TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS PAGE

INTRODUCTION

Section I: Court Report from Patrick N. Harris, Presiding Judge .........................................................1 Financial & Statistical Data Annual Caseload Comparison.....................................................................................2 Criminal/Traffic and Civil Caseload ..................................................................... 3 - 6 New Case Filings ..............................................................................................3 Reactivated/Transferred Cases..........................................................................4 Terminated Cases ..............................................................................................5 Pending Year-End ............................................................................................ 6 Court Computer Fund Expenditures & Receipts ........................................................7 Probation Fund Expenditures & Receipts ...................................................................8 Special Projects Fund Expenditures & Receipts .........................................................9 Judicial Operating Expenditures ...............................................................................10 Statement...................................................................................................................11 Section II: Mental Health Court Diversion Program 2014 Highlights .........................................................................................................12 Section III: The “Fresh Start” Drug Court Program 2014 Highlights ................................................................................................. 13 - 18

Section IV: Probation Annual Report Caseload Statistics ....................................................................................................19 Mission Statement .....................................................................................................19 Team Probation and Who’s Who ...................................................................... 20 - 21 Community Corrections Act Grant ...........................................................................22 Services .................................................................................................................... 22 Drug Screening………………………………………………………………..........23 Daily Breath Tests………………………………………………………………….24 Community Service Program ............................................................................ 25 - 28 Closing ......................................................................................................................29 Section V: Clerk of Court Financial & Statistical Data Table of Distribution for Fines and Costs .................................................................30 2014 Agency Caseload Comparison ........................................................................31 Criminal/Traffic Division Receipts & Disbursements ...................................... 32 - 33 Civil Division Receipts & Disbursements ................................................................34 All Division Receipts & Disbursements………………………………………35 - 36 Clerk Operating Expenditures ...................................................................................37

SECTION I:

COURT

2014 Annual Report

March 30, 2015 2014 was another busy and productive year of growth for Fairfield County Municipal Court. Interior demolition and exterior renovations began in earnest on the Columbian Building at 136 W. Main Street in 2014. Under the leadership and oversight of construction manager Elford Construction and architect Brandstetter-Carroll, work is progressing to revitalize the historic building into the new home for Municipal Court. While we had hoped for a mid-summer, 2015, completion date, we are now looking at October, 2015, occupancy, as work was slowed somewhat by the discovery and correction of some structural damage. Parking for the new court was addressed by the County Commissioners’ generous donation of the county-owned Chestnut Street parking lot in March, 2014. This will be a tremendous asset to all visitors to the court and will correct the long-time parking concerns of jurors. The county retained ownership and usage of the former bank drive-thru building. New case filings (21,535) were up approximately 1% in 2014, with the number of new traffic cases increasing 6% over the previous year. Additionally, the court held a record number of jury trials (27) in 2014. The court continues to positively impact lives outside the courtroom through our Fresh Start Drug Court and Mental Health Court specialized dockets, our Court Psychologist and busy Probation Department. Regular monitoring of behavior, one-on-one and group counseling resources, and assessments are offered by these staff members. I encourage you to read more specifics about these programs in this report. I’d like to highlight two new initiatives undertaken in the court in 2014 that are aimed at increasing offender accountability. In November, the court purchased the Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument and began in-house urine testing of both pre- and post-conviction defendants. More information on this system is provided in the Drug Court and Probation sections of this report. The court is excited about the potential positive impacts this system offers. In October, 2014, the court promoted Probation Department Administrative Assistant Sarah Halley to the position of pre-trial reporting bond officer. Halley Graham had served as the only officer in that position since October, 2011, and her interactions with pre-trial defendants proved so effective that we added a second officer to this specialized monitoring program. I wish to take this opportunity to thank the Fairfield County Board of Commissioners for their continued support of the Court’s extensive defendant electronic monitoring program. The Commissioners’ financial support of this objective gives us as judges an effective jail alternative for defendants whom we determine require additional controls. The Commissioners are an important partner in the operations of the Fairfield County Municipal Court. I also wish to thank the Lancaster City Council and the City Administration for their continued support and guidance, particularly during the process of planning and renovating a new Court facility. I am certain that the finished product will be a safe, efficient and stately building of which the entire county can be proud. Yours truly, Patrick N. Harris, Judge

Page 2

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014SMALL CLAIMS 555 436 460 715 645 590 822 590 526 353 435 405CIVIL 2505 2666 2871 3073 4220 4029 3618 3548 3649 3652 2756 2720CRIMINAL 2647 2837 2997 3124 2680 3190 3046 2902 3355 3478 3551 2629TRAFFIC 13510 11378 12021 11825 11700 11294 11828 13448 12132 12877 13670 14583OVI 769 756 691 798 700 680 601 751 755 698 712 686ANNUAL TOTAL 19979 18073 19179 19535 19711 19783 19915 21239 20417 21058 21124 21535

Fairfield County Municipal Court Annual Caseload Comparison

2014 New Case Filings

In addition to the new cases filed in various categories, the Court's caseload for2014 also included 2,502 cases pending as of January 1, 2014.

Page 3

3,125

512

2,629

686

14,583

18,410

2014 New Criminal/Traffic filings by case type

New Civil Cases Filed in 2014

New Criminal/Traffic Cases Filed in 2014

OVI

Criminal Misdemeanors

Criminal Felonies

Other Traffic

18,410

38

1,702

892 88

405 3,125

2014 New Civil filings by case type

New Criminal/Traffic Cases Filed in 2014

New Civil Cases Filed in 2014 Contracts

Personal Injury

Evictions

Small Claims

Other Civil

2014 Reactivated/Transferred Cases

Reactivated results include: Bench warrant return, Release of forfeiture filed, etc. Transferred results include: Plea of "not guilty" entered, guilty sentencing, grand jury indictment, etc.

Page 4

1,060 707

2,746

634

2,142

6,229

2014 Reactivated/Transferred Criminal/Traffic cases

Civil Cases Transferred or Reactivated in 2014

Criminal/Traffic Cases Transferred or Reactivated in 2014

Criminal Misdemeanors

Other Traffic

Criminal Felonies

OVI

6,229

8

132

892

26 1,060

2014 Reactivated/Transferred Civil cases

Criminal/Traffic Cases Transferred or Reactivated in 2014

Civil Cases Transferred or Reactivated in 2014

Evictions

Personal Injury & Property Damage

Contracts

Other Civil

2014 Terminated Cases

Cases shown as closed by method of termination

Page 5

4,280

11,152

27

1,474

1,773

581

3,230

3,394 3,033

58 24,722

2014 Terminated Criminal/Traffic cases

Civil Cases Terminated in 2014

Criminal/Traffic Cases Terminated

Violations Bureau

Jury Trial

Dismissal Guilty or No Contest Plea/Original Charge

Guilty or No Contest Plea/Reduced

Trial/Hearing Transfer

Other Terminations

Unavailability of Accused

24,722

1,397

410

245

1,097

1,054 68

9

4280

2014 Terminated Civil cases

Criminal/Traffic Cases Terminated in 2014

Civil Cases Terminated in 2014

Dismissal

Transfer

Bankruptcy Stay

Trial/Hearing by Judge

Dismissal

Transfer

Other Termination

Hearing by Magistrate

Dismissal

Transfer

Defaul

Cases Pending as of December 31, 2014

New Filings/Terminations/Pending Year-End

Page 6

799

5

490

185

655 1,335

Pending Criminal/Traffic cases as of December 31, 2014

Civil Cases Pending as of December 31, 2014

Criminal/Traffic Cases Pending as of December 31, 2014

OVI

Criminal Other

Criminal Felonies

1,335

14

498 203

14

70

799

Pending Civil cases as of December 31, 2014

Criminal/Traffic Cases Pending as of December 31, 2014

Civil Cases Pending as of December 31, 2014

Contracts

Evictions

Other Civil

Small Claims Personal Injury &

Property Damage

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

New Filings

Terminated

Pending Year End

Court Computer Fund

The Court had to invest in upgrades to the court recording system equipment in 2014 and continued to fund computerized legal research to help reduce General Fund expenses.

Page 7

Contract Services

$36,223.69 Equipment $25,005.20

Supplies $9,951.16

2014 Expenses

$-

$50,000.00

$100,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

$250,000.00

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014Expenses $37,098.46 $14,794.30 $42,522.18 $42,706.95 $71,180.05Receipts $54,215.50 $48,893.00 $51,619.50 $49,543.20 $54,591.03Fund Balance $160,027.13 $194,125.83 $203,223.15 $203,223.15 $193,470.38

Dollars

Five-Year History

Expenses Receipts Fund Balance

Total Expense $71,180.05

Probation Fund

Page 8

Salaries $318,348.38

PERS $46,150.21

Medicare $4,358.99

Health Insurance $68,112.00

Workers Comp $6,786.12

Contract Services

$5,339.00

Supplies $9,477.97

Travel $367.36

2014 Expenses

Total Expense $458,594.94

$-

$50,000.00

$100,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

$250,000.00

$300,000.00

$350,000.00

$400,000.00

$450,000.00

$500,000.00

2010 2011 2012 2013 20142010 2011 2012 2013 2014

EXPENSES $401,315.98 $385,569.85 $459,128.84 $442,853.57 $458,594.94RECEIPTS $451,079.10 $454,211.99 $467,836.25 $416,963.23 $464,560.55Fund Balance $132,720.62 $201,362.76 $210,070.17 $184,179.83 $190,145.44

Five Year History

Special Projects Fund

Major 2014 expenses included debt service and architectural fees for the Columbian project and the required local match for the Fresh Start Drug Court Program. Additionally, the Court is utilizing Special Projects dollars to fund the position of Court Psychologist to perform evaluations and offer counseling.

Page 9

Contract Services $463,600.98

Supplies $32,000.00

Building $497,519.08

Salary/Benefits $55,800.06

2014 Expenses

Total Expenses $1,048,920.12

$-

$200,000.00

$400,000.00

$600,000.00

$800,000.00

$1,000,000.00

$1,200,000.00

$1,400,000.00

$1,600,000.00

$1,800,000.00

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014Expenses $180,531.81 $205,088.79 $711,629.16 $670,570.69 $1,048,920.12Revenue $442,268.52 $472,832.36 $664,045.85 $614,844.11 $755,579.75Fund Balance $1,407,972.81 $1,675,716.38 $1,707,681.65 $1,651,955.07 $1,358,614.70

Five Year History

FAIRFIELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT –JUDICIAL’S 2014 OPERATING EXPENSES

CITY OF LANCASTER

JUDICIAL EXPENDITURE

2014 BUDGET

Salaries 476,803.48 483,650.00 PERS 67,637.00 67,715.00 PERS Pick-up 0.00 0.00 Hospitalization 132,382.81 131,640.00 Medicare 6,507.44 7,015.00 Sick Leave Buyout 999.65 1,000.00 Telephone 3,829.97 4,500.00 Settlement 0.00 0.00 Contract Services 8,789.17 10,500.00 Appointed Counsel 0.00 1,000.00 Maintenance of Equipment 1,266.70 1,500.00 Training/Seminars 2,269.74 5,000.00 Supplies and Incidentals 10,883.03 12,000.00 Copy Machine 1,154.51 4,000.00 Postage 2,294.68 4,000.00 Miscellaneous 5,419.03 5,945.00 Travel Expense 1,719.12 5,000.00 Association Dues 2,055.00 2,055.00 Employee Physicals/Medical 0.00 500.00 New Equipment 0.00 2,000.00 CITY TOTAL: $724,011.33 $749,020.00

COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD

JUDICIAL EXPENDITURE

2013 BUDGET

Salaries & Benefits 125,736.19 186,520.00 Contract Expenses 22,875.60 27,400.00 Travel Expense 5,389.05 7,500.00 Juror Expense 8,625.00 8,800.00 COUNTY TOTAL: $162,625.84 $231,655.00 CITY AND COUNTY TOTAL: $886,637.17 $980,675.00

Page 10

STATEMENT

The statements are prepared for submission to the Lancaster City Council and the Fairfield

County Board of Commissioners in compliance with the Ohio Revised Code, 1901.14(A)(4).

Completed at Lancaster, Ohio, March 31, 2015.

Jackie Long Court Administrator

SECTION II:

SPECIALIZED DOCKET: MENTAL HEALTH COURT DIVERSION

PROGRAM

Mental Health Annual Report 2014

The court continues to employ a part-time psychologist, made available for assessments, counseling, consultation, and co-coordination of Mental Health Court. A total of 77 Mental Health / AOD assessment were completed by the Court Psychologist in 2014. This number is significantly lower than last year’s due to the psychologist going on maternity leave for 12 weeks, during which time no assessment / evaluation services were provided. The psychologist also returned from maternity leave working two days a week instead of the previous three. Assessments are provided at no cost to defendants who are court-ordered to have an assessment but generally do not have insurance or funds to obtain an assessment through private or even community means. Of the 77 assessments that were completed in 2014, 48 of the assessments were for males and 29 were for females.

The psychologist also attended court-sponsored Specialized Forensic trainings so that more specialized evaluations can be provided through the court, such as Competency evaluations and Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGRI) evaluations. Provision of these evaluations will be of significant cost savings for the court, rather than contracting these services elsewhere.

Judge Harris’s bailiff also continues in her dual-role as a mental health court probation officer, supervising participants in the mental health court program as well as co-coordinating the operations of mental health court. She has been indispensable in her ability to maintain communication with the participants as well as help navigate obtaining driving privileges, driver’s licenses, and other case management needs within the court participants. The court also maintains close contact with our three community agencies, New Horizons, Mid-Ohio Psychological Services, and The Recovery Center, all of which work with the court in providing services to those in the mental health court program.

Specialized Docket Certification documents were also submitted to the Supreme Court, although since submission, some internal changes have been made and are pending, which has suspended the court’s pursuit of certification at this time.

Regarding referrals to specialized dockets, 17 referrals were made to Mental Health Court. Nine members were accepted into the program and we have had 10 graduates. Two participates earned a driver’s license, three members became sober parents, and 10 participants went from unemployed to being gainfully and successfully employed. Nine participants have been terminated from the program. At present, there are 14 current members of the mental health docket.

Page 12

SECTION III:

SPECIALIZED DOCKET: THE “FRESH START” DRUG

COURT PROGRAM

THE “FRESH START” DRUG COURT PROGRAM Initiated by Judge David A. Trimmer

The Fairfield County Municipal Drug Court, operational since February 2007, has recently just closed a very important chapter in the history of the program. On February 9, 2015, Judge Trimmer was sworn in as a Judge of the Fairfield County Common Pleas Court, having been elected to the position following the retirement of Judge Chris Martin. Judge Teresa Liston will be acting Judge until Governor Kasich fills Judge Trimmer’s vacant position. Although this vacancy creates a time of significant change for Municipal Court and the Fresh Start program, we are excited for what the future holds for the program as well. Whomever the Governor appoints for this position will most certainly have big shoes to fill, but it will also create an opportunity to make changes to the program to hopefully increase the success of our participants.

This t-shirt was given as a goodbye gift to Judge Trimmer from our Drug Court participants.

Judge Trimmer and the participants had a constant banter regarding who the Reigning Cornhole Champion, a game played during our Annual Fall Fishing Derby for Drug Court participants and their families.

One of the most significant attributes of a successful Specialized Docket such as Drug Court is the treatment team. In viewing other Specialized Dockets from around the state of Ohio, we couldn’t be more proud of our team. Judge Trimmer assembled a very cohesive team to meet the needs of our participants. Tamara Bartek, Coordinator, coordinates services for the participants, obtains and maintains grant funding, maintains statistics on the program, and coordinates with outside agencies to facilitate services for participants. Duffy Arter, Probation Officer, meets with each drug court participant between one and five times per week to ensure compliance with all of the requirements of the program. Stephanie Hall, Senior Prosecutor, has been an incredible resource by attending all treatment team meetings and status hearings to ensure the program is maintaining the integrity of holding offenders accountable while providing treatment for offenders to reduce recidivism. Defense Attorney Jason Price provides the perspective to ensure the rights of participants are maintained and respected throughout their participation in the program. And Melissa Naberhaus, Drug Court Counselor from The Recovery Center, is able to provide consistency treatment as well as direct communication with the court by attending all treatment team meetings and status hearings.

Page 13

This year also brought about some procedural changes to the Fresh Start Program. With the closure of ETAT Enterprises, our primary drug testing center, we were forced to explore options regarding the future of our drug testing program. With an average of 30 participants at any given time in the program, and those participants testing between one and three times per week, cost was a significant factor in any decision. Through an agreement with ThermoFisher Scientific, the Municipal Court secured an Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument in November 2014.

Indiko Plus Analyzer Probation Chief Scott Beaver operating Indiko

The addition of the Indiko Plus has allowed Municipal Court to significantly increase our drug testing productivity while also saving money. Looking back at previous Municipal Court expenditures from 2012 (including all of probation and bond cases), 5470 tests were performed at a cost of $50,841. With the addition of Indiko Plus, we anticipate increasing our testing to approximately 5500 tests for the upcoming year of 2015 and decreasing our costs to approximately $33,825 – an anticipated savings of $17,016. Not only is the court able to save money and increase the amount of testing, but we are able to test for a more expanded testing panel as well, including testing for alcohol. Previous testing for Alcohol (Ethyl Glucuronide, commonly referred to as EtG) cost the court $30/test or SCRAM monitors at $9/day. A test for EtG is a direct biomarker of ethanol ingestion with a 2 to 5 day detection window in urine and is generally accepted to detect beverage ethanol consumption at or above a 90 percent sensitivity level. EtG is only evident when alcohol has been consumed. EtG’s superior detection window and sensitivity over conventional breath and urine ethanol detection methods has made it an increasingly popular method of detection of participant alcohol use and relapse among probationers and individuals being monitored on bond.

Page 14

DRUG COURT SOBER-LIVING ACTIVITIES Fall Family Fishing Derby The Fall Family Fishing Derby allows participants/graduates and their families and the drug court staff to gather together for a day of sober-living activities. Chief Probation Officer Scott Beaver acts as “Chief Grill Master” and cooks hamburgers and hot dogs for everyone. Advisory Committee Members and volunteers from the community (Senator Tim Schaffer, members of SOLACE, and Tim Huston) facilitate games, fishing, and activities for participants/graduates and their families.

Lancaster Police Chief Dave Bailey and Sheriff Dave Phalen competing in the Family Fishing Derby’s Three-Legged Race

Annual Christmas Celebration Located at The Liberty Center, Drug Court held our Seventh Annual Christmas Celebration for drug court participants and their families. Senior Prosecutor Stephanie Hall, Senator Schaffer, Defense Attorney Jason Price (and his wife, Chrissie and their therapy dog, Jackson), Community Member Tim Huston, Fairfield County SOLACE Chapter, Sheriff Phalen, Police Chief Bailey, local community members, and Municipal Court employees were able to provide a wonderful holiday dinner for participants and their families. Local community members and court staff also provided over 30 children of drug court participants presents from Santa. DJ Johnny Garber provided entertainment, dancing, and games for the participants and their families.

Judge Trimmer as “Santa” with a child of a Drug Court participant

Community Give-Back Continuing the belief that participants will “give back” to their community, participants have logged over 12,000 hours of Community Service with the Lancaster Police Department, Lancaster Parks and Recreation Department, and Municipal Probation Department. Drug Court participants continue to plant and maintain the flower bed in front of the police department through FOPA Grant monies and AmeriStop Community donations.

Page 15

2014 DRUG COURT STATISTICS

To date, 17 participants have acquired their GED while in the program; 19 participants have entered college; and 29 drug free babies have been born to participants while in the program. The Municipal Drug Court 2014 success rate averaged 91%, based on consistent compliance and negative drug screens. Based on the change in the individuals currently participating, our team is able to verify we are having a positive impact in the lives of participants and their families, by helping them to empower themselves towards recovery. Our program is able to collect and maintain detailed data on our program and its success. Data collected from 2014 is as follows:

Data Collected 2014 Statistics Total Statistics of Program Number of Participants 77 participants served 246 participants total Graduates 13 Graduates 71 Graduates Number of Children of Participants 23 children 251 children 62% of Graduates have maintained 12+ months sobriety post-graduation

General Stats: 26 years Average Age of a Drug Court participant 81% Percent of 2013 Inductees whose drug of choice is Heroin 249 Average number of jail days suspended on an inductee’s probation

518 Average number of days graduates spend in program 315 Average number of days terminated participants spend in program 2014 Report Card for Drug Court: 95% Sober Percentile Average Among Participants 86% Compliance Percentile Rate Among Participants 91% Sober/Compliance Ratio Among Participants

JAIL DAYS SAVED BY DRUG COURT: 29,570 Number of Jail Days saved by participants enrolled in drug court $1,922,050 Amount Saved by suspended jail time

Average Number of Jail Days Served by Drug Court Participants: 25 Average number of jail days served among current/graduate participants 229 Average number of jail days served among terminated participants

Recidivism Rates 38% Recidivism among graduates 72% Recidivism among those terminated from drug court

Page 16

“IN THE WORDS OF A DRUG COURT PARTICIPANT”…. Each of us in this program has our own stories that place us where were are today and all of us have the common thread of addiction. My story of addiction started 22 years ago. In 2009, at the age of 31, I first entered recovery and with the help of my higher power and had great success. However, after a year, I relapsed and this happened every year after that. This past year, I couldn’t stop relapsing and I found myself at a whole new bottom where I was facing losing my husband and possibly my daughter if I didn’t get my life back on track. My parents were at their end as well, having dealt with my addiction for all those years.

Something had to change. I had been trying to work a program on my own and on my terms and it wasn’t working. So when I was presented with the opportunity to participate in the Fresh Start program, I knew it was a gift from God.

The first 3 months of this program have affected my life in so many ways. I was given a structured program to follow, no longer was I on my own. Because of the busy schedule I’ve had to follow, I’ve learned how important it is to be organized. I’ve gained a new self confidence in finding that I am capable of keeping up with a challenging schedule and I have learned how to prioritize and how to balance my home life, work, and my recovery and it is all because of this program. Completing the 30 meetings in 30 days has also helped me a great deal because I had to put myself out there, when normally I would shrink back and avoid meetings all together. It helped me to leave my insecure feelings behind and I learned that the more meetings I went to, the more comfortable I felt going to them. I found meetings that I now consider to be my “home groups” and I look forward to them each week. I have learned why it is so important to regularly attend meetings.

This program has given me accountability and I just cannot express how much that has helped my marriage and my family. It has given them the peace of mind and reassurance that when I say I am clean, I really am. They have gone from being disappointed to being encouraged and proud. Another huge way this program is helping me is the individual counseling I receive. I have been to my share of counselors, but no one compares to what I get out of my sessions with Melissa.

I know that the drug court team, Duffy, Tamara, Melissa, Stephanie, and Judge Trimmer genuinely care about me and are dedicated to helping me change my life once and for all and for this I am truly blessed. I am so thankful for all the time and energy they put into helping me and my family have a better life.

Page 17

“IN THE WORDS OF A DRUG COURT GRADUATE”…. I’ve watched my share of people graduate from this program. If you are anything like me, it gives you mixed emotions…jealousy, hope, boredom…and maybe some pride that a fellow addict is doing well.

I’ve definitely looked forward to this day. I actually started a countdown to it about six months ago. At that time, in my mind, this was the day my life would start again…as if it was on hold due to drug court. Graduation day would be the best day ever. But countdowns have a way of making time drag. And if my life starts again today, then what have I been living these past 17 months while so much good has happened? When I remind myself to stay in the moment, I find I’m happier than I’ve ever been. Looking back on my time in this program, I see that I’ve found so much joy, had a lot of fun, and been given more than I dreamed possible. I also had moments of utter sadness. I was in a desperate state for months as I cried for my child. I was an emotional mess for months and knew if I just kept doing all the right things, I would see my son again…and I did.

Having my son back in my live has been my one goal in all of this. I can’t express how grateful I am for having him back. He is my heart!

Some of this program has been a pain, and I was certainly the first to complain if given a chance. But I’m also the first person to say how amazing this program is. You see, I’m not out hustling today in hopes of getting drugs. I’m not wondering what possession I have to sell and how much I can get out of them. Today I’m clean. I have my family back. My sister has been with me every step of the way and I thank her for thinking I’m someone worth standing by.

As far as graduation day being the best day of drug court…? For me, it’s an accomplishment. I’m proud to be able to say, “I did it,” but I can‘t say it’s the best day. My best day, out of the last 17 months was December 28th, 2012. That’s the day I went to jail. That’s the day I was separated from drugs because I couldn’t do it myself. That’s the day my life started again.

Judge Trimmer, Tamara, Duffy, and Melissa…you helped me rewrite my story. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you.

Page 18

SECTION IV:

PROBATION DEPARTMENT

Fairfield County Municipal Court Probation Department

2014 Annual Report

March 2015

The Probation Department experienced another busy and productive year for 2014. The year held a continuation of positive strides for the department, and Changing Offender Behavior. Due to the passage of HB 86/ SB 337, and mainly as a result of the Theft threshold modification, we continued to experience an increase in Criminal/ Traffic Bond cases. We continue to experience an increase in unclassified misdemeanor offenses, and 2014 cases were up by 309 cases than in 2013.

Defendants who are ordered to complete probation are given sentences with terms ranging from one to five years of Community Control. Defendants are placed on one of the following levels of probation; Non-Reporting, Reporting, Intensive Supervised Probation (ISP), or could be placed into one of our Specialized Dockets, Drug Court, known as the “Fresh Start Program” and Mental Health Court, with the average Probation Department caseload totaling over 6,000 cases annually.

New Probation Cases for 2014 Total Number of New Cases in 2014 = 2,716 Total Number of New Cases in 2013 = 2,407

Statistics below do not include all Misdemeanor/ Felony Bond cases Males Females

Total = 1914 Total = 802 Ages: Ages: 18-29 870 18-29 401 30-39 512 30-39 227 40-49 336 40-49 113 50-59 150 50-59 53

60 & Over 46 60 & Over 8 Oldest (age): 77 Oldest (age): 68

~Probation Department Mission:

The Probation Department is committed to changing the lives of those who find themselves in need of some positive direction in their lives. Whether this direction is a link to services within the community that could give them a helping hand or services that could change the direction their lives are taking, the Probation Department is committed to making a difference. It is the belief of the Judges and the Probation Staff that positive direction in changing offender behavior through proven evidence based practices will help the betterment of the community in general by showing the benefits of what being a positive, productive member of society can be.

Page 19

~Team Probation and Who’s Who:

The Probation Department prides itself in working as a Team. The Probation Department is not made up of individual persons working in individual directions. The Team is comprised of individuals working together toward a unified goal; to help those find a positive direction for their lives. We consider ourselves a tight-knit Team who always helps one another when a need arises; therefore, making our Team strong, which not only helps the community but reinforces our TEAM as a whole.

Scott E. Beaver, Chief Probation Officer, has been with the Department since May 2005 and is a tremendous asset to the Probation Department. Scott has tremendous leadership qualities and offers vital guidance for his staff. With Scott's background in the military and law enforcement, the Probation Department has a leader who is involved in every aspect of the department and emphasizes teamwork. Scott handles a Probation/Diversion caseload, daily administrative duties and is the Community Corrections Act Director.

Jeni Rhymer, Senior Probation Officer and Probation Department employee since April 1994 handles non-reporting probationers for Judge Harris. Jeni continues to assist Scott in various aspects of the probation office. Jeni has a huge heart and is eager to utilize her genuine passion to help improve those lives that she comes into contact with on a daily basis. Jeni does a great job at managing a caseload of more than 2,000 people and assisting our TEAM in any way she can.

Matt Schein, ISP Officer since August 2004, works with the Intensive Supervision Probation Unit for Judge Trimmer. Matt also assists with the Mental Health Court when needed. Matt handles a case load of more than 350 people that require in some cases daily contact. This position also requires Matt to conduct house checks as appropriate. Another aspect of this position is to conduct bar checks on occasion. Matt has a great sense of humor that keeps the TEAM and those he comes into contact with smiling.

Elizabeth George, Non-Reporting Officer since March 2005, works for Judge Trimmer and assists our Court, Court of Common Pleas, Law Enforcement and anyone else needing her Spanish-speaking skills. Like Jeni, Elizabeth handles a caseload of more than 2,000 people and works extremely hard at changing the lives of those who she comes into contact with, and takes pride in her ability to do so. Elizabeth also goes out of her way to not only assist our department, but is always eager to help others in need, clearly exemplifying herself as a TEAM player.

Erica Lanning, ISP Officer Erica has years of experience from the Ohio State Highway Patrol, and offered tremendous support for the department as our Administrative Assistant. On September 26, 2011, Erica was promoted to fill the vacant ISP position, and now like Matt, handles a caseload of more than 300 defendants that in most cases require weekly reporting. Erica also performs the duties of the TAC (Terminal Agency Coordinator) for the LEADS/CCH terminal. Erica has a tremendous smile and is a vital link within our TEAM, and never hesitates to go over and beyond her duties. Page 20

Mindy Conrad, Reporting Probation Officer since September 2006, supervises those probationers sentenced and ordered by either Judge to report on a regular basis. Mindy’s caseload consists of those probationers who may require closer supervision than the non-reporting caseload. Mindy also supervises those who have completed the Intensive Supervision Probation Program prior to them transitioning into non-reporting probation. Mindy handles a large case load and assists Halley and Sarah with the Pre-Trial Bonds when needed. Mindy has demonstrated the ability to quickly take command of the tasks at hand. Mindy has shown excellent communication skills and a passion to change the lives of those she comes into contact with. She is a tremendous complement to our TEAM.

Duffy Arter, Drug Court Probation Officer since January 2007, works for Judge Trimmer and the “Fresh Start” Drug Court Program. Duffy works closely with our Drug Court Coordinator, Tamara Bartek and has exceeded expectations in his ability to work closely with drug court participants, and ensures the participants he is available for them 24/7. With Duffy’s hard work and dedication to the needs of the Court, participants, treatment providers and anyone else he comes into contact with, the Fresh Start Drug Court Program will no doubt continue to be extremely successful and one of the best in the country! Duffy has shown that he is willing and able to complete our TEAM concept.

Sarah Haley, Pre-Trial Bond Officer became part of our TEAM on December 19, 2011, to fill our vacant administrative assistant position. On October 6, 2014, Sarah was promoted to her current position, Pre-Trial Bond Officer, and will handle Bond cases for Judge Harris. Sarah continues to handle several of the administrative duties that she completed while the administrative assistant to the Probation Department. Sarah’s excellent skills and willingness to go above and beyond her job duties will definitely contribute, and make her an important asset on the TEAM!

Halley Graham, Pre-Trial Bond Officer since December 2007. Halley worked as a Judicial Office Assistant helping defendants with their bonds and attorney request until her position was eliminated due to cuts of the General Fund. It only made sense with Halley’s experience to allow her to join our TEAM and continue helping defendants as our Pre-Trial Bond Officer for Judge Trimmer cases. Halley assists defendants with their terms of bond while their cases are pending and works closely with their attorneys, and the Prosecutors. This allows the Court to make the best possible decision on a sentencing structure to help change the offender’s behavior, with the best possible chance of success. We are excited to have Halley as part of our TEAM, and she continues to make significant strides within our TEAM!

The Probation Department staff offers over 100 years’ experience as a TEAM!

Page 21

~Community Corrections Act Grant:

The Probation Department is proud to announce, once again, the renewal of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, Community Corrections Grant. This grant helps to fund the Intensive Supervision Probation Department and is vital to the operations of this unit. It is my pleasure to announce after the State performed their annual audit of the Community Corrections Act Program; the Intensive Supervision Probation Unit once again was compliant and continues to be identified as one of the best in the State. The Community Corrections TEAM continues to work on the new grant standards to become compliant with HB86 and the ODR&C Standards. This is a tremendous reflection on the hard work and dedication of the Intensive Supervision Probation Officers.

We are also pleased to announce a continuation of a $4,000 increase in benefits awarded from the state for this program. In addition we continue to receive $10, 000.00 to be used for an Emergency Jail Reduction Program to assist in the overcrowding issue at the Fairfield County Jail. The State study revealed that the jail continues to be overpopulated and these funds will help pay for Active Real-time GPS, S.C.R.A.M and S.A.M. bracelets to monitor defendants at their homes 24/7.

~Services:

Faced with a continued over-crowding issue with the jail, the Court has continued to use American Court Services to supply electronic house arrest monitoring equipment and other monitoring services, which allows defendants who would normally remain in jail to be monitored at home. This, in turn, assists the community in several ways. The defendant has the ability to remain employed, thus caring for his/her family, meeting Court ordered terms as well as affording the defendant the ability to obtain counseling as deemed appropriate. This ability helps save Thousands of Tax Payer dollars! American Court Services will immediately advise the Probation Department of any violations that have occurred, which in turn are addressed with the Probation Officer/Court as appropriate.

American Court Services offer several types of services: Electronic Monitoring House Arrest Units: Real- Time GPS monitoring, S.C.R.A.M., an alcohol monitoring bracelet, and S.A.M. (Substance Abuse Monitoring).

American Court Services offers drug testing services through the S.A.M. program. This is a random selection program that requires defendants to call on a daily basis to see if they have been selected for drug testing. This helps to keep the defendants accountable and assists the Probation Department greatly to monitor drug abuse in a way that has never been afforded to the Probation Department due to time constraints. Results of testing are made available to the Judges and the Probation Department through a secure website that is available at any time. Page 22

(ISP Officer Matt Schein, continues to present to middle school students)

~Probation Drug Tests:

This positive relationship with American Court Services has afforded the Probation Department the ability to improve our case follow-up and management system. The Probation Department continues to complete more than a thousand drug screens per year, and we are excited to announce the implementation of a new Drug/Alcohol Screening tool. The Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument, obtained through ThermoFisher Scientific in November of this year is currently being mostly used by the Drug Court program. However, we have been using the instrument for all levels of Probation and Bond. The use of the Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument will allow us to significantly increase the number of offenders to be tested and/or screened, and save several thousands of dollars at the same time. The instrument will provide us much more accurate statistical data and assist us in targeting the most abused pharmaceutical and/or street drugs in our communities. The Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument has the ability to go back eighty (80) hours to test for alcohol (EtG), and currently test for the following drugs: Marijuana, Cocaine, Opiates, Oxycodone, Benzodiazepines, Amphetamine/Methamphetamine, Methadone, Buprenorphine, Barbiturates, Tramadol, Ecstasy and Creatinine levels.

Two active Meth labs found while conducting a house check of an offender on Intensive Supervised Probation (ISP)

Page 23

~Daily Breath Tests:

In order to assist certain probationers with maintaining their sobriety, the Court has a number of individuals reporting for daily breath tests. This works to help them maintain accountability as well as assist them with their plan to keep their employment. Portable Breath Test (PBT) continues to be administered by the probation department. However, there are fewer tests required than in 2013 thanks to the continued success and effectiveness of the S.C.R.A.M. units, and the Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument. In most cases, the offenders will only need to report for alcohol testing two times per week versus every day utilizing the Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument.

Page 24

This too saves taxpayer money by keeping defendants out of jail and reduces alcohol-related offenses while the defendants are on Probation and/or Bond. In some cases, the Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument’s ability to test for alcohol will have huge savings to the Defendant, City and County. The S.C.R.A.M. bracelet cost is $13.00 per day vs. the Indiko Plus Drug Testing Instrument $1.53 per test with the average offender reporting two times per week. (Total cost is $3.06 per week vs. $91.00 per week on SCRAM)

~Community Service Program:

The Probation Department has continued to supervise defendants working community service throughout Fairfield County. Defendants have worked more than approximately 3600 hours of community service at different locations such as The Recycling Station, Goodwill, Salvation Army, Dog Shelter, Schools, Parks and Recreations. The Probation Department has also supervised and worked closely with defendants during our Saturday Community Service Program since it’s inception in 2005. The Saturday Community Service Program focuses on assisting non-profit organizations, or Government Departments within Fairfield County, having a need for completing tasks that may have been left undone due to low manpower or funding issues.

If you think your agency could benefit from the Saturday Community Service Program, please contact the Fairfield County Municipal Court, Probation Department for further information, and scheduling at (740) 687-6686. The following is a breakdown of the Departments or Agencies that have received assistance through the Saturday program:

• Liberty Union, Courthouse, Cemetery, Pickerington PD, Transportation, Town Hall (Bremen), Humane Society, Lancaster Parks & Recreation, Carroll Civic Center, Lancaster Main Street Commerce, Lancaster Farm Market, Lancaster Streets Department

Maywood Mission

Page 25

• 2014 Lancaster Festival/ Art Walk

(Art Walk 2014)

• Fairfield County Youth Baseball Association, YMCA of Lancaster & Rec. Plex, Bike Trail, Skate Park, Pickerington Commerce, City Hall/ Courthouse

Art Walk 2014

Page 26

Lancaster Patrol Post-23

Lancaster Patrol Post-23

2014 Lancaster Festival Lot Cleaning

Page 27

Lancaster Festival weed & glass clean up

• Saturday Community Service Program 2104

Page 28

~In closing:

We anticipate another busy and productive year in 2015 and are eager to continue assisting in the positive change of offender behavior. I would like to sincerely thank the entire Probation Staff for all their hard work, dedication and passion to change lives and make a difference in our community. I also want to say Thank You, to the Judges, Court Administrator, Bailiffs, Clerk of Court staff and all those that support our department.

2014 NATIONAL CHAMPIONS- THE OHIO STATE BUCKEYES!!! It has been a long time since I drank coffee from my favorite mug, and I wonder if Sherry will take it with her when she retires.

GO BUCKS!

Scott E. Beaver, Chief Probation Officer

Page 29

SECTION V:

CLERK OF COURT

TABLE OF DISTRIBUTION FOR FINES AND COSTS FINES: Pursuant to state statute, any fines collected by this court, for criminal and traffic offenses, are distributed as follows:

AGENCY/PERSON FILING

THE CHARGE

CHARGE BROUGHT UNDER AN ORDINANCE OR THE

OHIO REVISED CODE

RECIPIENT

Lancaster Police Department Ordinance

Ohio Revised Code 100% to City of Lancaster 100% to Fairfield County

Ohio State Highway Patrol

Ohio Revised Code

40% to City of Lancaster (1) 50% to State of Ohio and 10% to Fairfield County

Fairfield County Sheriff Ohio Revised Code 100% to Fairfield County Village/City Police Departments in

court’s jurisdiction of Fairfield County Ordinance

Ohio Revised Code 100% to that village/City 100% to Fairfield County

Public Utilities Commission of Ohio Ohio Revised Code 100% to Fairfield County Division of Wildlife

Division of Watercraft

Ohio Revised Code 100% to the Ohio Department

of Natural Resources

Any agency or person filing a narcotics charge

Ordinance

Ohio Revised Code

100% to city/vil where offense occurred 50% to Ohio Board of

Pharmacy & 50% to law enforcement agency (2)

Any agency or person filing

a liquor charge

Ordinance

Ohio Revised Code

100% to city/vil where offense occurred 50% to State of Ohio and 50% to Fairfield County

Any agency or person filing any other type of charge

Ordinance Ohio Revised Code

100% to city/vil where offense occurred 100% to Fairfield County

COURT COSTS: Pursuant to state statute, all court costs go to the City of Lancaster, except: (a) Moving Violations: $10.00 State Traffic Fund (§2949.094) $9.00 State Victims of Crime Reparations Fund (§2743.70) $20.00 State Indigent Defense Support Fund (§2949.091. (b) Non-Moving Violations: $10.00 State Indigent Defense Support Fund (§2949.091) (c) Criminal Violations: $9.00 State Victims of Crime Reparations Fund (§2943.70) $20.00 State Indigent Defense Support Fund (§2949.091). (1) One-half of 40% to the City of Lancaster General Fund and one-half of 40% to Fairfield County Law Library (2) Except charges filed under ORC 2925.03; 100% of fine money to law enforcement agency per entry of the court Note: For OVI and driving Under OVI suspension, under ORC, portions of the fine go to various agencies other than listed on the Table of Distribution for Fines

Page 30

Page 31

Agen

cyFe

loni

es (C

RA)

Mis

dem

eano

rs (C

RB

)O

MVI

(TR

C)

Traf

fic (T

RD

)To

tals

Ohi

o D

ept o

f Agr

icul

ture

00

00

0A

man

da T

wp

Zoni

ng0

00

00

Bal

timor

e V

illage

715

17

30B

loom

Tw

p Zo

ning

00

00

0B

erne

Tw

p Zo

ning

00

00

0B

rem

en V

illage

00

00

0B

rice

Pol

ice

Dep

artm

ent

00

00

0C

olum

bus

Pol

ice

Dep

artm

ent

120

10

13C

arro

ll Villa

ge2

94

1631

Fairf

ield

Cou

nty

Dog

War

den

061

00

61Fo

reig

n W

arra

nts

04

00

4H

ocki

ng T

wp

Zoni

ng0

00

00

Hum

ane

Soc

iety

00

00

0Li

thop

olis

Villa

ge3

146

1538

Dep

t of L

iquo

r0

90

09

City

of L

anca

ster

226

1122

146

2470

3964

Met

ro P

ark

Com

m0

10

01

Mille

rspo

rt V

illage

214

062

78M

isce

llane

ous

Age

ncy

00

00

0N

atur

al A

rea/

Per

serv

00

00

0D

ivis

ion

of W

ildlif

e0

440

246

Ohi

o S

tate

Hig

hway

Pat

rol

3019

237

298

2710

421

Par

k an

d R

ec0

211

628

Priv

ate

Com

plai

nt -

City

016

00

16C

ity o

f Pic

kerin

gton

3314

145

8530

4P

ublic

Util

ities

Com

mis

ion

00

00

0C

ity o

f Rey

nold

sbur

g21

118

718

164

Fairf

ield

Cou

nty

She

riff D

ept.

174

628

102

2070

2974

Priv

ate

Com

plai

nt -

Sta

te2

192

00

194

Sur

ar G

rove

Villa

ge0

01

56

Ohi

o D

ept o

f Tax

011

00

11V

iole

nt T

wp

Zoni

ng0

10

01

Div

isio

n of

Wat

ercr

aft

016

00

1651

226

2968

614

583

1841

0

2014

- Ne

w C

ases

File

d Ag

ency

Rep

ort

Tota

ls =

RECEIPTS DISTRIBUTIONSBalance as of December 31, 2013 45,323.00$ Cash Bonds 305,278.79$ 318,722.79$

City of LancasterOrdinance Fines 49,541.07$ 49,541.07$ Parking Fines 16,767.00$ 16,767.00$ State Highway Patrol Fines 55,271.04$ 55,271.04$ Lancaster Police - Law Enforcement & Education Fund 1,798.00$ 1,798.00$ Lancaster Police Drug Enforcement Fund 770.00$ 770.00$ Court Costs 538,384.11$ 538,384.11$ Law Library 55,270.99$ 55,270.99$ Worker's Compensation Premiums -$ -$ Criminal Account Interest Income 20.99$ 20.99$ Clerk Computer Fund 153,276.19$ 153,276.19$ Judge Computer Fund 45,277.55$ 45,277.55$ Indigent Driver's Alcohol & Treatment Fund 43,277.53$ 43,277.53$ Special Projects Fund 487,455.05$ 487,455.05$ Indigent Alcohol Treatment Fund (Moving Violations) 18,128.11$ 18,128.11$ Probation Services Fund 423,095.69$ 423,095.69$ Family Violence Fund (Law Director) 607.80$ 607.80$ Indigent Interlock/SCRAM OVI Fund 41,225.09$ 41,225.09$

Fairfield CountyTraffic Uniform Fines 116,877.49$ 116,877.49$ Criminal Regular Fines 48,980.62$ 41,980.62$ State Highway Patrol Fines 27,633.26$ 27,633.26$ Liquor Violation Fines 1,203.25$ 1,203.25$ Overload Violation Fines 90,856.40$ 90,856.40$ Dog Violation Fines 1,664.00$ 1,664.00$ County Sheriff Costs 31,752.52$ 31,752.52$ County Sheriff - Law Enforcement & Education Fund 1,138.70$ 1,138.70$ County Sheriff Drug Enforcement Fund 2,275.00$ 2,275.00$ County Jail - OVI Housing Authority 23,461.47$ 23,461.47$ Parks & Recreation Fines 445.00$ 445.00$ Parks & Recreation - Law Enforcement & Education Fund -$ -$ Jury & Witness Cost Reimbursement 3,306.08$ 3,306.08$ Affidavit of Indigency Filings 4,125.07$ 4,125.07$ Annual Law Library Payment -$ 7,000.00$ Fairfield County Humane Society -$ -$ Expungments 1,555.00$ 1,555.00$ (Continued)

Page 32

FAIRFIELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURTCRIMINAL / TRAFFIC DIVISION RECEIPTS & DISTRIBUTIONS - 2014

State of OhioState Highway Patrol Fines 138,157.87$ 138,157.87$ Seat Belt Violation Fines 50,361.00$ 50,361.00$ Child Restraint Fines 700.00$ 700.00$ Liquor Violation Fines 1,203.25$ 1,203.25$ Victims of Crime 119,106.25$ 119,106.25$ General Fund 734.50$ 734.50$ Expungments 2,340.00$ 2,340.00$ Indigent Defense Support Fund (Moving Violations) 335,030.45$ 335,030.45$ Justice Program Service Fund (Moving Violations) 1,327.59$ 1,327.59$ Indigent Defense Support Fund (OVI) 30,990.24$ 30,990.24$ Drug Enforcement Fund (Moving Violations) 40,983.27$ 40,983.27$ Ohio Department of Natural Resources Fines 2,380.44$ 2,380.44$ Ohio Department of Natural Resources Drug Fines 575.00$ 575.00$ Ohio Department of Natural Resources OVI Fines -$ -$ Division of Watercraft Fines 850.00$ 850.00$ Division of Watercraft Drug Fines -$ -$ Board of Pharmacy Fines 6,457.32$ 6,457.32$ Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles 160.00$ 160.00$ State Highway Patrol Law Enforcement & Education Fund 6,471.89$ 6,471.89$ State Highway Patrol Drug Enforcement 1,938.00$ 1,938.00$ Bond Surcharge Fee 7,166.50$ 7,166.50$

Other AgencyBaltimore Village 95.00$ 95.00$ Lithopolis Village 225.00$ 225.00$ Millersport Village 40.00$ 40.00$ Pickerington City 1,101.00$ 1,101.00$ Reynoldsurg City 350.00$ 350.00$ Sugar Grove Village 125.00$ 125.00$ Carroll Village 185.00$ 185.00$ Capital Recovery Service Collections 105,667.11$ 105,667.11$ All Other County Sheriff Costs 7,969.64$ 7,969.64$ Columbus Police Department 25.00$ 25.00$ Department of Taxation - Criminal Enforcement 675.00$ 675.00$ Board of Park Commission (Metro Parks) -$ -$ Overpayments 5,478.78$ 5,195.11$ Unclaimed Funds Paid to City 702.00$ 702.00$ Balance as of 12/31/2014 N/A 32,162.67$

Totals: 3,505,613.96$ 3,505,613.96$

Page 33

FAIRFIELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURTCRIMINAL / TRAFFIC DIVISION RECEIPTS & DISTRIBUTIONS - 2014

Balance December 31, 2013 129,715.13$ Court Costs 153,859.86$ Civil Account Deposits Received 3,996.36$ Judgment Collections 1,331,959.51$ Computer Fund (Clerk) 59,399.92$ Computer Fund (Judges) 9,293.22$ Special Projects Fund 229,303.24$ State Costs Collected 73,861.23$ Civil Account Interest Income 14.95$ Landlord/Tenant Deposits 6,423.00$ Trusteeship Debtor Deposits 9,511.01$

TOTAL 2014 CIVIL DIVISION RECEIPTS = 2,007,337.43$

City Treasurer, General Fund 154,089.99$ Computer Fund (Clerk) 59,399.92$ Computer Fund (Judges) 9,293.22$ Special Projects Fund 229,303.24$ Civil Account Deposits Disbursed 3,332.36$ Judgments to Plaintiffs 1,346,290.28$ State Treasurer Costs 73,861.23$ Landlord/Tenant Disbursements 2,469.06$ Trusteeship Disbursements 9,828.58$ Unclaimed Funds (Paid to City Auditor's Office) 517.81$ Balance December 31, 2014 118,951.74$

TOTAL 2014 CIVIL DIVISION DISBURSEMENTS = 2,007,337.43$ Page 34

FAIRFIELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT

CIVIL DIVISION RECEIPTS - 2014

CIVIL DIVISION DISBURSEMENTS - 2014

RECEIPTS DISTRIBUTIONSBalance as of December 31, 2013 175,038.13$ Cash Bonds 305,278.79$ 318,722.79$ Civil Post Judgment Collections 1,331,959.51$ 1,346,290.28$ Civil Deposits 3,996.36$ 3,332.36$ Landlord/Tenant 6,398.06$ 2,469.06$ Trusteeship 9,320.77$ 9,828.58$

City of LancasterOrdinance Fines 49,541.07$ 49,541.07$ Parking Fines 16,767.00$ 16,767.00$ State Highway Patrol Fines 55,271.04$ 55,271.04$ Lancaster Police - Law Enforcement & Education Fund 1,798.00$ 1,798.00$ Lancaster Police Drug Enforcement Fund 770.00$ 770.00$ Court Costs 692,459.15$ 692,459.15$ Law Library 55,270.99$ 55,270.99$ Worker's Compensation Premiums -$ -$ Interest Income 35.94$ 35.94$ Clerk Computer Fund 212,676.11$ 212,676.11$ Judge Computer Fund 54,570.77$ 54,570.77$ Indigent Driver's Alcohol & Treatment Fund 43,277.53$ 43,277.53$ Special Projects Fund 716,758.29$ 716,758.29$ Indigent Alcohol Treatment Fund (Moving Violations) 18,128.11$ 18,128.11$ Probation Services Fund 423,095.69$ 423,095.69$ Family Violence Fund (Law Director) 607.80$ 607.80$ Indigent Interlock/SCRAM OVI Fund 41,225.09$ 41,225.09$

Fairfield CountyTraffic Uniform Fines 116,877.49$ 116,877.49$ Criminal Regular Fines 48,980.62$ 41,980.62$ State Highway Patrol Fines 27,633.26$ 27,633.26$ Liquor Violation Fines 1,203.25$ 1,203.25$ Overload Violation Fines 90,856.40$ 90,856.40$ Dog Violation Fines 1,664.00$ 1,664.00$ County Sheriff Costs 31,752.52$ 31,752.52$ County Sheriff - Law Enforcement & Education Fund 1,138.70$ 1,138.70$ County Sheriff Drug Enforcement Fund 2,275.00$ 2,275.00$ County Jail - OVI Housing Authority 23,461.47$ 23,461.47$ Parks & Recreation Fines 445.00$ 445.00$ Parks & Recreation - Law Enforcement & Education Fund -$ -$ Jury & Witness Cost Reimbursement 3,306.08$ 3,306.08$ Affidavit of Indigency Filings 4,125.07$ 4,125.07$ Annual Law Library Payment -$ 7,000.00$ Fairfield County Humane Society -$ -$ Expungments 1,555.00$ 1,555.00$ (Continued)

Page 35

FAIRFIELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURTALL DIVISIONS RECEIPTS & DISTRIBUTIONS - 2014

State of OhioState Highway Patrol Fines 138,157.87$ 138,157.87$ Seat Belt Violation Fines 50,361.00$ 50,361.00$ Child Restraint Fines 700.00$ 700.00$ Liquor Violation Fines 1,203.25$ 1,203.25$ Victims of Crime 119,106.25$ 119,106.25$ General Fund 734.50$ 734.50$ Expungments 2,340.00$ 2,340.00$ Indigent Defense Support Fund (Moving Violations) 335,030.45$ 335,030.45$ Justice Program Service Fund (Moving Violations) 1,327.59$ 1,327.59$ Indigent Defense Support Fund (OVI) 30,990.24$ 30,990.24$ Drug Enforcement Fund (Moving Violations) 40,983.27$ 40,983.27$ Ohio Department of Natural Resources Fines 2,380.44$ 2,380.44$ Ohio Department of Natural Resources Drug Fines 575.00$ 575.00$ Ohio Department of Natural Resources OVI Fines -$ -$ Division of Watercraft Fines 850.00$ 850.00$ Board of Pharmacy Fines 6,457.32$ 6,457.32$ Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles 160.00$ 160.00$ State Highway Patrol Law Enforcement & Education Fund 6,471.89$ 6,471.89$ State Highway Patrol Drug Enforcement 1,938.00$ 1,938.00$ Bond Surcharge Fee 7,166.50$ 7,166.50$ Legal Aid Fund 73,861.23$ 73,861.23$

Other AgencyBaltimore Village 95.00$ 95.00$ Lithopolis Village 225.00$ 225.00$ Millersport Village 40.00$ 40.00$ Pickerington City 1,101.00$ 1,101.00$ Reynoldsurg City 350.00$ 350.00$ Sugar Grove Village 125.00$ 125.00$ Carroll Village 185.00$ 185.00$ Capital Recovery Service Collections 105,667.11$ 105,667.11$ All Other County Sheriff Costs 7,969.64$ 7,969.64$ Columbus Police Department 25.00$ 25.00$ Department of Taxation - Criminal Enforcement 675.00$ 675.00$ Board of Park Commission (Metro Parks) -$ -$ Overpayments 5,478.78$ 5,195.11$ Unclaimed Funds Paid to City 702.00$ 1,219.81$ Balance as of 12/31/2014 N/A 151,114.41$

Totals: 5,512,951.39$ 5,512,951.39$ Page 36

FAIRFIELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURTALL DIVISIONS RECEIPTS & DISTRIBUTIONS - 2014

Page 37

CITY OF LANCASTER CLERK'S EXPENDITURE 2014 BUDGETSalaries $580,498.55 $631,570.00 Overtime $0.00 $0.00 Retirement $0.00 $0.00 Sick Leave Buyout $0.00 $0.00 PERS Retirement $80,046.12 $88,600.00 PERS Pick-up $0.00 $0.00 Hospitalization $94,720.20 $116,436.00 Medicare $8,020.57 $9,200.00 Telephone $3,746.66 $4,500.00 Jury & Witness Fees $451.91 $1,000.00 Maintenance of Equipment $359.89 $1,500.00 Training & Seminars $0.00 $500.00 Insurance & Bonding $270.00 $450.00 Contract Services $6,272.51 $12,990.00 Incidentals & Supplies $16,063.55 $22,000.00 Postage $40,000.00 $40,000.00 Travel Expenses $0.00 $500.00 Association Dues $557.00 $560.00 Litigation $0.00 $0.00 New Equipment $0.00 $0.00 CITY TOTAL: $831,006.96 $929,806.00

COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD CLERK'S EXPENDITURE 2014 BUDGET

Worker’s Compensation $773.05 $865.00Unemployment $0.00 $0.00Witness Fees $3,844.57 $4,500.00COUNTY TOTAL: $68,790.25 $95,923.00

CITY AND COUNTY TOTAL: $899,797.21 $1,025,729.00

FAIRFIELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT –CLERK’S 2014 OPERATING

Salaries (includes PERS, Medicare, & Insurance)

$64,172.63 $90,558.00