Skip to main content

AgendaQuick™

View Agenda Item

Consent-General Government   # 16.
Board of Supervisors
County Counsel
Meeting Date:
05/26/2026
Brief Title
Indigent Defense Panel Agreements
From:
Philip J. Pogledich, County Counsel
Staff Contact:
Phil Pogledich, County Counsel, x8172
Supervisorial District Impact:
Countywide

Subject

Approve new three-year contracts with Conflict Indigent Defense Panel attorneys for the period July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2029 at an initial monthly compensation rate of $15,820. (General fund impact $1,417,200) (Pogledich)

Recommended Action

Approve new three-year contracts with Conflict Indigent Defense Panel attorneys for the period July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2029 at an initial monthly compensation rate of $15,820.

Strategic Plan Goal(s)

Collaborative Community
County Mandated Service

Reason for Recommended Action/Background

This item seeks Board approval of new three-year contracts with conflict indigent defense panel ("Panel") attorneys. Some background is provided in Section A, followed by a discussion of the general terms of the contracts in Section B. This staff report concludes by discussing (in Section C) additional terms specific to the Panel's work in the People v. Jack Y. Lee case arising from the Oakdale Fire, including additional compensation.

A.  Background.

State law requires the County to provide representation for indigent defendants in misdemeanor and felony criminal trials and related proceedings.  The Office of the Public Defender handles most such work, but at times the Public Defender is unable to handle particular matters due to a conflict of interest (such as in multi-defendant cases) or other reasons.  In such instances, the Court will appoint a private practice attorney to provide representation at the County's cost.

To control such costs, the County has long (at least 40 years) contracted with a panel of local attorneys to provide conflict indigent defense services at a flat monthly rate (the "Panel"). The Panel currently consists of five attorney positions staffed by filled by six experienced attorneys (two of which split a Panel position) that handle felony and misdemeanor matters regularly plus a separate attorney (not included in this Board item) that handles misdemeanor appeals, habeas petitions filed under the Racial Justice Act, and other minor matters at an hourly rate on an as-needed basis. One of the attorneys also serves as the panel administrator, with responsibility for monitoring case assignments and handling other tasks essential to panel operations for a stipend of $2,000/month on top of the monthly rate for services.

B.  Terms of the New Three-Year Contracts.

The proposed new three-year contracts are similar in most respects to the existing Panel contracts. The agreement template is included as Attachment A. Key changes include the following:
  • Higher monthly compensation, with a different escalator. The contract currently in effect (approved in mid-2023) set monthly pay at $13,130.46 with a fixed 3% bump in Year 2 (2024-25) and a 2% in Year 3 (2025-26). After some negotiation, for the new contracts this Office recommends a Year 1 figure of $15,820/month (+13.56%) tied to the actual cumulative PD/DA attorneys bargaining unit increases from 2025-2026, with +4% in Years 2 (also aligned with PD/DA increases) and 3 (based on a general assumption that PD/DA attorneys bargaining unit will receive at least 2% equity plus 2% COLA as a result of bargaining unit negotiations for the 2028-2029 fiscal year).
  • New trial-length pay. The 2023 template has no premium for unusually long trials—all work is covered by the flat monthly fee. This Office recommends including $200/day compensation for trials that last longer than five court days. This recommendation is intended to respond to statewide criticism that flat-fee indigent defense contracts can produce inadequate assistance of counsel, including by discouraging attorneys from taking cases to trial. This provision is unlikely to be utilized frequently.
  • A restored sixth panel attorney dedicated to juvenile work. The 2023 contract treats juvenile (Welfare & Institutions Code §§601/602, Probate Division 4, and related Civil Code matters) as "backup civil representation" handled by the existing panel. The renewal would add a sixth 0.75-FTE slot specifically for a juvenile caseload of 30+ cases, at an annual cost of about $189,840. This Office believes that a sixth attorney is needed--both in light of the significant juvenile caseload and overall Panel caseloads, which are considerably higher than their peers in the Public Defender's Office even though Panel duties are not considered full-time. Historically, the Panel included six attorneys and downsized early in the COVID-19 pandemic, but workloads have since increased substantially.  
Like the existing Panel agreements, the updated agreements will maintain:
  • Clear descriptions of the scope of services to be provided and the responsibility of individual attorneys for certain related costs (Section I.A-C);
  • Equal monthly compensation for all panel attorneys with the exception of a stipend for the panel administrator of $2,000/month;
  • A provision for good faith negotiations in the event an individual attorney spends substantially more or less time on conflict indigent defense services than expected at the inception of the agreement (Section II.A);
  • A well-defined process for any requests for extra compensation (these are not common), including increased discretion for the Office of the County Counsel and a requirement of Board approval of significant additional compensation (Section II.C);
  • Termination provisions that allow the County or an attorney to terminate an agreement on 90 days advance notice, as well as related provisions on the post-termination handling of existing cases (Section IV);
  • Robust case information and workload reporting requirements; and
  • Provisions requiring attorney availability by phone or in-person for client meetings and, if an attorney shares office space with another panel attorney, adherence to ethical rules intended to protect client confidences (Section XV).
The Panel administrator contract will also include language on the scope of such services (see Att. B), which will include the preparation of “panel procedures” for ongoing matters such as, by way of example, cases with defendants that may be eligible for Mental Health Court or Addiction Intervention Court. The goal of this requirement is to ensure a common understanding among panel attorneys of how such matters should be handled. When requested by the County Counsel, the panel administrator will collaborate with other panel attorneys to prepare written procedures addressing specific topics.   

Lastly, at any point during the three-year contract term, the County can initiate a competitive solicitation process or otherwise evaluate alternative methods of providing conflict indigent defense services (e.g., a second Public Defender office, similar to certain other California counties). The panel attorneys are aware of the possibility that the County may explore one or both of these options during the contract term.

If authorized by the Board, the Office of the County Counsel will finalize the template with each attorney prior to the expiration of the current agreements on June 30, 2026. The panel administrator agreement will be identical to the other agreements aside from the inclusion of the additional scope of services language in Attachment B and the monthly stipend amount mentioned above. The Office will also present a new contract on misdemeanor appeals in the near future.

C.  Additional Terms for the Oakdale Fire Defense Counsel Appointment. 

With the Public Defender already representing a defendant in the Oakdale Fire criminal actions, the Court recently appointed two Panel attorneys to represent a second defendant (Jack Y. Lee). This Office negotiated terms for the appointment with the Panel attorneys, ultimately settling on the following (reflected largely in Section IV.1 of the agreement):
  • Temporary full-time workload (IV.1.A). The standard contract indicates that each covered attorney is expected to provide roughly 1,400 hours/year (0.75 FTE) of legal services. For as long as the attorney is providing or supporting Lee representation, that expectation jumps to approximately 1,900 hours annually—effectively a full-time commitment. This applies to the two attorneys that currently split a panel position, with each going to a full-time role during the Lee case.
  • Extra monthly compensation of $5,500 (IV.1.B). To match the higher workload, the attorney receives an additional flat $5,500 per month on top of the regular monthly rate. This add-on is fixed for the duration — it doesn't get the 4% annual escalators that apply to base compensation. Because the Panel attorneys have already been working on (or supporting other Panel attorneys working on) the matter since May 1, 2026. Section IV.1 is designed to make sure they are appropriately compensated for that work from May 1, 2026 forward until the case is resolved.
  • Special rule for the May 1–June 30, 2026 startup period (IV.1.B, second paragraph). For the first two months of Lee work (which predate the contract's effective date), the $5,500 monthly add-on is scaled down proportionally if the attorney's actual reported hours fall below an average of 142.5 hours/month (90% of the monthly average needed to hit 1,900 annual hours). The catch-up payment, once approved by County Counsel, shows up on the next monthly payment that's at least 15 days after the supplemental report is submitted.
  • Supplemental reporting tied to the catch-up payment (Section VI). The standard Exhibit A report begins July 1, 2026, but Section VI specifically adds that supplemental reporting for the May 1–June 30 period is a prerequisite to receiving the extra Lee compensation for those two months. 
  • $250,000 ancillary services bump for the Lee case (IV.1.C). The Panel's annual ancillary services budget (investigators, experts, interpreters, etc.) stays at $100,000 generally, but the County will augment that budget specifically to support Lee, estimated at roughly $250,000 over the life of the case (through verdict or any earlier resolution). All the normal Section I.C approval steps for ancillary spending still apply.
  • Extra trial-phase compensation for lead counsel (IV.1.D). If the attorney is appointed as one of the two lead trial counsel in Lee, they can request additional compensation during trial on a showing that the location, nature, length, complexity, or intensity of the trial demands services materially beyond the contract. The County agrees to negotiate in good faith, with any deal taken to the County Administrative Officer or—if it exceeds CAO authority—the Board of Supervisors for approval. 
  • Automatic sunset / reversion to normal terms (IV.1.E). All of the above temporary modifications end automatically at the earlier of (a) final disposition of Lee (plea, dismissal, or verdict) or (b) the attorney's reassignment or removal from the matter. After that, the contract reverts to its normal 1,400-hour/0.75 FTE terms.
The additional annual costs associated with the Lee compensation incentives are slightly more than $500,000, with additional expenses as needed to cover experts, investigators, and other services essential to a legally adequate defense. While substantial, the service expectations are closely aligned with those expressed by the Public Defender in connection with their defendant (Tollefson) in the Oakdale Fire criminal actions and this Office believes the Court would have ordered substantially the same compensation if the County and Panel had failed to agree.

Conclusion

For the reasons set forth above, the Office of the County Counsel recommends that the Board authorize new three-year agreements (based on the template included as Att. A) with attorneys that will serve on the conflict indigent defense panel. The template will be modified in minor respects for some attorneys, including the Panel Administrator (to add terms specific to her oversight role based on Att. B). The agreement for the new juvenile attorney mentioned in Section B will not include any Lee provisions (including but not limited to compensation), as that attorney will not provide services in Lee.  

Collaborations (including Board advisory groups and external partner agencies)

CAO

Competitive Bid Process/Vendor Performance

Not applicable.

Fiscal Impact

Fiscal impact (see budgetary detail below)

Fiscal Impact (Expenditure)

Total cost of recommended action:
$    1,417,200
Amount budgeted for expenditure:
$   1,313,786
Additional expenditure authority needed:
$    0
On-going commitment (annual cost):
$    0

Source of Funds for this Expenditure

General Fund
$1,313,786

Further explanation as needed:

The anticipated costs arising from the proposed agreements will be included in the approved (final) budget for each fiscal year during the three-year term, commencing with the 2026-27 fiscal year. The exact amount expended year-to-year will vary, depending largely on the disposition of the People v. Jack Y. Lee case discussed in the staff report. During the initial year of the new agreement, increased fees for attorney services are expected to be $519,840, with the likelihood of additional amounts for expert witnesses and other ancillary services (estimated at $250,000 over the expected 2 - 3 year life of the action).

No additional expenditure authority is being requested at this time. A request for additional funding for this contract will be included with the Adopted Budget request.

Attachments

Form Review

Inbox Reviewed By Date
Phil Pogledich Phil Pogledich 05/19/2026 01:40 PM
Financial Services Laura Liddicoet 05/19/2026 02:14 PM
County Counsel (Originator) Phil Pogledich 05/21/2026 08:41 AM
Berenice Espitia Berenice Espitia 05/21/2026 09:29 AM
Form Started By:
Phil Pogledich
Started On:
05/18/2026 12:34 PM
Final Approval Date:
05/21/2026