Hypocrisy mounts as lawmakers question chief public defender’s request for money

Hypocrisy, political showboating and general incompetence were on full display during Monday’s legislative subcommittee hearing, where lawmakers were grilled Gregg Parrishexecutive director Arkansas Public Defenders Commissionregarding his request for $1.25 million in state funds to continue paying some part-time public defenders.

The funds were needed to fund a part-time public defender program created in 2022 to address about 5,000 cases left in a backlog caused by court closures from March 2020 to June 2021 due to COVID-19, Parrish said. Arkansas Legislative Council Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review Subcommittee.

Part-time public defenders were working exclusively on thousands of backlogged cases, Parrish said, and there were “about 5,000” such cases remaining, according to figures provided to Parrish by Administrative Office of the Courts.

If it weren’t for the $1.25 million, Parrish said he would have to start laying off part-time lawyers “starting next week.”

Parrish’s request apparently irked some GOP lawmakers, who were quick to point out that the Legislature approved $4.5 million in 2022 to fund the positions.

Chairwoman of the subcommittee Fran Cavenaugh, Representative (R-Walnut Ridge) seemed particularly irritated that the backlog was caused by the pandemic.

“I’m concerned that we have all these cases that have been pushed back to COVID, and quite frankly, I’m tired of hearing how COVID has put everything on hold and how COVID can’t do this because we’re in 2024 — and it’s going to be 2025 soon — and we’re still using all these cases that have been pushed back to COVID as an excuse for why they can’t get done and catch up on the backlog,” Cavenaugh said, before finally asking Parrish where people charged in the roughly 5,000 backlogged cases are being held. (It depends on the charges, the nature of the crime, whether the person has posted bail, etc., Parrish said.)

Cavenaugh continued to use the pandemic as an “excuse,” only occasionally interrupting her tirade to ask a question.

“At some point, we have to take back control, make sure these people are heard in a timely manner, and stop going back and asking for more money for something that happened with all these cases that came back to COVID,” she said. “COVID is in the rearview mirror. We don’t have any more money for COVID — it’s basically gone.”

(Note: COVID-19 is not “in the rearview mirror.” COVID-19 hospitalizations in Arkansas have been rising since May. More than 200 people were hospitalized in Arkansas in July alone.)

The “COVID money” that Cavenaugh referred to is money from American Rescue Plan Act$1.9 trillion stimulus package signed by President Joe Biden in March 2021.

Under ARPA — which every member of Arkansas’ congressional delegation voted against — Arkansas received nearly $2.7 billion in federal funds to be spent on measures to help the state recover from the pandemic. All of the $4.5 million previously “transferred” (to use Rep. Cavenaugh’s term) to the Public Defender Commission came from that federal money.

Not wanting to be outdone, Representative Mark Berry (R-Ozark) seized on Cavenaugh’s anti-COVID rhetoric — at one point calling the backlog “alleged COVID cases” — and tossed it with a smattering of baseless accusations about how previous money was spent.

“I agree with Rep. Cavenaugh: This COVID thing has got to go away,” Berry said, before asking if most of the funds were used for raises for current public defender staff.

Parrish quickly clarified that no, ARPA funds can only be used to pay part-time public defenders specifically to deal with the COVID backlog. ARPA money must be used specifically to fund programs directly related to the impacts of the pandemic.

One of these was the part-time public defender program.

Undeterred by the clear response to the allegations, Berry doubled down. “Okay, so I’m opposed to you getting my vote on this money until you explain to us what you’ve done with this money and what you plan to do with the $1.25 million you’re asking for,” he said, “because my understanding is that a large portion of ARPA funds have gone toward pay raises for your employees.”

The subcommittee’s resistance to providing the requested funds now that state money is being spent, not federal ARPA funds, smacked of hypocrisy in light of a Sunday story in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette about raises for executive branch employees — including 73 employees working in Attorney General Tim Griffin’s office — that were given at the start of the state’s fiscal year, July 1.

Griffin, predictably, tried to get ahead of the newspaper’s report by offering a flimsy explanation.

“I have no interest in hiring mediocre staff: the people of Arkansas deserve the best legal representation in matters that affect the lives of millions of people,” Griffin told the newspaper. “I strive for excellence, and in my office, I strive to hire only the best for the people of Arkansas.”

But if that is indeed Griffin’s goal, one wonders why he hired Lisa Wiedower, formerly known as Lisa Wilkins, who cost the state nearly a million dollars in judgments, attorney fees, and costs in a civil rights lawsuit while she was an employee of the Arkansas Department of Corrections. (The fact that Wiedower received a $26,000 raise despite moving from assistant attorney general II to assistant attorney general I raises even more questions about the sincerity of Griffin’s stated goals.)

Representative Jeff Wardlaw (R-Hermitage) was also in the middle of the session yesterday. When Wardlaw began questioning Parrish, Rep. Berry had already asked Parrish specifically how many public defenders he had hired with ARPA funds, and Senator Blake Johnson (R-Corning) just asked Parrish how many cases were pending when the initial ARPA appropriations were approved and how many are currently pending. Parrish did not have an answer to that question.

Wardlaw was not discouraged by the fact that these questions had already been asked.

“How many lawyers did you hire for that $4 million?” he asked Parrish.

After being told the same thing Berry was told (never more than 37 part-time lawyers because the money would run out quickly if they filled All 45 authorized positions), Wardlaw asked the same question again. “How many lawyers do you typically hire pre-COVID,” he asked, “and how many additional lawyers did you hire exactly with the $4 million that you received from this committee to help clear the COVID backlog?”

Wardlaw received the same answer as before.

He continued, “How did that impact the backlog of hiring the additional 30 attorneys, so what did you see as an improvement in the backlog after hiring those attorneys?”

Parrish said the judges he spoke with felt the program was intended to reduce the backlog.

“Give us a number,” Wardlaw replied. “This Legislature gave you $4 million a few years ago to help with the backlog, and you just told me you hired about thirty lawyers to help you. What has that done to the backlog between then and now?”

Parrish again stated that he did not have the number in front of him and that such data would have to come directly from Administrative Office of the Courts.

The two lawmakers appeared to better understand Parrish’s position as head of the public defender commission.

Senator Bart Hester (R-Cave Springs) asked Parrish a series of questions to clarify that the backlog was not the commission’s fault, then suggested that a solution might be to create more judgeships. Hester said the Legislature would likely do that next session.

Hester quickly changed the subject when Parrish noted that adding judges would require more public defenders and prosecutors.

Senator Linda Chesterfield (D-Little Rock) asked specifically whether the lack of public defenders was a problem unique to adult court or whether it extended to juvenile court as well. “Is that a problem across the board?” she asked. “We don’t have enough people to meet the needs of people in criminal court, and similarly, do we not have enough people to meet the needs of people in the juvenile justice system?”

Parrish said the problem is “broad-based” and involves a lack of adequate numbers of public defenders in all courts across the state.

“Because of how much we pay,” Parrish said, “we can usually only hire someone who’s just out of law school full-time,” and his lack of experience means he can initially handle only felonies or class C or D misdemeanors.

Parrish spoke at length, giving examples and lamenting the fact that public defender offices across the state cannot find experienced attorneys willing to work full time at public defender salaries.

Senator Johnson seemed confused by Parrish’s explanation. “You explained to us that most of the additional people that have been hired are for lower-level cases,” he said. Parrish explained that he was not talking about part-time attorneys, but more generally about how difficult it is to find full-time public defenders here because of the pay and hours.

Parrish’s argument deserves an asterisk, though. Just before he started working for Arkansas Times In 2023, I interviewed for a job at the Pulaski County Public Defender’s Office. I had worked there for over three years (September 2006 – October 2009), had many years of experience in criminal law, and I sincerely wanted to return to the office. I interviewed with two attorneys I had known since my first term at the office, and when the interview was over, I was told they wanted to hire me, but ultimately it was Parrish.

I’ve never heard of them.

This was about a year after I reported on Parrish’s botched and ill-fated hiring of then-state senator Trent Garner as one of his part-time public defenders. I later heard from a mutual friend that Parrish was “very upset” about the report. So maybe that’s not Just salaries and work hours that prevent some public defender firms from hiring experienced attorneys.

Ultimately, the subcommittee was not swayed by Parrish’s claims that he would have to start laying people off if the funds were not approved. Lawmakers instead voted to put Parrish’s request on hold until Friday to give him time to provide additional information they requested, including the specific number of people hired, how the initial ARPA funds were spent and the type and location of cases still outstanding.