legislature if it so chooses, along with a local match from counties receiving the funding.

While the Court of Appeals decision put the onus for funding on counties, it also established the right of every child to representation in a CHINS case, said Cindy Booth, executive director of Child Advocates Inc., which provides GAL/CASA services in Marion County courts.

“Even though we use volunteers, we have to have staff to manage the volunteers, recruit them, provide office space and so on,” Booth said. “If there is such a gap, the county must fund.”

The average cost per GAL case is about $628, Booth said, and the state hasn’t increased funding since 2007. That’s resulted in rising costs for Marion County.

While court officials must return to the City-County Council periodically for additional sums to make sure children in abuse and neglect cases have a voice in court, Booth said the money has always been approved. “For some reason the controller for the county has not appropriated enough money from the beginning,” she said, even though costs could likely be estimated to within about $50,000.

Still, she said, “Marion County has been very responsive and very responsible to make sure every child has an advocate in every case.”

But some counties have significant waiting lists, Dunn said – Madison, St. Joseph and Vanderburgh among the largest. That’s why she’s asking program directors around the state who operate on shoestring budgets to assess their needs to make the case for more state funding. That would alleviate the pressure on counties feeling the strain while making sure children are represented.

“We are looking at, right now, what would it take to serve all the children across the state,” Dunn said.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Child Advocates do not help the children!
    Child Advocates profited over 6 million last year alone. They are bullies & do not act in children's best interests but rather their own. They placed my children full time with their unlicensed alcoholic father despite recommendations for over 5 yrs. Meanwhile my children have medical conditions left untreated living with their father and their education has suffered greatly. Get these people terminated!!!
  • Ask
    Ask Spicoli over at SmackedForum. He should know the situation really well. Then when you see what he has to say about citizens of Indiana you might think twice about who you elect in the Superior Courts.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

    2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

    3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

    4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

    5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

    ADVERTISEMENT