The Massachusetts District Attorneys Association (MDAA) sent a letter to candidates on Oct 7 asking for support for legislation that would require budget parity between public prosecution and public defense offices. They expressed concern at disparities that have grown in the last eight years. The letter claims that 8 years ago District Attorneys offices received $78 million and the Committee for Public Counsel Services received $51. For FY 2010 the District Attorney office appropriations were $92 million, while the CPCS appropriation was $168 million.
One item that struck me in particular was the amount of private outsourcing that was reported, which I shared with the Berkshire District Attorney when I met with him on October 18. He told me that presently 90% of the caseload that is handled by CPCS is given to private contractors, who are called ‘bar advocates.’ It made me think of Halliburton!
The MDAA requested that I e-mail my thoughts on their proposal to them, which I did today. The text of the e-mail follows.
TO: MA DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S ASSOCIATION (MDAA)
I am herewith following up on the e-mail that I sent to MDAA on October 14, 2010. I have since then met with David Capeless, who serves as District Attorney for most of my district (4th Berkshire). Mr. Capeless and I met in his office on October 18. He gave me further background on the issues you presented in your October 7 letter to candidates and the legislative proposals that your association has recently been publicizing – namely, a call for legislation that requires fiscal parity between prosecutors and defenders.
In our discussion, I shared with Mr. Capeless that there were two items that had struck me upon reading the background that you provided in the October 7 lette: 1) a concern at the volume and expense of private outsourcing that MDAA reports is being conducted by the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS); and 2) a concern that calculations of true parity must include a valuation of services and staff that are funded outside the respective agencies, but are at the disposal of District Attorneys offices and CPCS.
When I inquired how long this had been an issue of concern to MDAA, Mr. Capeless shared with me the history of your earlier attempts to bring this issue to the attention of the state legislature. This history apparently includes regular legislative appropriations above CPCS’s budget and ever-increasing private outsourcing of ‘bar advocates’ who are paid by the hour, costing more in taxpayer money than if additional CPCS staff were hired. According to Mr. Capeless the legislature has not seen fit to make an issue of this.
I asked Mr. Capeless about press reports that I had read on October 15 regarding the value of police department resources that DA offices have access to, and how the value of other agency contributions (police department work, for example) should be included in a parity calculation that the proposed legislation would define. Mr. Capeless responded that CPCS staff have access to the same police department resources that DA offices do. This needs more comprehensive investigation before I can take a position on it.
If I am elected I promise to further investigate the matter and to file appropriate legislation if public funds could be saved while a fair and balanced justice system maintained. If the legislature has been derelict in addressing this or not debating real solutions to the problem, it is yet another symptom of the democracy deficit that our commonwealth suffers from. The next legislative session may present an opportunity for the legislature to begin a debate that is overdue. I hope to be one of the new faces from a new party on Beacon Hill which will bring about such debate on the issues that MDAA raises as well as on other important issues.
Lee Scott Laugenour
Candidate, State Representative
4th Berkshire District