People of limited means trying to pay off court fees, as well as the sheriff’s office, could catch a break at the next Clark County council meeting.
At its Tuesday morning hearing, the council will consider a measure that will increase the work program credit for offenders trying to pay off fines and fees. The council will also consider an update to its two-year budget that will include requests from the sheriff’s office.
Work program credit
In Clark County, individuals convicted of crimes are required to help pay for programs and other costs associated with their rehabilitation and supervision.
Ela Selga, District Court administrator, said that if released offenders convince a judge that these costs will be a hardship, they are allowed to participate in a work program.
“They pick up litter, they go to the parks and do some yardwork,” she said. “It’s a lot of cleanup.” Shifts begin at 7 a.m. and run until 3:30 p.m.
Currently offenders earn a $75 credit toward their fees for each shift. She said that offenders can apply the credit toward fines owed as well as fees associated with victims’ impact classes and getting suspended licenses back.
On Tuesday, the council will consider a resolution that will increase the credit to $100 per shift. She said the amount of the credit is based on the going rate for similar work as well as the state minimum wage, which increased to $11 an hour earlier this year.
Selga said that in April there were 94 individuals participating in the program.
Jeff Barrar, the owner of the law firm Vancouver Defenders, said that the increase in the credit amount is significant. His firm contracts with the county to provide indigent defense and his clients sometimes become overwhelmed with fees.
“Any relief is a positive step,” he said.
Supplemental budget
The county council will also consider a resolution adopting the spring supplemental appropriation to the 2017-2018 budget. Clark County Budget Director Adriana Prata said that the supplemental appropriation is mostly for housekeeping purposes and makes technical adjustments.
The sheriff’s office requested additional funds for vehicles, ballistic armor, more employees to help with public record requests and a study on how to replace its now-shuttered central precinct. While the council has ultimate approval over the budget, the county manager mostly recommended either not funding the requests or funding with conditions or modifications.
Initially, the county manager recommended not funding a $275,000 request from the sheriff’s office for ballistic equipment including safety vests, helmets and gas masks. Prata explained that the sheriff’s office has found money in previous budgets for this need. She said that the county manager recommended that the sheriff’s office prioritize ballistic equipment and instead ask for additional funds for items that had a lower priority.
“The question becomes, how is the sheriff prioritizing the budget? What falls to the bottom of the priority list that would not get funded?” She said. “We thought that was the item to come back and ask for funding for.”
However, Prata said that after receiving feedback from the council, funding for ballistic equipment will be included in the supplemental appropriations.
The county manager’s recommendations include funding a study for the replacement of the sheriff’s central precinct in Brush Prairie as part of a broader study of county facilities. The recommendations include funding the purchase of a third jail transport van, but to not fund replacing a second van until the county completes a study on its existing fleet. The recommendations also do not include a $203,745 request to add two positions to the sheriff’s public records unit.
Mark Gassaway, finance director who serves on the county’s finance team that helps craft budget recommendations, said the sheriff’s office didn’t provide enough data to justify the two positions when it’s already seen its workload reduced after losing a records management contract with the Vancouver Police Department. The Clark County Prosecuting Attorney’s office took the 600-request backlog from the sheriff’s office. According to Chris Horne, chief civil deputy prosecutor, about 90 percent of them are cleared.
“We just don’t have enough information to understand that the business need is there,” Prata said.
Darin Rouhier, finance manager for the sheriff’s office, said that the sheriff would still prefer to have the central precinct issue studied separately. He also said that over the last six months the sheriff’s office has provided data to justify its request for the records positions.
Armored vehicle
The county manager’s recommendations for the supplemental budget include allowing the sheriff’s office to use $270,000 from the seizure fund (money seized from the proceeds of criminal activity) to purchase a Lenco BearCat G2, an armored vehicle.
Gassaway pointed out that the sheriff’s office already has a BearCat and the Vancouver Police Department has one as well. He said there are no benchmarks or standards for how many armored vehicles a community should have.
Sheriff’s Cmdr. Mike McCabe said there are no standards because there are too many variables (population, density, incidents) to account for. He said that the sheriff’s office figures there should be three in case there is a serious incident. He said one BearCat could be stationed in the front of a building where an incident has occurred, another in the back and a third to run a rescue operation if needed.
He said that the sheriff’s office has two “Peacekeeper” armored vehicles that were purchased two decades ago, are no longer reliable and cost $34,000 a year to maintain. After getting the new BearCat, he said the sheriff’s office will retire the Peacekeepers with a total net reduction in armored vehicles with fewer costs.
