Legal-defense cost cutting? Mayor urged not to tinker

By Ken Armstrong
Seattle Times staff reporter

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most e-mailed articles

Other links An Unequal Defense: A seattletimes.com special project

"We have people come from other nations and express interest in our criminal-justice system and ask how to do it right. And we always point to Seattle," said David Carroll, a research director for the National Legal Aid & Defender Association.

So Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels' decision to change the system has dumbfounded many lawyers in King County and beyond. Nickels' office is soliciting bids for new public-defense contracts — contracts that invite low-cost bidding from for-profit law firms and may loosen caseload limits and other safeguards that define the present system, according to an array of critics that includes judges, ethics experts and the King County Bar Association.

"Our basic position is puzzlement. Why change? We don't understand it," said John Cary, first vice president of the King County Bar Association.

"My initial reaction was, 'Why?' " Carroll said.

The Seattle City Council has likewise taken notice. Council member Nick Licata said he is considering proposing an ordinance that would require caseload limits for lawyers and restrict public-defense work to nonprofit law firms.

"What I don't want to see is a repeat of what we saw in Grant County, where they had contracts with for-profit law firms that were providing poor service or farming the work out to other lawyers without quality controls," he said.

The new contracts will cover public-defense services in Seattle Municipal Court — the state's busiest court, where each year thousands of defendants face criminal charges that extend up to gross misdemeanors, punishable by as much as a year in jail.

Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis said the city can save money without sacrificing the quality of representation provided to defendants too poor to hire their own lawyer.

"We're committed to maintaining quality," Ceis said. "But we have to make sure we're getting that quality at a fair price."

Under the present system, Seattle pays King County to provide public-defense services for Municipal Court. In 2004, the city will pay about $5.2 million, including $1 million for the county's administrative costs, said Edsonya Charles, the mayor's adviser on criminal-justice issues.
 
The county, with long experience from overseeing courts that handle felonies and other matters, in turn employs three nonprofit law firms that specialize in indigent defense. The county requires those firms to limit defense attorneys to 380 misdemeanor cases a year and to provide a set number of supervisors, investigators and other support staff.

Nickels wants to remove King County as the go-between and have the city contract directly with two law firms. A primary defender would handle an estimated 5,000 to 7,000 cases a year, and the other firm would take up to 1,000 cases.

That streamlined approach could save perhaps $300,000 a year on administrative costs, Charles said.

Last year, the city cut its public-defense costs after discovering it was paying more than the county for overhead expenses under the indigent-defense contracts, Ceis said. By directly controlling the contracts, he said, the city could make sure it avoids paying too much.

But the city's approach has upset many lawyers and judges.

The King County Bar Association wrote to Nickels, saying, "We fear that you will inadvertently dismantle a defender system that has well served the interests of the public."

The association, with about 5,000 members, challenged the city's proposed plan on several grounds. Among them: failing to include strict caseload limits, inviting a form of competitive bidding that has caused profound problems in other jurisdictions, and requiring law firms that bid to provide a reference from a prosecuting attorney, a defense lawyer's traditional adversary.

Fred Bonner, the Municipal Court's presiding judge, also wrote to Nickels in March, saying judges were "concerned that you would unilaterally undertake such an endeavor without first discussing it with us." Bonner urged Nickels to slow down, ask for more advice, and restrict applicants to nonprofit law firms. Many studies show such firms provide more effective assistance of counsel, the judge wrote.

Planning to invite bids from both for-profit or nonprofit law firms, the city says cost will count for 20 percent of the selection criteria.

New contracts will go out for bid on May 24, take effect in January 2005, and cover three years, according to the city. It has scheduled a meeting for this morning to hear from those who may have concerns about the draft proposal.

The city's current caseload limit of 380 misdemeanors a year per attorney falls below the American Bar Association's recommended limit of 400, but exceeds the Washington State Bar Association's recommended ceiling of 300.

A draft of the city's request for proposals doesn't establish a caseload limit, Charles said, but the city has no intention of increasing attorneys' existing workload.

Ceis, the deputy mayor, said the current request for proposals is only a draft and could be changed based upon feedback the city receives.

Ken Armstrong: 206-464-3730 or karmstrong@seattletimes.com