Virtual magistration pilot now just a ‘trial’

The Austin Public Safety Commission on Monday tabled a resolution aimed at stopping or postponing a proposed pilot program that would eliminate Travis County from the process of magistration for people arrested by Austin officers, including pretrial services. Commissioners learned from APD Chief of Staff Jeff Greenwalt that the department is now planning to do what he called a “mock trial” of the proposal, not a full-fledged pilot.

Nelly Paulina Ramirez, who chairs the commission and sponsored the resolution, explained that the commission decided to table the resolution “because what (the police) presented was really different from what we understood. … Right now, I’m just happy that it is slowing down … that they’re talking about what is even feasible.”

Magistrate judges determine whether police have probable cause for an arrest, set bond for those who have been arrested and make decisions about whether to release a person on personal recognizance. They rely on advice from Travis County pretrial services employees, who check on the arrested person’s background, pending criminal cases, employment and finances in making recommendations.

But those services are expensive. Greenwalt explained to commissioners that under the previous contract between the city and Travis County, the city paid $6.9 million per year for magistration services at the Travis County jail. That contract has expired, and Greenwalt said the first proposal from Travis County for the upcoming year was $14.5 million. “Cost is the No. 1 issue,” he said when explaining why APD now wants to cut the county out of the magistration process for people arrested by Austin officers.

Eventually, Greenwalt said, the negotiators arrived at a new contract price of $9.9 million. That contract will be on the City Council agenda on Jan. 18, he said. But Greenwalt says APD wants to test a process that would eliminate use of Travis County’s pretrial services and do virtual magistration. Greenwalt pointed out that APD has the same access to information that pretrial services has. But it is not clear whether the arrestee and victims would be as willing to talk to officers as they are to talk to a Travis County employee.

The department proposes to do the magistration at APD headquarters, which is notably old and slated for replacement. Greenwalt did not discuss whether arrestees would be screened for illness, including mental illness, before magistration. He emphasized that the proposal would save time for APD officers because the arresting officer would leave after magistration was done and another officer would transport the prisoner to the Travis County Jail. Greenwalt suggested that more APD officers would volunteer for overtime work if they knew they would be working at headquarters rather than patrolling.

Commissioners were not impressed by that argument. Commissioner Rebecca Bernhardt said there is already concern about an officer shortage. She said officers would be paid overtime for doing work that Travis County is currently doing. Commissioner Pierre Nguyen said he thought that adding another change of custody from one officer to the next would make what was already a traumatic event, even more so – especially for an innocent person.

Adeola Ogunkeyede, chief Travis County public defender, said the plan is clearly unconstitutional. She said the proposal “undermines trust in the system and calls into question the fair administration of justice.” Ogunkeyede’s remarks were in line with a Nov. 30 letter signed by all of Travis County’s criminal court judges opposing the proposed APD magistration pilot program.

The judges and the public defender both pointed to the goal of providing legal counsel at first appearance for those who are arrested.

According to that letter, Travis County Commissioners Court has already devoted $1.5 million to retrofit the jail “for the sole purpose of assisting with counsel representing people at their first appearance before a magistrate. Instituting a system that not only takes arrestees away from Central Booking but also utilizes a virtual magistration system where they do not see the judge in person is a countermeasure to this aim and works against the goals of our local criminal justice system. The city’s current plan does not include any opportunity for appointed counsel to be present at magistration, nor is there a plan to make it possible in the future.”

Greenwalt acknowledged that there was no plan to include lawyers for people who would be brought to APD for magistration. After the meeting, he told the Austin Monitor he was happy to have had the conversation. He concluded, “All the things that were brought up today we need to make sure that we’re checking those boxes.”

Photo by Oregon Department of Transportation, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.