Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System 1975 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Law Enforcement Assistance Administration Bureau of the Census National Criminal Justice State and Local Government Information and Statistics Service Special Studies SD-EE No. 9 No. 82 Other National Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service Reports ^,xpenaiiure ana tmpioymeni Data for the Criminal Justice System: 1974 (annual) Trends in Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System: 1971 to 1974 Criminal Justice Agencies in Regions 1-10(10 volumes) National Survey of Court Organization (1971) National Survey of Court Organization: 1975 Supplement to State Judicial Systems Victimization Surveys: Criminal Victimization in the United States: A Comparison of 1973 and 1974 Findings 1973 (final report) Criminal Victimization Surveys in 13 American Cities: Na- tional Crime Surveys in Boston, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Houston, Miami, Milwaukee, Minneapolis', New Orleans, Oakland, Pittsburgh, San Diego, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. Criminal Victimization Surveys in Chicago, Detroit. Los Angeles, New York, and Philadelphia: A Comparison of 1972 and 1974 Findings Criminal Victimization Surveys in Eight American Cities: A Comparison of 1971/72 and 1974/75 Findings in Atlanta, Baltimore, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Newark, Portland, and St. Louis Crimes and Victims: A Report on the Dayton-San Jose Pilot Survey of Victimization National Prisoner Statistics: Capital Punishment 1975 Prisoners in State and Federal Institutions on December 31, 1974 Census of State Correctional Facilities, 1974: Advance Report National Prisoner Statistics— Continued Census of Prisoners in State Correctional Facilities, 1973 Survey of Inmates of State Correctional Facilities, 1974: Advance Report The Nation's Jails: A report on the census of jails from the 1972 Survey of Inmates of Local Jails Survey of Inmates of Local Jails, 1972 Children in Custody: Advance Report on the Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facility Census of 1972-73 Report on the Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facility Census of 1971 Utilization of Criminal Justice Statistics Project: Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1975 Public Opinion Regarding Crime, Criminal Justice, and Related Topics New Directions in Processing of Juvenile Offenders: The Denver Model Who Gets Detained? An Empirical Analysis of the Pre- Ad judicatory Detention of Juveniles in Denver Juvenile Dispositions: Social and Legal Factors Related to the Processing of Denver Delinquency Cases Offender-Based Transaction Statistics: New Directions in Data Collection and Reporting Sentencing of California Felony Offenders The Judicial Processing of Assault and Burglary Offenders in Selected California Counties Pre-Adjudicatory Detention in Three Juvenile Courts: An Empirical Analysis of the Factors Related to Detention Decision Outcomes Delinquency Dispositions: An Empirical Analysis of Processing Decisions in Three Juvenile Courts Note: Single copies available from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, P.O. Box 24036, Southwest Station, Washington, D.C. 20024. Multiple copies available from Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System 1975 Issued March 1977 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Griffin B. Bell, Attorney General Law Enforcement Assistance Administration National Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service SD-EE No. 9 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Juanita M. Kreps Secretary Bureau of the Census State and Local Government Special Studies, No. 82 LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION Richard W. Velde Administrator Paul K. Wormeli Deputy Administrator Harry Bratt, Assistant Administrator National Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service Benjamin H. Renshaw, Director Statistics Division BUREAU OF THE CENSUS Robert L. Hagan, Acting Director Shirley Kallek Associate Director for Economic Fields Sherman Landau, Chief Governments Division ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was prepared jointly by the Bureau of the Census and the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. In the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, general supervision was provided by Charles R. Kindermann, with project direction by Sue A. Lindgren and editorial supervision by Marilyn Marbrook, all of the Statistics Division. In the Bureau of the Census, Governments Division, general supervision was provided by Alan R. Jones and Diana M. Cull. Significant contributions were made by Bernice J. Brigham, Victoria E. Campbell, Ora E. Dorsey, Purnell E. Johnson, Edward C. Malloy Jr., and Joan B. Taylor; and Operations units under the supervision of Ulvey S. Harris and Howard S. Sales. Preparation of publication copy was supervised by Helen D. Files. In the Field Division, general coordination was provided by E. Wilson Burdorff; and in Data Preparation Division by Clyde N. Rains. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 76-7484 SUGGESTED CITATION U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administra- tion and U.S. Bureau of the Census, Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System: 1975 U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1977 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington. D.C. 20402 - Price $4.40 Stock No. 003-024-01370-2 CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Table A. Total criminal justice direct expenditure and percent change by level of government, fiscal years 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, and 1975 1 Table B. Total full-time equivalent criminal justice employees and percent change, by level of government, October 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, and 1975 2 Table C. Percent distribution of total direct expenditure for the criminal justice system by activity and level of government, fiscal year 1975 3 Table D. Percent distribution of full-time equivalent employment in the criminal justice system by activity and level of government, October 1 975 3 Figure 1. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure by level of government, fiscal year 1975 4 Figure 2. Percent distribution of criminal justice system full-time equivalent employment by level of government, October 1975 4 Figure 3. Federal Government criminal justice system total expenditure, fiscal year 1975 5 Figure 4. Federal Government criminal justice system full-time equivalent employment, October 1975 5 Table E. Percent distribution of Federal criminal justice full-time equivalent employment and payroll, by activity, October 1975 6 Table F. Average monthly salaries for Federal full-time equivalent employees in the criminal justice system, by activity, October 1975 6 Figure 5. State government criminal justice system total expenditure, fiscal year 1975 Figure 6. State government criminal justice system full-time equivalent employment, October 1975 Table G. Percent distribution of State criminal justice full-time equivalent employment and payroll, by activity, October 1975 8 Table H. Average monthly salaries for State full-time equivalent employees in the criminal justice system, by activity, October 1975 8 Figure 7. Local government criminal justice system total expenditure, fiscal year 1975 9 Figure 8. Local government criminal justice system full-time equivalent employment, October 1975 9 Figure 9. County government criminal justice system total expenditure, fiscal year 1975 10 Figure 10. County government criminal justice system full-time equivalent employment, October 1975 10 Figure 1 1 . Municipal government criminal justice system total expenditure, fiscal year 1975 11 Figure 12. Municipal government criminal justice system full-time equivalent employment, October 1975 11 Table I. Percent distribution of county criminal justice full-time equivalent employment and payroll, by activity, October 1975 12 Table J. Percent distribution of municipal criminal justice full-time equivalent employment and payroll, by activity, October 1975 12 Table K. Average monthly salaries for county full-time equivalent employees in the criminal justice system, by activity, October 1975 . 13 Table L. Average monthly salaries for municipal full-time equivalent employees in the criminal justice system, by activity, October 1975 13 Table M. Criminal justice system direct expenditure and employment of independent cities and consolidated city-county governments, fiscal year 1975 14 Table N. Total criminal justice direct expenditure of all local governments and local governments in the 1 7 largest SMSA's, fiscal year 1975 14 Table O. Relative standard errors of local government totals of criminal justice expenditure 16 CONTENTS— Continued Section I. VARIABLE PASS-THROUGH DATA Table Page 1 . Percent distribution of total criminal justice expenditure from own sources of State and local governments, by State, fiscal year 1975 19 Section II. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM SUMMARY DATA 2. Percent distribution of expenditure for the criminal justice system, by level of government, fiscal year 1975 21 3. Percent distribution of employment and payrolls for the criminal justice system, by level of government, October 1975 . . 21 4. Criminal justice system expenditure of the Federal Government, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 22 5. Criminal justice system employment and payrolls of the Federal Government, October 1975 24 6. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 26 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 .... 34 8. Total criminal justice system expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975. ... 42 9. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution of full-time equivalent employees by State and type of government, October 1975 46 10. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll, by State and type of government, October 1975 54 1 1. Criminal justice system direct expenditure of local governments in the 17 largest SMSA's, by county area, fiscal year 1975 62 12. Criminal justice system employment of local governments in the 17 largest SMSA's, by county area, October 1975 66 13. Criminal justice system payrolls of local governments in the 17 largest SMSA's, by county area, October 1975 70 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975 74 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975 86 16. Total criminal justice system expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 98 1 7. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution of full-time equivalent employees of 394 large city govern- ments, October 1975 104 18. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll of 394 large city governments, October 1975 1 16 19. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1 975 128 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 138 2 1. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution of full-time equivalent employees of 334 large county governments, October 1975 1 48 22. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll of 334 large county governments, October 1975 158 23. Total criminal justice system expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 .... 168 Section III. POLICE PROTECTION 24. Police protection expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 174 25. Police protection expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 179 26. Police protection expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 185 Section IV. JUDICIAL 27. Judicial expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 193 28. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of State governments, fiscal year 1975 198 29. Judicial expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 199 30. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 205 3 1 . Judicial expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 211 32. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of State governments, October 1975 218 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975 220 Section V. LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION 34. Legal services and prosecution expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 . . 233 35. Legal services and prosecution expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 . . . 238 36. Legal services and prosecution expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 244 Section VI. PUBLIC DEFENSE 37. Public defense expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 252 38. Public defense expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 257 39. Indigent defense expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 263 CONTENTS— Continued Section VII. CORRECTIONS Table Page 40. Corrections expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 271 41. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of State governments, fiscal year 1975 276 42. Corrections expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 277 43. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 283 44. Corrections expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 289 45. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975 296 46. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of State governments, October 1975 299 47. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975 302 48. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of 394 large city governments, October 1975 312 Section VIII. OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE 49. Other criminal justice expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 327 Appendix 1 : Exhibit tables A, B, C, and D 333 Appendix 2: Definitions of Terms 359 Appendix 3: Survey Forms 363 TABLE FINDING GUIDE Subjects by Type of Government and Table Designation This guide lists all subjects covered in this report, but does not indicate all the detail shown in some tables, e.g. percent distributions, capital outlay, employment by full-time and full-time equivalent, etc. Unless otherwise noted, expenditure data are for FY 1975 and employment and payroll data for October 1975. Symbols appear with some table designations to indicate that only U.S. summary data are shown. A guide to the symbols appears at the end of the matrix. Total U.S. Federal govern- ment State govern- ments Local governments Subject Total, county, municipal 17 large SMSA's 334 large counties 394 large cities CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Direct expenditure: FY '71, '72, '73, '74, '75 A A A* A* Total expenditure: direct and inter- governmental 2 2,4 2*,6,8 2*, 6,8 19,23 14,16 Total expenditure from own sources (variable pass-through) 1 1 Direct expenditure only C C C*,7 C*,M,N? 7 B* N**,ll 20 15 Number of employees: FY '71 , '72, '73, '74, '75 B B B* Number of employees D,3 D,E,3, 5 D,*G*,3*, 9 DUtJt 3*,9 12 21 17 Payroll E,3 E,3,5 G*,3*,10 lt.Jt.3*, 10 13 22 18 POLICE PROTECTION 1 Total expenditure: direct and inter- governmental 2 2,4 2*,6,24 2*,6,24 19,25 14,26 Direct expenditure only C C C*,7 C*,M,N* 7 N**,ll 20 15 Number of employees D,3 D,E,3, 5 D*,G*,3*, 9 D*,lf,Jt 3*,9 12 21 17 Payroll 3 E,3,5 G*,3*,10 lt,Jj,3*,10 13 22 18 Average monthly salaries F H* Kt,l4 JUDICIAL Total expenditure: direct and inter- governmental 2 2,4 2*,6,27 2*,6,27 19,29 14,31 Direct expenditure only C C C*,7,28 C*,M,N* 7 N**,ll 20,30 15 Number of employees D,3 D,F,3, 5 D*,G*,3*, 9,32 DMt.Jt 3*. 9 12 21,33 17 Payroll 3 E,3,5 G*,3*. 10,32 ltJt.3*, 10 13 22,33 18 Average monthly salaries F H* Kt,l4 Direct expenditure, employment and payroll, by type of court and miscellaneous 28,32 30,33 Total U.S. Federal govern- ment State govern- ments Local governments Subject Total, county, municipal 17 large SMSA's 334 large counties 394 large cities LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION Total expenditure: direct and intergovernmental 2,4 2*,6,34 2*,6,34 19,35 14,36 Direct expenditure only C C C*,7 C*,M,N* 7 N**,ll 20 15 Number of employees D,3 D,E,3, 5 D*,G*, 3*,9 D*,lt,Jt 3*,9 12 21 17 Payroll 3 E,3,5 G*,3*, 10 lt,J$,3*,10 13 22 18 Average monthly salaries F H* Kt,U PUBLIC DEFENSE Total expenditure: direct and inter- governmental 2 2,4 2*,6,37 2*,6,37 19,38 14,39 Direct expenditure only C C C*,7 C*,M,Nf 7 N**,ll 20 15 Number of employees D,3 D,E,3, 5 D*,G*, 3*, 9 D*,lt,Jt 3*,9 12 21 17 Payroll 3 E,3,5 G*,3*, 10 lf,Jt3*10 13 22 18 Average monthly salaries F H* Kt,L$ CORRECTIONS Total expenditure: direct and inter- governmental 2 2,4 2*, 6, 40 2*,6,40 19,42 14,44 Direct expenditure only C C C*,7,41 C*,M,N* 7 N**,ll 20,43 15,45 Number of employees D,3 D,E,3, 5 D*,G*,3*, 9,46 D*,lf,Jt 3*,9 12 21,47 17,48 Payroll 3 E,3,5 G*,3*, 10,46 lt,Jt,3*, 10 13 22,47 18,48 Average monthly salaries F H* Kf,Lt Direct expenditure, employment and payroll for correctional institutions, by type, and for administration, pro- bation/parole/pardon, and miscel- laneous 41,46 43,47 45,48 OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE Total expenditure: direct and inter- governmental 2 2,4 2*,6,49 2*,6,49 19 14 Direct expenditure only C C C*,7 C*,M,N* 7 N**,ll 20 15 Number of employees D,3 D,E,3, 5 D*,G*, 3*,9 D*,ltJt, 3*,9 12 21 17 Payroll E,3 E,3,5 G*, 3*, 10 lf,J$,3*,10 13 22 18 Average monthly salaries F H* Kt,L$ 1 Exhibit Tables A and B in Appendix 1 present expenditure and employment data for large special police forces which are part of independent school districts or special districts. These data are not included in other police protection data in this report. Exhibit Tables C and D in Appendix 1 present expenditure and employment data for special police forces which are part of State and local colleges and universities. These data are included in other police protection data in this report. *Table shows total data for combined state or local governments only; it does not give data for individual state or local governments. tTable shows data for combined county governments only; it does not give data for individual counties. | Table shows data for combined municipal governments only; it does not give data for individual municipalities. **Table shows data for 17 SMSA's combined; it does not give data for individual SMSA's. IMPORTANT We have provided a User Evaluation Questionnaire at the end of this publication. It will assist us in improving future reports if you will complete and return it at your earliest convenience. The questionnaire is a self-mailing form and requires no postage. INTRODUCTION This publication is the ninth in a series of annual reports that present public expenditure and employment data on criminal justice activities in the United States. In this report, expenditure data cover the fiscal year (FY) 1975, and employment data are for the month of October 1975. Refer to the Survey Method- ology section of the text for a discussion of the variation in some fiscal year ending dates. As in previous years, specific data are supplied for the Federal Government, each of the 50 State governments, and the aggre- gate local level of government within each State. Survey coverage was designed to produce reliable estimates for each State of the percent of total State and local law enforcement expenditure funded and expended by units of general local government. These estimates, shown in table 1 , are necessary for compliance with the provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended. Data are published separately for the aggregate county governments and the aggregate muni- cipal governments (cities, towns, and townships) within each State, for each of the 334 counties with a 1973 population of 100,000 or more, for the 394 cities with a 1973 population of 50,000 or more, and for the 17 largest standard metropolitan statistical areas (SMSA's). Historical overview Although this annual series of reports began in fiscal year 1967, caution should be exercised in comparing data in the FY 1971 and later volumes with data in earlier volumes. Beginning with FY 1971, the survey was greatly expanded: The survey panel of governmental units was increased by a third, and the number of units for which data are compiled in the field by specially trained agents was more than doubled. Data collection further benefited from a growing familiarity with the criminal justice systems of the various States and of the individual units within the States. Data from the FY 1971 through FY 1975 annual volumes are essentially comparable; these data were collected in each year from the same panel of governments and were edited and processed in a uniform fashion. Refer to the Survey Methodology section of the text for more detail. Table A shows the steady rise in expenditure for criminal justice activities at all levels of government over the 5 years. The number of full-time equivalent criminal justice employees also increased at all levels of government but at a much slower rate than expenditure (see table B). A report entitled Trends in Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System, 1971-1974 , which summarizes data from the annual publications, is available. The next trends report, covering fiscal years 1971 through 1975, is being prepared for release in the spring of 1977. Obtaining copies of reports Copies of the annual and trends reports are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402; U.S. Department of Commerce District Offices; and the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Washington, D.C. 20531. Organization of this report In this introductory text, Federal, State, and local government criminal justice expenditure and employment data are discussed and compared with 1974 data. Accompanying tables and charts are followed by a description of survey methodology, data sources, and limitations. Table A. Total criminal justice direct expenditure and percent change by level of government, fiscal years 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, and 1975 Amount (millions of dollars) Percent increase or decrease (-) Level of government 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1971 to 1972 1972 to 1973 1973 to 1974 1974 to 1975 1971 to 1975 Total 1 10,517 2 1,215 2,681 6,621 11,732 1,502 2,948 7,281 13,007 1,651 3,304 8,052 14,851 1,859 3,900 9,092 17,249 2,188 4,612 10,449 11.6 2 23.6 10.0 10.0 10.9 9.9 12 .1 10.6 14.2 12 .6 18.0 12 .9 16.1 17.7 18.3 14.9 64.0 2 80 .1 State 72 .0 57 .S Note: Because of rounding, detail does not add to total. a Federal Government data for fiscal years 1971, 1972, 1973, and 1974 have been revised, with resulting revisions made to total. 2 The Federal expenditure amount shown for 1971 does not include data for the Office of Building Secu- rity Services of the Federal Reserve System; the Judicial, Prevention and Enforcement Services Division of the Bureau of Indian Affairs; or the Center for Studies of Crime and Delinquency at the National Institute of Mental Health, as these agencies were not included in the 1971 survey. INTRODUCTION Table B. Total full-time equivalent criminal justice employees and percent change, by level of government, October 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, and 1975 Number of employees Percent increase or decrease (-) Level of government October 1971 October 1972 October 1973 October 1974 October 1975 October 1971 to October 1972 October 1972 to October 1973 October 1973 to October 1974 October 1974 to October 1975 October 1971 to October 1975 Total Federal .... State 861,776 x 77,523 205,859 578,394 898,305 85,222 216,603 596,480 945,309 87,139 232,299 625,871 1,011,205 93,755 252,588 664,862 1,050,503 96,136 263,208 691,159 4.2 ^.9 5.2 3.1 5.2 2 .2 7.2 4.9 7.0 7.6 8.7 6.2 3.9 2 .5 4.2 4.0 21.9 l 2A.O 27.9 19.5 lr The Federal employment figure shown for October 1971 does not include employees at the Office of Building Security Services of the Federal Reserve System; the Judicial, Prevention and Enforcement Serv- ices Division of the Bureau of Indian Affairs; or the Center for Studies of Crime and Delinquency at the National Institute of Mental Health, as these agencies were not canvassed in the 1971 survey. Following the introductory text are the main tables, which are organized into three major parts. Section I presents "variable pass-through" data (table 1), with an accompanying explanation of this unique concept. Section II presents summary data for the criminal justice system at the Federal, State, and local government levels and for selected SMSA's and individual govern- ments, showing the interrelationship of the various sectors of the system (tables 2-23). Sections III-VIII cover each of the six "sectors" of the criminal justice system individually, pro- viding where possible a further breakdown of data on particular criminal justice activities (tables 24^19). In addition, appendix 1 includes two tables that show ex- penditure and employment data for special police force activities in selected school districts and special districts not included in the summary totals for general local governments. For the first time, appendix 1 includes two tables that show expenditure and employment data for campus police forces of State and local governments-data which are included in the summary tables. Refer to the Survey Methodology section of the text for a dis- cussion of the differences in general local governments and independent school districts and special districts in the pre- sentation of data in this report. Immediately preceding this introduction, a table-finding guide has been provided for quick reference to the subjects covered. The guide cross-references all subjects contained in this report pertaining to criminal justice activities by all govern- ments combined and each level of government— Federal, State, and local. Local governments are further broken down into counties and municipalities. Definitions for concepts, categories and terms used in this report are contained in appendix 2. Two concepts that recur frequently, however, are worth noting here. Total expenditure is comprised of direct and intergovernmental expenditure of a government or level of government for criminal justice activities. In most expenditure tables, certain totals must be adjusted to exclude duplicative intergovernmental expenditure amounts. For example, money paid by a State government to a county government within that State is reported by the State govern- ment as an intergovernmental expenditure and by the county government as a direct expenditure when the money is spent. Therefore, in order to arrive at a combined State-local govern- ment total that does not duplicate these amounts, intergovern- mental expenditure amounts are deducted from the State-local total, since those amounts are also reflected in the direct ex- penditures of the recipient governments. The same is true of intergovernmental payments between counties and munici- palities within the same State. Full-time equivalent employment is a statistical measure that represents the total number of em- ployees (full and part-time), discounted by applying average full-time earning rates. It is calculated by dividing the total payroll (full-time plus part-time) by the full-time payroll and multiplying the resultant quotient by the number of full-time employees. It is also important to note that in this report the judicial, legal services and prosecution, and public defense categories include expenditure and employment data for both criminal and civil justice activities because available source documents for many governments do not segregate these activities for courts or agencies that handle both. Nor are the State and local government officials who provide the survey data able to make this break reliably and consistently. Therefore, in the absence of a consistent and reliable basis for proration, and to preserve uniformity in the collection and presentation of data, both criminal and civil activities are included for these categories. Appendix 3 exhibits the mail questionnaires used in the 1975 survey, followed by a user evaluation questionnaire soliciting comments from readers. General, fiscal year 1975 Local governments continued to spend more than the Federal and State governments combined for all criminal justice activi- ties. Figure 1 shows that local governments accounted for 61 percent of all direct criminal justice expenditure: State govern- ments contributed 26 percent and the Federal government 13 percent. However, when each activity is examined separately, the proportion accounted for by the different levels of government varied throughout the criminal justice system. As seen in table C, four of the activities-police protection, judicial, legal services and prosecution, and public defense, were supported mainly by local governments. For the first time in 1975, local governments also expended the largest amount for activities included under "other criminal justice." State govern- ments contributed the largest amounts for corrections. INTRODUCTION Table C. Percent distribution of total direct expenditure for the criminal justice system by activity and level of government, fiscal year 1975 Level of government Total Police protection Judicial Legal services Public defense Corrections Other criminal justice Total 100.0 12 .7 26.7 60.6 100.0 14.9 15.5 69.6 100.0 8.0 24.1 67.9 100.0 19.0 23.1 57.9 100.0 31.0 23.4 45.6 100.0 5.6 57.1 37.3 100 .0 23 .9 State 37 .9 38 .2 1 Federal Government data for fiscal years 1971, 1972 1973, and 1974 have been revised table A. See text Relationships similar to those found for expenditure among the various levels of government also apply to employment. Figure 2 shows that almost two-thirds of the total full-time equivalent criminal justice employees of all governments were employed by local governments. As seen in table D, the propor- tion of people employed by the three levels of government in each sector generally approximated the proportion of expendi- tures made in the sector. An exception to this pattern is seen in the public defense sector, where the Federal government ac- counted for 3 1 percent of the total expenditure, but only 3 per- cent of the employees. This is because the Federal government makes more extensive use of court-appointed counsel systems, whereby fees are paid to private counsel to defend indigent clients accused of crimes, than do State and local governments which more frequently hire employees directly to provide public defense services. It should also be noted that 82 percent v of Federal public defense expenditure was accounted for by the Community Services Administration's legal services program (formerly a part of OEO) for counseling indigent persons in purely civil matters. Other Federal public defense programs service clients involved in criminal matters or mixed criminal and civil matters. Federal Government (tables 4 and 5) General expenditure by the Federal government totaled $252,707 million in fiscal year 1975. Of this amount, $3,019 million, or 1 percent, was expended on criminal justice activities. The $3,019 million represents an increase of $417 million, or 16 percent over the $2,602 million expended in FY 1974. The police protection sector accounted for the largest portion of the overall dollar increase: $240 million. However, the legal services and prosecution sector accounted for the largest per- centage increase, 51 percent or $59.5 million, reflecting large increases within the Department of Justice for the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, up $28.8 million, and the Office of Management and Finance, up $14.7 million. Increases also occurred in the judicial sector, up 2 1 percent ; in "other criminal justice," up 1 1 percent; and in corrections, up 2 percent. The public defense sector showed a slight decrease of $4.6 million or 5 percent. Figure 3 shows that as in previous years, the largest share of Federal criminal justice money was expended for police protec- tion activities, including those agencies that enforce Federal law and those that provide security and police services to Federal property and buildings. Of the $3,019 million in total Federal criminal justice expenditure, nearly half (or $1,464 million) was for agencies in the police protection sector, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation ($417 million), the Bureau of Customs ($288 million), the Drug Enforcement Administration ($126 million), and the Postal Inspection Service ($105 million). The second largest block of Federal criminal justice expenditure ($882 million or 29 percent) was reported by agencies in the "other criminal justice" sector, primarily by LEAA with FY 1975 expenditure of $852 million. The other four sectors ac- counted for 22 percent of Federal criminal justice expenditure. If Federal grants to State and local governments are not in- cluded, the increase over 1974 in Federal criminal justice direct expenditure (current operating expenses and capital outlay) was 18 percent. The number of full-time equivalent Federal employees in criminal justice activities increased 3 percent from October 1974 to October 1975. There were 96,136 full-time equivalent employees in October 1975, including 69,196 (72 percent) in the police protection sector; 10,707 (11 percent) in the cor- rections sector; 7,099 (7 percent) in the legal services and prosecution sector; and 7,278 (8 percent) in the judicial sector Table D. Percent distribution of full-time equivalent employment in the criminal justice system by activity and level of government, October 1975 Level of government Total Police protection Judicial Legal services Public defense Corrections Other criminal justice Total 100.0 7.1 25.1 65.8 100.0 11 .1 14.8 74.1 100.0 5.5 19.4 75.1 100.0 12 .8 22 .3 64.9 100.0 2 .9 40.1 57.0 100.0 4 .8 56.5 38.7 100 .0 23.1 46.6 30.3 State INTRODUCTION FIGURE 1. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure by level of government, fiscal year 1975 $17,249 million Local $10,449 million (60.6% Federal 1 $2,188 million (12.7%) State $4,612 million (26.7%) 1 Federal government data for fiscal years 1971, 1972, 1973, and 1974 have been revised. See text table A. For each level of government, this graph depicts direct expenditure only and excludes in tergo vernmen tal expenditure to avoid duplication, since payments from one level of government to another are reflected in the direct expenditures of the recipient level of government. On the other hand, figures 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 depict total expenditure, including both direct and intergovernmental expenditure, of individual levels and types of governments. See text and Appendix 2: Definitions of terms. FIGURE 2. Percent distribution of criminal justice svstem full-time equivalent employment by level of government, October 1975 1 ,050,503 Local employees 691,159 (65.8%) Federal employees 96,136 (9.1%) State employees 263,208 (25.1%) U.S. Department of Commerce BUREAU OF THE CENSUS INTRODUCTION FIGURE 3. Federal government criminal justice system total expenditure, fiscal year 1975 $3,019 million 1 Other criminal justice $882 mill ion -~—~^_ (29.2%) Corrections $243 million ^\ (8.0%) \ Police protection W^/fn J $1,464 million Public defense \ m '// /! / (48.5%) $87 million "^S. \ wB wBF £- / i / (2.9%) \ OHIp/ / 1 J Legal services $177 million — '***cy Judicial 72,761 (28.2%) > INTRODUCTION FIGURE 11. Municipal government criminal justice system total expenditure, fiscal year 1975 Public defense $26 million (0.4%) Legal services $223 million (3.3%) Judicial $408 million (6.1%) $6,697 million 1 Corrections $400 million (6.0%) Other criminal justice $65 million (1.0%) Police protection $5,574 million (83.2%) 1 Because of rounding, detail does not add to total. FIGURE 12. Municipal government criminal justice system full-time equivalent employment, October 1975 Public defense 202" (0.04%) Legal services 12,670" (2.9%) Judicial 26,371 (6.1%) 433,567 Corrections /' \ 18,938 . (4.4%) \ Other criminal justice 1,255 (0.3%) l Police protection I 374,131 / (86.3%) 12 INTRODUCTION Table I. Percent distribution of county criminal justice full-time equivalent employment and payroll, by activity, October 1975 'Dollar amounts in thousands ) Activity Full-time equivalent employees October 1975 payroll Percent distribution Full-time equivalent employment October 1975 payroll Total Police protection Judicial Legal services Public defense Corrections Other criminal justice 'Because of rounding, detail does not add to total At the municipal level, also, the largest proportionate in- crease year-to-year was in the "other criminal justice" sector, 17 percent; but this increase was considerably less than the 55 percent increase between FY 1973 and FY 1974. Municipal expenditure for the other sectors ranged from a 9 percent in- crease in legal services to a 1 7 percent increase in the corrections sector. At both the county and municipal levels, employment and payrolls were distributed throughout the various sectors in nearly the same percentages as expenditure (see tables I and J). There were 257,592 full-time equivalent county criminal justice employees in October 1975 drawing a monthly payroll of $252 million. As at the State level, in those sectors with a concentra- tion of higher-paid employees, such as legal services and public defense (see table K), the percentage of total payroll exceeded the percentage of total employees. There were 433,567 full-time equivalent municipal criminal justice employees in October 1975 with a monthly payroll of $482 million. Among the sectors with a significant number of employees, the legal services and corrections sectors paid the highest average salaries (see table L). Overall, the number of county full-time equivalent employees in October 1975 increased by 18,421 or 8 percent over October 257,592 89,273 72,761 23,261 3,423 67,942 932 £251,535 90,874 64,488 26,172 4,629 64,478 893 100.0 34.7 28.2 9.0 1.3 26.4 0.4 100.0 36.1 25.6 10.4 1 .8 25.6 0.4 1974. The police protection sector showed the greatest increase in the number of full-time equivalent employees, 6.205 (8 per- cent), and the "other criminal justice" sector showed the greatest proportionate increase, 50 percent (311 employees). The number of municipal full-time equivalent employees in- creased by 2 percent compared with October 1 974. The police sector had the greatest increase in the number of full-time equivalent employees, 7,612 (2 percent); and the public defense sector showed the greatest proportionate increase, 13 percent, but the numbers were very small- 179 employees in October 1974 and 202 employees in October 1975. Separate data are presented in tables 19-23 for the 334 county governments with a 1974 population of 100,000 or more. Over one-half (54 percent) of the total 1974 United States population lives in the 334 largest counties, and these counties accounted for more than three-fourths ($3,033 million) of the total ex- penditure for criminal justice activities at the county level. These same counties employed 73 percent of all county-level full-time equivalent criminal justice employees (186,958) and paid them 80 percent of the total county criminal justice payroll for October 1975. These figures, of course, reflect the greater need for criminal justice services and the larger salaries in densely populated areas. Table J. Percent distribution of municipal criminal justice full-time equivalent employment and payroll, by activity, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands ) Full-time equivalent employees October 1975 payroll Percent di stribution Activity Full-time equivalent employment October 1975 payroll To ta 1 433,567 374,131 26,371 12,670 202 18,938 1,255 $481,634 417,988 26,144 14,638 212 21,213 1,439 100.0 86.3 6.1 2 .9 0.1 4.4 0.3 100 .0 86.8 5.4 3.0 (z) 4 .4 0.3 Z Less than half the unit of measurement shown, INTRODUCTION 1 i Table K. Average monthly salaries for county full-time equivalent employees in the criminal justice system, by activity, October 1975 Activity October 1975 $1,018 886 1 125 1 352 949 Other criminal justice 958 Separate data are presented in tables 14-18 for the 394 city governments with a 1973 population of 50,000 or more. Total criminal justice expenditure by the 394 large city governments amounted to $4,576 million, and full-time equivalent criminal justice employees numbered 275,991. These 394 cities have slightly more than one-half (53 percent) of the municipal popu- lation and accounted for more than two-thirds of the municipal criminal justice expenditure, 68 percent. These same 394 cities employed 64 percent of all municipal full-time equivalent employees working in the criminal justice system and paid them 69 percent of the total municipal criminal justice payroll. Again, as with the large counties, the proportion of payroll exceeded the proportion of employees, reflecting the generally larger salaries in the large metropolitan areas. Table L. Average monthly salaries for municipal full-time equivalent employees in the criminal justice system, by activity, October 1975 Activity October 1975 $1,117 991 1 155 1,049 1,120 1 147 The distribution of expenditure and employment throughout the various criminal justice sectors in the 334 counties and the 394 cities reflects the distribution for counties and cities generally. It should be noted that in the individual city tables, certain cities displayed are either independent, being wholly outside any county area, or operate wholly or in part as a consolidated city-county. In general, these cities are more similar to large counties than to other large cities in the scope of their criminal justice responsibilities; that is, in addition to police protection, which is the primary criminal justice function in most cities, these cities also operate extensive judicial and corrections systems and may have significant public defense expenditures. The independent cities are: Washington, D.C.; Baltimore, Md.; St. Louis, Mo.; and the following cities in Virginia: Alexandria, Chesapeake, Hampton, Lynchburg, Newport News, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Richmond, Roanoke, Virginia Beach, and 31 others, 23 of which are included in the survey sample and are shown in table M below. Data are not available for the eight cities not included in the survey sample. The consolidated city-county governments are: San Francisco, Calif.; Denver, Colo.; Jacksonville, Fla.; Columbus, Ga.; Honolulu, Hawaii; Indianapolis, Ind.; Lexington, Ky.; Baton Rouge, La.; New Orleans, La.; Boston, Mass.; New York City, N.Y.; Philadelphia, Pa.; Nashville-Davidson, Tenn.; and four others that are not displayed in the individual city tables because they had popula- tions of less than 50,000 in 1973. They are: Juneau, Alaska; Sitka, Alaska; Nantucket, Mass.; and Carson City, Nev. All 17, however, are displayed in table M below to show their effect on total municipal direct expenditure and employment for all criminal justice functions. Because New York City's criminal justice expenditure ac- counted for 50 percent of the combined total of independent cities and consolidated city-counties, the effect of these units on total municipal expenditure is less dramatic when New York City is removed, dropping from 29 percent to 17 percent. Similarly, New York City accounts for 45 percent of total crim- inal justice employment for this group, and when it is removed, the impact on total municipal employment is reduced from 24 percent to 14 percent. Local governments in the 1 7 largest SMSA's ( tables 11, 12, and (tables 11, 12, and 13) Data are presented on criminal justice expenditure, employ- ment, and payroll of all governments in the 17 largest standard metropolitan statistical areas (SMSA's) and within the individual SMSA for each of its component county areas. The county area data include aggregate figures for the county government and for all municipalities within that county. In a few instances, data for individual cities are listed separately in the SMSA tables because the city is either the only government within a county area, e.g., consolidated city-county governments such as Philadelphia or New York City, or the city is organizationally independent and within no recognized county boundary, e.g., St. Louis, Mo., or Baltimore, Md. The State Economic Area (SEA) rather than the SMSA is shown for Boston because the SMSA's in New England are made up of the towns rather than the counties, a deviation from the general SMSA concept. The SEA, on the other hand, is made up of counties. As seen in table 1 1 , the 17 largest SMSA's expended $4,987 million for criminal justice activities in FY 1975. Almost half (48 percent) of the Nation's total local ciiminal justice direct expenditure was made by governments in these areas, where 30 percent of the 1970 United States population resides. On a sector-by-sector basis, governments in these SMSA's accounted for 48 percent of all local government direct expenditure for police protection; 47 percent of local expenditure for judicial activities; 44 percent of local expenditure for legal services and prosecution activities; 50 percent of local expenditure for public defense activities; 49 percent of all local expenditure for cor- rections activities; and 41 percent of local expenditure for "other criminal justice" activities (see table N). The local governments in the 17 largest SMSA's employed 288,520 full-time equivalent personnel in criminal justice, or 42 percent of the total number of local government full-time equivalent employees working in criminal justice. The percentage of all local government employees working in each criminal justice sector in these SMSA's was police protection, 42 per- cent; judicial, 40 percent; legal services and prosecution, 39 percent; public defense, 46 percent; corrections, 44 percent; and "other criminal justice," 51 percent. 14 INTRODUCTION Table M. Criminal justice system direct expenditure and employment of independent cities and consolidated city-county governments, fiscal year 1975 Dollar amounts in thousands Total criminal justice Total criminal justice State and type of syst em State and type of government syst em government Direct Total Direct Total expenditure employees expenditure employees United States: Kentucky : Local governments, total 1 . 10,448,613 756,627 9.329 683 4,040,844 7,155,858 306,080 509^765 Louisiana : Baton Rouge-East Baton Municipalities, total 1 .. 15,368 40,261 1 406 Independent cities and consolidated city- 3,178 2 ,103,770 120,098 Maryland : 894 261 75,513 35 20 4,002 81,621 89 , 799 468 57,383 5 616 Alaska : Massachusetts : Sitka 4,485 51 California : Missouri : St . Louie 3 978 Colorado : Nevada : 40,924 2,368 New York : 916 69 200,378 9,525 Florida : 26,566 1,807 New York — Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, 1,054,895 54 454 Georgia : Pennsylvania : 6,881 604 232,500 14 974 Hawaii : Tennessee : 29,397 1,981 22,491 1,755 Indiana : Virginia : 30,379 2,746 Independent cities (33 ) 2 . 87,546 6,361 Expenditure and employment data for independent cities and consolidated city-county governments included . 2 There are 41 independent cities in Virginia; however, 8 of these cities are not included in the vey sample . Table l\l. Total criminal justice direct expenditure of all local governments and local governments in the 17 largest SMSA's, fiscal year 1975 (Millions of dollars ) Local government Total Police protection Judicial Legal services Public defense Corrections Other criminal justice Local governments in 17 largest SMSA * s Percent of all local governments 1 $10,449 4,987 47.7 $6,813 3,266 47.9 $1,405 663 47.2 $540 237 43.9 $128 64 50.0 $1,434 705 49.2 $129 53 41 .1 Percentages based on unrounded figures shown in tables 7 and 11 INTRODUCTION 15 SURVEY METHODOLOGY-SOURCES AND LIMITATIONS OF THE DATA General Survey coverage and collection methods are described in detail later in the text, and the definitions applied in the col- lection of data are presented in appendix 2. As in the previous editions of this annual series, several tables show comparisons of criminal justice expenditure and full-time equivalent employment with the total general expenditure and full-time equivalent employment for all functions of the par- ticular government or level of government. Prior to the FY 1971 report, local government total expenditure and full-time equiva- lent employment included data for independent school districts and special districts as well as for general local governments, i.e., counties, municipalities, and townships. The "variable pass-through" provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control Act of 1970, however, required that the concept of "local" government be confined to units of general local govern- ment only in determining the ratio of State-to-local government criminal justice expenditure. Beginning with the FY 1971 report, therefore, the same concept was applied consistently throughout the publication to reflect the intent of the law, and the total general expenditure and total full-time equivalent employment figures shown for the "local" level of government in these com- parisons include data for units of general local government only and do not include data for independent school districts or special districts. This change may result in significant differences from the percentages shown in years prior to FY 1971 in those States where education is largely the responsibility of inde- pendent school districts, or where there are large special districts. Criminal justice expenditure and employment data in this series, however, have always been for units of general local government only; i.e., no data on the criminal justice activities of independent school districts or special districts have ever been included. As in previous reports, however, appendix 1 presents separate data for those independent school districts and special districts having significant special police expenditure and employment. In ad- dition, appendix 1 includes separate data for campus police of colleges and universities that are dependent agencies of State and local general governments— data that are also included in the summary figures for State and local governments. Survey coverage The survey through which basic figures for this report were collected covered the Federal government, all State governments, and a representative sample of local governments within each State. Data were collected for all county governments (regardless of size), for all municipalities (and townships in the New England and Middle Atlantic States) having a 1970 population of 10,000 or more, and for a sample of the remaining municipalities and townships with less than 10,000 population, selected according to the relative size of their annual expenditures as reported in the 1967 Census of Governments. The survey panel therefore included the Federal government, the 50 State governments, and 9,045 local governments (the 3,043 county governments, 4,305 municipalities, and 1,697 townships). The survey period Federal Government data are shown for FY 1975, which ended June 30, 1975. The State expenditure data presented in this report cover the fiscal year ending June 30, 1975, for all States except three whose fiscal years ended as follows: New York, March 31, 1975; Texas, August 31, 1975; and Alabama, September 30, 1975. However, there are some State agencies that operate on a dif- ferent fiscal year basis from the rest of the State government. In such instances, figures shown are for the agency's fiscal year that ended within the State's regular fiscal year. For local governments, the 1975 fiscal years reported are those that closed between July 1, 1974, and June 30, 1975. Most municipalities and counties ended their fiscal years on December31, 1974, or June 30, 1975. Employment data shown for Federal, State, and local govern- ments are for October 1975. Data collection The survey was accomplished using two methods of data collection: Field compilation and mail canvass. Trained field representatives compiled expenditure and employment data from the governments' own records for the 50 States, the 334 largest counties, the 394 largest cities, and selected smaller units. The compilation work was done between July 1975 and June 1976 in accordance with the definitions presented in appendix 2. All other units in the sample were canvassed by mail for expenditure and employment data, over a 5-month period beginning in January 1976 and ending in May 1976. Response for field-compiled units was 100 percent. The response from mail canvass units was 95 percent. The mail canvass ques- tionnaires are exhibited in appendix 3. The field survey efforts and mail canvass were supplemented by reference to a variety of published government documents such as budgets, financial statements, and audit reports. In some cases, such sources were the basis for breakdowns of totals into more detailed employment and expenditure figures. The expenditure and employment data for the Federal Government were collected through a special mail survey, with telephone followup, of Federal criminal justice agencies, in ac- cordance with definitions used for State and local governments (see appendix 2). For reports prior to 1971, expenditure data were derived from the Budget of the United States Government , and employment figures were obtained from the U.S. Civil Service Commission. Data limitations The sample selected to develop local government figures is one of all possible samples of the same size that could have been chosen using the same sampling design. Estimates derived from these different samples would differ from each other and also from a complete census using the same data collection pro- cedures. This variation among all possible estimates is sampling error. Because all State and county governments were included in the survey, State and county figures are not subject to sampling error. The local government sample was designed to produce an estimate for each State of the portion of total criminal justice expenditures made by local governments with a relative sampling error of less than one-half of 1 percent. For the fiscal year 1975 data, the errors were less than one-half of 1 percent in all but 1 1 States; however, in all States, the errors were less than three-quarters of 1 percent, at the 95 percent confidence level. The relative sampling error of the State-by-State estimates of local government criminal justice expenditure has been calculated at the two-thirds confidence level and found to be within 3 If, INTRODUCTION percent of the estimated totals for all but 2 States and less than 2 percent for 37 States. The results of the computations of standard errors for local government totals on a relative standard error basis are summarized in table below. Because State government figures are not subject to sampling variation, the State-local aggregates shown for individual States are relatively more reliable than the local government estimates they include. The data are also subject to the inaccuracies in classification, response, and processing that would occur if a complete census had been conducted under the same conditions as the sample survey. Every effort was made to keep such errors to a minimum through care in examining, editing, and tabulating the data submitted by government officials. Followup procedures were used extensively to clarify inadequate and inconsistent survey returns. Readers should be generally cautious in comparing govern- ments, because other differences in functional responsibilities from State to State and government to government can also affect the comparability of expenditure and employment data. For example, some State governments directly administer certain activities that elsewhere are undertaken by local governments, with or without fiscal aid, and the same variation in the division of responsibilities exists for counties and cities. and a mail canvass questionnaire designed specifically to elici criminal justice data was used for all but the largest governments which were canvassed by field agents. These changes must b> taken into account in making year-to-year comparisons fron FY 1967 through FY 1970. In the FY 1970 report, individual unit data were publishec for 128 large counties (as compared with 55 counties in earlie reports) and for 158 large cities (compared with 48 cities i: earlier reports). The Federal expenditure data presented in a reports through FY 1970 were extracted from the Budget c the United States Government , and the employment data wa provided by the U.S. Civil Service Commission. Since FY 1971 Federal data have been collected by a special mail canvas: For the FY 1971 survey, a new and enlarged panel of loc; governments was drawn specifically for the criminal justic expenditure and employment survey, including all count governments and a larger sample of municipalities and towi ships, to produce more reliable estimates for use by LEAA i the allocation of block grant funds between State and loc governments. The data presented in reports since FY 1971 ai therefore essentially comparable, because they are derived froi the same sample using the same methods of data collection an processing. The only significant variations occurred in classific tion of certain expenditure items discussed in detail in tt following section. The available source documents did not consistently provide full itemization of expenditure or employment for the sector subcategories presented in this report. As a result, sector break- downs may be incomplete for particular governmental units. Because of rounding, the detail data in some tables may not add precisely to the totals shown. Changes in survey methodology As discussed earlier, this series of annual reports dates back to FY 1967. The survey originated in the Bureau of the Census as a special in-house study in which police protection, judicial, and corrections data were extracted for selected large govern- ments from data compiled in the Bureau's regular annual finance and employment sample surveys. In the FY 1969 survey, prose- cution and public defense were added to the original three criminal justice categories, coverage was extended to the entire regular annual survey sample of counties and municipalities, Changes in classification In the FY 1971 report, police protection expenditure includ( amounts expended for traffic safety and related traffic enginee ing. Beginning with the FY 1972 report, these expenditur were excluded from the police protection figures. Also, data f special police forces administered by general-purpose gover ments (such as airport police, park police, housing police, eti were included in the police protection figures if the force ei ployed 10 or more full-time sworn officers with general arre powers. Beginning with the FY 1972 report, data for these fore were included regardless of size. In the FY 1971 report, corrections expenditure figui covered a number of drug and alcohol abuse facilities and pr grams administered by assorted agencies, departments, ai private organizations receiving public funding. Beginning with t FY 1972 report, these institutions and programs were includ only if administered by a corrections agency of the crimir justice system. Table 0. Relative standard errors of local government totals of criminal justice expenditure 0.5 or less 0.5-1.0 1.0-2 .0 2 .0-3.0 3.0-4.0 Alaska Arizona Colorado New Jersey Alabama South Carolina California Connecticut Delaware New Mexico Arkansas Wyoming Hawaii Indiana Florida North Carolina Idaho Nevada Maryland Georgia Ohio Minnesota New York Massachusetts Illinois Oklahoma Missouri Rhode Island Michigan Iowa Oregon Nebraska Texas Kansas Pennsylvania New Hampshire Kentucky South Dakota North Dakota Louisiana Tennessee Utah Maine Vermont West Virginia Mississippi Virginia Wisconsin Montana Washington INTRODUCTION 17 In many States, statutes either require or permit local govern- ments to supplement the salary of State-paid judges of major trial courts. In the FY 1971 report, an attempt was made to count these judges and their total payroll only at the State level. However, this effort was not uniformly successful. There- fore, beginning with the FY 1972 report, judges actually re- ceiving a check from both the State and local governments were counted as part-time employees at both levels. Statistics Division, National Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Washington, D.C. 20531. ACKNOWLEDGMENT AVAILABILITY OF DATA In addition to this publication, data are also available on magnetic tape and computer printout. For details, contact the The Bureau of the Census is indebted to the many Federal, State, and local government officials who provided the infor- mation and gave other assistance for the preparation of this report. Section I. VARIABLE PASS-THROUGH DATA The data in this table were developed to comply with the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 as amended, which requires that the block grants made by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration to each State be allocated between the State and local governments according to the ratio of State-to-local law enforcement expenditure from their own revenue sources. The concept of "expenditure from own sources" specified in the law and used in the data collection means that the expenditure figures from which the State-to-local ratio was developed do not include amounts expended from revenue received from other govern- ments. For example, State or local government expenditure from sales or property tax revenue are included but not amounts expended from intergovernmental revenue, such as Federal grant monies. (It should be noted that this is the only table in this publication based on this concept. All other expenditure tables reflect expenditure from all sources.) Specifically for local government, any expenditure from revenue received from another local government, or received directly from the Federal Government or from the State government must be excluded. Likewise for State governments, expenditure from revenue received from local governments or from the Federal Government must be excluded. The following items were deducted from total criminal justice expenditure of local governments to arrive at local government expend- iture from own revenue sources: Revenue received directly from the Federal Government for criminal justice purposes. State payments to local governments for cirminal justice purposes, and payments from local government(s) to other local government(s) for criminal justice purposes. The same procedure was followed to arrive at State government expenditure from own revenue sources. Criminal justice revenue received directly from the Federal Government and local criminal justice payments to the State goverment were deducted from the total State expenditure for criminal justice. This procedure assumes that all intergovernmental payments received by a government will be expended during the same fiscal year they were received. While this may not be the case in a particular year, any discrepancy will cancel out over time. VARIABLE PASS-THROUGH DATA 19 Table 1. Percent distribution of total criminal justice expenditure from own sources of State and local governments, by State, fiscal year 1975 (Amounts in thousands of dollars) Expenc itures from own sources Percent distribution Item Total State-local ' State Local 1 State Local UNITED STATES, TOTAL . . . 13 599 116 119 531 64 741 177 083 58 813 2 094 267 162 679 187 934 38 181 193 176 557 781 239 117 55 101 34 761 698 387 201 958 110 075 110 617 126 357 191 240 39 658 311 420 412 339 610 330 181 762 77 836 237 770 32 749 69 170 70 156 33 109 589 283 54 551 1 979 499 261 940 20 125 520 997 98 142 145 186 657 809 48 712 124 445 25 397 190 956 530 134 48 668 25 237 273 807 210 132 54 338 224 591 17 069 4 385 122 44 650 53 660 55 018 26 763 565 172 65 490 100 786 29 143 207 249 84 066 17 547 14 051 184 713 72 538 41 350 50 478 56 319 67 469 21 150 167 035 121 460 160 740 47 006 36 230 60 441 12 486 26 383 20 346 12 353 157 747 26 723 466 727 148 933 6 617 173 409 38 162 51 808 210 120 26 551 61 219 10 968 65 343 151 791 22 806 18 740 138 423 79 712 24 630 75 013 7 588 9 213 994 74 881 11 081 122 065 32 050 1 529 095 97 189 87 148 9 038 193 176 350 532 155 051 37 554 20 710 513 674 129 420 68 725 60 139 70 038 123 771 18 508 144 385 290 879 449 590 134 756 41 606 177 329 20 263 42 787 49 810 20 756 431 536 27 828 1 512 772 113 007 13 508 347 588 59 980 93 378 447 689 22 161 63 226 14 429 125 613 378 343 25 862 6 497 135 384 130 420 29 708 149 578 9 481 32.2 37.4 82.9 31. 1 45.5 27.0 40.3 53.6 76.3 37.2 35.2 31.8 40.4 26.4 35.9 37.6 45.6 44.6 35.3 53.3 53.6 29.5 26.3 25.9 46.5 25.4 38.1 38.1 29.0 37.3 26.8 49.0 23.6 56.9 32.9 33.3 38.9 35.7 31.9 54.5 49.2 43.2 34.2 28.6 46.9 74.3 50.6 37.9 45.3 33.4 44.5 67.8 62.6 17. 1 68.9 54.5 73.0 59.7 46. 4 23.7 100.0 62.8 64.8 68.2 59.6 73.6 64. 1 62.4 54.4 55.4 LOUISIANA 64.7 46.7 46.4 70.5 73.7 74. 1 53.5 74.6 MONTANA 61.9 61.9 71.0 62.7 73.2 51.0 76.4 43. 1 67. 1 66.7 61.1 OREGON i . 64.3 PENNSYLVANIA 68. 1 45.5 50.8 56.8 TENNESSEE 65.8 71.4 53. 1 VERMONT 25.7 49.4 62. 1 WEST VIRGINIA 54.7 WISCONSIN 66.6 WYOMING 55.5 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. 1 Local governments data are estimates subject to sampling variation; see text for data limitations, Section II. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM SUMMARY DATA CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 21 Table 2. Percent distribution of expenditure for the criminal justice system, by level of government, fiscal year 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) nt dlsti lbutlou State governments TOTAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM'. DIRECT EXPENDITURE INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE POLICE PROTECTION 3 DIRECT EXPENDITURE INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE JUDICIAL 3 DIRECT EXPENDITURE INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION 3 DIRECT EXPENDITURE INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE PUBLIC DEFENSE 3 . OIRECT EXPENDITURE. . . . . . INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE CORRECTIONS 3 DIRECT EXPENDITURE INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE 3 .... DIRECT EXPENDITURE INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE 17 248 860 17 248 860 ( 3 ) ( 3 ) 2 067 664 2 067 664 ( 3 ) 933 126 933 126 ( 3 ) 280 270 280 270 ( 3 ) 3 843 313 3 843 313 ( 3 ) 338 325 338 325 ( 3 ) 2 187 875 1 464 244 1 460 625 3 61« 16 5 332 165 332 37 017 37 017 881 585 80 848 800 737 5 321 378 4 612 373 7 09 005 1 577 889 1 512 130 65 759 561 291 497 660 63 631 219 247 215 ^97 3 250 73 127 65 481 7 646 2 291 749 2 193 000 98 749 598 075 128 105 469 970 10 501 604 10 448 612 144 501 6 817 005 6 813 407 64 620 1 412 763 1 404 672 17 226 542 440 539 854 2 967 471 470 433 535 58 170 (X) 12.7 (X) (X) 14.9 (X) (X) 8.0 (X) (X) 19.0 (X) (X) 31.0 (X) (X) 5.6 (X) (X) 23.9 (x) (x) 26.7 (x) (X) 15.5 (X) (X) 24.1 (X) 23.1 (X) (x) 23.4 (X) (X) 57.1 (X) (X) 37.9 (X) (x) 60.6 (X) (X) 69.6 (X) (X) 67.9 (X) (x) 57.9 (X) (X) 45.6 (X) (X) 37.3 (X) (X) 38.2 (X) Nole Data Local ampling variatio rounds to - Represents zer X Not applicable. 1 Local governments data are 2 Data and percent distribut text. 3 The total line for each se avoid the artificial inflation which would r recipient govemment(s) ultimately expend(s) tes subject to sampling variation; see text for dat r total criminal justice system and other criminal al years 1971, 1972, 1973 and 1974 and for the total ice system, excludes duplicative intergovernmental expenditure amou mental expenditure amount for one government is tabulated and then rgovernmen tal expenditure lines are not totaled for the same reason Table 3. Percent distribution of employment and payrolls for the criminal justice system, by level of government, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) vity All governme rt.' Feder£ Governn 1 ent State governments Loca I Pel cent distribut ion Acti Federal State governments Local Kove.n nt TOTAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: 1 128 1 024 1 050 1 158 669 612 625 7 08 151 127 131 141 61 50 55 67 6 6 6 8 232 220 224 224 7 6 7 8 569 505 503 872 518 3; l 045 888 534 940 122 403 323 364 695 647 021 357 213 009 952 520 635 458 948 229 319 97 95 96 145 70 68 69 102 7 7 7 13 7 6 7 11 10 10 10 15 1 1 1 2 623 465 136 110 087 924 196 289 351 238 278 118 323 992 099 270 185 185 185 315 894 647 7 07 693 783 479 671 425 274 319 257 633 263 203 280 593 100 272 89 428 92 445 97 737 26 402 24 183 25 57R 37 372 13 122 11 950 12 334 15 615 2 602 2 518 2 547 3 057 128 523 126 196 126 933 123 252 3 398 3 358 3 371 3 561 756 671 691 733 499 453 463 508 117 96 99 90 40 31 35 40 3 3 3 4 92 84 96 85 2 2 2 2 657 407 159 169 159 969 404 862 781 519 132 632 95ft 381 931 810 860 318 625 841 592 109 «S0 690 277 111 187 333 ft. 7. 9.1 12.5 10.5 11.3 11.1 14.4 4.9 5.7 5.5 9.3 11.9 13.9 12.8 16.6 2.8 3.1 2.9 3.8 4.7 4.8 4.8 7.0 23.9 21.3 23.1 29.2 24. 3 25.2 25. 1 24.2 15.0 14.6 14.8 13.8 17.4 18.9 19.4 26.5 24. 4 23.7 22.3 23.1 39.1 41.8 40.1 37.2 55.4 57.1 56.5 54.9 45.6 48.3 46.6 42.8 67. 65.5 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT 65.8 63.3 POLICE PROTECTION: TOTAL EMPLOYEES ....... 74.5 74. 1 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT 74.1 71.8 JUDIC ial: 77.7 75.4 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT 75.1 64.2 LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION: 66.7 62.4 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT 64.9 60.3 PUBLIC DEFENSE: 58. 1 55.1 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT 57.0 58.9 CORRECTIONS: 39.9 38.1 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT 38.7 38.1 OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE: 30.5 30.4 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT 30.3 28.0 subject to sampling 22 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 4. Criminal justice system expenditure of the Federal Government, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) ital expenditur To State governments To lc governn FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GENERAL EXPENDITURE i ALL FUNCTIONS . . . . TOTAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM . . . , POLICE PROTECTION. TOTAL , THE congress: U.S. CAPITOL POLICE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS POLICE FORCE. . . , FEDERAL JUDICIARY: SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES POLICE FORCE , DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREi U.S. FOPEST service: COOPERATIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR: NATIONAL PARK SERVICE: U.S. PARK POLICE U.S. PARK RANGERS 2 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION ... FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ... IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE U.S. BORDER PATROL INVESTIGATION DIVISION U.S. MARSHAL? SERVICE 3 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION! FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION: AIRPORT POLICE U.S. COAST GUARD 2 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY: BUREAU OF ALCOHOLt TOBACCO, AND FIREARMS CONSOLIDATED FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER INTERNAL REVENUF SERVICE: INTELLIGENCE DIVISION INTERNAL SECURITY DIVISION OFFICE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE U.S. SECRET SERVICE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION: OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE MANAGEMENT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK POLICE . . . SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION POLICE FORCE. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE: POSTAL INSPECTION SERVICE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION: SECURITY DIVISION JUDICIAL, TOTAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE 3 rCHCRAi. ridh'tary: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. . U.S. COURT OF CLAIMS U.S. COURT OF CUSTOMS AND PATENT APPEALS U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS U.S. CUSTOMS COURT U.S. DISTRICT COURTS U.S. TAX COURT LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION, TOTAL . . DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: ANTITRUST DIVISION BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS CIVIL DIVISION CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION CRIMINAL DIVISION LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION . See footnot s tit end m table. 252 707 000 3 018 566 1 U6U 244 16 258 1 204 11 qnc, 14 162 125 820 416 740 51 147 27 137 12 425 3 056 23 901 93 934 10 7->2 424 287 i in 78 492 75 985 469 243 105 033 17 336 165 332 17 394 q 784 1 844 5 653 1 927 203 079 000 2 187 875 1 460 625 14 497 1 204 0', 999 10 433 77 275 16 767 698 10 97 1 I 254 1' 665 6 550 11 899 14 162 125 8?C 416 740 ■=■ 1 147 27 137 12 425 3 056 23 901 83 085 2 974 '""■ 934 10 772 n J u 287 614 78 492 75 985 469 !43 105 033 17 ',-■,,, 165 332 17 '■ ) '1 659 16 492 2 147 103 999 10 433 1 ' ■ 275 16 767 698 II 97 1 A 54 II 6 550 181 281 000 2 101 546 1 407 702 14 498 1 204 11 228 14 052 122 150 3°7 748 46 215 27 073 12 245 2 989 23 759 2 681 89 025 10 715 424 285 743 75 248 469 240 16 592 156 919 4 717 1 708 4 982 1 9)5 21 798 000 86 329 52 923 449 1< 1 "- .' 1 \ 02 141 5 352 71 683 16 660 684 in 959 a 226 16 '. \i\ 6 510 671 110 3 670 !8 99? 4 932 64 1 3 5 689 293 4 909 57 1 87 1 3 244 744 8 413 136 >.- 1 315 15 1 858 5 091 3 592 107 14 12 1 5] 40 49 628 000 830 691 3 619 1 311 35 451 000 735 546 14 177 000 95 145 3 619 1 311 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 4. Criminal justice system expenditure of the Federal Government, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) 23 Total Dii ect expenditure Intergov ernmental expenditure Item 1 Total Direct Capital Total To State To local current outlay governments governments LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION — CONTINUED DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE — CONTINUED 888 888 873 15 - - - 506 506 503 3 - - - OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND FINANCE. . . . 22 891 22 891 21 007 1 884 - - - OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 1 121 1 121 1 107 14 - - - OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL . 942 942 921 21 - - - EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF U.S. ATTORNEYS. . 76 094 76 094 74 874 1 220 - - - 594 594 576 18 - - - OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL .... 1 604 1 604 1 588 16 - - - OFFICE OF WATERGATE SPECIAL PROSECUTION 2 10 87 411 319 017 2 10 87 411 319 017 2 408 10 253 86 874 3 66 143 - " TAX DIVISION _ FEDERAL JUDICIARY: COMMUNITY DEFENDER ORGANIZATIONS. . . . 1 701 1 701 1 701 - - - - FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER ORGANIZATIONS . 3 465 3 465 3 322 143 - - - REPRESENTATION BY COURT-APPOINTED COUNSEL 10 394 10 394 10 394 COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION: 71 457 71 457 71 457 - - " - 213 113 216 778 196 009 20 769 26 33b " 26 335 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE , NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE: ADDICTION RESEARCH CENTER 1 960 1 960 1 852 108 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: 2 168 938 014 191 2 161 679 191 2 907 142 275 19 1 31 19 404 26 335 : 26 335 14 909 14 909 14 694 215 FEDERAL JUDICIARY: 35 101 35 101 34 090 1 Oil - " - 881 585 80 848 80 359 489 800 737 735 546 65 191 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH.' CENTER FOR STUDIES OF CRIME AND 9 373 6 809 6 809 - 2 564 2 309 255 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS: DIVISION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES. 10 795 10 795 10 520 275 - - - DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: 3 413 3 413 3 379 34 - - - LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION 5 85 1 4 1 545 970 439 53 4 1 372 970 489 53 264 4 898 1 489 108 72 798 173 733 237 64 936 - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. 'Data are based on a canvass of all Federal cri "Estimated criminal justice activities only. 'Total expenditure allocated to police protecti ■"Primarily focuses on matters of a civil nature tnal justice 3, judicial, see text for data and othe ll justi based nfor supplied by the U.S. Marshals ontrast to State and local programs which focus on criminal and civil matters. 5 Law Enforcement Assistance Administration data presented in the fifth (FY 1971), sixth (FY 1972), seventh (FY 1973), and eighth (FY 1974) reports in this series for total expenditure, total direct expenditure, direct current expenditure, total intergovernmental expenditure, intergovernmental expenditure to State governments, and intergovernmental expenditure to local governments are revised as follows: 1971 — $232,938, $10,831, $10,783, $222,107, $198,209 and $23,898; 1972— $379,230, $19,848, $19,801, $359,382, $325,068, and $34,314; 1973— $623,214, $33,602, $33,551, $589,612, $539,190, and $50,422; 1974— ' $769,429, $53,087, $53,070, $716,342, $655,180, and $61,162. Dollar amounts are in thousands. These revisions affect the "other criminal justice" total and criminal justice system total in these earlier reports. Revised figures for the Federal Government and the total for all levels of government are shown in text table A. ,'4 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 5. Criminal justice system employment and payrolls of the Federal Government, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Full-tin only Full-time equivalent Total October payroll FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT, ALL FUNCTIONS . „ . . . , TOTAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM , POLICE PROTECTION, TOTAL THE CONGRESS: U.S. CAPITOL POLICE , LIBRARY OF CONGRESS POLICE FORCE FEDERAL JUDICIARY: SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES POLICE FORCE . . . DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, U.S. FOREST SERVICE: COOPERATIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE: U.S. PARK POLICE U.S. PARK RANGERS 2 , DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION . FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE: U.S. BORDER PATROL INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE 3 , DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION: AIRPORT POLICE U.S. COAST GUARD 2 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY: BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, AND FIREARMS CONSOLIDATED FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE: INTELLIGENCE DIVISION INTERNAL SECURITY DIVISION OFFICE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE U.S. SECRET SERVICE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION: OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE MANAGEMENT . . . SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK POLICE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION POLICE FORCE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE: POSTAL INSPECTION SERVICE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION: SECURITY DIVISION JUOICIAL, TOTAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE 3 FEDERAL JUDICIARY: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES U.S. COURT OF CLAIMS U.S. COURT OF CUSTOMS AND PATENT APPEALS U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS U.S. CUSTOMS COURT U.S. DISTRICT COURTS U.S. TAX COURT See footnotes at end oi table. 2 889 698 97 623 70 087 1 104 100 655 1 545 4 080 19 i 7. 2 323 1 166 549 172 1 948 3 758 197 3 919 556 16 4 475 3 155 1 729 7 351 '\ 35 840 115 4 664 200 2 647 246 95 465 68 924 1 101 100 640 1 4l(-. 4 057 19 1 /O 2 218 1 141 490 171 1 948 3 711 107 3 826 556 13 786 3 155 3 753 30 41 5 4Q6 1 729 7 238 92 35 > 'JO 115 4 664 192 2 757 319 96 136 69 196 1 i 04 100 650 1 545 4 06 19 171 2 245 1 145 511 1 171 948 3 752 197 3 8 38 5 i( 16 13 866 3 155 1 729 7 278 58 234 92 35 840 115 4 664 195 3 583 761 145 110 102 289 1 3 36 108 830 997 7 687 29 281 3 583 1 824 645 201 1 294 5 905 272 22 315 5 359 44 33 1 413 13 118 4.-I 1.04 364 172 64 1 513 197 9 006 319 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 5. Criminal justice system employment and payrolls of the Federal Government, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) 25 Number of employe Full-time only Full-time equivalent Total October payroll 11 270 1 241 69 776 527 1 138 404 ',K 36 LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION, TOTAL .,.00 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: ANTITRUST DIVISION. . BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS CIVIL DIVISION , CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION . CRIMINAL DIVISION LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT ANO FINANCE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OFFICE OF WATERGATE SPECIAL PROSECUTION FORCE .... TAX DIVISION PUBLIC DEFENSE. TOTAL FEDERAL JUDICIARY: COMMUNITY DEFENDER ORGANIZATIONS FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTATION BY COURT-APPOINTED COUNSEL COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION: LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM CORRECTIONS, TOTAL DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE: ADDICTION RESEARCH CENTER (LEXINGTON, KY . ) DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: BOARD OF PAROLE BUREAU OF PRISONS ............ OFFICE OF THE PARDON ATTORNEY U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE 3 FEDERAL JUDICIARY: FEDERAL PROBATION SERVICE OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE, TOTAL DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH: CENTER FOR STUDIES OF CRIME AND DELINQUENCY .... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS: IV IS ION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: COMMUNITY RELATIONS SERVICE LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE 3 TEMPORARY STUDY COMMISSIONS ..... X Not applicable. 'Data are based on a canvass of all Federal criminal justice agenc: 2 Estimated criminal justice activities only. 3 Total employment and payroll allocated to police protection, judii supplied by the U.S. Marshals Service. 788 33 528 347 690 241 30 20 59 219 (X) 185 (X) (X) 10 894 129 7 612 2 376 1 783 120 839 220 735 33 492 332 661 234 30 20 39 444 (X) 185 (X) (X) 10 647 7 444 8 r ,fu; 2 376 1 479 102 757 196 text for data limitati rrections, and other cr 758 33 507 341 679 238 30 20 40 450 (x) 185 (X) (X) 10 707 7 477 8 613 2 376 1 671 1 14 795 2 04 61 759 (X) J15 (X) (X) 15 693 207 11 330 3 180 2 425 215 1 361 258 inal justice based 26 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 6. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total general expenditure Total criminal j ustice system Police pro tection Judicial State and type of government 1 Amount Percent of total general expenditure Amount 3 Percent of total criminal justice system Amount 3 Percent of total criminal justice system 170 119 961 138 302 913 85 048 297 32 744 225 54 283 380 2 203 895 2 049 795 744 491 252 348 534 473 979 189 797 754 360 101 184 341 177 915 1 549 836 1 459 718 737 644 310 005 434 234 1 092 731 1 135 590 300 629 135 162 166 828 18 131 786 15 271 687 10 625 620 6 569 270 4 228 620 1 854 008 1 616 188 840 732 299 070 555 092 3 190 625 1 930 237 1 715 113 1 750 200 510 072 514 979 117 501 37 666 80 010 1 328 336 1 328 366 1 368 780 4 985 835 4 528 405 2 313 696 1 118 721 1 212 583 2 956 316 2 764 481 998 769 569 347 528 899 1 349 514 1 082 473 295 270 74 755 220 515 533 946 536 390 153 457 98 475 73 487 15 060 987 5 321 378 10 501 604 3 896 347 6 696 801 149 497 64 070 95 654 34 230 61 926 67 877 56 327 12 694 2 475 11 958 201 958 63 660 142 873 71 108 72 093 70 353 34 288 40 792 18 652 22 599 2 234 343 636 845 1 685 361 987 457 719 902 188 406 84 322 115 379 23 144 92 415 205 342 111 660 99 831 100 034 45 341 32 377 14 187 4 768 9 420 200 378 200 378 200 378 634 052 268 454 376 634 182 680 194 120 282 758 115 805 182 342 97 405 87 268 58 777 20 569 39 745 10 354 29 397 40 979 18 348 23 928 13 158 11 066 8.9 3.8 12.3 11.9 12.3 6.8 3.1 12.8 13.6 11.6 6.9 7.1 3.5 1.3 6.7 13.0 4.4 19.4 22.9 16.6 6.4 3.0 13.6 13.8 13.5 12.3 4.2 15.9 15.0 17.0 10.2 5.2 13.7 7.7 16.6 6.4 5.8 5.8 5.7 8.9 6.3 12.1 12.7 11.8 15.1 15.1 14.6 12.7 5.9 16.3 16.3 16.0 9.6 4.2 18.3 17.1 16.5 4.4 1.9 13.5 13.9 13.3 7.7 3.4 15.6 13.4 15.1 8 325 537 1 577 889 6 817 005 1 303 993 5 574 033 89 348 22 396 67 139 11 128 56 024 27 090 16 734 10 483 1 789 10 433 117 976 32 671 85 312 19 532 65 846 36 732 10 969 25 829 6 383 19 613 1 137 706 23 "06 916 488 273 764 663 913 100 830 16 128 84 729 10 765 73 999 117 236 23 881 95 319 95 513 22 064 10 101 11 978 3 529 8 449 97 056 97 056 97 056 314 507 48 275 266 271 94 726 171 595 142 785 30 838 111 991 36 719 77 205 36 608 228 36 380 9 479 26 908 20 224 4 799 15 495 5 311 10 350 55.3 29.7 64.9 33.5 83.2 59.8 35.0 70.2 32.5 90.5 39.9 29.7 82.6 72.3 87.2 58.4 51.3 59.7 27.5 91.3 52.2 32.0 63.3 34.2 86.8 50.9 36.3 54.4 27.7 92.2 53.5 19.1 73.4 46.5 80.1 57.1 21.4 95.5 95.5 48.7 31.2 84.4 74.0 89.7 48.4 48.4 48.4 49.6 18.0 70.7 51.9 88.4 50.5 26.6 61.4 37.7 88.5 62.3 1.1 91.5 91.5 91.5 49.4 26.2 64.8 40.4 93.5 1 902 332 561 291 1 412 763 1 013 652 408 246 21 851 6 197 15 931 14 059 1 974 12 587 12 482 187 77 110 21 188 3 236 17 952 15 509 2 476 7 532 2 097 5 450 4 452 1 246 266 837 28 446 239 517 228 633 11 054 26 601 18 733 7 872 2 125 5 749 22 960 22 829 382 389 8 604 7 178 1 548 995 553 19 112 19 112 19 112 85 405 31 639 53 783 46 459 7 326 37 801 7 112 30 700 27 846 2 980 8 461 8 461 5 908 3 247 2 661 2 611 156 12.6 10.5 13.5 26.0 6.1 14.6 STATE 9.7 16.7 41.1 3.2 ALASKA. . . 18.5 STATE 22.2 1.5 3.1 0.9 10.5 STATE 5.1 12.6 21.8 3.4 ARKANSAS 10.7 STATE 6.1 13.4 23.9 5.5 11.9 STATE 4.5 14.2 23.2 1.5 14.1 STATE 22.2 6.8 9.2 6.2 11.2 STATE 20.4 0.4 0.4 19.0 STATE 22.2 10.9 COUNTIES 20.9 5.9 STATE 9.5 9.5 9.5 13.5 state 11. 8 14.3 25.4 MUNICIPALITIES 3.8 13.4 state 6.1 LOCAL, TOTAL 16.8 COUNTIES 28.6 MUNICIPALITIES 3.4 HAWAII 14.4 STATE 41.1 _ . 14.4 STATE 17.7 11.1 COUNTIES 19.8 1.4 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 27 Table 6. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal se prose rvices and =ution Publi c defense Cor •ections Other crim nal justice State and type of government 1 *«... Percent of total criminal justice system Amount 3 Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system 755 851 219 247 542 440 319 540 223 282 6 424 3 097 3 341 1 984 1 360 5 588 4 070 1 518 601 917 10 145 1 745 8 400 5 636 2 775 2 763 944 1 829 1 176 655 137 385 21 628 115 757 88 479 27 290 12 876 2 760 10 116 5 375 4 852 8 989 5 659 3 480 3 480 1 949 1 346 603 186 418 6 736 6 736 6 736 29 541 20 741 8 803 3 709 5 105 10 632 3 478 7 157 5 284 1 875 4 039 1 655 2 384 614 1 770 2 357 628 1 729 1 248 481 5.0 4.1 5.2 8.2 3.3 4.3 4.8 3.5 5.8 2.2 8.2 7.2 12.0 24.3 7.7 5.0 2.7 5.9 7.9 3.8 3.9 2.8 4.5 6.3 2.9 6.1 3.4 6.9 9.0 3.8 6.8 3.3 8.8 23.2 5.3 4.4 5.1 3.5 3.5 4.3 4.2 4.3 3.9 4.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 4.7 7.7 2.3 2.0 2.6 3.8 3.0 3.9 5.4 2.1 6.9 8.0 6.0 5.9 6.0 5.8 3.4 7.2 9.5 4.3 193 253 73 127 127 938 102 280 26 036 1 396 1 2"3 191 79 111 1 304 1 302 2 2 3 535 3 535 3 247 288 452 20 475 474 8 40 255 1 878 39 152 38 096 1 056 2 977 2 794 183 20 163 2 024 2 007 17 17 560 540 20 20 1 935 1 935 1 935 10 068 9 041 1 028 921 134 2 854 1 316 1 638 1 570 87 1 269 1 269 3 3 681 681 685 1 1.3 1.4 1.2 2.6 0.4 0.9 1.9 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.9 2.3 (Z) (Z> 1.8 2.5 4.6 0.4 0.6 0.1 1.2 2.5 (Z) 1.8 0.3 2.3 3.9 0.1 1.6 3.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 1.0 1.8 (Z) (Z) 1.2 1.7 0.1 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.6 3.4 0.3 0.5 0.1 1.0 1.1 0.9 1.6 0.1 2.2 6.2 (Z) (Z) 1.7 2.8 5.2 (Z) 3 626 535 2 291 749 1 471 470 1 091 552 400 153 29 246 21 889 8 953 6 966 2 372 20 738 20 717 505 8 497 43 786 20 341 23 445 23 169 492 20 951 13 755 7 200 6 166 1 068 630 900 299 087 366 194 352 138 14 682 41 209 31 167 10 043 3 719 6 356 52 529 52 323 206 207 11 361 11 361 73 114 73 114 73 114 184 802 145 802 39 077 30 461 8 692 86 306 56 185 30 569 25 948 4 873 7 862 6 916 946 227 719 10 770 7 851 2 931 2 877 69 24.1 43.1 14.0 28.0 6.0 19.6 34.2 9.4 20.3 3.8 30.6 36.3 4.0 0.3 4.2 21.7 32.0 16.4 32.6 0.7 29.8 40.1 17.6 33.1 4.7 28.2 47.0 21.7 35.7 2.0 21.9 37.0 8.7 16.1 6.9 25.6 46.9 0.2 0.2 25.1 35.1 36.5 36.5 36.5 29.1 54.3 10.4 16.7 4.5 30.5 48.5 16.8 26.6 5.6 13.4 33.6 2.4 2.2 2.4 26.3 42.8 12.2 21.9 0.6 257 478 598 075 129 988 65 330 65 050 1 233 9 248 99 14 85 570 1 022 5 329 5 667 4 229 4 014 215 1 924 6 503 9 9 21 260 54 900 8 252 6 346 1 907 3 912 12 740 2 435 1 140 1 297 1 605 4 961 428 428 803 1 851 38 38 2 425 2 425 2 425 9 729 12 956 7 673 6 405 1 268 2 379 16 876 287 38 249 538 2 040 32 32 1 039 1 823 432 426 9 1.7 11.2 COUNTIES 1.2 1.7 MUNICIPALITIES 1.0 0.8 STATE 14.4 0.1 (Z) 0.1 0.8 STATE 1.8 MUNICIPALITIES - ARIZONA 2.6 8.9 3.0 5.6 MUNICIPALITIES 0.3 2.7 19.0 (Z) (Z) 1.0 STATE 8.6 0.5 COUNTIES 0.6 MUNICIPALITIES 0.3 COLORADO 2.1 STATE 15.1 2.1 COUNTIES. . . 4.9 1.4 0.8 STATE 4.4 0.4 0.4 DELAWARE 1.8 5.7 0.3 COUNTIES 0.8 (Z) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE 1.2 MUNICIPALITIES 1.2 1.2 Florida 1.5 4.8 LOCAL, TOTAL 2.0 3.5 MUNICIPALITIES 0.7 0.8 STATE 14.6 0.2 (Z) MUNICIPALITIES 0.3 0.9 9.9 0.1 0.3 MUNICIPALITIES . 2.5 9.9 1.8 COUNTIES 3.2 MUNICIPALITIES 0.1 it end of table 28 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 6. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) State and type of Tota L Ken 3ral expendit 7 370 931 7 119 197 ? 8.11 ?03 74* 923 2 114 513 ? 88? 0^4 ? 706 998 1 ?75 938 544 02? 751 446 1 968 287 1 770 611 860 758 44? 718 440 04? 1 478 810 1 228 422 604 728 ?56 009 370 98? 2 120 812 ? 03? 510 5 38 170 183 676 370 Obi ? 53? 05? ? 585 136 776 215 333 507 470 860 857 188 736 675 323 ?08 12 235 324 403 u 9?4 111 3 136 475 3 123 957 2 118 591 1 060 529 A 683 017 "J ^60 815 4 169 978 129 579 4 174 804 7 431 578 6 499 624 3 181 356 1 221 834 2 102 570 3 14? 140 ? 918 ?45 1 615 262 854 050 809 090 1 439 665 1 433 630 5?5 305 31 1 916 215 837 ? 569 004 ? 219 8?0 996 6/9 ?8 C . 850 74 1 52? 545 700 476 517 186 Q05 174 774 73 4V5 Percent o :otal gener Police protect! Percent total criir ILLINOIS , STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL. . , COUNTIES. . . , MUNICIPALITIES, INDIANA , STATE , local, total. . , counties. . . , municipalities, iowa. ...,.., state local, total. . , counties. . . , municipalities, KANSAS , STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . , COUNTIES. . . , MUNICIPALITIES, KENTUCKY , STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL. . , COUNTIES. . . , MUNICIPALITIES, LOUISIANA STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL. . , PARISHES. . . , MUNICIPALITIES, MAINE STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL. . , COUNTIES. . . , MUNICIPALITIES, MARYLAND STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . , COUNTIES. . . , MUNICIPALITIES, MASSACHUSETTS . . , STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL. . , COUNTIES. . . , MUNICIPALITIES, MICHIGAN , STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL. . COUNTIES. . . MUNICIPALITIES, MINNESOTA .... STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . COUNTIES. . . MUNICIPALITIES MISSISSIPPI . . STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . COUNTIES. . . MUNICIPALITIES MISSOURI STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . COUNTIES. . . MUNICIPALITIES MONTANA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . COUNTIES. . . MUNICIPALITIES 778 322 217 121 589 564 172 166 423 997 223 026 91 121 146 431 48 797 97 923 125 689 54 040 77 428 35 406 43 382 121 155 58 127 69 869 30 518 40 589 154 555 67 785 97 601 46 342 52 353 226 36? 86 974 153 850 62 609 91 527 45 911 25 300 22 612 6 8?7 16 149 346 097 190 258 19? 679 9 7 447 95 59? 472 711 143 465 345 327 68 172 ?78 911 675 409 200 96? 513 311 191 686 528 763 203 021 64 505 148 760 71 500 79 962 87 209 4 3 440 46 815 20 ?75 26 699 ?72 022 86 ?76 197 70? 54 056 144 4?9 38 793 16 85 8 23 300 12 085 10 50 3 10.6 3.0 21.0 23.1 20.1 7.7 3.4 11.5 9.0 13.0 6,4 3.1 8.9 8,0 9.9 8.2 4.7 11.6 11.9 10.7 7,3 3.3 18.1 25.2 14.1 8,9 3.4 19.8 18.8 19.4 5.4 3.4 7.0 55.8 5.0 7.0 6.1 6.2 4.6 9.0 7.1 3.3 8.3 52.6 6.7 9.1 3.1 16.1 15.6 15.6 6,5 2.2 9.2 6.1 3.0 8.9 6.5 12.4 10.6 3.9 19.8 18.9 19.4 7.1 3.5 12.5 7.4 14.3 513 159 63 807 452 018 39 895 412 887 131 775 33 409 98 371 15 238 83 156 68 954 19 107 49 935 9 435 41 094 55 592 11 154 44 462 9 529 36 098 85 285 24 116 62 822 17 859 45 509 135 579 32 889 102 759 38 066 64 847 25 982 8 297 17 686 2 283 15 427 185 916 62 904 147 569 71 654 76 271 281 883 40 860 242 663 1 135 241 561 391 059 66 905 326 131 44 151 285 807 110 812 22 184 92 748 22 242 71 704 53 383 20 267 33 133 8 652 24 537 164 416 24 603 140 243 20 704 120 216 19 400! 4 189 15 271 5 919 9 493 65.9 29.4 76.7 23.2 97.4 59.1 36.7 67.2 31.2 84.9 54.8 35.4 64.4 26.6 94.7 45.9 19.2 63.6 31.2 88.9 55.2 35.6 64. 4| 38.5! 86.9 59.9 37.8 66.8 60.8 70.9 56.6 32.8 78.2 33.4 95.5 53.7 33.1 76.6 73.5 79.8 59.6 28.5 70.3 57.9 33.3 63.5 23.0 86.9 54.6 34.4 62.3 31.1 89.7 61.2 46.7 70.8 42.7 91.9 60.4 28.5 70.9 38.3 83.2 50.0 24.8 65.5 45.6 90.4 87 365 30 340 57 034 56 847 437 24 386 5 009 19 853 14 122 5 896 17 794 5 918 11 921 12 324 25 15 927 5 377 10 551 9 3181 1 248| 19 288| 6 588 12 818 10 462 2 359 29 102 5 615 23 547 12 155 11 392 6 115 3 714 2 52° 2 Ml 23? 35 422 21 018 15 430 9 998 5 436 62 368 12 646 52 136 37 054 16 786 94 065 IS 719 78 2 40 58 700 21 242 27 ?47 4 72? 2? 542 21 939 911 10 797 2 960 7 84^ 7 23? 614 35 109 12 306 2 3 246 15 230 8 05? 4 544 1 135 3 409 3 066 3.UI 11.2 14.0 9.7 33.0 0.1 10.9 5.5 13.6 28.9 6.0 14.2 11.0 15.4 34.8 0.1 13.1 9.3 15.1 30.5 3.1 12.5 9.7 13.1 22.6 4.5 12.9 6.5 15.3 19.4 12.4 13.3 14.7 11.2 36.8 1.4 10.2 11.0 8.0 10.3 5.7 13.2 8.8 15.1 54.4 6.0 13.9 9.3 15.2 30.6 6.5 13.4 7.3 15.2 30.7 1.1 12.4 6.8 16.8 35.7 2.3 12." 14.3 11.8 28.2 5.6 11.7 6.7 14.6 23.6 3.3 See footnotes at CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 6. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) 29 Legal s pros ervices and ecution Publi c defense Cor rections Other cri ninal justice State and type of government 1 Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount 3 Percent of total criminal justice system Amount 3 Percent of total criminal justice system ILLINOIS 35 892 10 183 27 204 18 133 9 072 10 406 4 214 6 232 3 479 2 761 6 607 1 836 4 771 3 310 1 495 8 557 3 745 4 813 3 376 1 438 9 074 4 007 5 067 3 066 2 001 10 862 5 420 5 442 2 784 2 667 2 020 1 423 598 225 374 12 977 1 791 11 186 6 194 4 991 16 567 5 216 11 355 2 883 8 472 34 012 7 422 26 593 17 254 9 384 11 323 1 934 9 389 5 544 3 858 3 581 1 788 1 793 1 123 670 11 350 1 551 9 799 4 983 4 819 2 541 655 1 886 1 483 403 4.6 4.7 4.6 10.5 2.1 4.7 4.6 4.3 7.1 2.8 5.3 3.4 6.2 9.3 3.4 7.1 6.4 6.9 11.1 3.5 5.9 5.9 5.2 6.6 3.8 4.8 6.2 3.5 4.4 2.9 4.4 5.6 2.6 3.3 2.3 3.7 0,9 5.8 6.4 5.2 3.5 3.6 3.3 4.2 3.0 5.0 3.7 5.2 9.0 2.9 5.6 3.0 6.3 7.8 4.8 4.1 4.1 3.8 5.5 2.5 4.2 1.8 5.0 9.2 3.3 6.6 3.9 8.1 11.4 3.8 7 393 1 712 5 681 5 660 21 1 797 252 1 545 1 335 214 1 736 18 1 718 1 746 1 507 1 337 170 153 18 1 083 1 890 444 450 45 1 169 1 169 691 484 411 150 261 259 2 5 579 5 569 10 10 5 100 3 095 2 083 2 074 9 12 490 6 532 11 437 9 559 1 878 2 172 335 1 838 1 920 113 594 594 551 42 2 067 1 781 286 36 250 381 381 370 11 0.9 0.8 1.0 3.3 (Z) 0.8 0.3 1.1 2.7 0.2 1.4 6 296 4 449 1 849 1 844 59 60 169 39 968 23 796 19 812 4 645 107 776 59 802 47 987 42 081 6 618 12 943 10 938 2 676 2 642 100 8 822 8 775 47 34 13 87 544 74 491 22 290 8 513 14 427 65 017 47 658 19 698 13 713 2 827 16 863 11 229 5 634 5 628 200 60 631 46 563 14 828 14 848 53 4 420 3 583 848 643 221 21.4 30.4 11.5 22.0 0.7 28.4 49.6 16.4 35.8 5.1 18.1 31.0 11.2 24.8 2.5 22.7 39.8 7.8 19.6 0.5 32.8 43.6 0.7 13.9 0.2 29.8 47.4 13.9 13.5 14.6 28.5 51.9 13.5 25.6 3.7 26.2 35.5 15.7 29.6 1.2 23.1 51.3 8.1 20.5 (Z) 21.9 36.0 7.2 11.3 3.5 916 2 136 2 2 8 3 038 10 739 1 911 1 051 865 27 337 46 013 6 889 5 381 1 554 809 4 202 440 550 12 11 1 4 224 11 241 2 134 367 1 769 2 636 7 639 1 421 611 810 1 006 3 244 292 218 74 5 083 10 291 265 180 84 231 1 790 32 9 23 3.1 STATE 14.6 (Z) (Z) MUNICIPALITIES . . . 0.1 TENNESSEE 1.4 13.3 1.3 1.9 MUNICIPALITIES 0.9 TEXAS 4.6 STATE 23.9 1.6 3.2 MUNICIPALITIES 0.6 STATE . . . . 1.4 15.3 1.6 2.7 0.2 4.5 (Z) 1.4 STATE 7.2 1.3 0.6 1.8 1.2 8.3 1.0 0.8 1.1 1.6 10.3 0.8 1.1 MUNICIPALITIES 0.4 1.9 11.3 0.1 COUNTIES. , 0.2 MUNICIPALITIES 0.1 1.1 18.0 0.3 0.2 0.4 34 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure 2 Total criminal justice system Police protection Judi cial State and type of government Amount Percent of total direct expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system 170 119 961 86 335 299 83 784 662 30 903 381 52 881 277 2 203 895 1 462 070 741 825 221 877 519 948 979 189 619 192 359 997 182 456 177 541 1 549 836 815 300 734 536 301 253 433 263 1 092 731 792 781 299 950 134 273 165 678 18 131 786 7 827 715 10 304 071 6 169 399 4 134 672 1 854 008 1 013 276 840 732 290 910 549 822 3 190 625 1 476 653 1 713 972 1 713 972 510 Oli 392 571 117 501 37 499 80 001 1 328 336 1 328 336 1 328 336 4 985 835 2 682 540 2 303 295 1 094 026 1 209 269 2 956 316 1 959 984 996 332 475 988 520 343 1 349 514 1 059 320 290 194 74 616 215 578 533 946 380 887 153 059 79 699 73 359 15 060 987 4 612 373 10 448 613 3 828 436 6 620 178 149 497 54 358 95 140 34 053 61 087 67 877 55 315 12 562 650 11 912 201 958 59 092 142 866 71 065 71 801 70 353 29 672 40 681 18 513 22 169 2 234 343 555 630 1 678 713 980 319 698 394 188 406 73 033 115 373 23 026 92 347 205 342 106 195 99 147 99 147 45 341 31 169 14 172 4 753 9 419 200 378 200 378 200 378 634 052 257 554 376 498 182 568 193 930 282 758 100 527 182 231 95 447 86 784 58 777 19 035 39 742 10 345 29 397 40 979 17 066 23 913 13 128 10 786 8.9 5.3 12.5 12.4 12.5 6.8 3.7 12.8 15.3 11.7 6.9 8.9 3.5 0.4 6.7 13.0 7.2 19.4 23.6 16.6 6.4 3.7 13.6 13.8 13.4 12.3 7.1 16.3 15.9 16.9 10.2 7.2 13.7 7.9 16.8 6.4 7.2 5.8 5.8 8.9 7.9 12.1 12.7 11.8 15.1 15.1 15.1 12.7 9.6 16.3 16.7 16.0 9.6 5.1 18.3 20.1 16.7 4.4 1.8 13.7 13.9 13.6 7.7 4.5 15.6 16.5 14.7 8 325 537 1 512 130 6 813 407 1 294 838 5 518 569 89 348 22 387 66 961 10 986 55 975 27 090 16 616 10 474 50 10 424 117 976 32 671 85 305 19 516 65 788 36 732 10 941 25 791 6 362 19 429 1 137 706 221 591 916 115 273 270 642 845 100 830 16 102 84 728 10 765 73 964 117 236 22 596 94 640 94 640 22 064 10 101 11 963 3 514 8 449 97 056 97 056 97 056 314 507 48 275 266 232 94 722 171 510 142 785 30 838 111 947 34 915 77 032 36 608 228 36 380 9 472 26 908 20 224 4 732 15 492 5 308 10 184 55.3 32.8 65.2 33.8 83.4 59.8 41.2 70.4 32.3 91.6 39.9 30.0 83.4 7.6 87.5 58.4 55.3 59.7 27.5 91.6 52.2 36.9 63.4 34.4 87.6 50.9 39.9 54.6 27.9 92.0 53.5 22.0 73.4 46.8 80.1 57.1 21.3 95.5 95.5 48.7 32.4 84.4 73.9 89.7 48.4 48.4 48.4 49.6 18.7 70.7 51.9 88.4 50.5 30.7 61.4 36.6 88.8 62.3 1.2 91.5 91.6 91.5 49.4 27.7 64.8 40.4 94.4 1 902 332 497 660 1 404 672 1 006 601 398 072 21 851 6 197 15 654 14 059 1 594 12 587 12 482 105 105 21 188 3 236 17 952 15 485 2 467 7 532 2 097 5 435 4 386 1 049 266 837 27 546 239 291 228 245 11 046 26 601 18 733 7 868 2 120 5 747 22 960 22 580 380 380 8 604 7 056 1 548 995 553 19 112 19 112 19 112 85 405 31 639 53 766 46 442 7 323 37 801 7 112 30 689 27 793 2 897 8 461 8 461 5 908 3 247 2 661 2 606 55 12.6 10.8 COUNTIES 13.4 26.3 6.0 14.6 STATE 11.4 16.5 COUNTIES 41.3 MUNICIPALITIES 2.6 ALASKA 18,5 STATE 22.6 0.8 BOROUGHS MUNICIPALITIES 0.9 ARIZONA 10.5 STATE 5.5 12.6 21.8 3.4 10.7 STATE 7.1 13.4 COUNTIES 23.7 MUNICIPALITIES 4.7 11.9 state 5.0 14.3 COUNTIES 23.3 MUNICIPALITIES 1.6 14.1 STATE 25.7 6.8 9.2 MUNICIPALITIES 6.2 CONNECTICUT 11.2 STATE 21.3 LOCAL, TOTAL 0.4 MUNICIPALITIES 0.4 19.0 STATE 22.6 10.9 20.9 MUNICIPALITIES 5.9 STATE 9.5 9.5 MUNICIPALITIES 9.5 13.5 12.3 14.3 25.4 MUNICIPALITIES 3.8 13.4 STATE 7.1 16.8 29.1 MUNICIPALITIES 3.3 14.4 STATE 44.4 COUNTIES _ MUNICIPALITIES _ 14.4 19.0 11.1 COUNTIES 19.9 MUNICIPALITIES 0.5 end '*i table CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) 35 Legal se pros rvices and ecutlon Public defense Corrections Other cri minal justice State and type of government Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal Justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system 755 851 215 997 539 854 316 765 223 090 6 424 3 097 3 327 1 984 1 344 5 588 4 070 1 518 601 917 10 145 1 745 8 400 5 636 2 764 2 763 944 1 819 1 176 643 137 385 21 628 115 757 88 478 27 279 12 876 2 760 10 116 5 264 4 852 8 989 5 512 3 477 3 477 1 949 1 346 603 186 417 6 736 6 736 6 736 29 541 20 741 8 800 3 701 5 100 10 632 3 478 7 154 5 279 1 875 4 039 1 655 2 384 614 1 770 2 357 628 1 729 1 248 481 5.0 4.7 5.2 8.3 3.4 4.3 5.7 3.5 5.8 2.2 8.2 7.4 12.1 92.4 7.7 5.0 3.0 5.9 7,9 3.8 3.9 3.2 4.5 6.4 2.9 6.1 3.9 6.9 9.0 3.9 6,8 3.8 8.8 22.9 5.3 4.4 5.2 3.5 3.5 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.9 4.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 4.7 8.1 2.3 2.0 2.6 3.8 3.5 3.9 5.5 2.2 6.9 6.7 6.0 5.9 6.0 5.8 3.7 7.2 9.5 4.5 193 253 65 481 127 772 101 901 25 871 1 396 1 243 153 71 82 1 304 1 302 2 2 3 535 3 535 3 247 288 452 20 432 430 1 40 255 1 103 39 152 38 096 1 056 2 977 2 794 183 20 163 2 024 2 007 17 17 560 540 20 20 1 935 1 935 1 935 10 068 9 041 1 027 917 no 2 854 1 221 1 633 1 546 87 1 269 1 269 681 681 680 1 1.3 1.4 1.2 2.7 0.4 0.9 2.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.9 2.4 0.3 0.9 2.7 0.1 0.3 STATE COUNTIES COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES STATE 2.5 3.6 1.8 3.2 0.1 STATE 36 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure 2 Total criminal justice system Police pro tection Judi :ial State and type of government Amount Percent of total direct expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount 87 365 30 332 57 033 56 596 437 24 386 4 635 19 751 13 883 5 868 17 794 5 918 11 876 11 870 6 15 927 5 377 10 550 9 302 1 248 19 288 6 470 12 818 10 462 2 356 29 162 5 615 23 547 12 155 11 392 6 115 3 586 2 529 2 511 18 35 422 19 992 15 430 9 994 5 436 62 368 11 215 51 153 37 043 14 111 94 065 16 224 77 841 58 121 19 720 27 247 4 722 22 525 21 646 879 10 797 2 960 7 837 7 228 609 35 109 11 891 23 218 15 167 8 051 4 544 1 135 3 409 3 065 344 Percent of total criminal justice system ILLINOIS 7 370 931 4 563 210 2 807 721 726 765 2 080 955 2 882 074 1 608 716 1 273 358 528 924 744 434 1 968 287 1 126 829 841 458 402 710 438 748 1 478 810 876 814 601 996 223 835 378 160 2 120 812 1 584 737 536 075 175 614 360 461 2 532 052 1 765 326 766 726 297 692 469 034 857 188 535 166 322 022 11 997 310 025 4 924 111 1 813 573 3 110 538 2 050 268 1 060 270 6 683 017 3 Oil 904 3 671 113 124 295 3 546 818 7 431 578 4 268 921 3 162 657 1 191 444 1 971 213 3 142 110 1 541 790 1 600 350 831 434 768 915 1 439 665 920 519 519 146 305 586 213 560 2 569 004 1 574 299 994 705 260 927 733 778 545 700 361 382 184 318 110 975 73 343 778 322 188 810 589 512 166 329 423 183 223 026 78 339 144 688 47 192 97 496 125 689 43 954 76 735 34 062 42 673 121 155 51 325 69 830 30 478 39 352 154 555 56 979 97 576 45 818 51 759 226 362 72 528 153 834 62 541 91 293 45 911 23 301 22 610 6 813 15 797 346 097 153 723 192 373 96 852 95 521 472 711 128 376 344 335 68 148 276 187 675 409 166 256 509 152 186 420 322 732 203 024 54 389 148 635 69 877 78 758 87 209 40 416 46 794 20 258 26 535 272 022 74 446 197 576 53 802 143 774 38 793 15 498 23 295 12 960 10 334 10.6 4.1 21.0 22.9 20.3 7.7 4.9 11.4 8.9 13.1 6.4 4.3 9.1 8.5 9.7 8.2 5.9 11.6 13.6 10.4 7.3 3.6 18.2 26.1 14.4 8.9 4.1 20.1 21.0 19.5 5.4 4.4 7.0 56.8 5.1 7.0 8.5 6.2 4.7 9.0 7.1 4.3 9.4 54.8 7.8 9.1 3.9 16.1 15.6 16.4 6.5 3.5 9.3 8.4 10.2 6.1 4.4 9.0 6.6 12." 10.6 4.7 19.9 20.6 19.6 7.1 4.3 12.6 11.7 14.1 513 159 61 186 451 973 39 833 412 140 131 775 33 409 98 366 15 231 83 135 68 954 19 032 49 922 9 426 40 495 55 592 11 154 44 438 9 511 34 927 85 285 22 463 62 822 17 383 45 439 135 579 32 835 102 744 38 027 64 717 25 982 8 297 17 685 2 282 15 403 185 916 38 653 147 263 71 064 76 199 281 883 39 220 242 663 1 131 241 532 391 059 64 954 326 105 43 962 282 143 110 812 18 087 92 725 22 082 70 643 53 383 20 267 33 116 8 641 24 476 164 416 24 188 140 228 20 639 119 589 19 400 4 134 15 266 5 917 9 349 65.9 32.4 76.7 23.9 97.4 59.1 42.6 68.0 32.3 85.3 54.8 38.9 65.0 27.6 94.9 45.9 21.7 63.6 31.2 88.8 55.2 39.4 64.4 37.9 87.8 59.9 45.3 66.8 60.8 70.9 56.6 35.6 78.2 33.5 97.5 53.7 25.1 76.6 73.4 79.8 59.6 30.6 70.5 1.7 87.5 57.9 39.1 64.0 23.6 87.4 54.6 33.3 62.4 31.6 89.7 61.2 50.1 70.8 42.7 92.2 60.4 32.5 71.0 38.4 83.2 50.0 26.7 65.5 45.7 90.5 11.2 STATE 16.1 9.7 34.0 0.1 10.9 STATE 5.9 13.7 29.4 MUNICIPALITIES 6.0 14.2 12.1 15.5 34.8 (Z) 13.1 STATE 10.5 15.1 30.5 3.2 KENTUCKY 12.5 STATE 11.4 13.1 22.8 4.6 12.9 STATE 7.7 15.3 19.4 12.5 13.3 STATE 15.4 11.2 36.9 0.1 10.2 STATE 13.0 8.0 10.3 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 5.7 13.2 STATE 8.7 14.9 54.4 MUNICIPALITIES 5.1 13.9 STATE 9.8 15.3 COUNTIES 31.2 6.1 13.4 STATE 8.7 15.2 31.0 MUNICIPALITIES 1.1 12.4 STATE 7.3 LOCAL, TOTAL 16.7 35.7 2.3 12.9 STATE 16.0 11.8 28.2 5.6 11.7 STATE 7.3 LOCAL, TOTAL 14.6 COUNTIES 23.6 3.3 it end or table CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) 37 Legal se rvices and edition Public defense Cor -ections Other cri minal justice State and type of government Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system ILLINOIS , 35 892 8 688 27 204 18 132 9 072 10 406 4 214 6 192 3 449 2 743 6 607 1 836 4 771 3 310 1 462 8 557 3 745 4 812 3 374 1 438 9 074 4 007 5 067 3 066 2 001 10 862 5 420 5 442 2 783 2 659 2 020 1 423 597 224 373 12 977 1 791 11 186 6 194 4 991 16 567 5 216 11 351 2 879 8 472 34 012 7 422 26 590 17 205 9 384 11 323 1 934 9 389 5 543 3 846 3 581 1 788 1 793 1 123 670 11 350 1 551 9 799 4 980 4 819 2 541 655 1 886 1 483 403 4.6 4.6 4.6 10.9 2.1 4.7 5.4 4.3 7.3 2.8 5.3 3.8 6.2 9.7 3.4 7.1 7.3 6.9 11.1 3.7 5.9 7.0 5.2 6.7 3.9 4.8 7.5 3.5 4.4 2.9 4.4 6.1 2.6 3.3 2.4 3,7 1.2 5.8 6.4 5.2 3.5 4.1 3.3 4.2 3.1 5.0 4.5 5.2 9.2 2.9 5.6 3.6 6.3 7.9 4.9 4.1 4.4 3.8 5.5 2.5 4.2 2.1 5.0 9.3 3.4 6.6 4.2 8.1 11.4 3.9 7 393 1 712 5 681 5 660 21 1 797 252 1 545 1 332 214 1 736 18 1 718 1 718 1 507 1 337 170 152 18 1 083 664 419 419 1 169 1 169 685 484 411 150 261 259 2 5 579 5 569 10 10 5 100 3 017 2 083 2 074 9 12 490 1 060 11 430 9 551 1 878 2 172 335 1 837 1 747 90 594 594 551 42 2 067 1 781 286 36 250 381 381 370 11 0.9 0.9 1.0 3.4 (Z) 0.8 0.3 1.1 2.8 0.2 1.4 (Z) 2.2 5.0 1.2 2.6 0.2 0.5 (Z) 0.7 1.2 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.8 1.1 0.5 0.9 0.6 1.2 3.8 (Z) 1.6 3.6 (Z) (Z) 1.1 2.4 0.6 3.0 (Z) 1.8 0.6 2.2 5.1 0.6 1.1 0.6 1.2 2.5 0.1 0.7 1.3 2.7 0.2 0.8 2.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.0 1.6 2.9 0.1 127 490 83 616 43 874 43 005 869 50 029 33 910 16 119 11 992 4 128 29 086 21 655 7 431 7 268 163 36 900 28 845 8 055 7 320 735 32 359 22 790 9 569 7 632 1 937 48 177 27 840 20 337 8 738 11 599 10 449 8 976 1 473 1 473 99 870 84 272 15 598 7 874 7 724 97 347 63 364 33 983 24 946 9 037 134 851 69 967 64 884 56 399 8 485 47 852 27 623 20 229 18 470 1 759 17 237 14 067 3 170 2 459 711 55 475 34 015 21 460 11 303 10 158 10 927 8 712 2 215 1 994 221 16.4 44.3 7.4 25.9 0.2 22.4 43.3 11.1 25.4 4.2 23.1 44.2 9.7 21.3 0.4 30.5 56.2 11.5 24.0 1.9 20.9 40.0 9.8 16.7 3.7 21.3 38.4 13.2 14.0 12.7 22.8 38.5 6.5 21.6 28.9 54.8 8.1 8.1 8.1 20.6 49.4 9.9 36.6 3.3 20.0 42.1 12.7 30.3 2.6 23.6 50.8 13.6 26.4 2.2 19.8 34.8 6.8 12.1 2.7 20.4 45.7 10.9 21.0 7.1 28.2 56.2 9.5 15.4 2.1 7 023 3 276 3 747 3 102 645 4 633 1 919 2 715 1 306 1 409 1 512 495 1 017 470 547 2 672 867 1 805 819 986 7 468 585 6 883 6 856 27 1 414 818 596 154 442 933 869 64 63 1 6 333 3 446 2 887 1 716 1 171 9 446 6 344 3 102 75 3 027 8 932 6 629 2 303 1 182 1 121 3 618 1 688 1 930 389 1 541 1 617 1 334 284 256 28 3 605 1 020 2 585 1 677 908 1 000 862 138 132 6 1.7 0.6 2.1 2.4 1.9 2.8 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.3 2.2 1.7 2.6 2.7 2.5 STATE .... STATE MUNICIPALITIES KENTUCKY 1.0 7.1 15.0 0.1 MUNICIPALITIES 0.2 0.5 2.0 3.7 COUNTIES 0.9 (Z) 1.8 MARYLAND 1.5 1.8 1.2 2.0 4.9 0.9 0.1 1.1 1.3 4.0 0.5 0.6 0.3 1.8 3.1 1.3 0.6 2.0 1.9 3.3 0.6 1.3 0.1 1.3 1.4 1.3 3.1 0.6 2.6 5.6 0.6 1.0 0.1 MICHIGAN MUNICIPALITIES LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES STATE MONTANA 38 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure 2 Total criminal ustice system Police pr Dtection Jud icial State and type of government — Percent of total direct Amount Percent of total criminal justice system At unt Percent of total criminal justice system NEBRASKA 1 097 325 595 195 502 130 210 792 291 337 574 148 290 807 283 341 194 033 89 308 602 860 350 854 252 006 28 427 223 580 5 918 486 2 669 094 3 249 392 1 245 885 2 003 507 784 556 550 781 233 775 71 351 162 424 24 328 192 7 122 163 17 206 029 3 420 621 13 785 408 4 397 185 1 773 204 2 623 981 2 080 335 543 646 473 588 342 138 131 450 60 768 70 682 6 674 781 3 495 045 3 179 736 1 222 775 1 956 961 1 733 396 1 121 042 612 354 185 760 426 595 1 746 158 1 122 482 623 676 314 713 308 963 7 919 397 5 348 806 2 570 591 700 975 1 869 616 943 034 521 571 421 463 421 462 1 789 437 1 364 152 425 285 282 095 143 190 77 467 29 004 48 463 19 794 28 669 76 371 22 116 54 255 39 057 15 198 37 411 13 731 23 679 5 635 18 044 646 367 162 248 484 119 153 000 331 119 63 050 29 545 33 505 7 619 25 887 2 061 406 424 742 1 636 664 353 115 1 283 549 290 414 156 632 133 783 53 469 80 313 23 775 8 219 15 556 7 268 8 288 611 165 183 594 427 572 142 741 284 830 115 964 52 003 63 961 17 412 46 549 165 492 60 748 104 744 58 618 46 126 751 287 233 Oil 518 276 115 944 402 332 55 042 27 377 27 665 27 665 146 297 69 032 77 265 45 323 31 942 7.1 4.9 9.7 9.4 9.8 13.3 7.6 19.1 20.1 17.0 6.2 3.9 9.4 19.8 8.1 10.9 6.1 14,9 12.3 16.5 8.0 5.4 14.3 10.7 15.9 8.5 6.0 9.5 10.3 9.3 6.6 8.8 5.1 2.6 14.8 5.0 2.4 11.8 12.0 11.7 9.2 5,3 13.4 11.7 14.6 6.7 4.6 10.4 9.4 10.9 9.5 5.4 16.8 18.6 14.9 9.5 4.4 20.2 16.5 21.5 5.8 5.2 6.6 6.6 8.2 5.1 18.2 16.1 22.3 40 445 9 488 30 957 5 711 25 246 39 690 3 911 35 779 23 405 12 373 22 794 5 619 17 175 1 068 16 107 383 058 58 446 324 612 19 991 304 621 37 885 10 416 27 469 5 190 22 279 1 180 757 108 999 1 071 758 174 568 897 190 144 227 39 477 104 750 26 264 78 486 12 512 2 355 10 157 2 495 7 662 323 254 49 147 274 107 36 811 237 296 63 255 17 935 45 320 5 412 39 907 80 607 19 829 60 778 19 511 41 267 422 000 106 408 315 592 10 075 305 517 32 369 5 850 26 519 26 519 71 150 23 642 47 508 18 108 29 399 52.2 32.7 63.9 28.9 88.1 52.0 17.7 65.9 59.9 81.4 60.9 40.9 72.5 19.0 89.3 59.3 36.0 67,1 13.1 92.0 60.1 35.3 82.0 68.1 86.1 57.3 25.7 65.5 49.4 69.9 49.7 25.2 78.3 49.1 97.7 52.6 28.7 65.3 34.3 92.4 52.9 26.8 64.1 25.8 83.3 54.5 34.5 70.9 31.1 85.7 48.7 32.6 58.0 33.3 89.5 56.2 45.7 60.9 8.7 75.9 58.8 21.4 95.9 95.9 48.6 34.2 61.5 40.0 92.0 12 064 5 929 6 135 5 037 1 097 6 771 1 306 5 465 4 437 1 023 5 100 1 535 3 565 2 487 1 079 74 209 16 318 57 891 44 999 12 893 6 916 5 564 1 352 284 1 068 269 380 47 828 221 552 61 751 159 801 35 415 25 936 9 479 9 478 1 3 902 1 103 2 799 2 479 320 64 707 10 183 74 524 51 461 23 063 14 862 6 335 8 527 6 932 1 595 20 381 5 253 15 128 14 054 1 074 114 127 25 847 88 280 49 360 38 920 8 207 7 906 301 301 15 106 1 934 13 172 12 000 1 172 15.6 STATE 20.4 12.7 25.4 3.8 8.9 5.9 10.1 11.4 6.8 13.6 state 11.2 15,1 44.1 MUNICIPALITIES 6.0 NEW JERSEY 11.5 STATE 10.1 12.0 29.4 3.9 NEW MEXICO 11.0 STATE 18.8 4.0 3.7 MUNICIPALITIES 4.1 NEW YORK 13.1 STATE 11.3 13.5 17.5 MUNICIPALITIES 12.4 12.2 STATE „ . 16.6 7.1 17.7 MUNICIPALITIES (Z) 16.4 STATE 13.4 18.0 34.1 MUNICIPALITIES 3.9 13.9 STATE 5.5 17.4 36.1 MUNICIPALITIES 8.1 12.8 STATE 12.2 LOCAL, TOTAL 13.3 MUNICIPALITIES 39.8 3.4 OREGON 12.3 STATE 8.6 14.4 COUNTIES 24.0 MUNICIPALITIES 2.3 15.2 STATE 11.1 17.0 42.6 9.7 14.9 STATE 28.9 1.1 1.1 10.3 STATE 2.8 17.0 26.5 3.7 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) 39 Legal se pros rvices and ecution Public defense Cor ■ections Other crl ninal justice State and type of government Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system NEBRASKA 4 702 417 4 285 2 940 1 345 5 217 1 062 4 155 3 081 1 074 1 342 638 704 249 454 42 264 7 189 35 075 25 696 9 379 3 722 2 543 1 179 287 892 94 632 23 322 71 310 25 134 46 176 7 818 5 230 2 588 1 037 1 550 1 726 522 1 204 952 252 32 136 11 302 20 834 10 248 10 586 6 674 4 542 2 132 527 1 605 13 260 5 924 7 336 5 597 1 740 31 217 5 517 25 700 11 816 13 883 1 978 1 172 806 806 3 451 1 875 1 576 1 Oil 564 6.1 1.4 8.8 14.9 4.7 6.8 4.8 7.7 7.9 7.1 3.6 4.6 3.0 4.4 2.5 6.5 4.4 7.2 16.8 2.8 5.9 8.6 3.5 3.8 3.4 4.6 5.5 4.4 7.1 3.6 2.7 3.3 1.9 1.9 1.9 7.3 6.4 7.7 13.1 3.0 5.3 6.2 4.9 7.2 3.7 5.8 8.7 3.3 3.0 3.4 8.0 9.8 7.0 9.5 3.8 4.2 2.4 5.0 10.2 3.5 3.6 4.3 2.9 2.9 2.4 2.7 2.0 2.2 1.8 975 975 975 1 222 161 1 061 1 048 13 230 230 10 930 10 547 383 236 147 1 845 1 813 32 32 26 295 4 004 22 291 8 106 14 185 4 965 4 965 205 205 205 4 282 50 4 232 3 548 684 739 739 704 35 2 660 113 2 547 2 472 75 7 168 7 168 4 042 3 125 420 420 1 049 608 441 428 13 1.3 2.0 4.9 1.6 0.7 2.0 2.7 0.1 0.6 1.7 (Z) 1.7 6.5 0.1 0.2 (Z) 2.9 6.1 0.1 (Z) 0.1 1.3 0.9 1.4 2.3 1.1 1.7 3 'f 0.9 1.3 2.8 0.7 (Z) 1.0 2.5 0.2 0.6 1.2 4.0 0.1 1.6 0.2 2.4 4.2 0.2 1.0 1.4 3.5 0.8 0.8 1.5 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.9 (Z) 17 546 12 350 5 196 4 784 412 22 118 14 351 7 767 7 057 710 7 479 5 417 2 062 1 826 236 127 865 66 813 61 052 60 819 233 11 569 8 415 3 154 1 560 1 595 447 937 225 162 222 775 79 173 143 602 89 583 76 309 13 274 13 219 56 5 120 3 958 1 162 1 117 45 160 997 111 002 49 995 38 450 11 546 27 494 22 454 5 040 3 838 1 202 42 275 27 020 15 255 15 111 144 165 947 91 413 74 534 40 350 34 184 11 549 11 549 46 952 38 869 8 083 7 427 656 22.6 42.6 10.7 24.2 1.4 29.0 64.9 14.3 18.1 4.7 20.0 39.5 8.7 32.4 1.3 19.8 41.2 12.6 39.8 0.1 18.3 28.5 9.4 20.5 6.2 21.7 53.0 13.6 22.4 11.2 30.8 48.7 9.9 24.7 0.1 21.5 48.2 7.5 15.4 0.5 26.3 60.5 11.7 26.9 4.1 23.7 43.2 7.9 22.0 2.6 25.5 44.5 14.6 25.8 0.3 22.1 39.2 14.4 34.8 8.5 21 .0 42.2 32.1 56.3 10.5 16.4 2.1 1 735 820 915 346 568 1 354 1 325 29 29 465 292 173 5 168 8 040 2 935 5 105 1 259 3 846 1 113 794 319 298 21 42 405 15 427 26 978 4 383 22 595 8 406 4 715 3 691 3 471 220 311 281 30 21 9 5 789 1 910 3 879 2 224 1 655 2 940 737 2 203 2 203 6 309 2 609 3 700 1 873 1 827 10 828 3 826 7 002 300 6 702 519 480 39 39 8 591 2 104 6 486 6 349 137 2.2 STATE 2.8 1.9 1.8 MUNICIPALITIES 2.0 NEVADA 1.8 STATE 6.0 0.1 0.1 1.2 state 2.1 0.7 0.1 MUNICIPALITIES 0.9 1.2 STATE 1.8 1.1 0.8 MUNICIPALITIES 1.2 NEW MEXICO 1.8 STATE 2.7 1.0 3.9 MUNICIPALITIES 0.1 NEW YORK 2.1 STATE 3.6 1.6 1.2 MUNICIPALITIES 1.8 2.9 3.0 2.8 COUNTIES 6.5 MUNICIPALITIES 0.3 1.3 state 3.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.9 STATE 1.0 0.9 1.6 0.6 2.5 STATE 1.4 3.4 4.7 3.8 4.3 LOCAL, TOTAL 3.5 3.2 MUNICIPALITIES 4.0 1.4 1.6 1.4 0.3 MUNICIPALITIES 1.7 0.9 1.8 0.1 0.1 5.9 STATE 3.0 8.4 14.0 0.4 See footnotes at end of table. 40 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure 2 Total criminal justice system Police pr otection Judi cial State and type of government Amount Percent of total direct Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal 497 730 345 333 152 397 62 456 89 941 3 488 725 1 547 802 1 940 923 892 580 1 048 344 6 568 763 4 059 955 2 508 808 820 475 1 688 333 778 027 547 356 230 671 115 256 115 415 404 220 333 037 71 183 405 70 778 4 734 459 2 073 474 2 660 985 1 309 222 1 351 763 2 762 245 1 869 172 893 073 375 398 517 675 1 162 287 937 594 224 693 78 681 146 012 3 800 820 1 698 225 2 102 595 860 131 1 242 464 328 684 220 542 108 142 65 785 42 357 29 425 13 414 16 Oil 8 017 7 994 211 966 67 421 144 545 54 903 89 642 594 175 166 453 427 723 168 579 259 144 56 974 22 779 34 195 13 394 20 801 26 913 19 989 6 924 245 6 679 293 836 136 364 157 472 61 420 96 052 228 506 82 685 145 821 72 571 73 250 64 385 28 432 35 954 19 025 16 928 262 721 82 490 180 231 70 209 110 022 20 185 8 362 11 822 5 659 6 164 5.9 3.9 10.5 12.8 8.9 6.1 4.4 7.4 6.2 8.6 9.0 4.1 17.0 20.5 15.3 7.3 4.2 14.8 11.6 18.0 6.7 6.0 9.7 60.5 9.4 6.2 6.6 5.9 4.7 7.1 8.3 4.4 16.3 19.3 14.1 5.5 3.0 16.0 24.2 11.6 6.9 4.9 8.6 8.2 8.9 6.1 3.8 10.9 8.6 14.6 14 637 4 650 9 987 2 529 7 458 109 659 17 878 91 781 14 614 77 168 347 277 68 760 278 517 45 053 233 464 33 014 8 559 24 455 6 437 18 017 12 084 5 670 6 414 37 6 377 153 929 47 169 106 760 39 989 66 771 119 575 27 201 92 374 27 989 64 385 34 489 13 412 21 077 4 972 16 105 152 101 19 177 132 924 27 868 105 055 11 367 3 175 8 192 2 730 5 462 49.7 34.7 62.4 31.5 93.3 51.7 26.5 63.5 26.6 86.1 58.4 41.3 65.1 26.7 90.1 57.9 37.6 71.5 48.1 86.6 44.9 28.4 92.6 15.1 95.5 52.4 34.6 67.8 65.1 69.5 52.3 32.9 63.3 38.6 87.9 53.6 47.2 58.6 26.1 95.1 57.9 23.2 73.8 39.7 95.5 56.3 38.0 69.3 48.2 88.6 4 529 2 065 2 464 2 242 222 30 012 6 565 23 447 18 027 5 420 74 738 9 668 65 070 54 302 10 769 6 416 2 064 4 352 2 404 1 947 3 359 3 196 163 163 33 204 14 571 18 633 9 435 9 198 24 720 4 502 20 218 16 934 3 284 8 702 2 163 6 539 6 292 247 28 526 8 461 20 065 19 510 555 2 546 970 1 576 1 360 216 state 15.4 LOCAL, TOTAL 2.8 14.2 9.7 16.2 32.8 6.0 12.6 5.8 15.2 32.2 4.2 11.3 9.1 12.7 17.9 TENNESSEE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES STATE MUNICIPALITIES 12.5 16.0 2.4 66.5 MUNICIPAI ITIES 11.3 10.7 11.8 15.4 WASHINGTON 10.8 STATE 13.9 23.3 MUNICIPALITIES 13.5 STATE 33.1 WISCONSIN 10.9 10.3 11.1 27.8 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES 12.6 LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Z Less than half the unit of measurement shown. "Data for municipalities, and the local governments totals which include munic (boroughs, parishes) are based on a canvass of all county governments and therefo 2 The relation of criminal justice direct expenditure to total direct expenditu include data for independent school districts or special districts. data, are estimates subject to sampling variation; data for counties re not subject to sampling variation; see text for data limitations, s based on data for general purpose governments only and does not CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 41 Table 7. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal services and Public defense Corr ections Other crin inal justice State and type of government Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system 2 780 1 336 1 444 1 154 290 7 419 4 511 2 908 1 012 1 896 33 027 7 272 25 755 18 408 7 347 3 398 1 080 2 318 1 579 739 1 581 1 291 290 290 10 868 3 367 7 501 3 300 4 201 13 132 4 029 9 103 6 150 2 954 3 254 913 2 341 1 847 494 13 693 3 214 10 479 6 151 4 328 1 367 435 932 677 255 9.4 10.0 9.0 14.4 3.6 3.5 6.7 2.0 1.8 2.1 267 267 261 6 1 669 955 714 469 244 0.9 1.7 3.3 0.1 0.8 1.4 0.5 0.9 0.3 0.7 0.9 2.4 0.7 1.2 2.9 0.1 2.3 3.1 1.4 2.8 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.5 0.5 2.1 3.6 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.0 0.3 1.3 3.4 1.3 2.1 4.4 (Z) 6 296 4 449 1 847 1 830 18 60 169 36 385 23 784 19 731 4 054 107 776 59 802 47 974 41 909 6 065 12 943 10 267 2 676 2 592 84 8 822 8 775 47 34 13 87 544 65 317 22 227 8 220 14 006 65 017 45 322 19 695 18 308 1 387 16 863 11 229 5 634 5 625 9 60 631 46 533 14 098 14 098 4 420 3 583 837 633 205 21.4 33.2 11.5 22.8 0.2 28.4 54.0 16.5 35.9 4.5 18.1 35.9 11.2 24.8 2.3 22.7 45.1 7.8 19.4 0.4 32.8 43.9 0.7 13.9 0.2 29.8 47.9 14.1 13.4 14.6 28.5 54.8 13.5 25.2 1.9 26.2 39.5 15.7 29.6 0.1 23.1 56.4 7.8 20.1 (Z) 21.9 42.8 7.1 11.2 3.3 916 914 2 2 3 038 1 127 1 911 1 051 860 27 337 20 951 6 387 4 888 1 499 809 809 440 429 11 11 4 224 2 090 2 134 365 1 769 2 636 1 215 1 421 611 810 1 006 715 292 218 74 5 083 4 819 265 180 84 231 199 32 9 23 3.1 STATE 6.8 (Z) (Z) TENNESSEE 1.4 STATE 1.7 1.3 1.9 1.0 TEXAS I 5.61 4 020 4.4 4.6 STATE 12.6 6.0 10.9 2.8 6.0 4.7 6.8 11.8 3.6 5.9 6.5 4.2 (Z) 4.3 3.7 2.5 4.8 5.4 4.4 5.7 4.9 6.2 8.5 4.0 5.1 3.2 6.5 9.7 2.9 5.2 3.9 5.8 8.8 3.9 6.8 5.2 7.9 12.0 4.1 4 020 4 020 395 395 382 13 628 628 4 068 3 850 218 111 107 3 425 416 3 009 2 580 429 71 71 71 2 687 286 2 401 2 401 253 253 250 2 0.6 STATE 3.6 1.6 STATE 2.1 LOCAL, TOTAL . . 0.2 4.5 MUNICIPALITIES VIRGINIA 1.4 1.5 1.4 MUNICIPALITIES 0.6 1 .8 1.2 i .5 i .0 0,8 1.1 1 .6 STATE 2.5 0.8 1.9 LOCAL, TOTAL. . 5.8 0.1 0.3 0.1 STATE 0.3 0.2 0.4 42 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 8. Total criminal justice system expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) State and type of government 1 Direct expenditui Direct current Capital outlay Intergovernmental expenditure To State governments To local governments STATES-LOCAL* TOTAL. . STATES LOCAL, TOTAL . . . . COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES . . ALABAMA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES ALASKA , . . . . STATE LOCAL, TOTAL BOROUGHS MUNICIPALITIES ARIZONA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL . . COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES ARKANSAS STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES CALIFORNIA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES COLORADO STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES CONNECTICUT STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES DELAWARE „ STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA . . . . STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES FLORIDA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES GEORGIA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES HAWAII STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES See footnotes at end of table. 15 060 987 15 060 9 5 321 378 4 612 373 10 501 604| 10 448 613 3 896 347j 3 828 435 6 696 801i 6 620 178 149 497 64 070 95 654 34 230 61 926 67 877 56 327 12 694 2 475 11 958 201 958 63 660 142 873 71 108 72 093 70 353 34 288 40 792 18 652 22 599 2 234 344 636 845 1 685 362 987 457 719 903 188 406 84 322 115 379 23 144 92 415 205 342 111 660 99 831 100 034 45 341 32 377 14 187 4 768 9 420 200 378 200 378 200 378 634 052 268 454 376 634 182 680 194 120 282 758 115 805 182 342 97 405 87 268 58 777 20 569 39 745 10 354 29 397 149 497 54 358 95 140 34 053 61 087 67 877 55 315 12 56? 650 U 91? 201 958 59 09? 142 866 71 065 71 801 70 353 29 67? 40 681 18 513 22 169 2 234 34 3 555 63C 1 678 713 980 319 1 698 394 188 406 73 033 115 373 23 02 6 92 347 205 34? 106 195 99 147 99 147 45 34] 31 169 14 17? 4 753 9 419 200 378 200 378 200 378 634 05? 257 554 376 498 182 568 197 930 282 758 100 527 182 ?31 95 447 86 784 58 777 19 035 39 74? 10 345 2° ^97 177 015 299 801 877 213 546 926 330 287 140 263 49 507 90 757 32 618 58 139 58 075 45 886 12 189 640 11 549 168 612 51 549 117 063 54 423 62 640 57 639 23 031 34 608 14 327 20 281 2 132 159 534 151 1 598 007 924 962 673 045 176 569 68 879 107 690 20 992 86 699 186 528 90 709 95 819 95 819 42 922 29 075 13 847 4 547 9 300 181 988 181 988 181 988 572 164 224 396 347 769 166 657 181 112 260 682 90 787 169 895 88 633 81 262 57 329 18 763 38 566 9 941 28 625 883 972 312 572 571 400 281 509 289 891 9 234 4 851 4 383 1 435 2 948 9 802 9 429 373 10 36 3 33 346 7 543 25 803 16 642 9 161 12 714 6 641 6 073 4 186 1 887 102 184 21 479 80 705 55 357 25 348 11 837 4 154 7 683 2 034 5 649 18 814 15 486 3 328 3 328 2 419 2 094 325 206 119 18 390 18 390 18 390 61 887 33 158 28 729 15 911 12 818 22 076 9 740 12 336 6 814 5 522 1 448 272 1 176 404 77? 853 540 709 005 144 535 67 912 76 623 10 728 9 712 1 016 177 839 2 884 1 012 1 872 1 825 47 4 903 4 568 335 43 292 5 186 4 616 570 139 431 109 861 81 215 28 646 7 138 21 508 11 475 11 289 186 118 68 352 165 887 887 1 224 1 208 16 15 1 11 203 10 900 303 112 191 17 720 15 278 2 442 1 958 484 1 543 1 534 9 9 52 957 (X) 52 957 43 769 9 188 514 (X) 514 157 357 132 (X) 132 85 47 8 (X) 6 1 7 111 (X) 111 72 39 6 648 (X) 6 648 6 537 111 6 (X) 6 5 1 685 (X) 685 685 15 (X) 15 15 800 582 709 005 91 577 24 142 67 435 10 214 9 712 502 20 482 2 752 1 012 1 740 1 740 895 568 327 42 285 075 616 459 67 392 103 213 81 215 21 998 601 21 397 11 469 11 289 180 113 68 667 465 202 202 1 209 1 208 1 136 11 067 (X) 10 900 136 167 90 22 46 145 111 17 609 (X) 15 278 111 2 331 68 1 889 43 441 3 1 541 (X) 1 534 3 7 3 7 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 8. Total criminal justice system expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) 43 Total 2 Dj rect expendit ire Intergo vernmental exp enditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital out lay Total To State governments To local governments 40 979 18 348 23 928 13 158 11 066 778 322 217 121 589 564 172 166 423 997 223 026 91 121 146 431 48 797 97 923 125 689 54 040 77 428 35 406 43 382 121 155 58 127 69 869 30 518 40 589 154 555 67 785 97 601 46 342 52 353 226 362 86 974 153 850 62 609 91 527 45 911 25 300 22 612 6 827 16 149 346 097 190 258 192 679 97 447 95 592 472 711 143 465 345 327 68 172 278 911 675 409 200 962 513 311 101 686 328 763 203 024 64 505 148 760 71 500 79 962 87 209 43 440 46 815 20 275 26 699 40 979 17 066 23 913 13 128 10 786 778 322 188 810 589 512 166 329 423 183 223 026 78 339 144 688 47 192 97 496 125 689 48 9 54 76 735 34 062 42 673 121 155 51 325 69 830 30 478 39 352 154 555 56 979 97 576 45 818 51 759 226 362 72 528 153 834 62 541 91 293 45 911 23 3ol 22 610 6 813 15 797 346 097 153 723 192 373 96 852 95 521 472 711 128 376 344 335 68 148 276 187 675 409 166 256 509 152 186 420 322 732 203 024 54 389 148 635 69 877 78 758 87 209 40 416 46 794 20 258 26 535 35 736 15 079 20 657 10 291 10 366 743 012 184 912 558 100 150 647 407 453 207 820 70 794 137 027 43 639 93 387 118 316 45 182 73 134 32 902 40 232 112 505 47 912 64 593 26 711 37 883 135 504 50 837 84 668 35 546 49 122 210 429 68 632 141 797 58 803 82 993 43 024 21 781 21 243 6 345 14 898 333 968 146 482 187 485 92 819 94 666 454 399 123 379 331 020 61 824 269 196 639 555 152 062 487 493 178 519 308 975 193 773 52 111 141 661 65 904 75 757 76 619 33 899 42 720 18 000 24 720 5 243 1 987 3 256 2 836 420 35 310 3 898 31 412 15 682 15 731 15 206 7 545 7 661 3 553 4 108 7 373 3 772 3 601 1 160 2 441 8 650 3 413 5 237 3 768 1 469 19 051 6 142 12 909 10 272 2 637 15 933 3 896 12 037 3 738 8 300 2 887 1 520 1 367 468 899 12 129 7 241 4 888 4 033 855 18 312 4 997 13 315 6 324 6 992 35 853 14 194 21 659 7 902 13 757 9 252 2 278 6 974 3 973 3 001 10 591 6 517 4 074 2 259 1 815 1 594 1 282 312 31 281 34 962 28 311 6 651 5 637 813 14 814 12 782 2 032 1 605 427 7 139 5 086 2 053 1 344 709 8 079 6 802 1 277 40 1 237 11 924 10 806 1 118 524 594 14 748 14 446 302 68 234 2 364 1 999 365 13 352 37 201 36 535 666 595 71 17 837 15 089 2 748 24 2 724 46 002 34 706 11 296 5 265 6 031 12 943 10 116 2 827 1 623 1 204 3 205 3 024 181 17 164 15 (X) 15 13 2 52 (X) 52 7 45 1 743 (X) 1 743 1 362 381 693 tx> 693 681 12 39 (X) 39 4 35 25 (X) 25 25 16 (X) 16 6 11 2 (X) 2 2 306 (X) 306 306 992 (X) 992 9 983 4 159 (X) 4 159 3 762 397 125 (X) 125 102 23 22 (X) 22 7 15 1 579 STATE 1 282 297 18 279 34 910 STATE 28 311 6 599 5 831 768 13 071 STATE 12 782 289 243 IOWA 46 6 446 STATE 5 086 1 360 663 KANSAS 697 8 040 STATE 6 802 1 238 35 KENTUCKY 1 203 11 899 10 806 STATE 1 093 499 594 14 732 14 446 PARISHES 286 62 MAINE 224 2 363 1 999 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES 364 12 MARYLAND 352 36 896 STATE 36 535 COUNTIES 361 289 MUNICIPALITIES MASSACHUSETTS 71 16 846 STATE 15 089 1 757 15 MUNICIPALITIES MICHIGAN 1 742 41 844 34 706 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES 7 138 1 504 5 634 12 818 10 116 2 702 1 521 1 181 3 183 3 024 159 10 MUNICIPALITIES MINNESOTA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES MISSISSIPPI STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES See footnotes at end of table. 149 44 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 8. Total criminal justice system expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) State and type of government 1 Direct expenditure Capital outlay Intergovernmental expenditur To State governments To local governments MISSOURI STATE local, total counties municipalities MONTANA STATE local, total counties municipalities nebraska STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEVADA STATE. LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEW JERSEY STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEW MEXICO STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEW YORK STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NORTH CAROLINA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NORTH DAKOTA STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL , COUNTIES , MUNICIPALITIES . . . - , OHIO STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES , MUNICIPALITIES OKLAHOMA , STATE LOCAL, TOTAL , COUNTIES , MUNICIPALITIES . . . . , OREGON , STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL , COUNTIES , MUNICIPALITIES . . . . , See footnotes at end ol table. 272 022 86 276 197 702 54 056 144 429 38 793 16 658 ?3 300 12 985 10 503 77 467 32 992 48 507 19 898 29 019 76 371 24 715 54 295 39 099 25 794 37 411 14 970 23 878 5 864 18 060 646 367 188 912 484 539 153 029 332 304 63 050 32 247 33 886 8 131 25 976 061 406 522 396 647 893 363 254 292 371 290 414 166 620 133 917 54 286 80 564 23 775 10 163 15 559 7 280 8 491 611 165 228 454 428 567 147 915 286 337 115 964 57 278 66 944 20 485 46 589 165 492 68 182 104 826 58 811 46 954 272 022 74 446 197 576 53 802 143 774 38 793 15 498 23 295 12 960 10 334 77 467 29 004 48 463 19 794 28 669 76 371 22 116 ! 54 255 i 39 057 I 15 198 j 37 41J I 13 731 j 23 679 5 635 I 18 044 646 367 162 248 484 119 153 000 331 119 63 050 29 545 33 505 7 619 25 887 2 061 406 424 742 1 636 664 353 115 1 283 549 290 414 156 632 133 783 53 469 80 313 23 775 8 219 15 556 7 268 8 288 611 165 183 594 427 572 lt2 741 284 830 115 964 52 003 63 961 17 412 46 549 165 492 60 748 104 744 58 618 46 126 260 080 69 352 190 728 51 620 139 108 34 597 13 342 21 255 12 061 9 194 73 545 27 250 46 295 18 605 27 690 67 705 16 635 51 070 38 154 12 916 35 817 13 103 22 714 5 312 17 402 621 053 147 500 473 553 148 244 325 308 60 081 28 460 31 622 6 628 24 994 1 978 939 408 796 1 570 143 339 207 1 230 936 264 253 146 643 117 610 42 071 75 539 22 150 7 461 14 689 6 573 8 116 581 900 179 015 402 885 129 718 273 168 107 863 47 754 60 109 16 562 43 547 157 033 58 419 98 613 53 053 45 561 11 942 5 094 6 848 2 182 4 666 4 196 2 156 2 040 900 1 140 3 922 1 754 I 2 168 1 189 979 8 666 5 481 3 185 902 2 282 1 594 628 966 323 642 25 314 14 748 10 566 4 755 5 811 2 969 1 085 1 884 991 893 82 467 15 946 66 521 13 908 52 613 26 162 9 989 16 173 11 398 4 775 1 625 758 867 695 17? 29 265 4 579 24 686 13 024 11 662 8 101 4 249 3 852 850 3 002 8 460 2 329 6 131 5 565 566 12 739 11 830 909 254 655 1 553 1 360 193 24 169 4 441 3 988 453 104 349 13 237 2 599 10 638 42 10 596 1 483 1 239 244 229 15 27 878 26 664 1 214 30 1 185 304 702 602 512 90 116 615 97 654 18 961 10 140 8 822 11 056 9 988 1 068 817 251 2 159 1 944 215 12 203 51 541 44 860 6 681 5 174 1 507 8 388 5 275 3 113 3 073 39 8 455 7 434 1 021 193 828 126 (X) 126 115 10 5 (X) 5 1 4 420 (X) 420 22 39e 380 (X) 380 380 11 228 (X) 11 228 9 462 1 766 134 (X) 134 40 94 4 (X! 4 4 995 (X) 995 613 382 2 983 (X) 2 983 2 983 8? (XI 82 40 42 12 613 11 830 783 139 644 1 548 1 360 188 23 165 44 4 398 (X) 3 988 44 410 5 98 38 311 39 13 197 (X) 2 599 39 10 598 39 2 - 10 596 199 1 284 (X) 1 239 199 45 190 39 9 7 27 459 26 664 795 8 787 2 923 2 702 221 132 90 105 387 97 654 7 733 677 7 056 10 922 9 988 934 777 157 2 155 1 944 211 8 203 50 546 44 860 686 561 122 404 275 129 90 39 8 373 7 434 939 153 786 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 8. Total criminal justice system expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) 45 Total 2 Direct expenditure Int srgove rnmental expe nditure State and type of government ' Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 751 287 300 691 531 280 128 34', 404 73 J 55 0«2 29 78 '4 27 64 5 27 665 146 297 74 288 77 606 45 719 32 061 29 425 14 637 16 119 8 364 8 188 211 966 80 616 144 876 55 280 91 397 594 175 192 732 428 631 169 487 260 480 56 974 27 507 34 195 13 467 20 827 26 913 20 110 6 932 245 6 775 293 836 156 994 160 350 62 875 98 517 228 506 91 843 145 846 73 062 76 351 64 385 31 614 35 959 19 037 17 128 262 721 90 727 182 372 72 527 110 550 20 185 9 953 11 835 5 670 6 237 751 287 233 Oil 518 276 115 944 402 332 55 042 27 377 27 665 27 665 146 297 69 03? 77 265 45 323 31 942 29 425 13 414 16 Oil 8 017 7 994 211 966 67 421 144 545 54 903 89 642 594 175 166 453 427 723 168 579 259 144 56 974 22 779 34 195 13 394 20 801 26 913 19 989 6 924 245 6 679 293 836 136 364 157 472 61 420 96 052 228 506 82 685 145 821 72 571 73 250 64 385 28 432 35 954 19 025 16 928 262 721 82 490 180 231 70 209 110 022 20 185 8 362 11 822 5 659 6 164 727 743 225 100 502 643 111 626 391 017 53 360 26 693 26 667 26 667 121 469 57 521 63 948 34 143 29 804 27 486 12 835 14 652 6 869 7 782 182 551 56 327 126 224 44 622 81 602 555 665 156 044 399 621 154 730 244 891 53 539 21 127 32 412 12 619 19 794 24 115 17 382 6 733 210 6 523 278 357 132 540 145 817 57 407 88 410 217 543 77 964 139 579 68 395 71 185 56 722 24 822 31 901 15 785 16 116 254 782 79 828 174 955 67 908 107 047 19 075 8 097 10 978 5 114 5 864 23 544 7 911 15 633 4 318 11 315 1 682 684 998 998 24 828 11 511 13 317 11 180 2 138 1 938 579 1 359 1 147 212 29 415 11 094 18 321 10 281 8 040 38 510 10 409 28 101 13 849 14 252 3 435 1 652 1 783 776 1 007 2 798 2 607 191 35 156 15 479 3 824 11 655 4 013 7 642 10 962 4 721 6 241 4 176 2 065 7 663 3 610 4 053 3 240 813 7 938 2 662 5 276 2 301 2 975 1 110 265 845 545 300 82 67 14 12 2 2 2 5 5 1 1 15 13 2 1 28 26 2 1 4 4 24 20 3 1 2 12 9 3 3 3 3 11 8 2 2 1 1 478 680 798 400 398 407 407 771 256 515 396 119 764 223 541 348 193 327 195 132 377 755 524 279 245 908 336 827 728 99 72 27 216 121 95 95 549 630 919 455 465 750 158 592 491 101 393 182 211 11 200 083 237 846 318 528 676 591 85 12 73 13 004 (X) 13 004 11 962 1 042 (X) 341 (X) 341 258 83 108 (X) 108 102 6 331 (X) 331 292 39 908 (X) 908 650 258 (X) 8 (X) 8 8 2 878 (X) 2 878 1 132 1 746 26 (X) 26 4 22 6 (X) 6 6 2 141 (X) 2 141 2 138 3 13 (X) 13 12 2 69 474 STATE 67 680 1 794 438 MUNICIPALITIES 1 356 2 407 STATE 2 407 STATE 5 430 5 256 174 138 36 1 656 STATE. .... 1 223 433 246 TENNESSEE 188 14 996 STATE 13 195 1 801 85 MUNICIPALITIES TEXAS 1 716 27 615 STATE 26 279 1 336 258 STATE 1 078 4 827 4 728 99 72 27 209 STATE 121 88 MUNICIPALITIES 88 21 671 STATE 20 630 1 041 323 719 12 725 STATE 9 158 COUNTIES 3 567 487 3 079 3 387 STATE 3 182 COUNTIES 205 6 WISCONSIN 200 8 943 STATE 8 237 LOCAL, TOTAL 706 180 526 1 663 STATE 1 591 72 72 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. X Not applicable. *Data for municipalities, and the local governments totals which include municipal data, are estimates subject to sampling var- iation; data for counties (boroughs, parishes) are based on a canvass of all county governments and therefore are not subject to sampling variation; see text for data limitations. 2 For each State, and the United States summary, the expenditure figures shown on the "Local, total" line and the combined State- local total line (the data shown opposite the names of the individual States) exclude duplicative intergovernmental expend- iture amounts. This was done to avoid the artificial inflation which would result if an intergovernmental expenditure amount for one government is tabulated and then counted again when the recipient governments ) ultimately expend(s) that amount. 46 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 9. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution of full-time State and type of government 1 Total full-time equivalent employees Total crimin al ju stice syste Pol ice f rotection Judicial - Number of employees Percent of total full- time equiva- lent employ- Number oJ employees Percent of total nal justice system employ- Numbs r of employees Percent of total crimi- nal justice sy s t em employ - 5 Total Full- time only Full- equi le time nt Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent 1 2 3 4 5 STATES-LOCAL^ TOTAL. LOCAL/ TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. 6 319 2 727 3 592 1 399 2 192 927 465 465 874 59] 1 030 946 274 319 756 627 283 234 473 393 929 257 671 250 420 04 633 4 7 340 667 954 263 691 257 433 379 208 159 592 567 15. 1 9.7 19.2 18.4 19.8 599 431 100 272 499 159 95 229 403 930 543 89 453 87 366 397 428 969 057 912 555 849 92 445 463 404 89 273 374 131 57.8 35.1 67. 1 34.7 86.3 144 183^20 702 26 402 24 183 117 781 96 519 85 216 72 913 32 565 23 606 124 712 25 578 99 132 72 761 26 371 13. 1 9.7 14.3 28.2 6.1 6 7 a 9 to MUNICIPALITIES. . . 92 51 41 15 25 749 327 426 477 949 13 241 3 522 9 719 3 865 5 854 11 3 8 3 5 212 058 154 131 027 12 3 8 3 5 117 343 693 424 269 13.1 6.5 21.0 22. 1 20.3 7 963 1 625 6 338 1 216 5 122 7 1 5 1 4 ?83 488 795 058 737 7 520 1 505 6 015 1 131 4 884 62.7 45.0 69.6 33.5 92.7 2 286 332 1 954 1 604 350 1 451 116 1 335 1 246 89 1 803 326 1 476 1 344 132 15.0 9.8 17. 1 39.7 2.5 11 12 13 It 15 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 24 13 11 2 8 84? 35? 490 806 684 2 469 1 798 671 8 663 ? 1 ?44 601 643 8 635 2 1 304 649 655 8 647 9.3 12.4 5.7 0.3 7.5 1 209 627 582 3 579 1 147 583 564 3 561 1 156 589 567 3 564 50.2 35.7 86.6 37.5 87.2 560 553 7 7 433 427 6 6 462 456 6 6 20.1 27.7 0.9 0.9 lo 17 18 19 20 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 62 31 30 13 16 064 731 337 4?6 9T7 11 266 2 889 8 377 4 095 4 282 10 2 8 3 4 890 801 089 920 169 11 2 8 4 4 077 865 212 003 209 17.8 9.0 27.1 29.8 24.9 6 639 1 515 5 124 1 260 3 864 6 1 5 1 3 531 494 037 229 808 6 552 1 498 5 054 1 234 3 820 59.1 52.3 61.5 30.8 90.8 1 540 151 1 389 1 157 232 1 344 85 1 259 1 068 191 1 483 145 1 338 1 127 211 13.4 5.1 16.3 28.2 5.0 21 22 23 24 25 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 52 31 20 11 9 628 81? 816 359 457 6 472 1 723 4 749 2 026 2 723 5 1 7 1 2 289 707 58? 417 165 5 1 3 1 2 687 709 978 632 346 10.8 5.4 19.1 14.4 24.8 3 741 726 3 015 764 2 251 3 2 2 378 710 668 666 002 3 493 712 2 781 695 2 086 61.4 41.7 69.9 42.6 88.9 1 121 88 1 033 746 287 502 88 414 346 68 709 88 621 491 130 12.5 5.1 15.6 30.1 5.5 26 27 28 29 7 LOCAL/ TOTAL . . . . MUNICIPALITIES. . . 573 218 355 206 148 466 789 077 484 597 120 631 26 749 93 882 53 591 40 291 113 25 88 50 38 797 ?55 542 156 786 116 26 90 51 38 214 003 211 353 858 20.3 11.9 25.4 24.9 26.2 63 387 11 880 51 507 14 240 37 267 60 11 49 13 35 837 60? 23E 609 6?6 61 389 11 685 49 704 13 766 35 938 52.8 44.9 55.1 26.8 92.5 13 545 906 12 639 12 060 579 11 984 495 11 489 10 974 515 12 932 906 12 026 11 452 574 11.1 3.5 13.3 22.3 1.5 31 32 33 ^4 35 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 76 41 35 13 22 44? 169 ?77 223 050 12 803 4 183 8 620 2 141 6 479 11 4 7 1 6 895 015 880 837 043 12 4 8 1 6 160 063 097 938 159 15.9 9.9 23.0 14.7 27.9 7 364 985 6 379 1 038 5 341 7 6 5 013 939 074 948 126 7 084 949 6 135 972 5 163 58.3 23.4 75.8 50.2 83.8 1 851 1 130 721 188 533 1 628 1 074 554 179 375 1 692 1 082 610 180 430 13.9 26.6 7.5 9.3 7.0 36 3 7 33 39 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 124 39 84 84 278 535 746 740 12 934 5 569 7 365 7 365 11 5 6 6 818 463 755 355 11 5 6 6 879 491 388 388 9.6 13.9 7.5 7.5 8 509 1 370 7 139 7 139 7 1 6 6 569 340 229 229 7 556 1 346 6 210 6 210 63.6 24.5 97.2 97.2 1 180 1 141 39 39 1 118 1 111 7 7 1 125 1 121 4 4 9.5 20.4 0.1 0.1 40 41 42 43 44 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 20 14 6 2 3 314 1?° 186 380 806 3 237 2 165 1 072 340 732 7 2 106 109 697 337 660 3 2 1 128 116 012 340 67? 15.4 15.0 16.4 14.3 17.7 1 576 717 859 221 638 1 488 682 806 221 686 1 505 687 818 221 597 48.1 32.5 80.8 65.0 88.8 663 492 171 106 65 643 492 151 104 47 645 492 153 106 47 20.6 23.3 15.1 31.2 7.0 «5 46 47 48 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. . MUNICIPALITIES. . . 45 45 45 ?46 ?46 ?46 9 525 9 525 9 525 9 9 9 ?49 ?49 ?49 9 9 9 353 353 753 20.7 20.7 20.7 5 639 5 639 5 639 5 5 5 4Q9 409 409 5 492 5 492 5 492 58.7 58.7 58.7 921 921 921 913 913 913 917 917 917 9.8 9.8 9.8 49 5 51 fc 2 53 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 211 94 117 56 61 934 766 579 180 399 44 438 15 722 28 716 13 796 14 920 42 15 27 13 14 990 396 596 449 146 43 15 27 13 14 370 497 873 63b J37 20.5 16.4 23.7 24.1 23.4 23 842 3 068 20 774 7 436 13 338 13 3 20 7 12 174 040 134 318 816 23 285 3 046 20 239 7 351 12 888 53.7 19.7 72.6 54.3 89.9 5 691 1 228 4 463 3 768 695 5 261 1 136 4 125 3 602 523 5 389 1 160 4 229 3 630 599 12.4 7.5 15.2 26.8 4.2 54 55 56 57 58 COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . 126 72 54 22 31 6?0 488 07? 40^ 6?6 22 223 6 477 15 746 7 853 7 893 20 6 14 6 7 531 407 124 990 13 4 21 6 14 7 7 067 443 624 255 569 16.7 8.9 27.1 32.4 23.3 12 608 2 256 10 352 3 323 7 029 11 2 9 3 6 91? 2^ 676 167 519 12 123 2 240 9 883 3 191 6 692 57.6 34,8 67.6 44.0 90.8 2 846 349 2 497 2 142 355 2 288 315 1 973 1 748 225 2 478 342 2 136 1 881 255 11.8 5.3 14.6 25.9 3.5 59 HAWAII 41 30 10 2 8 4 4 'J 714 736 6 IP, 217 3 643 1 050 2 593 612 1 981 3 1 2 1 621 050 671 690 98] 3 1 2 1 b?4 05C 674 69 3 981 8.7 3.4 24.0 23.6 24.1 2 451 6 2 445 568 1 877 2 2 1 4 3? 6 4 26 640 877 2 434 6 2 428 551 1 877 67.2 0.6 94.3 92.9 94.8 534 534 534 534 534 534 14.7 50.9 6 J 6 1 62 6 5 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 6 4 IDAHO 23 14 8 5 3 60? 674 928 1 1 9H 3 350 947 2 403 1 257 1 146 2 2 1 922 01? 010 071 039 3 2 1 J?4 919 105 126 079 12.8 6.3 23.6 22.5 25.0 1 997 294 1 703 624 1 079 1 1 734 ?7P 456 640 916 1 779 280 1 499 559 940 58.8 30.5 71.2 49.6 96.0 494 184 310 300 10 436 178 258 258 454 180 274 271 3 15.0 19.6 13.0 24.1 0.3 6 5 6 67 68 MUNICIPALITIES. . . CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM equivalent employees by State and type of government, October 1975 47 Legal services and prosecution Public iefense Corrc cUons Other crin inal just! ce Number of employees Percent of Numb 3 r of empl oyees Percent of Numbe r of employees Percent of Number of employees Percent of z total E crimi- crimi- crimi- crimi- a Full- Full-time nal Full- Full-time nal Full- Full-time nal Full- Full-time nal a Total time equiva- justice Total time equiva- justice Total time equiva- justice Total time equiva- justice .3 only lent system employ- only lent system employ - only lent system employ- only lent system employ- 54 080 43 331 48 26b 5.1 6 462 5 836 6 172 0.6 221 115 210 305 213 813 22.2 5 675 5 469 5 558 0.6 1 13 122 11 950 12 334 4.7 2 602 2 518 2 547 1.0 128 523 126 196 126 933 48.2 3 398 3 358 3 371 1.3 2 40 958 31 381 35 931 5.2 3 860 3 318 3 625 0.5 92 592 84 109 86 880 12.6 2 277 2 111 2 187 0.3 3 25 125 21 332 23 261 9.0 3 626 3 153 3 423 1.3 73 052 65 498 67 942 26.4 986 887 932 0.4 4 15 833 10 049 12 670 2.9 234 165 202 19 540 18 611 in 93R 4.4 1 291 1 224 1 255 0.3 5 705 300 491 4.1 6 . 3 (z) 2 232 2 129 2 171 18.0 49 49 49 0.4 6 221 144 189 5.7 - - - - 1 302 1 268 1 281 38.3 42 42 42 1.3 7 484 156 302 3.5 6 - 3 (z) 930 861 890 10.1 7 7 7 0.1 8 265 118 210 6.2 4 - 3 (z) 776 709 736 21.4 - - - - 9 219 38 92 1.7 2 - - - 154 152 154 2.9 7 7 7 0.1 10 184 172 179 7.8 40 40 40 1.7 463 440 455 19.7 13 12 12 0.5 11 133 127 128 7.8 40 40 40 2.4 432 412 424 25.7 13 12 12 0.7 5 2 51 45 51 7.8 _ - - - 31 28 31 4.7 - - - - 13 5 5 5 62.5 14 46 40 46 7.1 - - - - 31 28 31 4.8 - - - - 15 637 609 622 5.6 149 143 146 1.3 2 264 2 226 2 237 20.2 37 37 37 0.3 16 88 87 87 3.0 - - - - 1 103 1 103 1 103 38.5 32 32 32 1.1 17 549 522 535 6.5 149 143 146 1.8 1 161 1 123 1 134 13.8 5 5 5 0.1 18 389 375 381 9.5 147 143 145 3.6 1 141 1 104 1 115 27.9 1 1 1 (Z) 19 160 147 154 3.7 2 - 1 (Z) 20 19 19 0.5 4 4 4 0.1 20 350 210 263 4.6 25 16 19 0.3 1 180 1 128 1 148 20.2 55 55 55 1.0 21 62 62 62 3.6 - - - - 792 792 792 46.3 55 55 55 3.2 22 288 148 201 5.1 25 16 19 0.5 388 336 356 8.9 - - - - 23 184 119 144 8.8 25 16 19 1.2 307 270 283 17.3 - - - - 24 104 29 57 2.4 - - - - 81 66 73 3.1 - - - - 25 7 714 7 348 7 491 6.4 1 590 1 552 1 564 1.3 34 103 31 831 32 572 28.0 292 245 266 0.2 26 684 664 668 2.6 - - - - 13 237 12 455 12 704 48.9 42 39 40 0.2 27 7 030 6 684 6 823 7.6 1 590 1 552 1 564 1.7 20 866 19 376 19 868 22.0 250 206 226 0.3 28 5 635 5 415 5 487 10.7 1 526 1 489 1 500 2.9 19 978 18 552 19 014 37.0 152 117 134 0.3 29 1 395 1 269 1 336 3.4 64 63 64 0.2 888 824 854 2.2 98 89 92 0.2 30 1 015 758 869 7.1 127 124 125 1.0 2 385 2 313 2 331 19.2 61 59 59 0.5 11 152 135 152 3.7 127 124 125 3.1 1 734 1 690 1 702 41.9 55 53 53 1.3 32 863 623 717 8.9 - - - - 651 623 629 7.8 6 6 6 0.1 3 3 534 357 427 22.0 . - - - 375 347 353 18.2 6 6 6 0.3 J4 329 266 290 4.7 - - - - 276 276 276 4.5 - - - - 3"' 465 395 450 3.8 89 89 89 0.7 2 624 2 582 2 593 21.8 67 65 66 0.6 3 b 306 304 304 5.5 89 89 89 1.6 2 624 2 582 2 593 47.2 39 37 38 0.7 ■V: 159 91 146 2.3 - - - - - - - - 28 28 28 0.4 58 159 91 146 2.3 - - - - - - - - 28 28 28 0.4 39 126 124 125 4.0 33 33 33 1.1 810 789 791 25.3 29 29 29 0.9 40 84 e4 84 4.0 33 33 33 1.6 810 789 791 37.4 29 29 29 1.4 41 42 40 41 4.1 4 2 13 12 13 3.8 4 3 29 28 28 4.2 4 4 162 162 162 1.7 - - - - 2 759 2 725 2 741 29.3 44 40 41 0.4 4 5 46 162 162 162 1.7 . . . . 2 759 2 725 2 741 29.3 44 40 41 0.4 47 162 162 162 1.7 - - - - 2 759 2 725 2 741 29.3 44 40 41 0.4 4 8 1 940 1 859 1 910 4.4 687 674 675 1.6 12 025 11 774 11 861 27.3 253 248 250 0.6 49 1 547 1 537 1 539 9.9 650 650 650 4.2 9 147 8 954 9 022 58.2 82 78 80 0.5 50 393 322 371 1.3 37 24 25 0.1 2 878 2 820 2 839 10.2 171 170 170 0.6 51 134 117 128 0.9 23 20 20 0.1 2 296 2 253 2 268 16.8 139 139 139 1.0 52 259 205 243 1.7 14 4 5 (Z) 582 567 571 4.0 32 31 31 0.2 53 863 592 667 3.2 58 45 52 0.2 5 796 5 642 5 695 27.0 52 52 52 0.2 su 189 173 178 2.8 6 6 6 0.1 3 637 3 637 3 637 56.4 40 40 40 0.6 55 674 419 489 3.3 52 39 46 0.3 2 159 2 005 2 058 14.1 12 12 12 0.1 56 493 343 390 5.4 45 32 39 0.5 1 849 1 709 1 753 24.2 1 1 1 (Z! 57 181 76 99 1.3 7 7 7 0.1 310 296 305 4.1 11 11 11 0.1 56 215 215 215 5.9 46 46 46 1.3 382 379 380 10.5 15 15 15 0.4 59 80 80 80 7.6 46 46 46 4.4 371 371 371 35.3 13 13 13 1.2 6 135 135 135 5.2 - - - - 11 8 9 0.3 2 2 2 0.1 61 31 31 31 5.2 - - - • 11 8 9 1.5 2 2 2 0.3 62 104 104 104 5.2 6 3 248 180 207 6.8 31 23 25 0.8 552 521 531 17.6 28 28 28 0.9 *4 40 36 37 4.0 - - . - 401 392 394 42.9 28 28 28 3.0 65 208 144 170 8.1 31 23 25 1.2 151 129 137 6.5 - - - _ 66 153 123 136 12.1 31 23 25 2.2 149 127 135 12.0 - - - - 67 55 21 34 3.5 - - - - 2 2 2 0.2 - - - - 6 8 48 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 9. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution of full-time Tot* 1 Total criminal j astice syst an Police p rotection Judicial Numbe r oi emplo ,ees Percent Number of employees Percent Numbe r of employees Percent ~ State and type of government 1 full-t equiVE emplo} lent total lull- total nal justice system employ- total nal justice system employ- 5 ■ ■ Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent equiva- lent employ- Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent 1 249 828 53 469 48 975 50 592 20.3 35 407 32 360 33 301 65.8 6 812 6 162 6 458 12.8 2 119 801 10 837 10 571 10 664 8.9 3 598 3 515 3 532 33.1 1 383 1 371 1 373 12.9 3 130 027 42 632 38 404 39 928 30.7 31 809 28 845 29 769 74.6 5 429 4 791 5 085 12.7 4 39 626 13 520 12 220 12 776 32.2 3 330 3 043 3 113 24.4 5 385 4 763 5 051 39.5 5 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 90 401 29 112 26 184 27 152 30.0 28 479 25 802 26 656 98.2 44 28 34 0.1 6 129 254 19 053 16 689 17 605 13.6 11 223 10 351 10 547 59.9 2 632 1 951 2 308 13.1 7 58 276 4 839 4 599 4 800 8.2 2 043 2 012 2 020 42.1 294 112 294 6.1 8 70 978 14 214 12 090 12 805 18.0 9 180 8 339 8 527 66.6 2 338 1 839 2 014 15.7 9 32 125 4 681 3 812 4 179 13.0 1 531 1 325 1 370 32.8 1 431 1 244 1 326 31.7 10 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 38 853 9 533 8 278 8 626 22.2 7 649 7 014 7 157 83.0 907 595 688 8.0 1 1 71 37 050 672 10 061 2 865 8 253 2 605 8 768 2 664 12.3 7.1 5 821 976 4 879 924 5 074 931 57.9 34.9 1 487 361 1 037 187 1 142 229 13.0 8.6 12 13 33 378 7 196 5 648 6 104 18.3 4 845 3 955 4 143 67.9 1 126 850 913 15.0 14 17 699 3 213 2 451 2 716 15.3 987 832 864 31.8 1 126 850 913 33.6 15 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 15 679 3 983 3 197 3 388 21.6 3 858 3 123 3 279 96.8 - - - - 16 65 35 069 572 10 942 3 454 9 341 3 316 9 700 3 335 14.9 9.4 5 505 851 4 799 746 4 928 764 50.8 22.9 1 735 223 1 240 190 1 334 191 13.8 5.7 17 18 LOCAL, TOTAL, .... 29 497 7 488 6 025 6 365 21.6 4 654 4 053 4 164 65.4 1 512 1 050 1 143 18.0 19 13 595 3 277 2 611 2 782 20.5 1 060 870 910 32.7 1 172 947 1 000 35.9 20 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 15 902 4 211 3 414 3 583 22.5 3 594 3 183 3 254 90.8 340 103 143 4.0 21 84 104 12 685 10 850 11 335 13.5 7 350 6 618 6 781 59.8 2 098 1 456 1 604 14.2 22 55 546 3 996 3 849 3 872 7.0 1 914 1 822 1 840 47.5 284 284 284 7.3 23 28 558 8 689 7 001 7 463 26.1 5 436 4 796 4 941 66.2 1 814 1 172 1 320 17.7 2 4 11 562 3 942 2 988 3 267 28.3 1 469 1 203 1 274 39.0 1 427 971 1 082 33.1 2 5 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 16 996 4 747 4 013 4 196 24.7 3 967 3 593 3 667 87.4 387 201 238 5.7 26 107 094 24 628 16 853 19 039 17.8 16 355 9 849 11 570 60.8 3 188 2 405 2 664 14.0 27 66 064 9 984 5 120 6 198 9.4 6 671 1 859 2 919 47.1 379 327 345 5.6 28 41 030 14 644 11 733 12 841 31.3 9 684 7 990 8 651 67.4 2 809 2 078 2 319 18.1 29 14 835 6 301 4 641 5 168 34.8 3 522 2 775 3 015 58.3 1 641 1 077 1 222 23.6 3 MUNICIPALITIES, . . 26 195 8 343 7 092 7 673 29.3 6 162 5 215 5 636 73.5 1 168 1 001 1 097 14.3 31 37 16 159 361 4 180 1 597 3 260 1 544 3 550 1 680 9.6 10.3 2 751 594 2 024 580 2 251 709 63.5 42.2 412 223 326 206 357 208 10. 1 12.4 32 33 20 798 2 583 1 716 1 870 10.0 2 157 1 444 1 542 82.8 189 120 149 8.0 34 837 705 433 497 59.4 309 172 191 38.8 182 120 147 29.6 35 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 19 961 1 878 1 283 1 371 6.9 1 848 1 272 1 351 98.5 7 - 2 0.1 36 199 931 21 879 21 420 21 557 10.8 12 481 12 336 12 360 57.4 2 247 2 081 2 134 9.9 37 67 688 9 069 8 895 8 948 13.2 2 506 2 501 2 502 28.0 1 154 1 072 1 098 12.3 3e 132 243 12 810 12 525 12 609 9.5 9 975 9 835 9 858 78.2 1 093 1 009 1 036 8.2 39 88 133 5 946 5 771 5 839 6.6 4 320 4 285 4 295 73.7 690 606 633 10.8 40 MUNICIPALITIES. . . 44 110 6 864 6 754 6 770 15.3 5 655 5 550 5 563 82.2 403 403 403 6.0 651 470 519 8.2 70 64 67 1.1 18 376 305 335 12.0 - - - - 613 439 484 17.4 56 50 53 1.9 19 223 83 136 3.8 2 - 1 (Z) 38 31 35 1.0 14 14 14 0.4 20 784 479 606 5.3 58 50 58 0.5 2 395 2 247 2 286 20.2 _ . . _ 21 231 176 181 4.7 42 42 42 1.1 1 525 1 525 1 525 39.4 . - - - 22 553 303 425 5.7 16 8 16 0.2 870 722 761 10.2 - - - - 23 319 222 275 8.4 16 8 16 0.5 711 584 620 19.0 - - - - 24 234 81 150 3.6 - - - - 159 138 141 3.4 - - - - 25 1 161 857 1 014 5.3 73 54 62 0.3 3 761 3 598 3 639 19.1 90 90 90 0.5 26 403 403 403 6.5 - - - - 2 466 2 466 2 466 39.8 65 65 65 1.0 27 758 454 611 4.8 73 54 62 0.5 1 295 1 132 1 173 9.1 25 25 25 0.2 28 412 218 332 6.4 19 7 12 0.2 698 555 578 11.2 9 9 9 0.2 29 346 236 279 3.6 54 47 50 0.7 597 577 595 7.8 16 16 16 0.2 30 145 122 135 3.8 _ . . . 843 761 780 22.0 29 27 27 0.8 31 97 97 97 5.8 - - - - 654 634 639 38.0 29 27 27 1.6 32 48 25 38 2.0 - - - - 189 127 141 7.6 - - - . 33 25 14 20 4.1 - - - - 189 127 141 28.7 -. - - . 34 23 U 18 1.3 - - - - - - - - - - - - 35 866 804 836 3.9 310 255 271 1.3 5 819 5 789 5 800 26.9 156 155 156 0.7 3S 119 94 101 1.1 309 254 270 3.0 4 826 4 820 4 822 53.9 155 154 155 1.7 37 747 710 735 5.8 1 1 1 (Z) 993 969 978 7.8 1 1 1 (Z) 38 434 402 424 7.3 1 1 1 (Z) 500 476 485 8.3 1 1 1 (Z) 39 313 308 311 4.6 - - - - 493 493 493 7.3 - - - - 40 963 820 929 3.4 175 175 175 0.6 5 459 5 353 5 381 19.8 125 121 121 0,4 41 321 321 321 4.8 132 132 132 2.0 3 085 3 085 3 085 46.4 83 83 83 1.2 42 642 499 608 3.0 43 43 43 0.2 2 374 2 268 2 296 11.2 42 38 38 0.2 43 196 179 187 4.8 43 43 43 1.1 1 838 1 732 1 760 44.7 - - - . 44 446 320 421 2.5 - - - - 536 536 536 3.2 42 38 38 0.2 45 1 852 1 677 1 687 4.5 182 155 161 0.4 7 812 7 257 7 420 19.6 81 81 81 0.2 46 304 304 304 3.7 104 104 104 1.3 3 714 3 651 3 659 44.9 58 58 58 0.7 4 7 1 548 1 373 1 383 4.6 78 51 57 0.2 4 098 3 606 3 761 12.6 23 23 23 0.1 48 1 133 1 047 1 083 9.3 74 47 53 0.5 3 619 3 229 3 361 29.0 16 16 16 0.1 49 415 326 300 1.7 4 4 4 (Z) 479 377 400 2.2 7 7 7 (Z) 50 939 552 746 5.7 120 85 108 0.8 2 978 2 748 2 848 21.8 119 118 118 0.9 51 89 m 81 2.7 11 10 10 0.3 1 568 1 485 1 524 51.6 82 82 82 2.8 5 2 850 478 665 6.6 109 75 98 1.0 1 410 1 263 1 324 13.1 37 36 36 0.4 53 515 346 473 9.8 109 75 98 2.0 1 335 1 189 1 249 25.8 12 11 11 0.2 5«| 335 132 192 3.7 - - - - 75 74 75 1.4 25 25 25 0.5 55 352 177 259 3.9 14 4 9 0.1 1 309 1 182 1 213 18.4 60 56 57 0.9 56 102 102 102 4.4 - - - - 990 914 933 40.5 56 56 56 2.4 57 250 75 157 3.7 14 4 9 0.2 319 268 280 6.5 4 - 1 (Z) 58 133 50 103 6.4 8 2 4 0.2 270 220 232 14.3 4 - 1 0.1 59 117 25 54 2.0 6 2 5 0.2 49 48 48 1.8 - - - - 60 1 136 749 889 4.3 99 98 98 0.5 4 336 3 887 4 030 19.6 39 39 39 0.2 61 99 83 85 1.8 98 98 98 2.1 2 339 2 194 2 217 46.9 35 35 35 0.7 62 1 037 666 804 5.1 1 - - - 1 997 1 693 1 813 11.4 4 4 4 (Z) 63 513 425 485 10.0 • - - - 1 242 939 1 059 21.8 . - - . 64 524 241 319 2.9 1 - - - 755 754 754 6.9 4 4 4 (Z) 65 323 164 236 8.1 23 u 15 0.5 737 626 665 22.8 54 46 48 1.6 66 85 26 51 5.6 - - - - 526 496 507 55.7 49 44 45 4.9 o7 238 138 185 9.2 23 u 15 0.7 211 130 158 7.9 5 2 3 0.1 68 168 127 151 12.6 23 11 15 1.3 192 119 143 11.9 5 2 3 0.3 69 70 U 34 4.2 - - - - 19 11 15 1.9 - - - „ 70 50 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 9. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution of full-time State and type government 1 Total lull-time equivalent employees 2 il justice syste Number of employe total full- time equiva- lent employ- Number of employe total nal ystem nploy- Number of employe NEBRASKA STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . NEVADA STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES, . . NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE LOCAL* TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . NEW JERSEY STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . NEW MEXICO STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL. . . . . COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . NEW YORK STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . NORTH CAROLINA STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . NORTH DAKOTA STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . OHIO STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . OKLAHOMA STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . OREGON STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . PENNSYLVANIA STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . RHODE ISLAND STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES. . . SOUTH CAROLINA STATE LOCAL/ TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . at end of tabic 48 184 26 336 21 848 11 299 10 549 21 140 9 561 11 579 7 790 3 789 25 164 12 100 13 064 2 285 10 779 218 332 67 491 150 841 49 235 101 606 38 833 25 656 13 177 4 928 8 249 703 562 188 026 515 536 101 488 414 048 231 555 80 199 151 356 122 728 28 628 16 844 10 642 6 202 3 209 2 993 237 457 92 942 144 515 62 128 82 387 78 823 45 150 33 673 12 241 21 432 63 383 38 447 24 936 13 379 11 557 249 973 129 515 120 458 40 700 79 758 41 017 18 022 22 995 22 995 78 726 51 304 27 422 16 096 11 326 6 332 2 031 4 301 1 656 2 645 4 341 980 3 361 2 434 927 3 722 889 2 833 460 2 373 43 725 8 697 35 028 11 424 23 604 5 148 2 361 2 787 704 2 083 118 835 23 328 95 507 22 295 73 212 26 648 10 910 15 738 8 656 7 082 2 506 558 1 948 926 1 022 49 420 10 599 38 821 12 440 26 381 11 303 4 510 6 793 1 694 5 099 10 853 3 524 7 329 4 031 3 298 52 354 11 476 40 878 11 255 29 623 3 809 1 567 2 242 2 242 11 318 4 347 6 971 3 677 3 294 5 308 1 921 3 387 1 318 2 069 4 159 952 3 207 2 333 874 2 545 873 1 672 361 1 311 39 967 3 459 31 508 11 005 20 503 4 886 2 296 2 590 610 1 980 110 806 23 078 87 728 20 394 67 334 25 731 10 861 14 870 8 323 6 547 1 756 537 1 219 581 6 3 8 41 531 10 115 31 416 10 541 20 875 10 240 4 466 5 774 1 507 4 267 9 745 3 411 6 334 3 487 2 847 47 129 11 231 35 898 9 648 26 250 3 547 1 552 1 995 1 995 10 186 4 303 5 883 3 085 2 798 5 659 1 950 3 709 1 411 2 298 221 960 26] 363 898 779 875 904 413 49) 41 098 8 528 32 570 11 138 21 432 4 919 2 306 2 613 640 1 973 113 259 23 119 90 140 21 097 69 043 21 133 10 869 10 264 3 600 6 664 545 1 353 673 680 43 790 10 399 33 391 11 363 22 028 10 491 4 479 6 012 1 580 4 432 9 7', 445 528 569 959 48 580 11 268 37 312 10 305 27 007 3 624 1 554 2 070 2 070 10 525 4 311 6 214 3 269 2 945 11.7 7.4 17.0 12.5 21.8 20.0 10.0 28.2 30.3 23.7 11.0 7.2 14.6 18.1 13.8 18.8 12.6 21.6 22.6 21.1 12.7 9.0 19.8 13.0 23.9 16.1 12.3 17.5 20.8 16.7 9.1 2.9 23.3 11.3 5.1 21.8 21.0 22.7 18.4 11.2 23.1 18.3 26.7 13.3 9.9 17.9 12.9 20.7 15.7 9.0 26.2 26.7 25.6 19.4 8.7 31.0 25.3 33.9 8.6 9. ^ 22.7 20.3 26.0 3 421 597 2 824 512 2 312 2 293 228 2 065 1 332 733 2 613 365 2 246 98 2 150 25 905 3 341 22 564 1 515 21 049 3 192 871 2 321 580 1 741 72 181 6 679 65 502 10 540 54 962 11 837 2 526 9 311 2 333 6 978 1 321 161 1 160 320 84C 28 446 2 952 25 494 3 082 22 412 6 382 1 536 4 846 563 4 283 57° 276 403 498 905 30 276 5 836 24 440 1 059 23 381 4? c ?93 13? 2 882 586 2 296 440 1 856 2 224 219 2 005 1 305 700 1 641 353 1 288 78 1 210 23 854 3 209 20 645 1 460 19 165 3 046 811 2 235 530 1 705 68 543 6 552 61 991 9 839 52 152 11 164 2 477 8 687 2 198 6 489 1 001 151 850 237 613 23 468 2 862 20 606 2 714 17 892 5 896 1 492 4 404 512 3 892 26 741 5 609 21 132 866 20 266 6 073 1 550 4 523 1 557 2 966 22? ?s? oqp Q4C 672 530 14? 4 78 664 3 106 587 2 519 455 2 064 2 237 221 2 016 1 310 706 1 780 354 1 426 84 1 342 24 146 3 234 20 912 1 494 19 418 3 038 818 2 220 543 1 677 69 432 6 563 62 869 10 047 52 822 11 297 2 485 8 812 2 224 6 588 1 043 153 690 250 640 24 277 2 877 21 400 2 802 18 598 6 019 1 505 4 514 531 3 983 5 277 1 231 4 046 1 335 2 711 27 380 5 628 21 752 954 20 798 2 262 283 1 979 1 979 778 53' '46 493 753 54.9 30.1 67.9 32.2 89.8 53.0 23.0 61.8 55.4 78.6 64.1 40.5 74.9 20.3 90.0 58.8 37.9 64.2 13.4 90.6 61.8 35.5 85.0 84.8 85.0 61.3 28.4 69.7 47.6 76.5 53.5 22.9 85.9 61.8 98.9 54.9 28.0 65.8 37.1 94.1 55.4 27.7 64.1 24.7 84.4 57.4 33.6 75.1 33.6 89.9 52.9 35.7 62.0 37.4 91.6 56.4 49.9 58.3 9.3 77.0 62.4 18.2 95.6 95.6 54.9 35.5 68.3 45.7 93.5 836 419 417 322 95 385 61 324 252 72 273 55 .186 116 7 2 4 984 809 4 175 3 143 1 032 598 U67 111 19 92 12 099 1 951 12 911 10 148 3 913 3 613 8 998 6 535 966 473 493 387 106 452 66 366 302 84 414 85 329 156 173 5 903 814 5 089 3 267 1 822 668 488 180 40 140 14 862 1 951 7 525 2 210 5 315 5 315 585 £4 521 380 141 8 022 435 7 587 5 256 2 331 1 539 425 1 114 677 437 1 487 237 1 250 1 055 195 9 411 1 085 8 326 4 975 3 351 493 441 52 52 1 601 88 1 513 1 332 181 7 475 2 210 5 265 5 265 291 64 ?27 211 16 6 265 122 6 143 4 292 1 851 1 178 425 753 602 151 1 180 210 970 907 63 8 635 1 067 7 568 4 217 3 351 464 «37 27 27 1 106 87 1 019 960 59 867 431 436 339 97 418 62 356 272 333 85 2«8 137 111 ,43 810 6 3 3 618 487 131 23 ;08 12 889 1 951 10 938 3 712 7 226 2 670 2 210 460 460 281 256 25 7 220 373 6 847 4 801 2 046 1 238 425 813 6^4 1 7 9 1 286 217 1 069 949 120 8 981 1 085 7 896 4 545 3 351 478 438 40 40 1 253 87 1 166 1 072 94 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 51 equivalent employees by State and type of government, October 1975 — Continued Legal s ervices and prosecu .on Public defense Corre ctions Other criminal j.usti =e Number of employees Percent of Number of employees Percent of ■ Number of employees Percent of Number of em ployees Percent of ^ s crimi- crimi- crimi- crimi- a Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent nal justice system employ - Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent nal justice system employ - Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent nal justice system employ- Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent nal justice system employ- j 509 339 384 6.8 49 42 44 0.8 1 337 1 161 1 210 21.4 50 48 48 0.8 1 45 45 45 2.3 - - - - 886 843 859 44.1 30 28 28 1.4 2 464 294 339 9.1 49 42 44 1.2 451 318 351 9.5 20 20 20 0.5 3 287 226 252 17.9 49 42 44 3.1 407 274 307 21.8 14 14 14 1.0 4 177 68 87 3.8 - - - - 44 44 44 1.9 6 6 6 0.3 5 356 340 348 8.2 65 64 64 1.5 1 131 1 102 1 110 26.3 44 44 44 1.0 & 59 56 57 5.9 7 6 6 0.6 578 568 572 59.6 42 42 42 4.4 7 297 284 291 8.9 58 58 58 1.8 553 534 538 16.5 2 2 2 0.1 8 232 227 228 9.6 58 58 58 2.5 508 489 493 20.9 2 2 2 0.1 9 65 57 63 7.0 - - - - 45 45 45 5.0 - - - - 10 92 65 85 3.1 . _ - . 581 547 561 20.2 22 19 20 0.7 1 1 44 44 44 5.0 - - - - 377 373 374 42.7 18 18 18 2.1 12 48 21 41 2.2 - - - - 204 174 187 9.8 4 1 2 0.1 13 25 12 25 6.1 - - - - 181 155 167 40.4 - - - - 14 23 9 16 1.1 - - - - 23 19 20 1.3 4 1 2 0.1 lb 2 986 2 511 2 760 6.7 548 527 536 1.3 8 163 7 879 7 995 19.5 220 212 218 0.5 16 519 484 489 5.7 523 514 517 6.1 3 384 3 327 3 362 39.4 116 116 116 1.4 17 2 467 2 027 2 271 7.0 25 13 19 0.1 4 779 4 552 4 633 14.2 104 96 102 0.3 18 1 831 1 790 1 797 16.1 10 9 10 0.1 4 751 4 539 4 605 41.4 50 44 49 0.4 1" 636 237 474 2.2 15 4 9 (Z) 28 13 28 0.1 54 52 53 0.2 20 303 284 291 5.9 59 57 59 1.2 873 848 860 17.5 53 53 53 1.1 21 235 233 234 10.1 58 56 58 2.5 658 658 658 28.5 51 51 51 2.2 22 68 51 57 2.2 1 1 1 (Z) 215 190 202 7.7 2 2 2 0.1 23 8 7 8 1.2 - - - - 76 54 66 10.3 - - - - 24 60 44 49 2.5 1 1 1 0.1 139 136 136 6.9 2 2 2 0.1 25 6 138 5 327 5 822 5.1 201 120 170 0.2 23 783 23 056 23 284 20.6 1 670 1 661 1 662 1.5 26 1 430 1 430 1 430 6.2 - - - - 12 392 12 269 12 299 53.2 876 876 876 3.8 27 4 708 3 897 4 392 4.9 201 120 170 0.2 11 391 10 787 10 985 12.2 794 785 786 0.9 28 1 663 1 450 1 598 7.6 201 120 170 0.8 5 875 5 273 5 471 25.9 103 99 99 0.5 29 3 045 2 447 2 794 4.0 - - - - 5 516 5 514 5 514 8.0 691 686 687 1.0 30 465 372 409 1.9 54 54 54 0.3 6 625 6 529 6 563 31.1 142 137 140 0.7 31 304 304 304 2.8 54 54 54 0.5 5 722 5 722 5 722 52.6 94 94 94 0.9 32 161 68 105 1.0 - - - . 903 807 841 8.2 48 43 46 0.4 33 69 22 41 1.1 - - - - 898 802 836 23.2 41 36 39 1.1 34 92 46 64 1.0 - - - - 5 5 5 0.1 7 7 7 0.1 35 202 128 153 8.1 5 3 3 0.2 374 316 336 17.7 19 17 18 0.9 36 38 37 37 6.8 - - - - 278 268 274 50.2 17 17 17 3.1 37 164 91 116 8.6 5 3 3 0.2 96 48 62 4.6 2 - 1 0.1 38 126 85 104 15.5 5 3 3 0.4 93 45 59 8.8 2 - 1 0.1 39 38 6 12 1.8 - - - - 3 3 3 0.4 - - - - 40 2 589 1 926 2 258 5.2 48 32 44 0.1 10 226 9 752 9 903 22.6 89 88 88 0.2 41 592 577 581 5.6 5 5 5 (Z) 6 528 6 462 6 476 62.3 87 87 87 0.8 42 1 997 1 349 1 677 5.0 43 27 39 0.1 3 698 3 290 3 427 10.3 2 1 1 (Z) 43 990 824 909 8.0 33 20 31 0.3 3 079 2 691 2 820 24.8 - - - - 44 1 007 525 768 3.5 10 7 8 (Z) 619 599 607 2.8 2 1 1 (Z) 45 679 521 575 5.5 42 31 34 0.3 2 569 2 522 2 533 24.1 92 92 92 0.9 46 400 400 400 8.9 - - - - 2 108 2 108 2 108 47.1 41 41 41 0.9 4 7 279 121 175 2.9 42 31 34 0.6 461 414 425 7.1 51 51 51 0.8 48 32 29 37 2.3 40 29 32 2.0 382 335 346 21.9 . - . - 49 247 92 138 3.1 2 2 2 (Z) 79 79 79 1.8 51 51 51 1.2 50 933 792 849 8.5 30 19 26 0.3 2 661 2 469 2 472 24.8 63 60 63 0.6 51 320 318 318 9.2 21 12 17 0.5 1 639 1 624 1 631 47.3 31 31 31 0.9 52 613 474 531 8.1 9 7 9 0.1 1 022 845 841 12.9 32 29 32 0.5 53 464 428 444 12.4 9 7 9 0.3 1 005 836 832 23.3 - • - - 54 149 46 87 2.9 - - - - 17 9 9 0.3 32 29 32 1.1 55 2 513 1 985 2 308 4.8 418 385 410 0.8 9 534 9 181 9 299 19.1 202 202 202 0.4 56 320 320 320 2.8 - - - - 4 054 4 054 4 054 36.0 181 181 181 1.6 57 2 193 1 665 1 988 5.3 418 385 410 1.1 5 480 5 127 5 245 14.1 21 21 21 0.1 ^8 1 336 1 066 1 164 11.3 418 385 410 4.0 3 446 3 093 3 211 31.2 21 21 21 0.2 59 857 599 824 3.1 - " - - 2 034 2 034 2 034 7.5 - - - - 60 136 106 129 3.6 31 31 31 0.9 694 694 694 19.2 30 30 30 0.8 61 78 78 78 5.0 31 31 31 2.0 694 694 694 44.7 30 30 30 1.9 62 58 28 51 2.5 63 58 28 51 2.5 64 291 203 235 2.2 35 29 33 0.3 3 233 3 096 3 144 29.9 85 80 82 0.8 6 5 102 102 102 2.4 - - - - 2 528 2 510 2 514 58.3 79 74 76 1.8 66 189 101 133 2.1 35 29 33 0.5 705 586 630 10.1 6 6 6 0.1 67 129 85 102 3.1 35 29 33 1.0 622 531 567 17.3 2 2 2 0.1 68 60 16 31 1.1 - - - - 83 55 63 2.1 4 4 4 0.1 6Q 52 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 9. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution of full-time State and type of government 1 Total tull-tim equivale employee Number of employe equiva- lent employ- Police protectl Number of employe Full-tin equiva- lent system employ - Number of employe Full-ti equiva lent JUStlC! system employ- SOUTH DAKOTA. . . . STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. TENNESSEE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. TEXAS STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. UTAH STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. VERMONT STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. VIRGINIA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. WASHINGTON STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. WEST VIRGINIA . . . STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. WISCONSIN STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. WYOMING STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . . COUNTIES. . . . MUNICIPALITIES. 18 452 11 548 6 904 3 300 3 604 184 501 55 025 129 476 64 312 65 164 292 030 147 855 144 175 52 141 92 034 36 119 24 752 11 367 6 016 5 351 12 920 9 916 3 004 25 2 979 234 844 78 849 155 995 81 696 74 299 96 507 60 564 35 943 15 883 20 060 47 931 35 342 12 589 5 391 7 198 147 145 53 193 93 952 34 691 59 261 13 284 7 755 5 529 3 522 2 007 2 625 1 066 1 559 578 981 16 529 4 421 12 108 4 260 7 848 48 088 10 978 37 110 15 374 21 736 4 760 1 616 3 144 1 296 1 848 1 908 1 164 744 35 709 23 521 11 264 12 257 4 948 7 309 15 420 4 686 10 734 5 473 5 261 5 271 1 918 3 353 1 566 1 787 19 748 4 897 14 851 5 528 9 323 1 904 628 1 276 605 671 2 043 955 1 088 401 687 15 114 4 262 10 852 3 655 7 197 44 087 10 615 33 472 931 448 483 037 446 640 100 540 17 523 17 852 7 824 10 028 3 542 6 486 13 882 4 505 9 377 4 840 4 537 4 683 1 888 2 795 1 345 1 450 16 797 4 603 12 194 4 752 7 442 1 613 591 1 022 478 ■544 2 183 980 1 203 442 761 15 422 4 288 11 134 3 787 7 347 45 400 10 708 34 692 14 137 20 555 2?R 496 73? 117 1 112 571 24 547 20 232 9 272 10 960 4 170 6 790 13 866 4 546 9 320 5 036 4 284 4 842 1 893 2 949 1 441 1 508 17 543 4 681 12 862 5 000 7 862 1 719 601 1 118 527 591 11.8 8.5 17.4 13.4 21.1 8.4 7,8 8.6 5.9 11.3 15.5 7.2 24.1 27. 1 22.3 11.7 6.0 24.0 18.6 30.2 13.0 11.2 19.0 96.0 18.4 8.6 11.8 7.0 5.1 9.1 14.4 7.5 25.9 31.7 21.4 10.1 5.4 23.4 26.7 21.0 11.9 8.8 13.7 14.4 13.3 12.9 7.7 20.2 15.0 29.4 1 492 254 1 238 320 918 9 452 1 320 8 132 1 514 6 618 28 942 5 734 23 208 4 135 19 073 2 820 628 2 192 675 1 517 1 135 428 707 4 70 3 13 497 5 091 8 406 3 070 5 336 7 947 1 667 6 280 1 888 4 392 3 089 962 2 127 481 1 646 12 605 1 400 11 205 2 310 8 895 1 074 241 833 ?74 659 1 152 237 915 236 679 8 748 1 168 7 580 1 366 6 214 27 729 5 565 22 164 3 815 18 349 2 404 567 1 837 559 1 278 924 403 521 2 519 614 071 543 368 176 61? 574 938 802 136 2 801 938 1 863 442 1 421 10 608 1 273 9 335 2 037 7 298 965 219 746 237 509 1 222 238 984 246 738 8 880 1 189 7 691 1 389 6 302 28 077 5 604 22 473 3 926 18 547 2 533 580 1 953 581 1 372 951 405 546 3 543 11 281 3 383 7 898 2 692 5 206 7 242 1 587 5 655 1 821 3 834 2 848 941 1 907 458 1 449 10 951 1 297 9 654 2 085 7 569 Q93 ?25 768 ?42 526 56.0 24.3 81.8 55.7 97.0 57.6 27.7 69.1 36.7 85.8 54.0 52.3 54.4 18.9 90.2 59.9 38.8 71.5 52.0 85.0 56.5 36.4 95.8 12.5 99.5 55.8 36.5 72.1 64.6 76.7 52.2 34.9 60.7 36.2 89.5 58.8 49.7 64.7 31.8 96.1 62.4 27.7 75.1 41.7 96.3 57.8 37.4 68.7 45.9 89.0 457 418 39 ?3 16 2 557 322 2 235 1 579 656 7 657 463 7 194 5 754 1 440 598 129 469 235 234 194 166 28 28 2 671 1 398 1 273 741 532 2 137 234 1 903 1 424 479 784 97 087 600 87 2 171 449 1 722 1 538 184 ?60 50 210 160 60 361 367 14 14 2 129 322 1 807 1 323 484 5 986 457 5 529 4 667 862 408 111 297 167 130 165 152 13 13 2 289 1 396 893 476 417 1 605 225 1 380 1 162 218 627 9c 531 512 19 1 723 402 1 321 1 307 14 189 50 139 124 15 392 376 16 lb 199 322 877 359 516 567 458 109 082 505 116 389 199 190 ,7 4 156 18 18 2 438 1 397 1 041 568 473 1 719 227 1 492 1 263 229 673 ^6 577 547 30 1 886 424 1 462 1 407 55 216 50 16b 139 27 18.0 38.4 1.3 3.6 14.3 7.5 16.9 35.9 7.1 12.6 4.3 14.8 24.5 5.0 11.9 7.8 14.2 17.8 11.8 10.3 14.0 3.2 75.0 12.1 15.1 9.5 13.6 7.0 12.4 5.0 16.0 25.1 5.3 13.9 5.1 19.6 38.0 2.0 10.8 9.1 11.4 28.1 0.7 12.6 8.3 14.8 26.4 4.6 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Z Less than half the unit of measurement shown. 'Data for municipalities, and the local governments totals which include municipal data ; are estimates subject to (boroughs, parishes) are based on a canvass of all county governments and therefore are not subject to sampling varif -The relation of criminal justice full-time equivalent employees to total full-time equivalent employees is based only and does not include data for State-operated liquor stores, locally operated utility systems, or for independent ampling va -iatioi ; data fo r counti ion; see text foi data lim i tat ions n data for genera 1 purpose government school dis nets and speci »1 distr ct CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 53 equivalent employees by State and type of government, October 1975— Continued Legal s ervices and prosecut ton Public defense Corre ctions ot her crim inal justi ce Number of employees Percent of total Number of employees Percent of total- Number of employees Percent of total Number of employees Percent of total ~ s crimi- crimi- crimi- crimi- '- Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent nal justice system employ- Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent nal justice system employ - Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent nal justice system employ- Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent nal justice system employ - 264 166 200 9.2 7 7 7 0.3 373 306 331 15.2 32 31 31 1.4 i 79 66 69 7.0 - - - - 283 254 266 27.1 32 31 31 3.2 2 185 100 131 10.9 7 7 7 0.6 90 52 65 5.4 - - - - 3 139 93 109 24.7 7 7 7 1.6 89 51 64 14.5 - - - - 4 46 7 22 2.9 - - - - 1 1 1 0.1 - - - - 5 588 386 451 2.9 82 76 79 0.5 3 789 3 717 3 754 24.3 61 58 59 0.4 6 257 257 257 6.0 23 19 21 0.5 2 464 2 461 2 464 57.5 35 35 35 0.8 7 331 129 194 1.7 59 57 58 0.5 1 325 1 256 1 290 11.6 26 23 24 0.2 8 166 36 74 2.0 42 40 41 1.1 948 879 913 24.1 11 11 11 0.3 '■i 165 93 120 1.6 17 17 17 0.2 377 377 377 5.1 15 12 13 0.2 10 2 947 2 342 2 540 5.6 13 5 9 (Z) 8 241 7 759 7 927 15.2 288 266 280 0.5 11 429 358 371 3.5 - - - - 4 278 4 165 4 203 39.3 74 70 72 0.7 12 2 518 1 984 2 169 6.3 13 5 9 3 963 3 594 3 724 9.0 214 196 208 0.5 13 1 768 1 580 1 647 11.7 13 5 9 (Z) 3 514 3 161 3 288 15.9 190 180 185 0.9 14 750 404 522 2.5 - - - - 449 433 436 2.1 24 16 23 0.1 L5 323 223 253 6.0 5 . 2 (Z) 981 866 904 21.4 33 30 31 0.7 16 91 62 70 4.7 - - - - 735 678 699 46.7 33 30 31 2.1 17 232 161 183 6.7 5 - 2 0.1 246 188 205 7.5 - - - - 18 142 126 135 12.1 3 - 1 0.1 241 185 201 18.0 - - - - 19 90 35 48 3.0 2 - 1 0.1 5 3 4 0.2 - - - - 20 85 78 79 4.7 36 36 36 2.1 437 416 422 25. 1 21 21 21 1.2 21 80 75 76 6.8 36 36 36 3.2 433 413 418 37.6 21 21 21 1.9 2 2 5 3 3 0.5 - - - - 4 3 4 0.7 - - - - 2 3 - - - - - - - - 3 2 3 12.5 - - - - 24 5 3 3 0.5 - - - - 1 1 1 0.2 - - - - 25 1 046 398 675 3.3 17 17 17 0.1 6 202 5 449 5 735 28.4 88 85 86 0.4 2 6 465 62 192 2.1 11 11 11 0.1 4 239 4 224 4 229 45.6 60 60 60 0.6 27 581 336 483 4.4 6 6 6 0. 1 1 963 1 225 1 506 13.7 28 25 26 0.2 2 8 316 184 275 6.6 - - - - 795 491 611 14.7 26 23 24 0.6 29 265 152 208 3.1 6 6 6 0. 1 1 168 734 895 13.2 2 2 2 (Z) 30 1 036 774 844 6.1 53 47 51 0.4 4 190 3 892 3 955 28.5 57 52 55 0.4 31 261 238 244 5.4 - - - - 2 493 2 437 2 457 54.0 31 31 31 0.7 32 775 536 600 6.4 53 47 51 0.5 1 697 1 455 1 498 16.1 26 21 24 0.3 33 459 420 432 8.6 53 47 51 1.0 1 623 1 388 1 445 28.7 26 21 24 0.5 34 316 116 168 3.9 - - - - 74 67 53 1.2 - - - - 35 303 240 274 5.7 _ _ _ _ 1 052 973 1 004 20.7 43 42 43 0.9 36 57 56 57 3.0 - - - - 762 759 759 40.1 40 39 40 2.1 37 246 184 217 7.4 - - - - 290 214 245 8.3 3 3 3 0.1 38 193 174 189 13.1 - - - - 289 214 244 16.9 3 3 3 0.2 39 53 10 28 1.9 - - - - 1 - 1 0.1 - - - - 40 919 695 855 4.9 21 18 20 0.1 3 985 3 710 3 787 21.6 47 43 44 0.3 41 198 154 163 3.5 13 13 13 0.3 2 790 2 718 2 740 58.5 47 43 44 0.9 42 721 541 692 5.4 8 5 7 0.1 1 195 992 1 047 8.1 - - - - 43 477 411 454 9.1 8 5 7 0.1 1 195 992 1 047 20.9 - - - - 44 244 130 238 3.0 4 5 170 104 134 7.8 15 9 14 0.8 372 335 350 20.4 13 11 12 0.7 4 6 34 28 29 4.8 - - - - 292 283 286 47.6 11 11 11 1.8 47 136 76 105 9.4 15 9 14 1.3 80 52 64 5.7 2 - 1 0.1 4 8 87 69 80 15.2 15 9 14 2.7 67 39 51 9.7 2 - 1 0.2 49 49 7 25 4.2 - - - - 13 13 13 2.2 - - - - 50 54 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 10. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll, by State and type of government, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) State and type of government Total Octobe payroll 2 October payroll Percent of tal October payroll October payroll Percent of total criminal justice systeir October payroll STATES-LOCAL, TOTAL . STATES LOCAL, TOTAL. ... COUNTIES , MUNICIPALITIES. . , ALABAMA , STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL , COUNTIES , MUNICIPALITIES , ALASKA , STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL , BOROUGHS , MUNICIPALITIES , ARIZONA , STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES , ARKANSAS STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES , CALIFORNIA STATE , LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES , MUNICIPALITIES , COLORADO STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES , CONNECTICUT STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES DELAWARE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. ... STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES FLORIDA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES GEORGIA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES HAWAII STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES , IDAHO STATE local, total counties municipalities See footnotes .it end of tabic. 971 039 638 867 332 172 174 459 157 713 72 348 45 216 27 132 9 528 17 604 37 973 20 093 17 880 4 294 13 586 58 858 31 712 27 147 11 088 16 058 36 147 25 116 11 030 5 140 5 891 679 707 264 512 415 195 232 203 182 992 75 866 44 914 30 952 9 399 21 553 123 109 36 667 86 442 86 442 16 964 11 438 5 527 1 910 3 617 55 932 55 932 55 932 186 500 86 088 100 412 46 716 53 696 97 258 59 489 37 769 15 921 21 847 44 968 34 650 10 319 2 308 8 Oil 19 271 13 435 5 836 3 039 2 797 1 013 762 280 593 733 169 251 535 481 634 9 858 3 065 6 793 2 511 4 283 3 865 2 854 1 Oil 14 99b 11 148 3 066 8 082 3 751 4 331 4 068 1 439 2 629 1 018 1 611 152 789 33 240 119 549 66 751 52 798 12 821 4 713 8 108 1 574 6 534 12 487 5 574 6 913 6 913 3 104 2 074 1 030 366 664 12 324 12 324 41 604 14 097 27 507 12 623 14 884 16 910 5 367 11 543 5 647 5 896 4 190 1 260 2 929 695 2 234 2 455 940 1 515 718 797 17.0 10.6 22.0 21.4 22.3 13.6 6.8 25.0 26.4 24.3 10.2 14.2 5.7 0.3 7,3 18.9 9.7 29.8 33.8 27.0 11.3 5.7 23.8 19.8 27.4 22.5 12.6 28.8 28.7 28.9 16.9 10.5 26.2 16.7 30.3 10.1 15.2 8.0 8.0 18.3 18.1 18.6 19.2 18.4 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.3 16.4 27.4 27.0 27.7 17.4 9.0 30.6 35.5 27.0 9.3 3.6 28.4 30.1 27.9 12.7 7.0 26.0 23.6 28.5 606 599 97 737 508 862 90 874 417 988 6 094 1 295 4 799 842 3 957 1 982 1 091 891 3 6 720 1 601 5 119 1 194 3 925 2 457 597 1 860 427 1 433 81 876 13 726 68 150 19 335 48 815 7 342 1 067 6 275 777 5 498 8 137 1 403 6 733 6 733 1 526 668 858 273 585 23 990 2 789 21 201 7 555 13 646 9 640 1 808 7 832 2 516 5 315 2 728 5 2 723 635 2 088 1 401 278 1 123 359 7^4 59.8 34.8 69.4 36.1 86.8 61.8 42.2 70.6 33.5 92.4 51.3 38.2 88.2 23.4 89.1 60.3 52.2 63.3 31.8 90.6 60.4 41.5 70.7 41.9 88.9 53.6 41.3 57.0 29.0 92.5 57.3 22.6 77,4 49.4 84.1 65.2 25.2 97.4 97.4 49.1 32.2 83.3 74.5 88.1 57.2 57.2 57.2 57.7 19.8 77.1 59.9 91.7 57.0 33.7 67.8 44.6 90.2 65.1 0.4 93.0 91.4 93.5 57.1 29.6 74.1 50.0 95.8 128 004 37 372 90 632 64 488 26 144 1 528 428 1 100 994 106 709 703 5 1 315 227 1 089 901 187 540 155 385 298 87 16 840 2 347 14 493 13 788 705 812 258 554 147 407 174 169 5 5 610 485 125 80 45 184 184 224 961 263 786 477 235 509 726 496 228 o04 604 410 254 156 154 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 55 Table 10. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll, by State and type of government, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal services and prosecution Publi< defense Corr ections Other criir inal justice State and type of government October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system 56 425 15 615 40 810 26 172 14 638 507 255 252 164 88 372 291 81 11 70 770 121 649 452 197 233 77 155 113 42 11 179 1 097 10 082 7 959 2 122 956 241 715 379 336 543 392 151 151 139 91 47 14 34 271 271 271 2 057 1 586 470 178 292 749 286 463 361 102 313 117 196 50 146 172 43 129 99 30 5.6 5.6 5.6 10.4 3.0 5.1 8.3 3.7 6.5 2.1 9.6 10.2 8.0 76.6 7.0 6.9 3.9 8.0 12.1 4.6 5.7 5.4 5.9 11.1 2.6 7.3 3.3 8.4 11.9 4.0 7.5 5.1 8.8 24.1 5.1 4.3 7.0 2.2 2.2 4.5 4.4 4.6 3.8 5.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 4.9 11.3 1.7 1.4 2.0 4.4 5.3 4.0 6.4 1.7 7.5 9.2 6.7 7.3 6.5 7.0 4.5 8.5 13.8 3.8 7 898 3 057 4 841 4 629 212 2 2 2 78 78 185 185 184 1 22 22 22 2 676 2 676 2 575 101 179 179 127 127 34 34 721 695 26 22 4 61 6 55 49 6 67 67 21 21 21 0.8 1.1 0.7 1.8 (ZJ 0.1 (Z) 2.0 2.7 1.7 2.3 4.9 (Z) 0.6 0.9 2.2 1.8 2.2 3.9 0.2 1.4 3.8 1.0 2.3 1.1 1.7 1.7 4.9 0.1 0.2 (Z) 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.9 0.1 1.6 5.3 0.9 1.4 3.0 208 942 123 252 85 690 64 478 21 213 1 676 1 042 634 508 125 701 667 33 33 2 110 1 075 1 035 1 018 17 766 560 206 157 49 39 914 16 017 23 896 22 938 959 2 453 1 896 556 264 292 2 446 2 446 760 760 3 766 3 766 3 766 9 362 6 985 2 377 1 937 440 4 158 2 713 1 445 1 222 223 454 446 8 8 420 334 86 85 1 20.6 43.9 11.7 25.6 4.4 17.0 34.0 9.3 20.3 2.9 18.1 23.4 3.3 3.3 18.9 35.1 12.8 27.1 0.4 18.8 38.9 7.8 15.4 3.1 26.1 48.2 20.0 34.4 1.8 19.1 40.2 6.9 16.8 4.5 19.6 43.9 24.5 36.6 30.6 30.6 30.6 22.5 49.6 8.6 15.3 3.0 24.6 50.5 12.5 21.6 3.8 10.8 35.4 0.3 1.1 17.1 35.5 5.7 11.9 0.1 5 893 3 561 2 333 893 1 439 51 46 5 5 23 23 47 42 5 1 4 50 50 305 53 252 157 95 79 72 7 7 61 37 24 24 36 36 49 49 49 250 80 170 144 26 66 45 21 1 21 24 22 2 2 31 31 0.6 1.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.5 1.5 0.1 MUNICIPALITIES ALABAMA 0.1 0.6 0.8 BOROUGHS MUNICIPALITIES 0.4 1.4 0.1 (Z) 0.1 1.2 3.5 ARKANSAS STATE MUNICIPALITIES 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.6 1.5 0,1 0.4 STATE 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.3 1.2 1.8 STATE 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.2 (Z) 0.4 0.6 1.7 0.1 0.3 FLORIDA MUNICIPALITIES GEORGIA MUNICIPALITIES STATE 1.3 3.4 STATE COUNTIES „ nd of tabic. 56 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 10. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll, by State and type of government, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total October payroll 2 Total criminal justice system Police protection Jud icial State and type of government October payroll Percent of total October payroll October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system 254 272 126 092 128 180 34 307 93 872 97 801 51 935 45 866 19 104 26 762 64 322 39 102 25 220 12 276 12 944 51 502 31 841 19 661 7 832 11 829 63 921 44 661 19 260 6 761 12 499 78 232 52 003 26 229 9 090 17 139 28 475 13 122 15 353 488 14 864 201 843 65 176 136 667 96 713 39 954 235 059 61 651 173 407 5 873 167 534 234 704 123 317 111 387 40 340 71 046 103 475 55 325 48 150 22 695 25 454 41 957 24 846 17 111 9 043 8 068 94 698 54 060 40 638 11 382 29 256 20 596 14 080 6 516 3 693 2 823 58 425 12 946 45 479 11 629 33 851 14 863 4 734 10 129 2 919 7 210 8 156 2 936 5 220 2 216 3 004 7 598 2 902 4 696 1 838 2 858 9 747 3 660 6 087 2 466 3 621 15 472 5 293 10 179 3 669 6 510 2 881 1 380 1 500 315 1 185 23 536 10 185 13 351 6 656 6 696 29 135 6 822 22 313 3 832 18 481 45 742 10 040 35 702 12 259 23 444 13 972 3 226 10 746 5 057 5 689 4 983 2 079 2 904 1 042 1 863 17 458 4 240 13 219 3 582 9 637 2 525 963 1 562 871 691 23.0 10.3 35.5 33.9 36.1 15.2 9.1 22.1 15.3 26.9 12.7 7.5 20.7 18.0 23.2 14.8 9.1 23.9 23.5 24.2 15.2 8.2 31.6 36.5 29.0 19.8 10.2 38.8 40.4 38.0 10.1 10,5 9.8 64.5 8.0 11.7 15.6 9.8 6.9 16.8 12.4 11.1 12.9 65.2 11.0 19.5 8.1 32.1 30.4 33.0 13.5 5.8 22.3 22.3 22.4 11.9 8.4 17.0 11.5 23.1 18.4 7.8 32.5 31.5 32.9 12.3 6.8 24.0 23.6 24.5 40 355 4 125 36 230 2 913 33 317 9 196 1 985 7 210 1 038 6 173 4 580 991 3 589 692 2 897 3 935 735 3 201 600 2 600 6 051 1 782 4 269 1 050 3 219 9 522 2 346 7 176 2 191 4 985 1 806 507 1 299 132 1 167 13 380 2 924 10 456 4 995 5 462 19 019 2 551 16 469 33 16 436 28 563 4 135 24 428 3 157 21 271 8 115 1 328 6 788 1 448 5 340 3 229 1 014 2 215 474 1 740 10 977 1 341 9 637 1 466 8 171 1 328 263 1 065 436 629 69.1 31.9 79.7 25.1 98.4 61.9 41.9 71.2 35.5 85.6 56.2 33.8 68.8 31.2 96.4 51.8 25.3 68.2 32.7 91.0 62.1 48.7 70.1 42.6 88.9 61.5 44.3 70.5 59.7 76.6 62.7 36.7 86.6 41.8 98.5 56.9 28.7 78.3 75.0 81.6 65.3 37.4 73.8 0.9 88.9 62.4 41.2 68.4 25.8 90.7 58.1 41.1 63.2 28.6 93.9 64.8 48.8 76.3 45.6 93.4 62.9 31.6 72.9 40.9 84.8 52.6 27.3 68.2 50.0 91.1 7 143 2 893 4 250 4 223 27 1 769 459 1 310 862 449 1 191 468 723 723 1 040 296 744 643 101 1 348 423 925 743 182 2 108 494 1 614 852 762 293 211 82 80 1 2 416 1 390 1 026 641 385 3 578 736 2 842 1 817 1 025 6 490 1 0B6 5 404 4 137 1 267 1 937 305 1 631 1 628 3 625 221 404 362 42 2 541 1 032 1 510 989 521 324 87 237 210 27 12.2 22.3 9.3 36.3 0.1 11.9 9.7 12.9 29.5 6.2 14.6 16.0 13.8 32.6 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . COUNTIES INDIANA . COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES KANSAS 13.7 10.2 15.8 35,0 3.5 13.8 11.6 15.2 30.1 5.0 13.6 9.3 15.9 23.2 11.7 10.2 15.3 5.4 25.5 0.1 10.3 13.6 7.7 KENTUCKY LOUISIANA STATE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MARYLAND . STATE . . COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES 5.7 12.3 10.8 12.7 STATE COUNTIES 14.2 10.8 15.1 33.7 13.9 STATE 15.2 COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES 12.5 STATE 13.9 34.8 2.3 14.6 24.3 11.4 27.6 MUNICIPALITIES MISSOURI STATE COUNTIES MONTANA 12.8 9.0 15.2 24.1 3.9 LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES i ml of table. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 57 Table 10. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll, by State and type of government, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) State and type of government October payroll Perce total c Public defe October payroll Percent total crlm October payroll October payroll Percent total crim ILLINOIS STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . INDIANA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . IOWA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . KANSAS STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . KENTUCKY STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . LOUISIANA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL PARISHES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . MAINE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . MARYLAND. . . . . ... , STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . MASSACHUSETTS STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . MICHIGAN STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . MINNESOTA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . MISSISSIPPI STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . MISSOURI STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . MONTANA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . See footnotes at end of tabic 2 497 548 1 949 1 460 489 839 353 485 253 233 500 137 364 280 83 526 153 372 254 118 537 186 352 234 118 896 446 4«9 220 230 137 109 28 11 17 1 069 140 930 530 400 950 354 596 173 422 2 303 448 1 855 1 421 434 880 112 768 526 241 236 124 112 65 46 827 102 725 394 331 191 63 128 104 24 4.3 4.2 4.3 12.6 1.4 5.6 7.5 4.8 8.7 3.2 6.1 4.7 7.0 12.6 2.8 6.9 5.3 7.9 13.8 4.1 5.5 5.1 5.8 9.5 3.2 5.8 8.4 4.4 6.0 3.5 4.8 7.9 1.9 3.6 1.4 4.5 1.4 7.0 8.0 6.0 3.3 5.2 2.7 4.5 2.3 5.0 4.5 5.2 11.6 1.9 6.3 3.5 7.1 10.4 4.2 4.7 6.0 3.8 6.3 2.5 4.7 2.4 5.5 11.0 3.4 7.6 6.5 8.2 11.9 3.5 613 116 497 496 1 102 22 80 62 18 368 367 1 1 184 142 43 43 219 150 68 64 140 11 129 129 1.0 0.9 1.1 4.3 (Z) 0.7 0.5 0.8 2.1 0.3 0.4 1.0 0.2 0.5 (Z) 0.6 1.2 0.? 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.6 1.6 3.6 (Z) (Z) 0.6 2.1 0.2 1.1 0.5 1.5 0.2 0.5 (Z) 1.0 0.3 1.2 2.6 0.2 0.3 O.J 0.6 2.3 (Z) (Z) 0.6 0.9 1.7 7 624 5 102 2 522 2 516 6 2 827 1 847 980 661 319 1 814 1 307 507 499 2 Oil 1 682 328 302 26 1 754 1 224 530 427 103 2 823 1 959 864 386 478 621 529 92 92 6 113 5 176 937 487 450 5 278 2 950 2 327 1 765 562 8 063 4 146 3 917 3 458 459 2 779 1 387 1 393 1 313 80 836 669 167 136 32 2 974 1 631 1 343 733 609 615 500 115 105 10 13.0 39.4 5.5 21.6 (Z) 19.0 39.0 9.7 22.6 4.4 22.2 44.5 9.7 22.5 0.3 26.5 58.0 7.0 16.4 0.9 18.0 33.5 8.7 17.3 2.8 18.2 37.0 8.5 10.5 7.3 21.5 38.3 6.1 29.1 26.0 50.8 7.0 7.3 6.7 18.1 43.2 10.4 46.1 3.0 17.6 41.3 11.0 28.2 2.0 19.9 43.0 13.0 26.0 1.4 16.8 32.2 5.8 13.0 1.7 17.0 38.5 10.2 20.5 6.3 24.3 51.9 7.4 12.0 1.5 194 163 31 20 11 130 67 63 44 19 49 33 17 1 16 72 21 51 39 12 190 187 2 2 126 90 36 103 74 29 22 121 84 37 12 25 51 50 0.3 1.3 0.1 0.2 (Z) 0.9 1.4 0.6 1.5 0.3 0.6 1.1 0.3 (Z) 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.3 1.8 0.8 1.8 !Z) (Z) 0.4 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.2 (Z) 0.9 2.6 0.3 0.2 0.4 1.0 2.4 (Z) (Z) 0.2 0.9 (Z) (Z) 2.1 5.3 0.1 0.2 58 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 10. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll, by State and type of government, October 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) State and type of gove Total October payroll 2 Percent of total October payroll October payroll October system 55.2 832 32.0 488 68.5 344 31.1 259 88.7 85 53.8 428 22.2 114 63.5 314 56.8 239 80.2 74 64.6 311 40.9 124 77.6 187 23.1 104 90.8 83 61.6 5 303 37.7 1 130 67.9 4 173 13.3 3 198 93.9 974 61.5 529 34.9 424 85.4 105 86.8 18 85.0 86 62.9 17 410 27.7 3 887 71.8 13 523 51.8 4 265 77.1 9 258 53.9 2 143 24.7 1 804 87.2 339 63.4 339 98.3 - 56.3 301 28.5 100 69.3 201 37.6 175 93.7 26 59.1 6 224 27.7 744 69.8 5 479 25.6 3 723 86.8 1 756 56.5 1 052 33.4 530 75.6 522 31.0 391 88.8 131 55.4 1 288 36.0 425 66.4 863 42.8 785 93.5 78 61.2 8 398 50.6 1 921 65.0 6 477 10.4 3 194 79.2 3 283 60.2 489 20.1 464 96.5 25 96.5 25 55.0 968 37.2 132 69.7 836 47.8 768 93.3 68 NEBRASKA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL. . COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEVADA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEW JERSEY STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEW MEXICO STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NEW YORK STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NORTH CAROLINA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES NORTH DAKOTA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES OHIO STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES OKLAHOMA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES OREGON STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES PENNSYLVANIA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES RHODE ISLAND STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES SOUTH CAROLINA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES See footnotes at end of table. 36 521 20 676 15 845 7 261 8 584 22 096 10 395 11 701 7 620 4 081 20 544 10 724 9 820 1 257 8 562 211 034 68 671 142 363 43 199 99 164 31 385 22 321 9 063 3 137 5 926 782 286 196 324 585 963 94 725 491 238 183 631 67 720 115 911 94 099 21 812 14 683 10 163 4 520 2 134 2 386 214 540 89 357 125 183 46 305 78 878 58 690 36 922 21 768 6 544 15 225 63 304 39 393 23 911 11 913 11 998 233 168 127 385 105 783 27 494 78 289 39 374 16 826 22 549 22 549 57 117 40 404 16 713 9 705 7 009 087 849 238 135 103 4 767 1 112 3 655 2 618 1 037 2 461 873 1 587 309 1 278 44 251 9 319 34 932 11 252 23 680 4 140 1 960 2 180 451 1 729 146 326 29 431 116 895 24 648 92 247 17 462 9 312 8 150 2 598 5 552 1 635 522 1 113 485 628 44 800 11 478 33 322 9 224 24 098 8 216 3 716 4 500 1 029 3 471 10 786 3 901 6 885 3 684 3 201 51 456 13 880 37 576 7 739 29 836 3 704 1 761 1 943 1 943 8 219 3 718 4 501 2 338 2 163 13.9 8.9 20.4 15.6 24.5 21.6 10.7 31.2 34.4 25.4 12.0 8.1 16.2 24.6 14.9 21.0 13.6 24.5 26.0 23.9 13.2 8.8 24.1 14.4 29.2 18.7 15.0 19.9 26.0 18.8 9.5 13.8 7.0 2.8 25.5 11.1 5.1 24.6 22.7 26.3 20.9 12.8 26.6 19.9 30.6 14.0 10.1 20.7 15.7 22.8 17.0 9.9 28.8 30.9 26.7 22.1 10.9 35.5 28.1 38.1 9.4 10.5 8.6 8.0 14.4 9.2 26.9 24.1 30.9 2 810 592 2 218 353 1 865 2 566 247 2 319 1 488 831 1 589 357 1 232 71 1 161 27 241 3 517 23 724 1 499 22 225 2 545 683 1 862 391 1 471 92 076 8 157 83 919 12 765 71 154 9 412 2 305 7 107 1 647 5 460 920 149 772 183 589 26 458 3 184 23 274 2 364 20 910 4 645 1 242 3 403 319 3 084 5 975 1 406 4 569 1 578 2 991 31 466 7 024 24 442 807 23 635 2 230 354 1 875 1 875 4 519 1 383 3 137 1 118 2 019 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 59 Table 10. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll, by State and type of government, October 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) State and type of gove October payroll October payroll October payroll October payroll Percent total criir NEBRASKA STATE local, total counties municipalities. . . . NEVADA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . , . NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . NEW JERSEY STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . NEW MEXICO STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . NEW YORK STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . NORTH CAROLINA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES, . . . NORTH DAKOTA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES. MUNICIPALITIES. . . . OHIO STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . OKLAHOMA STATE local, total counties municipalities. . . . OREGON STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . PENNSYLVANIA STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . RHODE ISLAND STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES. . . . SOUTH CAROLINA STATE LOCAL TOTAL, COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES. . . . See footnotes at end of tabl. 368 56 312 208 104 418 63 355 273 81 95 54 41 24 17 3 204 633 2 571 2 155 416 307 232 75 6 67 7 455 2 080 5 376 2 034 3 341 544 418 126 42 64 136 42 94 83 11 2 294 662 1 632 845 787 583 396 187 52 135 922 380 542 453 88 2 148 384 1 764 950 814 134 91 43 43 253 136 117 7.2 3.0 9.6 18.3 5.0 5.6 9.7 10.4 7.8 3.9 6.2 2.6 7,9 1.3 7.2 6.8 7.4 19,2 1.8 7.4 11.8 3.4 1.8 3.9 5.1 7.1 4.6 8.3 3.6 3.1 4.5 1.5 1.6 1.5 8.3 8.1 8.5 17.2 1.8 5.1 5.8 4.9 9.2 3.3 7.1 10.6 4.2 5.0 3.9 8.5 9.7 7.9 12.3 2.8 4.2 2.8 4.7 12.3 2.7 3.6 5.2 2.2 2.2 J.l 3.7 2.6 3.9 1.2 643 629 14 9 62 61 1 1 176 176 176 323 323 2.0 0.9 2.3 3.2 1.5 6.7 (Z) 0.1 1.5 3.1 (Z) ft 12 11 654 1 599 12 624 1 809 100.0 14.3 8 612 1 273 8 1 316 154 8 624 1 270 100.0 14.4 1 921 255 1 813 193 1 962 253 100.0 12.9 10 ESSEX COUNTY AREA . . 11 MIDDLESEX COUNTY AREA 4 066 3 897 4 237 33.6 2 887 2 761 3 005 34.1 566 552 596 30.4 12 NORFOLK COUNTY AREA . 1 718 1 626 1 845 14.6 1 292 1 243 1 389 15.7 224 192 237 12.1 13 SUFFOLK COUNTY AREA . 4 734 4 732 4 733 37.5 3 160 3 160 3 160 35.8 876 876 876 44.6 1^ CHICAGO SMSA 31 26 1 497 93 1 274 29 218 25 380 1 061 31 022 26 841 1 415 100.0 86.5 4.6 23 95V 20 572 857 22 19 262 474 729 23 474 20 481 940 100.0 87.2 4.0 4 217 3 753 181 3 791 3 392 147 4 160 3 696 205 100.0 88.8 4.9 15 COOK COUNTY AREA. . . 16 DU PAGE COUNTY AREA . 17 9 39 962 44 3 826 905 325 786 1 048 309 2.5 3.4 1.0 726 661 354 628 624 248 599 718 238 2.6 3.1 1.0 72 104 35 66 89 24 63 109 27 1.5 2.6 0.6 18 LAKE COUNTY AREA. . . 19 MCHENRY COUNTY AREA . 20 6 948 114 855 701 6 957 6 269 623 7 338 6 468 2.0 100.0 86.4 789 5 443 4 577 4 4 559 716 322 498 4 854 4 364 2.1 100.0 89.9 72 1 576 1 364 71 1 358 1 177 60 1 476 1 266 1.4 100.0 85.8 21 CLEVELAND SMSA 22 CUYAHOGA COUNTY AREA. 2' GEAUGA COUNTY AREA. . 8? 54 130 1.8 30 19 44 0.9 28 20 46 3.1 24 821 356 408 226 464 256 6.3 3.5 576 260 22b 149 282 164 5.8 3.4 113 66 105 56 101 63 6.8 4.3 25 MEDINA COUNTY AREA. . 26 DALLAS-FORT WORTH SMSA. ft 473 8 149 6 498 100.0 5 925 5 840 5 988 100.0 1 244 1 093 1 202 100.0 ^7 COLLIN COUNTY AREA. . 374 341 211 2.5 293 298 182 3.0 56 23 17 1.4 2"' DALLAS COUNTY AREA. . 5 ?44 5 176 5 235 61.6 3 765 3 74b 3 768 62.9 728 690 718 59.7 29 DENTON COUNTY AREA. . 181 168 235 2.8 99 99 137 2.3 27 27 37 3.1 30 ELLIS COUNTY AREA . . 25 23 108 1.3 19 19 86 1.4 - - - - 31 HOOD COUNTY AREA. . . 23 103 12 81 23 99 0.3 1.2 10 60 6 56 12 64 0.2 1.1 a 25 4 15 8 20 0.7 1.7 32 JOHNSON COUNTY AREA . 3? KAUFMAN COUNTY AREA . 94 66 77 0.9 59 47 52 0.9 26 10 13 1.1 3^ PARKER COUNTY AREA. . 70 55 66 0.8 35 33 36 0.6 21 9 16 1.3 36 ROCKWALL COUNTY AREA. 21 10 56 0.7 9 5 24 0.4 7 3 20 1.7 36 TARRANT COUNTY AREA . 2 300 2 168 2 316 27.3 1 557 1 516 1 594 26.6 333 302 327 27.2 37 16 34 725 [87 29 15 946 147 72 17 172 133 0.8 100. 0.8 14 11 370 126 11 14 003 97 33 11 661 87 0.6 100.0 0.7 13 2 749 35 10 2 523 29 26 2 864 28 2.2 100.0 1.0 38 39 LAPEER COUNTY AREA. . 40 LIVINGSTON COUNTY AREA 122 99 240 1.4 45 41 95 0.8 44 34 e6 3.0 41 MACOMB COUNTY AREA. . 1 743 1 672 2 007 11.7 1 075 1 056 1 249 10.7 345 314 394 13.8 42 OAKLAND COUNTY AREA . 2 632 2 434 2 883 16.8 1 566 1 523 1 758 15.1 491 413 526 18.4 43 ST. CLAIR COUNTY AREA 530 333 267 1.6 349 182 145 1.2 80 67 K 7 2.0 44 WAYNE COUNTY AREA . . 11 502 11 261 11 642 67.8 8 209 8 104 8 327 71.4 1 754 1 666 1 773 61.9 45 7 364 294 7 032 273 7 019 276 100.0 3.9 4 612 194 4 517 189 4 443 137 100.0 4.2 1 307 62 1 153 49 1 206 54 100.0 4.5 46 BRAZORIA COUNTY AREA. 4 7 FORT BEND COUNTY AREA 193 150 121 1.7 144 119 94 2.1 30 19 17 1.4 46 HARRIS COUNTY AREA. . 6 616 6 404 6 349 90.5 4 144 4 086 4 009 90.2 1 138 1 042 1 063 88.6 49 LIBERTY COUNTY AREA . 76 54 101 1.4 33 32 56 1.3 28 12 26 2.2 50 MONTGOMERY COUNTY AREA 150 133 141 2.0 90 85 89 2.0 32 24 26 2.2 51 WALLER COUNTY AREA. . 35 18 31 0.4 7 6 8 0.2 17 7 15 1.2 52 LOS ANGELES-LONG BEACH SMSA 35 609 34 652 35 056 100.0 21 226 20 847 21 007 100.0 4 528 4 203 4 356 100.0 53 LOS ANGELES COUNTY AREA . 35 609 34 652 35 056 100.0 21 226 20 B47 21 007 100.0 4 528 4 203 4 356 100.0 54 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL SMSA . 6 4 32 5 662 5 990 100.0 4 160 3 585 3 797 100.0 814 766 826 100.0 55 ANOKA COUNTY AREA . . . . 149 331 366 6.1 245 230 255 6.7 47 46 50 6.1 56 CARvER COUNTY AREA. . 165 122 59 1.0 119 96 44 1.2 20 16 7 0.8 57 CHISAGO COUNTY AREA . 92 60 40 0.7 57 44 28 0.7 12 12 7 0.8 58 DAKOTA COUNTY AREA. . 350 280 348 5.8 265 2 07 262 6.9 46 38 49 5.9 59 HENNEPIN COUNTY AREA. 2 984 2 827 2 841 47.4 1 932 1 807 1 314 47.8 352 349 348 42.1 60 RAMSEY COUNTY AREA. . 1 689 1 649 1 751 29.2 984 968 1 025 27.0 246 240 255 30.9 61 ST. CROIX COUNTY AREA 166 37 175 2.9 146 19 126 3.3 11 10 27 3.3 62 SCOTT COUNTY AREA . . 252 72 129 2.2 150 37 67 1.6 20 19 29 3.5 63 WASHINGTON COUNTY AREA 292 215 205 3.4 203 132 126 3.3 42 42 39 4.7 64 WRIGHT COUNTY AREA. . 93 69 76 1.3 59 45 50 1.3 16 14 15 1.6 65 NASSAU-SUFFOLK SMSA . . 1? 995 12 211 1? 734 100.0 9 023 8 415 8 790 100.0 1 702 1 591 1 657 100.0 66 NASSAU COUNTY AREA. . 7 7 '.4 7 129 7 688 60.4 5 397 4 699 5 302 60.3 1 005 958 1 025 61.9 67 SUFFOLK COUNTY AREA . 5 261 5 082 5 046 39.6 3 626 3 6 [ f , 3 488 39.7 697 633 632 38.1 68 NEWARK SMSA in L56 9 679 10 413 100.0 6 266 6 019 6 431 100.0 1 454 1 343 1 475 100.0 6>' ESSEX COUNTY AREA . . 5 885 5 797 5 960 57.2 3 554 3 ■, v 3 617 56.2 826 810 d38 56.8 70 MORRIS CO'JNTY AREA. . 1 359 1 112 1 313 12.6 942 781 902 14.0 187 129 174 11.6 /) SOMERSET COUNTY AREA. 62 '5 540 721 6.9 349 317 412 6.4 94 67 95 6.4 72 UNION COUNTY AREA . . ? 237 2 230 2 419 23.2 1 421 1 J89 1 500 23.3 347 337 368 24.9 ■'"'<' I" "I • end of tnblc CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM in the 17 largest SMSA's, by county area, October 1975 in thousands) 67 Legal services and prosecution Public defense Corre ctions Other crimir al justic Number of employees Number of employees Number of employees dumber of employees Percent Percent Percent Percent a! of SMSA of SMSA of SMSA of SMSA | total total total total fi Full- Full-time full- Full- Full-time full- Full- Full-time full- Full- Full-time full- o Total time equiva- time Total time equiva- time Total time equiva- time Total time equiva- time j only lent equiva- only lent equiva- only lent equiva- only lent equiva- lent lent lent lent ployees ployees ployees ployees 14 330 13 039 14 158 (X) 1 624 1 545 1 649 (X) 37 518 3b 213 37 771 (X) 1 149 1 107 1 123 (X) 1 487 471 526 100.0 1 1 5 100.0 709 697 812 100.0 _ _ _ 100.0 2 47 45 47 8.9 - - - - 37 37 37 4.6 _ - _ _ 3 303 303 303 57.6 - - - - 492 492 492 60.6 _ - - _ 4 84 84 84 16.0 - - - - 106 99 101 12.4 _ - - - 5 8 8 46 8.7 1 1 5 100.0 22 22 128 15.8 _ - - _ 6 23 10 25 4.8 - - - - 2b 28 33 4.1 - - - . 7 22 21 21 4.0 - - - - ?2 19 21 2.6 " - - - 8 374 346 384 100.0 41 41 43 100.0 1 343 1 311 1 385 100.0 28 25 26 100.0 9 38 27 40 10.4 6 8 8 18.6 233 212 233 16.8 5 5 5 19.2 10 97 90 103 26.8 27 27 29 67.4 455 447 483 34.9 23 20 21 80.6 11 60 52 63 16.4 6 6 6 14.0 136 133 150 10.8 _ - - _ 12 179 177 178 46.4 - - - - 519 519 519 37.5 - - - - 13 1 037 952 1 056 100.0 301 280 297 100.0 1 945 1 900 2 001 100.0 38 33 34 100.0 14 817 757 833 78.9 249 240 250 84.2 1 533 1 513 1 576 78.8 7 4 5 14.7 15 76 68 89 8.4 22 19 24 8.1 136 116 155 7.7 2 2 2 5.9 16 32 26 28 2.7 4 4 3 1.0 103 99 93 4.6 2 1 - - 17 56 52 63 6.0 9 y 10 3.4 111 110 125 6.2 21 21 23 67.6 18 18 17 14 1 .3 5 5 4 1.3 31 31 26 1.3 _ - - . 19 ,8 32 29 2.7 12 3 6 2.0 31 31 26 1.3 6 5 4 u. e 20 rn 231 323 100.0 . - - 100.0 716 652 685 100.0 . _ _ 100.0 21 287 199 267 8?. 7 - - - - 627 571 591 86.3 _ _ _ _ 22 10 2 14 4.3 - - - - 14 13 26 3.8 _ - _ _ 23 66 24 29 9.0 - - - - 61 53 52 7.6 _ - - _ 24 14 6 13 4.0 - - - - 16 15 16 2.3 - - - - 25 441 405 439 100.0 5 b 5 100.0 849 797 855 100.0 9 y 9 100.0 26 10 10 6 1.4 - - - - 10 10 6 0.7 _ - - - 27 212 205 209 47.6 - - - - 537 534 538 62.9 2 2 2 22.2 28 24 23 31 7.1 - - - - 31 19 30 3.5 _ - - _ 2.9 2 - 4 0.9 - - - - 4 4 18 2.1 _ - - - 30 4 - 2 0.5 - - - - 1 - 1 0.1 _ - . _ 31 6 5 6 ! .4 - - - - 12 5 9 1.1 - - - - 32 7 6 7 1 .6 - - - - 6 3 5 0.6 _ - - - 33 7 6 7 1 .6 - - - - 7 7 7 0.8 _ - _ _ 34 2 2 8 1 .8 - - - - 3 - 4 0.5 _ - - - 35 164 146 155 35.3 5 5 5 100.0 234 212 228 26.7 7 7 7 77.8 36 3 2 4 0.9 - - - - 4 3 9 1.1 - - - - 37 650 603 669 100.0 33 16 23 100.0 1 909 1 785 1 941 100.0 14 14 14 100.0 38 9 8 6 0.9 - - - - 17 13 12 0.6 _ - - - 39 8 7 17 2.5 - - - - 25 17 42 2.2 - - - - 40 97 91 113 16.9 17 15 17 73.9 204 191 229 11.8 5 5 5 35.7 41 122 108 132 19.7 - - - - 447 384 461 23.8 6 6 6 42.9 4? 26 18 13 1 .9 - - - - 84 66 52 2.7 _ - - _ 13 388 371 388 58.0 16 3 6 26.1 1 132 1 114 1 145 59.0 3 3 3 21.4 44 389 333 351 100.0 _ - _ 100.0 941 914 907 100.0 115 115 112 100.0 45 17 14 15 4.3 - - - - 21 21 20 2.2 _ - - - 46 5 4 3 0.9 - - - - 14 8 7 0.8 _ - - _ 47 345 301 313 89.2 - - - - 874 660 847 93.4 115 115 112 100.0 48 7 3 7 2.0 - - - - 8 7 12 1.3 - - - - 49 10 8 9 2.6 - - - - 18 16 17 1.9 _ - - _ 50 5 3 4 1 .1 - - - - 6 2 4 0.4 - - - - 51 2 601 2 551 2 584 100.0 587 580 589 100.0 6 664 6 463 6 518 100,0 3 2 2 100.0 52 2 601 2 551 2 584 100.0 587 586 589 100.0 6 664 6 463 6 518 100.0 3 2 2 100.0 53 406 297 332 100.0 82 67 72 100.0 940 897 933 100.0 30 30 30 100.0 54 30 29 33 9.9 1 1 1 1.4 26 25 27 2.9 _ _ _ 55 5 5 2 0.6 e - 3 4.2 13 5 3 0.3 _ _ _ _ 56 20 2 4 1 .2 - - - _ 3 2 1 0.1 _ _ - _ 57 15 13 14 4.2 - - - - 22 22 23 2.5 . - _ _ 58 152 138 147 44.3 58 54 55 76.4 4K5 474 473 50.7 5 5 4 13.3 59 89 83 90 27.1 8 8 6 11.1 337 325 347 37.2 25 25 2b 86.7 60 5 5 12 3.6 - - - - 4 3 10 1.1 _ - _ _ 61 66 8 15 4.5 - - - _ 16 8 18 1.9 _ _ . _ 62 14 11 11 3.3 7 4 5 6.9 26 26 24 2.6 _ _ _ _ 63 10 3 4 1 .2 - - - - 8 7 7 0.8 - - - - 64 653 629 656 loo.o _ - - 100.0 1 592 1 551 ■ 1 607 100.0 25 25 24 100.0 65 359 340 367 55.9 - - - - 962 921 983 61.2 11 11 11 45. P 66 294 289 289 44.1 - _ - - 630 630 624 38.8 14 14 13 54.2 67 729 670 741 100.0 11 11 11 100.0 1 662 1 603 1 719 100.0 34 33 36 100.0 66 395 367 386 52.1 11 11 11 100.0 1 089 1 067 1 098 63.9 10 10 10 27.8 69 76 62 74 10.0 - - - - 154 140 163 9.5 _ - _ _ 70 49 45 62 8.4 - - - - 129 108 147 8.6 4 3 5 13.9 71 209 196 219 29.6 - - - , 2°0 288 311 18.1 20 20 21 58.3 72 68 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 12. Criminal justice system employment of local governments (Dollar amounts Total crimi lal j ustic e sys tern Police protection Judi :ial Number of employees Number of employees Number of employees -: Percent Percent Percent - of SMSA of SMSA of SMSA - Area 1 total total total s Full- Full- f 11... full- Full- Full-time full- Full- Full-time full- - Tots 1 tin equi va- time Total time equiva- time Total time equiva- time only lent equiva- only lent equiva- only lent equiva- lent lent lent ployees ployees ployees 1 NEW YORK, N.Y.-N.J. SMSA. . 6? 743 60 784 62 05 3 100.0 46 296 44 857 45 657 100.0 6 687 6 384 6 563 100.0 2 BERGEN COUNTY, N.J. AREA. 3 271 2 007 3 P10 5.2 2 289 2 092 2 267 5.0 427 329 402 6.1 3 54 454 53 288 53 661 86.5 40 913 39 750 40 123 87.9 5 491 5 491 5 491 83.7 u PUTNAM COUNTY, N.Y. AREA. 123 107 153 0.2 59 51 73 0.2 12 12 16 0.2 5 ROCKLAND COUNTY, N.Y. AREA 841 641 939 1.5 412 393 522 1.1 197 81 122 1.9 b WESTCHESTER COUNTY, 4 034 3 051 4 090 6.6 2 623 2 571 2 672 5.9 560 471 532 8.1 7 PHILADELPHIA, PA. -N.J. AREA 24 115 22 680 24 698 100.0 14 348 13 486 14 316 100.0 5 050 4 700 5 306 100.0 a BUCKS COUNTY, PA. AREA. . 98° 681 1 050 4.3 576 491 586 4.1 207 192 233 4.4 9 BURLINGTON COUNTY, 8 88 723 1 00b 4.1 501 379 519 3.6 151 128 188 3.5 I'- CAMDEN COUNTY, N.J. AREA. 2 885 2 220 1 983 8.0 1 854 1 433 1 222 8.5 437 283 319 6.0 ll CHESTER COUNTY, PA. AREA. 582 407 938 3.9 137 165 312 2.2 156 131 264 5.0 12 DELAWARE COUNTY, PA. AREA 1 648 1 585 2 077 8.4 732 703 925 6.5 390 382 499 9.4 l 1 GLOUCESTER COUNTY, 482 4J3 719 2.9 230 218 352 2.5 105 83 145 2.7 11 MONTGOMERY COUNTY, 1 667 1 367 1 9?c 7.8 962 791 1 094 7.6 391 238 4"5 6.4 13 PHILADELPHIA CITY, PA.. . 14 974 14 '•.74 14 974 60.6 y 306 9 306 9 306 65.0 3 213 3 213 3 213 60.6 L« 6 862 6 143 6 855 100.0 4 349 3 792 4 209 100.0 1 301 1 241 1 388 100.0 17 ALLEGHENY COUNTY AREA . . 4 04 C 4 «?2 5 265 76.8 3 1 = 1 3 071 3 334 79.2 925 907 992 71.5 1 8 BEAVER COUNTY AREA. . . . S6 r 351 595 8.7 308 145 277 6.6 137 121 185 13.3 19 WASHINGTON COUNTY AREA. . 636 422 344 5.0 4 4b 253 220 5.2 101 90 66 4.8 po WESTMORELAND COUNTY AREA. 716 548 651 9.5 445 318 378 9.0 138 123 145 10.4 PI ST. LOUIS, MO. -ILL. SMSA. . 9 81" 9 UP 4 9 595 100.0 6 794 6 475 6 809 100.0 1 384 1 186 1 269 100.0 22 CLINTON COUNTY, ILL. AREA 35 19 48 0.5 19 6 16 0.2 5 4 10 0.8 23 FRANKLIN COUNTY, MO. AREA 142 108 124 1.3 89 74 83 1.2 29 20 23 1.6 24 JEFFERSON COUNTY, MO. AREA 158 142 137 1.7 75 73 83 1.2 52 48 55 4.3 Pb MADISON COUNTY, ILL. AREA 551 442 614 6.5 31b 299 356 5.2 101 93 112 8.8 26 MONROE COUNTY, ILL. AREA. 71 14 18 0.2 46 9 15 0.2 5 4 2 0.2 27 ST. CHARLES COUNTY, 649 593 706 7.4 546 543 635 9.3 70 27 37 2.9 26 ST. CLAIR COUNTY, 572 553 710 7.4 378 371 475 7.0 76 72 92 7.2 29 ST. LOUIS CITY, MO. . . . "5 978 3 V7b 3 978 41.5 2 785 2 785 2 785 40.9 451 451 451 35.5 30 ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MO. AREA 3 656 3 125 3 P.35 33.6 2 341 2 315 2 361 34.7 595 467 487 38.4 31 SAN FRANCISCO-OAKLAND SMSA. 14 476 13 313 13 920 100.0 7 834 7 406 7 540 100.0 1 851 1 720 1 321 100.0 32 ALAMEDA COUNTY AREA . . . 4 872 4 624 4 743 34.1 2 5 : 2 2 397 2 447 32.5 512 501 536 29.4 33 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AREA. 2 364 2 187 2 33 3 17.0 1 1 38 1 099 1 160 15.4 292 271 293 16.1 34 MARIN COUNTY AREA .... 834 772 839 6.0 i'/ t - 353 374 5.0 150 142 154 8.5 35 SAN FRANCISCO CITY. . . . 4 002 3 775 3 866 27.8 2 503 2 394 2 428 32.2 577 513 547 30.0 J'' SAN MATEO COUNTY AREA . . 2 404 2 155 2 109 15.2 1 319 1 163 1 131 15.0 320 293 291 16.0 37 WASHINGTON, D.C.- 15 090 14 652 14 903 100.0 9 740 9 448 V 617 100.0 1 618 1 550 1 584 100.0 5h ALEXANDRIA CITY, VA.. . . 386 383 383 2.6 268 268 268 2.8 50 49 49 3.1 59 ARLINGTON COUNTY, VA. . . 566 4 9H 520 3.5 3 8 b 357 366 3.8 52 35 42 2.7 40 CHARLES COUNTY, MD. AREA. 115 102 112 0.8 82 79 85 0.9 17 10 11 0.7 41 54 30 50 50 0.5 4 - 4 0.3 42 FAIRFAX COUNTY, VA. AREA. 1 110 1 105 1 119 7.5 8 800 809 8.4 180 180 182 11.5 43 FALLS CHURCH CITY, VA.. . 4^ 4 4 i 0.3 35 35 35 0.4 3 - 3 0.2 44 LOUDOUN COUNTY, VA. AREA. 128 I08 80 0.5 8 4 70 52 0.5 18 18 13 0.8 45 MONTGOMERY COUNTY, 1 280 1 271 1 P80 8.6 986 964 991 10.3 128 124 125 7.9 46 PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY, 1 645 1 613 1 636 11.0 1 255 1 246 1 264 13.1 205 182 185 11.7 47 PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY, 238 P37 3? 3 2.2 150 150 205 2.1 40 39 53 3.3 4" WASHINGTON, D.C. CITY . . 9 525 9 249 9 353 62.8 5 639 5 409 5 492 57.1 421 913 917 57.9 - Repr 1 . < M t /Ill or rounds to zero X Not applicable. 'Data for county areas include fi^u iatlor ; see text for data limitatio for the county government and subject to sampling CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM in the 17 largest SMSA's, by county area, October 1975— Continued in thousands) 69 Legal services and prosecution Public defense Corre :tions Other crimir al justic dumber of employees Number of employees Number of employees dumber of employees Percent Percent Percent Percent OJ of SMSA of SMSA of SMSA of SMSA ■2 total total total total c Full- Ful^-time full- Full- Full-time full- Full- Full-time full- Full- Full-time lull- Q> Total time equiva- time Total time equiva- time Total time equiva- time Total time equiva- time - only lent equiva- lent ployees only lent equiva- lent ployees only lent equiva- lent ployees only lent equiva- lent ployees 2 723 2 552 2 759 (X) 22 15 20 (X) 6 324 6 295 370 (X) 691 681 684 (X) 1 245 192 234 a. 5 5 - 1 5.0 293 275 295 4.6 12 9 11 1.6 2 2 Oil 2 Oil 2 011 7 2.9 - - - - 5 388 5 388 5 388 84.6 651 648 643 94.7 3 14 13 19 0.7 - - - - 38 31 45 0.7 - - - - 4 130 69 167 6.1 17 lb 19 95.0 81 81 106 1.7 4 2 3 0.4 5 323 267 328 11 .9 - - - - 524 520 536 8.4 24 22 22 3.2 6 1 193 1 054 1 230 100.0 101 101 137 100.0 3 415 3 331 3 703 100.0 8 8 6 10U.0 7 69 62 74 6.0 20 20 23 16.8 117 116 134 3.6 - - - - 8 68 61 89 7.2 « - _ . 168 155 209 5.6 _ _ _ _ 9 238 155 147 12.0 - - - - 348 341 289 7.8 8 8 6 100.0 10 59 42 82 6.7 18 18 33 24.1 162 141 277 7.5 - - - - 11 147 144 190 15.4 34 34 44 32.1 345 322 419 11.3 - - - - 12 43 39 67 5.4 - - - - 104 93 155 4.2 - - - - 13 91 73 103 8.4 29 29 37 27.0 194 186 243 6.6 _ _ _ _ 14 478 478 478 38.9 - - - - 1 977 1 977 1 977 53.4 - - - - 15 421 349 423 100.0 94 94 101 100.0 676 646 712 100.0 21 21 22 100.0 16 298 273 322 76.1 67 67 72 71.3 483 483 523 73.5 21 21 22 100.0 17 42 24 39 9.2 10 10 14 13.9 68 51 80 11.2 - - - _ 18 27 19 18 4.3 8 8 5 5.0 55 47 35 4.9 _ - - - 19 54 33 44 10.4 9 9 10 9.9 70 65 74 10.4 - - - - 20 509 315 386 100.0 29 18 31 100.0 1 094 1 026 1 096 100.0 4 4 4 100.0 21 3 2 6 1 .6 - - - - 8 7 16 1.5 - - - - 22 18 8 12 3.1 - - - - 6 6 6 0.5 - - - - ?3 16 12 14 3.6 - - - - 15 9 15 1.4 _ - - - 24 39 19 45 11 .7 12 5 14 45.2 84 76 92 6.4 _ - - _ 25 19 1 1 0.3 1 - - - - - - - - - - - 26 11 10 12 3.1 - - - - 22 13 22 2.0 - - - - 27 40 36 49 12.7 15 13 17 54.8 63 61 77 7.0 _ _ _ _ 28 141 141 141 36.5 - - - - 597 597 597 54.5 4 4 4 100.0 29 222 86 106 27.5 1 - - - 299 257 271 24.7 - - - - 30 898 848 853 100.0 317 308 315 100.0 3 512 3 182 3 331 100.0 64 49 60 100.0 31 294 278 262 30.7 165 158 161 51.1 1 377 1 278 1 325 39.8 12 12 12 20.0 32 229 208 226 26.5 66 64 67 21.3 639 545 617 18.5 - - - - 33 47 47 49 5.7 23 23 24 7.6 222 191 210 6.3 30 16 28 46.7 34 186 184 185 21 .7 63 63 63 20.0 654 603 625 18.8 19 IB 16 30.0 35 142 131 131 15.4 - ~ " - 620 565 554 16.6 3 3 2 3.3 ^6 442 433 446 100.0 _ _ 100.0 3 225 3 163 3 196 100.0 65 58 60 100.0 37 22 21 21 4.7 - - - - 46 45 45 1.4 - - - - 38 18 16 18 4.0 - - - - 95 74 61 2.5 15 12 13 21.7 ■< 312 15.7 14.4 9.6 9. 1 14. 1 12.3 16.9 20. 1 14.6 17.5 28.9 27.5 13.9 21.8 17.4 18.5 18.6 17.4 18.3 27.8 21.7 21. 1 19.7 22.3 15.7 13.9 21.9 19.6 9.8 10.7 15.2 21.2 14.4 15. 3 13.7 23.2 16.0 13.3 25.0 20.9 15.4 18.5 20.2 14.7 9.0 14.7 22. 1 19.9 16.0 12.5 11.5 16.4 17.0 14.2 19.8 14.6 1 1 175 1 100 2 870 5 741 3 814 1 912 1 405 4 370 30 989 2 602 2 157 12 298 918 3 250 1 093 1 165 2 141 1 898 7 311 5 181 1 037 4 332 1 989 5 001 2 833 1 911 2 943 3 004 3 935 1 970 2 800 1 853 2 193 2 991 8 522 3 617 3 116 3 950 1 545 3 032 5 151 4 567 1 475 17 279 187 632 2 576 1 731 3 646 1 415 17 969 2 018 2 967 2 428 2 090 5 704 1 129 2 949 2 119 1 667 4 323 5 202 12 138 2 041 4 764 2 085 22 710 49 290 18 147 1 762 2 411 6 27 1 3 108 92.3 96.7 91.2 91.6 88.9 92.4 87.6 75. 1 96.4 97.4 95. 1 95. 1 97. 1 93.7 97.8 92.5 97.3 95.9 97.9 97.9 98.5 98.3 95.7 97.5 92.5 98.7 96.8 96.5 93.0 93.3 98. 1 86.4 94.5 95.0 97.4 96.0 98.2 88.3 97.3 95.3 91.6 65.3 96.2 94.8 97.3 94.7 93.8 8 ?R9 117 11 1 374 109 19 1 137 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 75 Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal se prose rvices and cution Public defense Con ections Other crim inal justice City* Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system 149 227 322 20 77 94 66 43 35 65 1 302 141 113 602 43 88 76 37 80 50 275 265 31 211 44 287 80 81 63 64 90 38 32 49 51 93 269 56 54 176 138 98 244 261 75 1 317 7 331 79 69 118 36 342 26 98 87 158 298 22 62 57 88 114 204 219 67 134 102 1 494 3 599 7 08 96 67 314 204 3. 3 2.5 1.7 2.4 1.4 1.5 2.0 2.3 1.4 3.8 5.0 4.7 4.5 3.7 2.4 5.2 2.8 3.6 2.6 3.6 4.9 2.9 4.6 2.2 5.3 2.7 4. 1 2. 1 2. 1 2.2 1.9 1. 1 2.6 2.3 3.0 3.0 1.5 1.7 4.3 8.2 3. 1 4.5 5.2 4.8 6.7 3.8 3.0 3.8 3. 1 2.5 1.8 1.3 3.2 3.5 7.0 4.9 1.9 1.8 2.5 5.0 2.6 3.8 1.8 2.9 2.7 4.7 6.0 4.8 3.8 5.2 2.7 4.7 6.2 24 678 43 20 7 11 8 230 20 7 11 76 959 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.3 1.3 378 942 848 47 219 360 212 73 35 210 11 15 101 179 150 56 100 1 113 117 30 2 3 146 969 301 38 1 118 113 404 66 2 415 10 264 8.3 6.6 3.9 6.7 5.5 4.7 3.4 2.3 0.6 0.4 0. 1 8.6 4.8 10.3 4.2 1.3 (Z ) 2.2 2.8 1.0 0. 1 0.1 2.9 4.9 0.2 1.0 5.8 1.8 11.8 2.9 0. 1 1.7 13.6 53 096 75 25 46 79 14 159 68 32 201 104 406 35 Alabama: Arizona: ARKANSAS : - CALIFORNIA : 1.7 0.2 0.5 end of table 76 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) ■ Total general expenditure Total criminal ustlce system Police protection JudiC ial City' Amount Percent of total general expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system CALIFORNIA — CONTINUED 41 543 21 884 21 390 6 043 8 496 48 771 20 848 26 743 13 836 15 776 9 225 9 875 9 254 29 173 16 751 45 630 299 738 11 777 16 140 20 992 84 616 27 200 29 046 154 926 26 509 31 025 40 907 74 593 44 345 88 982 71 152 23 078 65 330 1 4 38 580 18 155 51 861 18 410 16 970 28 566 199 115 81 713 48 554 43 061 17 858 52 444 45 157 86 352 13 501 14 406 190 155 16 209 4R 229 20 290 23 319 220 515 18 558 29 098 14 605 4 618 13 363 984 238 6 912 12 982 9 8 19 10 741 9 659 3 368 4 275 1 604 1 392 2 252 5 619 2 378 5 902 2 392 2 130 1 951 2 606 1 634 3 158 2 541 5 399 40 924 1 348 7 911 3 570 8 567 1 5 37 1 747 8 898 1 47 6 1 790 2 928 6 610 2 858 5 002 4 895 1 755 5 537 200 367 2 943 7 917 3 677 3 845 5 322 26 566 17 048 6 833 7 897 2 364 9 386 2 472 10 431 2 819 2 430 28 593 2 138 6 881 3 87 1 4 082 29 397 2 097 1 70S 2 652 27 1 564 247 963 1 542 1 811 1 801 3 066 1 679 8. 1 19.5 7.5 23.0 26.5 11.5 11.4 22. 1 17.3 13.5 21. 1 26.4 17.7 10.8 15.2 11.8 13.7 11.4 49.0 17.0 10. 1 5.7 6.0 5.7 5.6 5.8 7.2 8.9 6.4 5.6 6.9 7.6 8.5 13.9 16.2 15.3 20.0 22.7 18. 6 13.3 20.9 14. 1 18.3 13.2 17.9 5.5 12. 1 20.9 16.9 15.0 13.2 14.3 19. 1 17.5 13.3 11. 3 5.9 18.2 0.6 11.7 25.2 22. 3 14.0 15. 3 28.5 17.4 3 283 4 014 1 532 1 306 2 067 5 430 2 264 5 512 2 310 2 105 1 872 2 551 1 512 2 875 1 754 4 959 29 120 1 262 6 910 3 142 8 013 1 483 1 700 8 373 1 400 1 736 2 795 6 486 2 648 4 7 19 4 717 1 577 4 843 97 056 2 724 6 905 3 569 3 670 4 223 16 784 16 615 6 333 6 777 2 196 8 535 2 390 10 140 2 530 2 288 24 515 1 927 4 479 2 993 3 67 6 26 908 1 851 1 644 2 574 27 1 494 243 332 1 470 1 755 1 694 g M 1 625 97.5 93.9 95.5 93.8 91.8 96.6 95.2 93.4 96.6 98.8 96.0 97.9 92.5 91.0 69.0 91.9 71.2 93.6 87.3 88.0 93.5 96.5 97.3 94. 1 94.9 97.0 95.5 98. 1 92.7 94.3 96.4 89.9 87.5 48.4 92.6 87.2 97. 1 95.4 79.3 63.2 97.5 92.7 85.8 92.9 90.9 96.7 97.2 89.7 94.2 85.7 90. 1 65. 1 77.3 90. 1 91.5 88.3 96.3 97. 1 100.0 95.5 98. 1 95.3 96.9 94. 1 95.2 96.8 61 130 151 236 3 401 44 355 82 63 6 3 1 1 7 12 5 37 15 1 386 19 112 76 406 11 138 4 406 222 207 87 13 1 037 52 1 135 139 130 101 64 1 271 11 _ COLORADO : 3.7 4. 1 5.9 4.4 8.3 3.3 4.5 2.3 CONNECTICUT : 0.7 0.4 0.2 0. 1 0. 1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.3 0. 1 DELAWARE : 7.0 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: 9.5 FLORIDA : 2.6 5. 1 _ 0.3 2.6 16.6 _ 3.2 2.6 _ _ _ _ 3. 1 GEORGIA : 0.5 3.6 2.4 16.5 3.6 3.2 HAWAI I : IDAHO : 4.8 ILLINOI S : 3.7 (Z 1 - _ 0. 1 - - - - 0.7 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) 77 Legal s pros ervices and ecution Public defense Corr ections Other crim Inal justice City" Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system CALIFORNIA — CONTINUEH 85 261 72 86 51 189 114 254 82 25 26 55 46 153 117 187 2 326 42 627 103 189 38 42 525 75 53 126 112 108 234 130 94 308 6 7 36 77 168 89 26 124 701 433 194 131 71 220 82 291 79 54 807 48 291 164 44 1 770 no 77 57 3 479 72 56 107 95 43 2.5 1 . 1 ' .5 ( .2 2.3 3.4 4.8 4.3 3.4 1.2 1.3 2. 1 2.8 4.8 4.6 3.5 5.7 3. 1 7.9 2.9 2.2 2.5 2.4 5.9 5. 1 3.0 4.3 1.7 3.8 4.7 2.7 5.4 5.6 3.4 2.6 2. 1 2.4 0.7 2.3 2.6 2.5 2.8 1.7 3.0 2.3 3.3 2.8 2.8 2.2 2.8 2.2 4.2 4.2 1. 1 6.0 5.2 2.9 3.6 1.4 4.7 3. 1 5.9 3. 1 2.6 146 12 1 935 10 13 2 19 13 23 45 27 0.4 0.2 1.0 0.3 0.2 (Z ) 0. 1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.4 134 136 2 15 5 17 5 309 19 243 199 73 114 56 425 19 138 835 4 458 71 591 97 408 123 75 2 053 HI 878 575 232 7 19 35 13 677 51 6.0 2.3 0. 1 0.9 0.2 0.3 13.0 0.2 6.8 2.3 36.5 1.9 5.4 0.5 3.6 15.7 16.8 1.0 7.5 4. 1 4.3 4.4 3. 1 7.2 5.2 12.8 14.9 5.7 2.4 1.7 0.8 0.3 1.7 51 514 622 103 10 2 97 3i 83 2 414 198 168 223 136 71 204 COLORADO : CONNECTICUT : DELAWARE : district of Columbia: Florida: Georgia: hawai i : idaho: Illinois: - 0. 1 end of table 78 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total general expenditure Total criminal j ustice system Police pr Jtection Judi cial City 1 Amount Percent of total general expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system — Percent of total criminal justice system ILLINOIS — CONTINUED 18 276 9 970 11 406 15 694 20 081 30 152 12 939 10 786 21 991 12 130 10 627 30 038 35 37 1 39 468 20 115 237 053 11 249 25 512 12 810 25 911 17 788 21 750 64 853 10 759 23 212 27 997 37 399 7 546 28 995 98 39 1 9 314 48 613 144 146 25 221 76 461 8 419 14 639 14 143 197 409 36 382 35 266 9 17 110 672 442 52 126 66 582 30 788 59 272 34 723 33 853 44 468 51 620 35 493 35 336 52 498 61 899 39 452 65 985 33 150 118 024 31 709 123 329 29 643 33 629 11 428 622 368 2 918 2 908 1 778 2 416 5 255 5 384 1 285 2 511 3 287 2 606 1 903 3 687 4 959 6 856 3 589 30 704 1 994 3 906 1 451 2 442 1 599 2 012 6 134 1 264 2 368 1 908 5 710 1 618 4 160 3 150 2 039 9 372 18 140 1 484 15 396 1 572 1 546 1 629 43 351 6 752 2 959 81 621 89 799 4 060 5 731 1 832 4 760 1 810 2 375 3 304 4 323 2 191 2 502 4 415 4 605 1 723 5 038 2 611 6 704 2 729 8 207 4 450 4 542 3 136 125 511 16.0 29.2 15.6 15.4 26.2 17.9 9.9 23.3 14.9 21.5 17.9 12.3 14.0 17.4 17.8 13.0 17.7 15. 3 11.3 9.4 9.0 9.3 9.5 11.7 10.2 6.3 15.3 21.4 14.3 8.3 21.9 19.3 12.6 5.9 20. 1 18.7 10.6 11.5 22.0 13.6 8.4 8.9 13.4 7.8 8.6 6.0 8.0 5.2 7.0 7.4 8.4 6.2 7. 1 8.4 7. 4 4.4 7.6 7.9 5.7 8.6 6.7 15.0 13.5 27.4 20.2 2 817 2 806 1 7 32 2 359 4 941 5 184 1 252 2 407 3 030 2 558 1 800 3 335 4 565 5 589 3 250 21 508 1 827 3 846 1 334 2 363 1 47 1 867 5 865 1 159 1 815 1 849 5 023 1 441 3 726 6 682 1 794 6 553 17 000 1 353 9 090 1 350 1 040 1 392 27 083 6 161 2 87 1 63 041 62 860 3 981 5 319 1 776 4 355 1 734 2 130 3 126 4 128 2 136 2 451 4 177 4 460 1 688 4 949 2 327 6 358 2 613 7 678 3 585 4 052 2 662 107 198 96.5 96.5 97.4 97.6 94.0 96. 3 97.4 95.9 92.2 98.2 94.6 90.5 92. 1 81.5 90.6 70.0 91.6 98.5 91.9 96.8 91.9 92.8 95.6 91.7 76.6 96.9 88.0 39. 1 89.6 82.0 88.0 69.9 93.7 91.2 59.0 85.9 67.3 85.5 62.5 91.2 97.0 7 7.2 70.0 98. 1 92.8 96.9 91.5 95.3 39.7 94.6 95.5 97.5 98.0 94.6 96.9 98.0 93.2 89. 1 94.3 95.7 93.6 80.6 89.2 84.9 85.4 16 38 126 324 218 3 708 106 57 5 17 156 78 64 251 57 923 517 42 3 609 125 45 95 6 129 336 5 420 13 439 1 517 182 394 _ _ _ _ 1.2 _ _ INDIANA : 2.0 3.4 _ 4.7 6. 1 12.1 5.3 _ 3.9 IOWA : _ 0.2 _ _ 0.7 _ KANSAS: 2.7 4.8 1.5 3. 1 KENTUCKY : 2.3 9.3 2.9 2.8 LOUISIANA : 23.4 8.0 2.9 5.8 14. 1 5.0 MAINE : Maryland: 6.6 MASSACHUSETTS: 15.0 - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - (Z ) MICHIGAN : 11.6 4.0 12.6 6.7 end of table CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 79 Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal se prose rvices and cution Public defense Con ections Other crim inal justice City' Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system ILLINOIS — CONTINUED 101 102 46 57 28 5 145 17 104 165 48 56 212 103 170 82 1 176 34 60 60 77 84 97 236 46 139 59 220 96 142 231 143 412 424 54 897 59 52 64 1 033 74 87 4 645 3 146 79 183 56 80 76 67 178 105 55 51 74 145 35 89 78 221 116 279 128 182 64 2 503 3.5 3.5 2.6 2.4 5.4 2.7 1.3 4. 1 5.0 1.8 2.9 5.7 2. 1 2.5 2.3 3.8 1.7 1.5 4. 1 3.2 5.3 4.8 3.8 3.6 5.9 3. 1 3.9 5.9 3.4 2.8 7.0 4.4 2.3 3.6 5.8 3.8 3.4 3.9 2.4 1. 1 2.9 5.7 3.5 1.9 3.2 3. 1 1.7 4.2 2.8 5.4 2.4 2.5 2.0 1.7 3. 1 2.0 1.8 3.0 3.3 4.3 3.4 2.9 4.0 2.0 2.0 6 5 7 134 3 5 40 165 4 294 137 1 4 1 344 0. 1 0. 3 0.2 0.6 0.2 0. 1 0.4 1. 1 0.3 0.7 3. 1 (Z ) 0. 1 1. 1 29 92 4 14 63 32 4 027 7 2 45 33 59 74 241 72 37 3 45 1 444 182 28 1 444 34 409 78 8 579 181 7 701 8 647 261 20 83 125 12 5 908 0.6 2.8 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.9 13. 1 0.4 0. 1 2.8 0.5 4.7 3. 1 4.2 1.7 4.6 2.2 15.4 1.0 1.9 9.4 2.2 26.5 4.8 19.3 2.7 9.4 9.6 5.5 0.8 1.9 2.8 0.4 4.7 49 291 710 101 20 43 - 323 70 151 613 17 7 19 1 233 1 814 1 707 229 64 158 90 164 206 125 249 90 Indiana: iowa: 2. 1 KANSAS : Kentucky: 0.5 Louisiana: maine: Maryland: Massachusetts: 1.9 3.0 MICHIGAN: 0. 1 See footnote 80 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total general expenditure Total criminal justice syste total gener expenditur crinuna e syste MICHIGAN — CONTINUED FARMINGTON HILLS. FLINT GRAND RAPIDS. . . KALAMAZOO .... LANSING LINCOLN PARK. . . LIVONIA PONT1AC ROSEVILLE .... ROYAL OAK .... SAGINAW ST. CLAIR SHORES. SOUTHFIELD. . . . STERLING HEIGHTS. TAYLOR WARREN WESTLAND WYOMING Minnesota: bloomington . . . DULUTH MINNEAPOLIS . . . ROCHESTER .... ST. PAUL MISSISSIPPI : BILOXI JACKSON MISSOURI : COLUMBIA FLORISSANT. . . . INDEPENDENCE. . . KANSAS CITY . . . ST. JOSEPH. . . . ST. LOUIS .... SPRINGFIELD . . . MONTANA : BILLINGS GREAT FALLS . . . NEBRASKA: LINCOLN OMAHA NEVADA : LAS VEGAS .... RENO NEW HAMPSHIRE : MANCHESTER. . . . NASHUA NEW JCRSEY: BAYONNE BLOOMFIELD. . . . CAMDEN CLIFTON EAST ORANGE . . . ELIZABETH .... IRV1NGTON .... JERSEY CITY . . . NEWARK PASSAIC PATERSON TRENTON UNION CITY. . . . V1NELAND NEW MEXICO : ALBUQUERQUE . . . NEW YORK: ALBANY BINGHAMTON. . . . BUFFALO MOUNT VERNON. . . NEW ROCHELLE. . . NEW YORK CITY . . 6 4 58 112 166 51 095 21 324 52 263 9 253 18 986 56 908 1 1 063 12 888 27 772 13 722 21 020 15 346 1 1 987 38 049 14 703 10 333 17 243 40 628 155 757 13 365 98 979 6 037 52 878 9 695 4 187 19 727 193 075 10 043 213 261 24 598 19 674 15 470 63 698 135 "7 33 380 26 509 56 374 34 723 16 172 16 ,vo l 27 v>.> 25 532 54 100 50 440 13 712 153 555 314 155 10 119 72 957 ?3 000 9 089 -,n 954 78 642 36 868 36 312 ..,.,, 579 21 843 23 300 1 641 287 1 546 9 513 8 502 3 573 6 738 1 751 3 667 5 771 2 362 2 536 4 406 349 781 650 209 >95 2 444 2 580 18 032 1 692 12 887 1 047 5 522 1 271 1 326 2 636 29 623 1 710 57 383 2 870 1 966 1 995 5 378 11 885 11 052 5 303 547 194 2 7 32 2 707 8 176 2 757 5 967 5 541 2 95 S 18 352 v 366 2 844 7 288 8 7 v, 2 489 1 682 12 788 6 341 2 '.V. .'4 i V 3 513 3 643 "Ml, 419 23.9 8.5 16.6 16.8 12.9 18.9 19.3 10. 1 21.4 19.7 15.9 17.3 20.9 21.8 17.3 10.4 13. 1 31.7 13.4 15.3 17.0 26.9 16.9 13.5 29.7 10.8 11.0 11.0 21.5 12.0 11.6 28. 1 10.0 24.9 27.4 5.4 16. 1 15.6 9. 1 1 393 8 385 6 790 3 012 5 045 1 575 3 246 4 918 2 087 2 201 4 211 2 228 3 550 2 955 2 543 5 301 3 731 1 924 2 324 2 336 15 019 1 624 10 344 955 686 1 173 1 284 2 429 25 329 1 582 42 016 2 667 1 819 1 816 10 274 4 671 2 241 1 851 7 ', o 7 071 7 658 7 593 5 215 c . 274 2 611 17 4 52 32 o-o 2 618 6 905 7 "7<7 2 287 1 517 10 304 5 847 7 1 1" 21 !98 3 088 3 223 707 0(1". 90. 1 88. 1 79.9 84.3 74.9 89.9 88.5 85.2 88.4 86.8 95.6 93.9 91.4 79.7 92.3 96.8 92. 1 73.2 92.9 92.5 91.0 70.7 87.9 88.0 84.4 92.2 94. 1 93.7 94. 1 87.4 95.2 88.4 95.0 79 515 748 32 3 543 98 214 456 187 204 102 521 197 130 133 302 V 2( 127 3 7 g 716 345 174 154 11 1 '-,7 60 238 89 404 134 105 494 1 494 96 -. •, 1- ! 115 73 92.2 251 89.8 150 88.6 1 844 87.9 228 88.5 252 66.9 140 333 Bnd of table CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 81 Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal services and prosecution Public defense Con ections Other crim inal justice City 1 Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system MICHIGAN — CONTINUED 69 195 303 197 171 30 117 251 88 67 195 42 152 102 83 215 61 95 100 192 897 68 593 26 206 60 18 111 864 72 2 068 67 56 28 273 552 4 30 181 55 44 111 71 226 75 234 133 193 300 473 85 147 124 38 92 513 208 88 839 157 168 34 099 4.5 2.0 3.6 5.5 2.5 1.7 3.2 4. 3 3.7 2.6 4.4 1.8 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.2 1.4 4. 1 4. 1 7.4 5.0 4.0 4.6 2.5 3.7 4.7 1.4 4.2 2.9 4.2 3.6 2.3 2.8 1.4 5. 1 4.6 3.9 3.4 2.2 2.0 4. 1 3.2 2.8 2.7 3.9 2.4 6.5 1.6 1.3 3.0 2.0 1.5 1.5 5.5 4.0 3.3 3.7 3.5 4.5 4.6 3.2 1 30 17 57 1 9 22 8 6 1 1 1 20 3 13 32 68 237 6 1 3 13 8 9 55 13 846 0. 1 0.3 0.2 0.8 0. 1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0. 1 (Z ) '-, 19 9( j 15 , • 929 140 120 078 18 959 19 •>,-, ■ -i 'i',., 12 534 36 115 '.'I S 55 BO ! » 37 ',( ■'. PI 1 1 1 M 132 11 U08 3 721 13 702 852 2 406 8 319 2 104 2 718 4 171 11 422 1 841 10 621 4 157 1 863 6 720 2 120 4 738 1 681 6 966 9 775 4 283 30 846 34 410 1 688 25 919 1 ' 205 1 569 2 063 2 188 1 660 1 458 1 759 1 641 2 '!. =, 2 083 2 642 !• 101 2 019 5 '• '•' 1 1 876 'i i. 1 638 11 691 9 440 5 712 18 39: 3 553 3 051 1 •M; .' 078 2 548 3 1-, 2 7 5 4 1 935 509 19 i -■ 2 5 "■■ 2 136 1 386 1 489 2 l,M 2 196 '. 2 ^ ' t ' ■s 4 ■ n ? ■< ,, 3.9 12.6 3. 1 11.3 13. 1 13.5 15.3 14.9 14.8 14.0 15.7 14.0 20.3 18.4 15. 1 10.4 15.9 19.3 20.6 5.4 10.3 14.0 22. 1 11.6 25.4 14.7 19.4 14.3 17.5 12.5 23.4 12.6 13.8 12.4 25. 1 15.9 13.3 10.7 4.6 11.9 6.4 7.9 3 363 12 395 766 2 195 7 687 1 874 2 375 3 695 9 320 1 714 10 369 4 046 1 767 6 556 2 052 4 639 1 655 6 822 8 io 3 389 24 076 25 1 427 20 9 387 9< , 1 817 1 381 1 271 1 '5 1 . 51 1 61 2 1 □ 1 59 i 2 001 13 n ■ 1 5 5 4 107 1 598 332 1 46;' 8 ..H,J 8 126 3 1 \ ' 16 940 3 3 >2 2 ') ■ 1 V, 2 5( 2 H7H 2 2 7 o 3 1 913 145 50 5 18 2 M v > 2 048 1 1 45 1 1 958 2 1 ^ 5 2 116 ' 2 I- 17 3 47 1 2 188 89.9 91.2 92.4 89. 1 87.4 88.6 81.6 93. 1 97.6 97.3 94.8 97.6 96.8 97.9 98.5 97.9 7 8 74.3 84.5 80.4 76.9 70.6 88. 1 86.0 76.6 35.9 71.1 76.8 81.5 76.7 75.7 83.4 75.4 77.0 90.4 89.3 85.7 89.7 93.5 97.9 98.0 97.7 97. 1 • V> 98. 1 98.9 62.2 95.2 96.6 95.9 97.9 97.9 95.7 96.5 94. 1 80.8 92.5 213 683 62 105 118 24C 249 695 349 382 2 791 4 022 92 2 552 135 138 138 195 32 1 319 323 1 041 328 533 265 37 357 366 " 1" 1 .' * 39 508 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 83 Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Percent total crim total crlmlna justice syste NEW YORK — CONTINUED NIAGARA FALLS . . ROCHESTER .... ROME SCHENECTADY . . . SYRACUSE TROY UTICA WHITE PLAINS. . . YONKERS north Carolina: asheville .... charlotte .... DURHAM FAYETTEVILLE. . . GREENSBORO. . . . HIGH POINT. . . . RALEIGH wilmington. . . . winston-salem . . north Dakota: FARGO OHIO : AKRON CANTON CINCINNATI. . . . CLEVELAND .... CLEVELAND HEIGHTS COLUMBUS DAYTON ELYRIA EUCLID HAMILTON KETTERING .... LAKEWOOD LIMA LORAIN MANSFIELD .... PARMA SPRINGFIELD . . . TOLEDO WARREN YOUNGSTOWN. . . . OKLAHOMA : LAWTON MIDWEST NORMAN OKLAHOMA CITY . . TULSA OREGON : EUGENE PORTLAND SALEM PENNSYLVANIA: ALLENTOWN .... ALTOONA BETHLEHEM .... CHESTER ERIE HARRISBURG. . . . LANCASTER .... PHILADELPHIA. . . PITTSBURGH. . . . READING SCRANTON WILKES-BARRE. . . YORK RHODE ISLAND: CRANSTON PAWTUCKET .... PROVIDENCE. . . . WARWICK south Carolina: charleston. . . . columbia greenville. . . . 145 544 24 106 235 112 103 227 398 201 111 313 169 1 055 830 78 1 073 410 95 106 95 150 117 317 4.8 1.8 3.2 3.4 6.9 6.9 4.7 7.2 4.4 2.0 416 3.6 348 3.7 215 5.8 344 1.8 158 4.4 64 2. 1 24 1.9 48 2.3 74 2.9 115 3.6 51 1.9 22 1.1 570 3.2 556 2.9 86 3.4 88 4. 1 29 2. 1 30 2.0 3.2 1.9 117 140 0.5 1. 1 1.0 0.3 449 343 2 390 3 377 21 1 344 1 385 423 476 2.0 534 412 1 774 225 0.5 1. 7 1.2 4. 1 15.2 2.4 See footnote end of table CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total general expenditure Total criminal „ ustice system Police pre tection Judicial City 1 Amount Percent of total general expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system south Dakota: 14 183 107 294 82 582 318 323 258 773 9 323 20 278 20 761 93 740 27 075 14 532 33 111 245 344 50 787 76 126 23 203 21 484 11 849 296 157 15 049 11 106 36 446 10 722 7 412 7 238 10 826 7 986 9 410 8 787 126 184 9 006 25 568 11 822 9 680 8 432 39 07 5 78 842 57 630 82 969 34 448 86 846 190 210 73 549 213 445 80 303 113 023 13 724 196 241 38 167 54 001 26 606 14 422 31 025 52 281 17 112 20 893 94 603 199 592 28 863 19 923 32 468 39 052 1 673 6 507 5 925 27 347 22 491 1 582 2 888 3 300 9 064 2 978 1 098 5 022 36 273 7 488 14 871 1 508 1 913 1 142 60 614 2 157 805 3 404 1 608 1 735 1 810 2 178 1 211 1 089 1 576 21 997 1 346 3 100 1 3 30 2 105 999 8 957 6 879 4 564 4 7 30 2 349 8 378 11 540 4 626 15 309 5 710 7 034 1 926 1 785 27 707 5 682 6 542 2 679 2 220 1 657 2 226 2 410 1 219 6 142 38 771 1 274 3 368 1 862 2 329 11.8 6. 1 7.2 8.6 8.7 17.0 14.2 15.9 9.7 11.0 7.6 15.2 14.8 14.7 19.5 6.5 8.9 9.6 20.5 14.3 7.2 9.3 15.0 23.4 25.0 20. 1 15.2 11.6 17.9 17.4 14.9 12. 1 15.5 21.7 11.8 22.9 8.7 7.9 5.7 6.8 9.6 6. 1 6.3 7.2 7. 1 6.2 12.0 13.0 14. 1 14.9 12. 1 10. 1 15.4 5.3 4.3 14. 1 5.8 6.5 19.4 4.4 16.9 5.7 6.0 1 545 6 091 5 392 23 106 15 746 1 385 2 518 2 798 3 242 2 688 1 009 4 249 32 531 7 032 13 674 1 272 1 670 996 53 527 1 883 698 3 028 1 5 39 1 611 1 575 1 887 1 069 1 018 1 423 20 301 1 2 37 2 901 1 578 1 783 858 7 970 4 488 2 838 3 317 1 644 4 353 8 428 3 151 10 814 2 518 5 059 1 604 1 683 22 786 5 013 5 344 ' M' ' KM 1 622 2 132 2 304 1 156 5 857 37 044 1 224 3 229 1 803 2 226 92.3 93.6 91.0 84.5 70.0 87.5 87.2 84.8 90.9 90.3 91.9 84.6 89.7 93.9 92.0 3 4. 4 87.3 87.2 88.3 87.3 86.7 89.0 95.7 92.9 87. 36.6 88.3 93.5 90.3 92.3 91.9 93.6 36.2 84.7 85.9 89.0 65.2 62.2 70. 1 70.0 52.0 73.0 68. 1 70.6 44. 1 71.9 83.3 94.3 82.2 88.2 81.7 86.5 94.6 97.9 95.8 95.6 94.8 95.4 95.5 96. 1 95.9 96.8 95.6 72 184 82 1 624 3 540 61 147 223 461 86 30 245 1 364 27 1 453 97 49 49 2 697 112 49 176 29 68 112 95 34 55 61 786 51 50 90 242 95 7 09 742 510 705 166 994 1 404 895 2 113 910 710 56 1 655 223 363 43 27 "i 41 12 37 23 14 17 TENNESSEE ■' TEXAS : 15.7 5. 1 6.8 5. 1 2.9 3.6 3.0 6. 1 3.9 6.2 4.4 2.8 5. 1 3.9 3.6 3.3 1.6 4.9 UTAH : 11.5 9.5 7.9 VIRGINIA : 10.8 11.2 14.9 7. 1 11.9 12.2 19.3 13.8 15.9 10.1 I^Tm 2.9 6.0 3.9 5.5 i'": ST VIRGINIA: 1.6 1.2 WISCONSIN : 1.3 1.7 1.0 1.0 _ 0.7 0.8 0.7 - Represents zer Z Less than hnl< 'Datn are bnpr.l lit ol measurer leld compllatic records of each city government shown; text for data llmitntlo CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 85 Table 14. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal se prose rvices and cution Public defense Con ections Other crim inal justice City 1 Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent oi total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system south Dakota: 47 232 229 367 521 89 101 193 361 99 30 253 1 000 121 318 54 143 49 858 96 50 146 40 56 50 105 55 16 37 560 50 83 66 68 43 238 295 167 245 123 261 446 208 821 496 337 122 83 825 218 297 172 55 35 62 64 42 277 1 343 49 113 45 85 2.8 3.6 3.9 1.3 2.3 5.6 3.5 5.8 4.0 3.3 2.7 5.0 2.8 1.6 2. 1 3.6 7.5 4.3 1.4 4.5 6.2 4.3 2.5 3.2 2.8 4.8 4.5 1.5 2.3 2.5 3.7 2.7 3.6 3.2 4.3 2.7 4.3 3.7 5.2 5.2 3. 1 3.9 4.5 5.4 8.7 4.8 6.3 4.6 3.0 3.8 4.5 6.4 2.5 2. 1 2.8 2.7 3.4 4.5 3.5 3.8 3.4 2.4 3.6 232 12 29 9 17 30 8 10 2 38 81 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.4 0. 1 0.5 0.9 1.2 9 222 1 589 2 377 40 122 86 105 29 275 1 057 64 412 85 51 48 2 940 66 8 54 47 91 53 32 350 8 66 96 3 40 972 1 049 443 399 2 727 1 2 39 352 1 561 1 778 845 134 19 1 553 228 344 80 37 3 1 9 8 14 1 3 1 0.5 3.7 5.8 10.6 2.5 4.2 2.6 3.5 2.6 5.5 2.9 0.9 2.8 5.6 2.7 4.2 4.9 3. 1 1.0 1.6 2.6 4.2 4.4 2.0 1.6 0.6 2. 1 5.2 0.3 0.4 14. 1 23.0 9.4 17.0 32.5 10.7 7.6 10.2 31. 1 12.0 7.0 1. 1 5.6 4.0 5.3 3.0 1.7 0. 1 (Z ) 0.7 0. 1 (Z 1 0. 1 0. 1 (Z ) 661 75 7 321 14 592 26 23 35 3 11 13 23 20 83 650 113 68 TENNESSEE : TEXAS: 0.3 0. 4 0.9 0. 1 1.0 1.4 1.5 UTAH : VIRGINIA : 5. 1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.2 WASHINGTON: 2.3 1.7 west Virginia: 2.5 Wisconsin: 86 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure Total criminal justice system Police protection Judicial City 1 Amount Percent of total direct expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system 32 729 770 97 405 10 028 47 093 41 262 30 101 21 169 12 369 18 677 198 384 19 897 20 861 100 915 12 922 25 668 11 589 7 88 4 11 037 13 320 43 916 18 828 3 210 33 219 9 312 31 007 8 562 10 296 17 302 16 783 14 886 9 216 13 560 9 562 9 643 19 492 64 179 16 767 16 141 42 043 15 811 20 970 25 498 34 587 9 156 142 305 827 143 15 955 13 569 15 179 3 726 124 853 11 050 15 083 16 777 24 922 41 529 2 672 17 129 13 980 14 029 38 329 32 932 72 697 16 218 43 344 14 247 166 598 550 010 119 640 15 330 17 723 33 377 22 728 4 544 679 12 837 1 194 3 183 6 307 4 235 2 139 1 522 4 521 33 852 2 836 2 427 13 294 1 162 3 611 1 408 1 301 2 221 1 938 7 681 5 446 no 4 622 2 030 5 392 78 1 992 2 925 3 068 4 083 2 008 2 822 1 902 2 237 3 098 8 950 3 673 3 162 4 126 1 676 3 198 5 392 4 974 425 19 597 194 963 2 655 1 800 3 793 35 19 429 2 033 3 058 2 501 2 248 6 115 23 3 "15 4 r ' 5-1.7 1.2 35" 2 '- n 4 "58 .. 178 24 799 75 513 18 855 1 858 2 478 6 595 3 308 13.9 13.2 11.9 6.8 15.3 14. 1 10. 1 12.3 24.2 17. 1 14. 3 11.6 13.2 9.0 14. 1 12. 1 16.5 20. 1 14.5 17.5 28.9 3.4 13.9 21.8 17.4 0.9 19.3 16.9 18.3 27.4 21.8 20.8 19.9 23.2 15.9 13.9 21.9 19.6 9.8 10.6 15.3 21. 1 14.4 4.6 13.8 23.6 16.6 13.3 25.0 0.9 15.6 18.4 20.3 14.9 9.0 14.7 0.9 19.9 15.9 12.5 . 1.* U .4 11.2 15.3 1 4 . 9 13.7 L 5 . 8 12. 1 14. 19.8 14.6 3 610 311 11 175 1 100 2 870 5 741 3 814 1 912 1 405 4 370 30 989 2 596 2 157 12 298 918 3 250 1 093 1 153 2 141 1 888 7 306 5 181 80 4 332 1 986 4 987 1 911 2 862 3 004 3 927 1 970 2 791 1 853 2 186 2 991 8 522 3 617 3 108 3 950 1 538 3 032 5 148 4 567 350 17 279 187 632 2 576 1 731 3 637 17 969 2 007 2 960 2 414 2 090 5 704 1 2 949 2 093 1 667 4 323 5 ->0? i - : <3 1 98 1 4 72 4 2 C76 ?.2 710 4° 2 Q 18 147 1 762 2 411 6 246 3 104 79.4 87. 1 92. 1 90.2 91.0 90. 1 89.4 92.3 96.7 91.5 91.5 88.9 92.5 79.0 90.0 77.6 88.6 96.4 97.4 95. 1 95. 1 72.7 93.7 97.8 92.5 95.9 97.8 97.9 96.2 98. 1 98.9 97.4 97.7 96.5 95.2 98.5 98.3 95.7 91.8 94.8 95.5 91.8 82.4 88.2 96.2 97.0 96.2 95.9 92.5 98.7 96.8 96.5 93.0 93.3 4.3 36.4 94.4 95.0 97.4 96.0 98.2 88. 1 97.2 95.3 91.6 65.3 96.2 94.8 97.3 94.7 93.8 336 659 449 27 80 192 136 117 47 78 1 239 88 111 37 4 100 94 89 64 10 995 ALABAMA '■ 3.0 3.2 ARIZONA : 3. 1 1.7 3.7 3. 1 4.6 2.8 ARKANSAS: 8. 6 2.6 6.3 4.9 California: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 14.6 _ _ _ _ _ CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 87 Table 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal services and prosecution Public defense Corr ections Other crim inal justice City' Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system 149 124 322 20 77 94 66 43 35 65 1 302 141 113 602 43 88 76 28 80 50 275 265 30 211 44 287 78 81 63 64 90 38 31 49 51 93 2 69 56 54 176 138 98 244 261 75 1 317 7 331 79 69 118 35 342 26 98 87 158 298 22 62 57 88 114 204 219 67 134 102 1 494 3 599 708 96 67 314 204 3.3 2.5 1.7 2.4 1.5 1.6 2.0 2.3 1.4 3.8 5.0 4.7 4.5 3.7 2.4 5.4 2.2 3.6 2.6 3.6 4.9 27.3 4.6 2.2 5.3 100.0 4. 1 2.2 2. 1 2.2 1.9 1. 1 2.6 2.3 3.0 3.0 1.5 1.7 4.3 8.2 3. 1 4.5 5.2 17.6 6.7 3.8 3.0 3.8 3. 1 100.0 1.8 1.3 3.2 3.5 7.0 4.9 95.7 1.8 2.6 5.0 2.6 3.8 1.8 3.0 2.8 4.7 6.0 4.8 3.8 5.2 2.7 4.8 6.2 24 571 43 20 7 8 230 20 11 76 959 0.5 0. 3 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.3 37 1 024 848 47 136 205 212 67 35 67 11 101 179 150 56 100 118 66 146 969 38 1 118 113 404 66 415 10 264 8.2 6.6 3.9 4. 3 3.3 5.0 3. 1 2.3 0.2 0.4 8.7 5.0 10.7 4.3 1.3 2.2 1.6 2.9 4.9 1.0 5.B 1.8 11.8 3.0 1.7 13.6 52 990 75 25 46 79 14 159 68 32 201 104 406 35 Alabama: Arizona: 0. 1 1.9 ARKANSAS : - California: 1.7 - 0.5 1.8 _ 2.1 0.2 8.9 0.4 0.5 0.5 See footnotes at end of table 8 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure Total criminal justice system Police pr otection Jud LCial City' Amount Percent of total direct expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system CALIFORNIA CONTINUED 41 525 21 884 21 390 6 043 8 496 48 771 20 848 26 743 13 836 15 307 9 225 9 875 9 252 29 173 16 142 45 438 295 847 11 777 16 140 20 992 84 616 27 137 29 046 146 813 26 505 31 025 39 925 74 593 44 345 88 982 70 953 22 835 65 321 1 374 713 18 008 51 861 18 410 16 970 28 566 196 188 81 664 48 554 43 061 17 858 52 444 45 113 86 352 13 501 14 251 185 277 16 209 48 229 20 290 23 319 215 578 18 558 29 098 14 605 4 618 13 36 3 973 838 6 912 12 982 9 819 10 741 9 659 3 368 4 243 1 604 1 392 2 243 5 619 2 378 5 862 2 392 2 122 1 941 2 602 1 619 3 158 2 541 5 399 40 924 1 348 7 911 3 570 8 567 1 537 1 747 8 898 1 472 1 790 2 928 6 610 2 858 4 988 4 895 1 755 5 537 200 367 2 943 7 917 3 677 3 845 5 322 26 566 17 048 6 833 7 874 2 360 9 386 2 472 10 431 2 819 2 355 28 435 2 138 6 881 3 87 1 4 073 29 397 2 009 1 708 2 652 27 1 5 38 247 963 1 542 1 811 1 801 3 066 1 679 8. 1 19.4 7.5 23.0 26.4 11.5 11.4 21.9 17.3 13.9 21.0 26.3 17.5 10.8 15.7 11.9 13.8 11.4 49.0 17.0 10. 1 5.7 6.0 6. 1 5.6 5.8 7.3 8.9 6.4 5.6 6.9 7.7 8.5 14.6 16.3 15.3 20.0 22.7 18.6 13.5 20.9 14. 1 18.3 13.2 17.9 5.5 12. 1 20.9 16.5 15.3 13.2 14.3 19. 1 17.5 13.6 10.8 5.9 18.2 0.6 11.5 25.5 22.3 14.0 18.3 28.5 17.4 3 283 3 982 1 532 1 306 2 059 5 430 2 264 5 494 2 310 2 098 1 864 2 549 1 512 2 875 1 754 4 959 29 120 1 262 6 910 3 142 8 013 1 483 1 700 8 37 3 1 399 1 736 2 795 6 486 2 648 4 705 4 717 1 577 4 843 97 056 2 724 6 905 3 569 3 670 4 223 16 784 16 615 6 333 6 777 2 192 8 535 2 390 10 140 2 530 2 288 24 515 1 927 4 479 2 993 3 676 26 908 1 851 1 644 2 574 27 1 481 243 332 1 470 1 755 1 694 2 920 1 625 97.5 93.8 95.5 93.8 91.8 96.6 95.2 93.7 96.6 98.9 96.0 98.0 93.4 91.0 69.0 91.9 71.2 93.6 87.3 88.0 93.5 96.5 97.3 94. 1 95.0 97.0 95.5 98.1 92.7 94.3 96.4 89.9 87.5 48.4 92.6 87.2 97. 1 95.4 79.3 63.2 97.5 92.7 86. 1 92.9 90.9 96.7 97.2 89.7 97.2 86.2 90. 1 65. 1 77.3 90.3 91.5 92. 1 96.3 97. 1 100.0 96.3 98. 1 95.3 96.9 94. 1 95.2 96.8 61 130 151 236 3 401 44 355 82 63 6 3 1 1 7 12 5 37 15 1 386 19 112 76 406 11 138 4 406 ?:? 207 87 13 958 52 1 135 139 130 13 64 1 27 1 11 - COLORADO : 3.8 4. 1 5.9 4.4 8.3 3.3 4.5 2.3 CONNECTICUT: 0.7 0.4 0.2 0. 1 0. 1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.3 0.1 DELAWARE : 7.0 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: 9.5 FLORIDA : 2.6 5. 1 _ 0.3 2.6 16.6 _ 3.2 2.6 _ _ _ _ 3. 1 GEORGIA: 0.6 3.4 2.4 16.5 3.6 3.2 HAWAI I : IDAHO : 0.6 ILLINOIS: 3.7 (Z) _ _ 0. 1 _ - - _ 0.7 footnotes .it end of table. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 89 Table 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal services and prosecution Public defense Con ections Other criir inal justice City 1 Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system CALIFORNIA — CONTINUED 85 261 72 86 50 189 114 254 82 24 26 53 46 153 117 187 2 326 42 627 103 189 38 42 525 72 53 126 112 108 234 130 94 308 6 7 36 77 168 89 26 124 701 433 194 131 71 220 82 291 79 54 807 48 291 164 44 1 770 110 77 57 3 479 72 56 107 95 43 2.5 6.2 4.5 6.2 2.2 3.4 4.8 4.3 3.4 1.1 1.3 2.0 2.8 4.8 4.6 3.5 b.7 3. 1 7.9 2.9 2.2 2.5 2.4 5.9 4.9 3.0 4.3 1.7 3.8 4.7 2.7 5.4 5.6 3.4 2.6 2. 1 2.4 0.7 2.3 2.6 2.5 2.8 1.7 3.0 2.3 3.3 2.8 2.8 2.3 2.8 2.2 4.2 4.2 1.1 6.0 5.5 2.9 3.7 1.4 4.7 3. 1 5.9 3. 1 2.6 146 12 1 935 10 13 2 19 13 45 27 0.4 0.2 1.0 0.3 0.2 (Z ) 0. 1 0.2 0.2 0.4 134 114 5 17 5 309 19 243 199 73 114 56 425 19 138 835 4 458 71 591 97 408 123 1 974 111 878 575 223 719 35 677 51 6.0 1.9 0.2 0.3 13.0 0.2 6.8 2.3 36.5 1.9 5.4 0.5 3.6 15.7 16.8 1.0 7.5 4. 1 4.3 4.4 6.9 5.2 12.8 14.9 5.5 2.4 1.7 0.3 1.7 51 514 622 103 10 2 97 33 83 2 414 198 168 223 136 71 204 2.6 Colorado: 1.5 Connecticut: 1.2 0.7 0. 1 3.4 0.7 4.7 DELAWARE : district of Columbia: 1.2 Florida: 0.7 2. 1 2.4 Georgia: 0.5 1.0 HAWAII : Idaho: ILLINOIS: - 0. 1 See footnotes end of table 90 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure Total criminal justice system Police pr otection Jud icial City 1 " Percent of total direct expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system ILLINOIS — CONTINUED 18 276 9 673 11 406 15 694 20 081 30 152 12 939 10 786 21 654 12 130 10 610 30 000 35 371 39 468 20 115 231 623 11 249 25 512 12 810 25 847 17 788 21 672 64 853 10 759 23 159 27 997 37 069 7 515 28 897 98 391 9 152 48 613 135 107 25 221 76 451 8 354 14 639 14 143 195 786 36 301 35 266 917 110 627 176 51 074 60 220 30 5 69 58 038 34 549 32 020 40 233 50 083 32 622 33 603 52 498 57 848 36 942 65 114 30 763 117 426 30 236 123 329 29 593 31 942 11 282 609 851 2 918 2 908 1 778 2 416 5 226 5 384 1 285 2 511 3 287 2 592 1 903 3 687 4 959 6 856 3 589 30 379 1 994 3 906 1 451 2 440 1 599 2 008 6 123 1 227 2 285 1 908 5 710 1 618 4 132 8 117 2 039 9 329 17 958 1 456 15 368 1 538 1 511 1 629 43 351 6 752 2 959 81 621 89 799 4 060 5 731 1 832 4 760 1 810 2 375 3 304 4 323 2 191 2 502 4 415 4 605 1 723 5 038 2 611 6 704 2 729 8 207 4 450 4 506 3 066 124 646 16.0 30. 1 15.6 15.4 26.0 17.9 9.9 23.3 15.2 21.4 17.9 12.3 14.0 17.4 17.8 13. 1 17.7 15.3 11.3 9.4 9.0 9.3 9.4 11.4 9.9 6.8 15.4 21.5 14.3 8.2 22.3 19.2 13.3 5.8 20. 1 18.4 10.3 11.5 22. 1 18.6 8.4 8.9 14.3 7.9 9.5 6.0 8.2 5.2 7.4 8.2 8.6 6.7 7. 4 8.4 8.0 4.7 7.7 8.5 5.7 9.0 6.7 15.0 14. 1 27.2 20.4 2 817 2 806 1 732 2 359 4 941 5 184 1 252 2 407 3 030 2 544 1 800 3 335 4 565 5 589 3 250 21 508 1 827 3 846 1 334 2 363 1 470 1 867 5 865 1 159 1 782 1 849 5 023 1 441 3 726 6 662 1 794 6 553 17 000 1 35 3 9 063 1 350 1 024 1 392 27 083 6 161 2 87 1 63 041 62 860 3 981 5 319 1 776 4 355 1 734 2 130 3 126 4 128 2 136 2 451 4 177 4 460 1 688 4 949 2 327 6 358 2 613 7 678 3 585 4 052 2 597 107 198 96.5 96.5 97.4 97.6 94.5 96.3 97.4 95.9 92.2 98. 1 94.6 90.5 92. 1 81.5 90.6 70.8 91.6 98.5 91.9 96.8 91.9 93.0 95.8 94.5 78.0 96.9 88.0 89. 1 90.2 82. 1 88.0 70.2 94.7 92.9 59.0 87.8 67.8 85.5 62.5 91.2 97.0 77.2 70.0 98. 1 92.8 96.9 91.5 95.8 89.7 94.6 95.5 97.5 98.0 94.6 96.9 98.0 98.2 89. 1 94.8 95.7 93.6 80.6 89.9 84.7 86.0 16 38 126 324 218 3 708 106 57 5 156 78 64 251 57 923 517 42 3 609 125 45 95 6 129 336 5 420 13 439 1 517 182 394 7 846 1.2 INDIANA: 2.0 3.4 4.7 6. 1 12.2 5.3 3.9 IOWA: 0.2 Kansas: 2.7 4.8 1.5 3. 1 Kentucky: 2.8 9.9 2.9 2.9 Louisiana: 23.5 8.1 3.0 5.8 14.1 5.0 MAINE : Maryland: 6.6 Massachusetts: 15.0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ (Z 1 Michigan: 11.6 4.0 12.9 6.3 Sec footnote and of tnbl« CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 91 Table 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal s pros srvices and scution Public defense Corr ections Other criminal justice City' Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system ILLINOIS — CONTINUED 101 102 46 57 285 145 17 104 165 48 56 212 103 170 82 1 176 34 60 60 77 84 97 236 46 106 59 220 96 142 231 143 412 424 54 897 59 52 64 1 033 74 87 4 645 3 146 79 183 56 80 76 67 178 105 55 51 74 145 35 89 78 221 116 279 128 182 64 2 503 3.5 3.5 2.6 2.4 5.5 2.7 1.3 4. 1 5.0 1.9 2.9 5.7 2. 1 2.5 2.3 3.9 1.7 1.5 4. 1 3.2 5.3 4.8 3.9 3.7 4.6 3. 1 3.9 5.9 3.4 2.8 7.0 4.4 2.4 3.7 5.8 3.8 3.4 3.9 2.4 1. 1 2.9 5.7 3.5 1.9 3.2 3. 1 1.7 4.2 2.8 5.4 2.4 2.5 2.0 1.7 3. 1 2.0 1.8 3.0 3.3 4.3 3.4 2.9 4.0 2. 1 2.0 6 5 7 184 3 5 165 4 294 - 137 1 4 1 344 0. 1 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.2 0. 1 1. 1 0.3 0.7 3. 1 (Z ) 0. 1 1. 1 92 4 14 63 32 3 702 7 45 22 22 74 241 44 360 45 1 441 1 444 390 78 8 579 181 7 701 8 647 261 20 83 89 7 5 665 2.8 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.9 12.2 0.4 2.8 0.4 1.8 3.2 4.2 1. 1 4.4 2.2 15.4 9.4 25.8 4.8 19.8 2.7 9.4 9.6 5.5 0.8 1.9 2.0 0.2 4.5 49 291 710 101 20 39 323 70 151 613 17 7 190 233 1 814 1 707 229 64 158 90 164 206 125 249 90 0.9 Indiana: _ 5.9 10.4 0.3 1.0 IOWA : _ 1.9 14. 1 Kansas: 1.2 3.7 7.6 Kentucky: 0. 1 0.5 LOUISIANA: 1.2 _ 0.5 MAINE : (Z ) MARYLAND : 1.0 MASSACHUSETTS: 1.9 4.0 1.3 6.7 2. 1 3.7 7.9 1.9 3.0 MICHIGAN : 0. 1 See footnotes end of table 92 Table 15. CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure Total criminal justice system Police pr otection Jud Lcial City 1 Amount Percent of total direct expenditure Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system MICHIGAN — CONTINUED 6 458 112 139 49 487 21 324 52 263 9 139 15 443 56 608 10 666 12 419 27 728 13 188 18 702 13 631 11 987 35 622 12 875 9 222 17 243 40 353 139 233 13 148 81 958 5 954 51 128 9 695 4 187 19 727 185 901 10 043 211 052 24 598 19 674 15 470 62 816 133 532 23 117 26 509 56 374 34 608 16 172 16 107 27 552 25 532 54 100 50 440 13 712 149 724 307 442 9 935 72 000 33 000 9 089 30 827 78 223 34 67 1 36 144 308 545 21 843 23 300 11 571 555 1 542 9 497 8 433 3 573 6 723 1 673 3 609 5 671 2 362 2 535 4 405 2 367 4 37 3 3 349 2 765 6 650 4 082 2 236 2 431 2 551 18 032 1 692 12 887 1 047 5 521 1 27 1 1 326 2 628 29 613 1 708 57 383 2 861 1 957 1 995 5 312 11 825 789 5 303 2 547 2 194 2 7 32 2 202 8 176 2 757 5 967 5 541 2 953 18 352 36 366 2 844 7 288 8 233 2 489 1 682 12 788 6 34 1 2 356 24 036 3 513 3 643 1 054 895 23.9 8.5 17.0 16.8 12.9 18.3 23.4 10.0 22. 1 20. 4 15.9 17.9 23.4 24.6 23. 1 18.7 31.7 24.2 14. 1 6.3 13.0 12.9 15.7 17.6 10.8 13. 1 31.7 13.3 15.9 17.0 27.2 11.6 9.9 12.9 8.5 8.9 3.4 20.0 4.5 6.3 16.9 13.7 29.7 10.8 11.0 11.0 21.5 12.3 11.8 28.6 10. 1 24.9 27.4 5.5 16.3 18.3 6.5 7.8 16. 1 15.6 9. 1 1 393 8 369 6 790 3 012 5 045 1 512 3 213 4 918 2 087 2 201 4 210 2 223 3 541 2 955 2 539 5 301 3 637 1 897 2 324 2 336 15 019 1 624 10 344 955 4 686 1 173 1 284 2 429 25 319 1 582 42 016 2 667 1 819 1 816 3 803 10 443 14 4 67 1 2 241 1 851 2 520 2 07 1 7 658 2 593 5 215 5 274 2 611 17 432 32 070 2 618 6 905 7 879 2 287 1 517 10 304 5 847 2 118 21 298 3 088 3 223 707 008 90.3 88. 1 80.5 84.3 75.0 90.4 89.0 86.7 88.4 86.8 95.6 93.9 81.0 88.2 91.8 79.7 89. 1 84.8 95.6 91.6 83.3 96.0 80.3 91.2 84.9 92.3 96.8 92.4 85.5 92.6 73.2 93.2 92.9 91.0 71.6 88.3 1.8 88. 1 88.0 84.4 92.2 94. 1 93.7 94. 1 87.4 95.2 88.4 95.0 88.2 92. 1 94.7 95.7 91.9 90.2 80.6 92.2 89.9 88.6 87.9 88.5 67.0 79 515 748 323 528 98 214 456 187 203 102 521 197 130 1 133 297 219 7 1 753 19 218 38 24 88 1 134 54 5 262 127 59 33 378 716 345 174 154 111 93 60 238 89 404 134 105 494 1 494 96 205 172 115 73 685 251 150 1 844 228 252 140 333 8.9 9.0 7.9 5.9 5.9 8.0 7.9 8.0 4.3 11.9 5.9 4.7 17.0 7.3 9.8 MINNESOTA : 0.3 (Z ) 5.8 MISSISSIPPI : 1.8 3.9 MISSOURI : 3.0 1.8 3.3 3.8 3.2 9.2 4.4 Montana: 3.0 1.7 NEBRASKA ■ 7. 1 6. 1 Nevada: 43.7 3.3 new Hampshire: 6.0 5. 1 new jersey: 3.4 2.7 2.9 3.2 6.8 2.4 3.6 2.7 4. 1 3.4 2.8 2.1 4.6 4.3 NEW MEXICO : 5.4 NEW YORK : 4.0 6.4 7.7 6.5 6.9 13.3 nd of table CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 93 Table 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal s ervlces and ecution Public defense Con ectrons Other crim mal justice City 1 Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system MICHIGAN — CONTINUED 69 195 303 197 171 30 117 251 88 67 195 42 152 102 83 215 61 95 100 192 897 68 593 26 206 60 18 111 864 72 2 068 67 56 28 273 552 430 181 55 44 111 71 226 75 234 133 193 300 473 85 147 124 38 92 513 208 88 839 157 168 34 099 4.5 2. 1 3.6 5.5 2.5 1.8 3.2 4.4 3.7 2.6 4.4 1.8 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.2 1.5 4.2 4. 1 7.5 5.0 4.0 4.6 2.5 3.7 4.7 1.4 4.2 2.9 4.2 3.6 2.3 2.9 1.4 5. 1 4.7 54.5 3.4 2.2 2.0 4. 1 3.2 2.8 2.7 3.9 2.4 6.5 1.6 1.3 3.0 2.0 1.5 1.5 5.5 4.0 3.3 3.7 3.5 4.5 4.6 3.2 1 30 17 57 1 9 22 8 6 1 1 1 20 3 22 68 237 6 1 13 8 9 55 13 846 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.8 0. 1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0. 1 5 8 609 25 536 11 822 8 808 8 411 39 075 73 794 57 630 '. 969 34 422 86 687 187 481 72 853 213 445 79 509 1 1. 457 15 680 13 724 184 519 37 382 52 207 .'<■ 132 14 ;r,n 31 (i ", 52 281 17 112 >0 B90 '14 603 193 491 28 19 i ■ ', 52 IS'. 38 Ml 6 473 5 925 25 862 22 491 1 582 2 888 3 300 9 064 2 978 1 069 5 022 36 273 7 424 14 871 1 508 1 913 1 142 60 614 2 157 783 3 404 1 60S 1 735 1 784 2 178 1 211 1 089 1 553 21 647 1 338 3 100 1 830 101 996 957 6 596 4 409 4 466 2 268 8 227 11 540 4 426 15 309 5 417 7 034 1 922 1 760 26 607 5 363 6 542 599 183 1 657 2 223 2 409 1 210 6 134 38 392 1 273 3 365 1 862 2 328 17.0 15.0 16. 1 9.7 11.0 7.4 15.2 14.8 14.6 19.5 6.7 8.9 9.8 20.9 14.3 7. 1 9.6 15.0 20. 1 15.2 11.6 15.5 12. 1 11.8 22.9 9.9 7.7 5.4 9.5 6.2 6.1 7.2 6.8 6. ' 14.3 12.5 '.. "• 4.3 14. 1 5.8 •■.' 19.8 4.4 16.9 5.8 6.0 6 057 5 392 23 106 15 746 1 385 2 518 2 798 8 242 2 688 1 009 4 •4<< 3 531 7 032 13 674 1 272 1 ( 70 996 53 527 1 883 698 3 028 1 539 1 611 1 575 1 887 1 069 1 018 1 4 ' '■ 20 301 1 2 37 2 901 1 578 1 779 858 7 970 4 488 2 838 3 317 1 644 4 353 8 4. 'A 3 151 10 "14 2 518 5 059 1 i,(i.'i 1 6 '7 22 786 4 887 5 344 2 516 2 101 1 -,.'.' 2 132 2 '.(i»l 1 15( 5 857 '■7 044 1 '.'4 ^ 229 1 603 2 Vi, 89.3 70.0 87.5 87.2 84.8 90.9 90.3 94.4 84.6 89.7 94.7 87.3 87.2 86.6 88.3 93.5 91.6 93.8 92.5 93.6 86.2 86. 1 89.0 68.0 64.4 74.3 72.5 52.9 73.0 71.2 70.6 46.5 71.9 83.5 95.3 85.6 91.1 81.7 89. 1 96.2 97.9 95.9 95.6 95.5 95.5 n,-,.s 96.2 96.0 96.8 95.6 184 82 6 38 3 540 61 147 22 3 4 6 1 86 30 245 1 364 271 697 112 35 L7« 2 42 95 7f,q 522 355 490 35 843 1 404 713 2 113 617 710 1 655 223 V.7 - Repr Z Less 'Data nts zero or rounds to zero. an half the unit of measurement shown, based on a field compilation from records ch city government show text for data limltatio CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 97 Table 15. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal s pros ervices and ecution Public defense Corr ectrons Other crim mal justice City 1 Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system south Dakota: 47 232 229 367 521 89 101 193 36 1 99 30 253 1 000 121 318 54 143 49 858 96 50 146 40 56 50 105 55 16 37 560 50 83 66 68 43 238 295 167 196 123 261 446 208 821 496 337 122 83 825 218 297 172 55 35 62 64 42 277 1 343 49 113 45 85 2.8 3.6 3.9 1.4 2.3 5.6 3.5 5.8 4.0 3.3 2.8 5.0 2.8 1.6 2. 1 3.6 7.5 4.3 1.4 4.5 6.4 4.3 2.5 3.2 2.8 4.8 4.5 1.5 2.4 2.6 3.7 2.7 3.6 3.2 4.3 2.7 4.5 3.8 4.4 5.4 3.2 3.9 4.7 5.4 9.2 4.8 6.3 4.7 3. 1 4. 1 4.5 6.6 2.5 2. 1 2.8 2.7 3.5 4.5 3.5 3.8 3.4 2.4 3.7 232 12 29 9 17 30 8 10 2 38 81 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.4 0. 1 0.5 0.9 1.2 222 1 090 2 377 40 122 86 105 275 1 057 412 85 51 48 2 940 66 54 47 91 53 32 66 96 40 909 1 049 443 399 2 727 1 239 334 1 561 1 778 845 130 453 35 344 3.7 4.2 10.6 2.5 4.2 2.6 3.5 5.5 2.9 2.8 5.6 2.7 4.2 4.9 3. 1 1.6 2.6 4.2 4.4 2. 1 2. 1 5.2 0.4 13.8 23.8 9.9 17.6 33. 1 10.7 7.5 10.2 32.8 12.0 6.8 1.7 0.7 5.3 661 75 7 321 14 592 353 11 13 23 20 83 650 113 68 Tennessee: TEXAS: 0.3 0.4 0.9 0. 1 1. UTAH : Virginia: 5. 4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.2 Washington: 2.4 west Virginia: 2.6 Wisconsin: 98 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 16. Total criminal justice system expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Capital outlay Const ru tion Intergovernmental expenditur TOTAL . . . . Alabama: birmingham. . . . GADSDEN HUNTSVILLE. . . . MOBILE MONTGOMERY. . . . TUSCALOOSA. . . . ARIZONA : GLENDALE MESA PHOENIX SCOTTSDALE. . . . TEMPE TUCSON ARKANSAS : FORT SMITH. . . . LITTLE ROCK . . . NORTH LITTLE ROCK PINE BLUFF. . . . CALIFORNIA: ALAMEDA ALHAMBRA ANAHEIM BAKERSFIELD . . . BELLFLOWER. . . . BERKELEY BUENA PARK. . . . BURBANK CARSON CHULA VISTA . . . COMPTON CONCORD COSTA MESA. . . . DALY CITY . . . . DOWNEY EL CAJON EL MONTE FREMONT FRESNO FULLERTON .... GARDEN GROVE. . . GLENDALE HAWTHORNE .... HAYWARD HUNTINGTON BEACH. INGLEWOOD . . . . LAKEWOOD LONG BEACH. . . . LOS ANGELES . . . MODESTO MOUNTAIN VIEW . . NEWPORT BEACH . . NORWALK OAKLAND ONTARIO ORANGE OXNARD PALO ALTO .... PASADENA PICO RIVERA . . . POMONA REDONDO BEACH . . REDWOOD CITY. . . RICHMOND RIVERSIDE . . . . SACRAMENTO. . . . SALINAS SAN BERNARDINO. . SAN BUENAVENTURA. SAN DIEGO .... SAN FRANCISCO . . SAN JOSE SAN LEANDRO . . . SAN MATEO .... SANTA ANA .... 4 576 129 12 837 1 194 3 266 6 559 4 478 2 156 1 522 4 52 1 33 995 2 842 2 427 13 309 1 178 3 708 1 456 1 336 2 221 1 948 7 686 5 447 1 068 4 622 2 033 5 406 2 913 1 992 3 006 3 068 4 142 2 008 2 862 1 902 2 244 3 098 8 950 3 673 3 170 4 126 1 685 3 198 5 398 4 974 1 550 19 597 195 264 2 655 1 800 3 802 1 451 19 429 2 044 3 065 2 515 2 248 6 115 1 151 3 415 2 242 1 755 4 437 5 417 12 357 2 311 4 398 2 187 24 799 75 521 18 855 1 858 2 478 6 620 4 544 679 12 837 1 194 3 183 6 307 4 235 2 139 1 522 4 521 33 852 2 836 2 427 13 294 162 611 408 301 2 221 1 9 38 7 681 5 446 110 4 622 2 030 5 392 73 1 992 2 925 3 068 4 083 2 008 2 822 1 902 2 237 3 098 8 950 3 673 3 162 4 126 1 676 3 198 5 392 4 974 425 19 597 194 963 2 655 1 800 3 793 35 19 429 2 033 3 058 2 501 2 248 6 115 23 3 415 2 216 1 755 4 437 5 417 12 357 2 249 4 858 2 178 24 799 75 513 18 855 1 858 2 478 6 595 12 407 1 123 3 109 6 118 3 877 2 026 1 518 1 527 30 373 2 807 2 251 12 619 1 106 3 445 1 322 1 180 2 180 1 931 7 256 4 090 110 4 570 2 015 5 352 78 1 935 2 857 3 006 3 966 1 978 2 684 1 802 2 102 2 935 8 857 2 839 3 114 4 107 1 658 3 110 5 174 4 754 37 1 19 297 189 113 2 533 1 685 3 329 35 18 993 2 013 3 022 2 468 2 232 6 099 22 3 364 2 139 1 706 4 376 5 258 12 318 2 121 4 645 2 048 24 167 7 3 981 18 164 1 807 2 364 6 22 1 IRQ 113 994 479 29 176 675 56 166 425 1 356 62 117 30 138 100 135 163 93 A 34 48 19 2 1 8 220 64 3 on 850 122 115 461) 436 20 159 39 128 213 130 632 1 532 691 51 1 14 374 189 358 106 170 37 4 56 124 411 106 62 116 27 138 100 lib 134 128 210 41 551 1 202 691 -,Q 92 570 2 913 2 136 153 147 344 2 448 37 85 115 - 136 328 10 259 252 243 1 125 301 see footnotes end of table CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 16. Total criminal justice system expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) 99 Total Direct expenditure Intergo vernmental expenditure City' Total Direct current Capita outlay Total To State governments To Total Equipment Construc- tion Land local governments CALIFORNIA — CONTINUED 3 312 3 308 2 949 359 205 154 - 4 - 4 3 368 3 368 2 850 518 54 464 - - - - 4 275 4 243 4 097 146 142 4 - 32 - 32 SANTA ROSA 1 604 1 604 1 509 95 95 - - - - - 1 392 1 392 1 374 18 18 - - - - - SOUTH GATE 2 252 2 243 2 094 149 92 57 - 9 - 9 5 619 2 378 5 619 2 378 5 559 2 352 60 26 19 26 41 5 902 2 392 2 130 5 862 2 392 2 122 5 749 2 368 2 101 113 24 21 113 24 21 - " 40 8 : 40 8 1 951 1 941 1 931 10 10 - - 10 - 10 2 606 2 602 2 539 63 63 4 COLORADO : 1 634 3 158 2 541 5 399 1 619 3 158 2 541 5 399 1 538 3 106 2 003 5 045 81 52 5 38 354 81 52 24 354 514 : 15 - COLORADO SPRINGS _ 40 924 1 348 40 924 1 348 38 495 1 126 2 429 222 434 214 450 8 1 495 : : _ 7 911 3 570 7 911 3 570 7 819 3 450 92 120 92 107 13 : : : CONNECTICUT: 8 567 8 567 8 454 113 72 41 - - - - 1 537 1 747 8 898 1 476 1 790 2 928 1 5 37 1 747 8 898 1 472 1 790 2 928 1 485 1 714 8 890 1 470 1 734 2 859 52 33 8 2 56 69 51 3 8 2 56 69 1 30 : 4 4 6 610 6 610 6 541 69 69 - - - - - 2 858 5 002 4 895 2 858 4 988 4 895 2 814 4 89 3 4 561 44 95 334 44 83 334 12 : 14 14 - 1 755 1 755 1 702 53 53 - " " " - DELAWARE : 5 5 37 5 537 5 483 54 54 - " " - - district of Columbia: 200 367 200 367 181 977 18 390 129 18 250 11 " - - Florida: 2 943 2 943 2 383 560 45 515 - - - - 7 917 7 917 7 815 102 102 - - - - - 3 677 3 677 2 612 1 065 70 - 995 - - - 3 845 5 322 3 845 5 322 3 407 5 231 438 91 438 91 : - - - - 26 566 26 566 22 457 4 109 675 3 434 - - - - 17 048 6 833 17 048 6 833 16 140 6 827 908 6 30 6 186 692 7 897 2 364 7 874 2 360 7 819 2 136 55 224 55 224 : : 23 4 4 9 386 9 386 8 936 450 450 - - - - - 2 472 2 472 2 387 85 82 3 - - - - 10 431 2 819 10 431 2 819 10 117 2 735 314 84 314 84 : - : : - Georgia: 2 430 28 593 2 138 6 881 3 87 1 4 082 2 355 28 435 2 138 6 881 3 871 4 07 3 2 242 26 793 2 044 6 583 3 195 3 968 113 1 642 94 298 676 105 113 1 244 94 278 200 105 13 20 476 385 75 158 9 - HAWAII : 29 397 29 397 28 625 772 697 75 Idaho: 2 097 2 009 1 915 94 91 " 3 88 - 88 ILLINOIS: ARLINGTON HEIGHTS .... 1 708 1 708 1 670 38 38 - - - - - 2 652 27 1 564 2 652 27 1 538 2 453 1 483 199 27 55 112 27 55 87 - 26 : 26 247 963 1 542 1 811 247 963 1 542 1 811 242 117 1 533 1 753 5 846 9 58 5 014 9 58 832 - : : it end of table. 100 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 16. Total criminal justice system expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditur Capital outlay ital expenditure State governme loca governm ILLINOIS — CONTINUED DES PLAINES . . . EAST ST. LOUIS. . ELGIN EVANSTON JOLIET OAK LAWN OAK PARK PEORIA ROCKFORD ROCK ISLAND . . . SKOKIE SPRINGFIELD . . . WAUKEGAN INDIANA : ANDERSON EVANSVILLE. . . . FORT WAYNE. . . . GARY HAMMOND INDIANAPOLIS. . . MUNCIE SOUTH SEND. . . . TERRE HAUTE . . . IOWA: CEDAR RAPIDS. . . COUNCIL BLUFFS. . DAVENPORT .... DES MOINES. . . . DUBUQUE SIOUX CITY. . . . WATERLOO KANSAS: KANSAS CITY . . . OVERLAND PARK . . TOPEKA WICHITA KENTUCKY: COVINGTON .... LEXINGTON .... LOUISVILLE. . . . OWENSBORO .... LOUISIANA: BATON ROUGE . . . LAFAYETTE .... LAKE CHARLES. . . MONROE NEW ORLEANS . . . SHREVEPORT. . . . MAINE : PORTLAND MARYLAND: BALTIMORE .... MASSACHUSETTS: BOSTON BROCKTON CAMBRIDGE .... CHICOPEE FALL RIVER. . . . HOLYOKE LAWRENCE LOWELL LYNN MALDEN MEDFORD NEW BEDFORD . . . NEWTON PITTSFIELD. . . . QUINCY SOMERVILLE. . . . SPRINGFIELD . . . WALTHAM WORCESTER .... 1 801 3 066 1 679 2 918 2 908 1 778 2 416 5 .■'■', 5 584 1 285 2 511 3 287 2 606 1 903 3 687 4 959 6 856 3 589 30 704 1 994 3 906 1 451 2 'in 1 599 2 012 6 1 54 1 264 2 368 1 908 5 710 1 618 4 160 8 150 2 039 9 372 ia 140 l 484 15 396 1 572 1 546 1 629 43 55] 6 89 799 4 060 '. 731 1 U 760 1 810 2 57 5 '■ 304 '1 2 191 2 502 4 415 ■1 M.i 1 5 (l vt 2 '1 1 6 704 ! 7 '•' 8 207 1 801 3 066 1 679 2 918 2 908 1 778 2 416 5 226 5 384 1 285 2 511 3 287 2 592 1 903 3 687 4 959 6 856 3 589 30 379 1 994 3 906 1 451 2 440 1 599 2 008 6 123 1 227 2 285 1 908 5 710 1 618 4 132 8 117 2 039 9 329 17 958 1 456 15 368 1 538 1 511 1 629 43 351 6 752 1 737 2 928 1 634 2 756 2 900 1 733 2 312 4 835 4 676 1 249 2 431 2 636 2 387 1 873 3 508 4 804 6 633 3 397 29 210 1 880 3 557 1 341 2 315 1 468 1 898 5 946 1 186 2 209 1 802 534 1 983 8 778 16 742 1 438 14 511 1 433 1 006 1 514 38 690 5 808 81 621 81 i 9a 89 799 87 488 4 060 4 049 5 731 5 604 1 832 1 7 49 4 760 4 717 1 810 1 734 2 375 2 368 3 304 3 246 4 323 4 321 2 19 1 2 I'M 2 502 2 475 4 415 4 52 5 4 605 4 176 1 723 1 '.-'.' 5 038 4 868 2 611 2 .,.,.-. 6 704 6 497 2 729 2 (, '.'i 8 207 8 I'd ' 64 138 45 104 59] 708 36 BO 651 205 50 179 155 223 192 1 69 11 'I 549 110 125 1 M 110 177 551 1 216 •'.'.7 105 5 1 ' 5 1 15 661 944 151 170 1 13 2 05 30 17a 155 22 7 L92 024 11 'I 349 110 125 129 110 144 52 i I 1 9 5 570 105 118 115 1 532 944 151 170 1 5 B 721 287 587 252 «3 182 end of table CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 16. Total criminal justice system expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) 101 Capital outlay local governments MICHIGAN! ANN ARBOR DEARBORN , DEARBORN HILLS DETROIT FARMINGTON HILLS FLINT GRAND RAPIDS KALAMAZOO LANSING LINCOLN PARK LIVONIA PONTIAC ROSEVILLE ROYAL OAK SAGINAW SOUTHFIELD ST. CLAIR SHORES STERLING HEIGHTS TAYLOR WARREN WESTLAND WYOMING MINNESOTA: BLOOMINGTON DULUTH MINNEAPOLIS ROCHESTER ST. PAUL MISSISSIPPI : BILOXI JACKSON MISSOURI : COLUMBIA FLORISSANT INDEPENDENCE KANSAS CITY ST. JOSEPH ST. LOUIS SPRINGFIELD MONTANA : BILLINGS GREAT FALLS NEBRASKA: LINCOLN OMAHA Nevada: las vegas RENO NEW HAMPSHIRE ■ MANCHESTER NASHUA NEW jersey: BAYONNE BLOOMFIELD CAMDEN CLIFTON EAST ORANGE ELIZABETH IRVINGTON JERSEY CITY NEWARK PASSAIC PATERSON TRENTON union city vineland new Mexico: albuquerque NEW YORK : ALBANY BINGHAMTON BUFFALO MOUNT VERNON NEW ROCHELLE See footnotes at end of table 4 450 4 542 3 136 125 511 1 546 9 513 8 502 3 573 6 738 1 751 3 667 5 771 2 362 2 536 4 406 4 386 2 372 3 349 2 781 6 650 4 209 2 295 2 444 2 580 18 032 1 692 12 887 047 522 1 27 1 1 326 2 636 29 623 1 710 57 383 2 870 1 966 1 995 5 378 11 885 11 052 5 303 547 194 2 732 2 202 8 176 2 757 5 967 5 541 2 953 18 352 36 366 2 844 7 288 8 233 2 489 6 341 2 358 24 036 3 513 3 643 4 450 4 506 3 066 124 646 1 542 9 497 8 433 3 573 6 723 1 673 3 609 5 67 1 2 362 2 535 4 405 4 373 2 367 3 349 2 765 6 650 4 082 2 236 2 431 2 551 18 032 1 692 12 887 047 521 1 271 1 326 2 628 29 613 1 708 57 383 2 861 1 957 1 995 5 312 11 825 789 5 303 2 547 2 194 2 7 32 2 202 8 176 2 757 5 967 5 541 2 953 18 352 36 366 2 844 7 288 8 233 2 489 1 682 6 341 2 356 24 036 3 513 3 643 4 432 4 438 2 446 121 256 1 460 9 433 8 308 3 462 6 520 1 598 3 355 5 527 2 292 2 532 4 367 3 919 2 299 3 053 2 287 5 702 2 427 2 392 2 483 17 397 1 526 12 660 900 2 4 5 1 215 1 245 2 451 28 899 1 651 56 087 2 739 1 792 1 279 5 004 11 415 770 967 2 449 1 999 2 703 2 195 8 176 2 707 5 944 5 518 2 953 18 352 36 114 2 796 7 288 8 233 2 455 1 682 6 283 2 224 23 056 3 477 3 582 620 390 454 68 296 478 948 1 655 589 635 166 227 147 278 177 714 1 296 122 165 716 308 410 132 980 382 483 111 107 203 195 75 75 254 254 144 144 295 168 214 266 124 144 142 238 1 226 122 165 65 305 410 19 296 132 215 238 907 10 28 1 310 734 1 472 490 10 103 102 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 16. Total criminal justice system expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergo- e r. tental expenditure city Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State overnments To local governments Total Equipment Construc- tion Land NEW YORK — CONTINUED 1 056 419 1 054 895 1 010 572 44 323 4 487 39 828 8 1 524 1 524 - 3 721 3 721 3 695 26 26 - - - - _ 13 702 13 702 13 702 - - - - - - _ 852 2 406 852 2 406 827 2 251 25 155 25 55 100 - ~ - - 8 319 2 104 2 7 18 4 171 8 319 2 104 2 7 18 4 171 8 099 1 848 2 666 4 091 220 256 52 80 220 205 52 80 51 : - : _ 11 422 11 422 11 218 204 204 north Carolina: 1 841 1 799 1 737 62 62 - - 42 - 42 10 621 10 621 10 009 612 282 330 - - - - 4 157 1 863 4 157 1 863 3 828 1 770 329 93 329 93 : _ _ _ - 6 720 6 674 6 486 188 188 - - 46 - 46 2 120 2 120 1 923 197 197 - - - - - 4 738 1 681 4 726 1 680 4 426 1 571 300 109 300 97 12 ~ 12 1 2 10 1 WINSTON-SALEM 6 966 6 966 6 188 778 315 - 463 - - - north Dakota: 1 595 1 587 1 531 56 56 8 8 ohio : 9 775 4 283 30 846 9 659 4 235 30 595 9 393 4 200 29 162 266 35 1 433 266 35 584 849 : 116 48 251 1 116 48 251 34 410 34 410 32 421 1 989 - 1 989 - - - - CLEVELAND HEIGHTS .... 1 688 1 674 1 641 33 33 - - 14 - 14 25 919 12 205 1 369 2 063 2 188 1 660 25 919 12 205 1 339 2 058 2 148 1 628 25 050 11 886 1 289 1 889 2 086 1 559 869 319 50 169 62 69 511 319 50 158 62 62 44 11 7 314 30 5 40 32 : 30 5 40 32 1 458 1 759 1 641 2 465 1 456 1 757 1 620 2 463 1 450 1 706 1 588 2 218 6 51 32 245 6 51 32 245 " : 2 2 21 2 11 2 2 10 2 2 083 2 642 2 074 2 632 1 928 2 490 146 142 146 142 _ _ 9 10 : 9 10 16 101 2 019 5 331 16 060 2 019 5 331 15 569 1 833 5 236 491 186 95 289 186 47 202 48 41 _ 41 - OKLAHOMA : 1 876 920 1 638 11 691 1 876 920 1 634 11 69 1 1 787 920 1 505 11 059 89 129 632 88 129 630 1 2 : 4 : 4 - 9 440 9 440 8 414 1 026 629 397 OREGON : 3 712 18 895 3 553 3 615 18 895 3 553 3 587 18 823 3 540 28 72 13 28 72 13 - - 97 : 97 _ PENNSYLVANIA : ALLENTOWN 3 051 3 05 1 2 858 19 3 193 - - - - - 1 260 2 078 1 259 2 078 1 230 1 929 29 149 29 149 _ " 1 • 1 - 2 548 3 179 2 754 2 548 3 179 2 754 2 503 2 991 2 658 45 188 96 45 187 76 1 20 - _ _ _ - 1 935 1 935 1 890 45 45 - - _ _ _ PHILADELPHIA 233 509 232 500 227 791 4 709 3 065 1 644 - 1 009 1 009 - 19 078 19 078 19 038 40 40 - - - - - 2 525 2 136 1 386 2 525 2 136 1 386 2 409 2 136 1 351 116 35 116 32 3 : : 1 _ WILKES-BARRE - 1 489 1 488 1 488 1 1 RHODE ISLAND: 2 046 2 198 2 046 2 198 1 889 2 134 157 64 132 64 25 ~ _ ~ PAWTUCKET - PROVIDENCE 6 339 6 339 6 268 71 71 - - - - - 2 521 2 521 2 437 84 84 - - - - See footnotes ltkI of mule CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Table 16. Total criminal justice system expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) 103 Capital outlay State governments local governments south Carolina: charleston. . . . columbia greenville. . . . south Dakota: sioux falls . . . tennessee : chattanooga . . . knoxville .... MEMPHIS NASHVILLE-DAVIDSON TEXAS: ABILENE AMARILLO ARLINGTON .... AUSTIN BEAUMONT BROWNSVILLE . . . CORPUS CHRISTI. . DALLAS EL PASO FORT WORTH. . . . GALVESTON .... GARLAND GRAND PRAIRIE . . HOUSTON IRVING LAREDO LUBBOCK MESQUITE MIDLAND ODESSA PASADENA PORT ARTHUR . . . RICHARDSON. . . . SAN ANGELO. . . . SAN ANTONIO . . . TYLER WACO wichita falls . . Utah: OGDEN PROVO salt lake city. . Virginia: alexandria. . . . chesapeake. . . . HAMPTON LYNCHBURG .... NEWPORT NEWS. . . NORFOLK PORTSMOUTH. . . . RICHMOND ROANOKE virginia beach. . Washington: bellevue EVERETT SEATTLE . SPOKANE . TACOMA WEST VIRGINIA: CHARLESTON. . . . HUNTINGTON. ... WISCONSIN: APPLETON GREEN BAY . . . . KENOSHA . LA CROSSE .... MADISON . MILWAUKEE .... OSHKOSH RACINE WAUWATOSA . . . . . WEST ALLIS. . . . . 252 297 366 6 507 5 925 27 347 22 491 1 582 2 888 3 300 9 064 2 978 1 098 5 022 36 273 7 488 14 871 1 508 1 913 1 142 60 614 2 157 805 3 404 1 608 1 735 1 810 2 178 1 211 1 089 1 576 21 997 1 346 3 100 1 830 2 105 999 8 957 6 879 4 564 4 7 30 2 349 8 378 11 540 4 626 15 309 5 710 7 034 1 926 1 785 27 707 5 682 6 542 679 220 1 657 2 226 2 410 1 2 19 6 142 38 771 1 274 3 368 1 862 2 329 240 297 6 473 5 925 25 862 22 49 1 1 582 2 888 3 300 9 064 2 978 1 069 5 022 36 27 3 7 424 14 871 1 508 1 913 1 142 60 614 2 157 783 3 404 1 608 1 735 1 784 2 178 1 211 1 089 1 553 21 647 1 338 3 100 1 830 2 101 996 8 957 6 596 4 409 4 466 2 268 8 227 11 540 4 426 15 309 5 417 7 034 1 922 1 760 26 607 5 363 6 542 2 599 2 183 1 657 2 223 2 409 1 210 6 134 38 392 1 273 3 365 1 862 2 328 2 079 3 728 2 110 4 810 5 652 23 640 21 354 1 513 2 824 3 060 8 87 1 2 695 1 022 4 7 38 35 533 7 393 14 657 1 478 1 776 1 095 55 397 2 Oil 696 3 148 1 332 1 507 1 716 2 086 1 119 1 004 1 432 20 598 1 215 3 044 1 643 922 8 723 6 417 4 156 4 Oil 2 161 5 955 11 116 4 135 15 119 4 542 6 996 1 840 1 753 !6 132 5 275 6 240 488 001 1 330 2 215 2 304 1 180 5 975 37 590 1 246 3 278 1 862 2 299 161 569 663 273 222 137 121 1 049 123 179 253 4 5 5 107 272 424 291 190 875 38 475 88 302 111 182 159 802 161 384 256 1 619 268 1 353 853 240 240 193 193 283 73 47 47 284 284 740 657 31 31 214 162 30 30 137 137 47 47 217 142 146 146 87 87 256 256 276 168 228 101 810 104 179 253 233 91 145 414 267 57 133 105 30 159 558 208 284 2 127 10 283 283 155 155 264 264 81 81 151 151 200 182 293 29 3 1 100 319 25 1 100 319 rounds to zero ield compilatio Df each city gover St for data 104 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 17. Criminal justice system employment and percent governments, Total full-time equivalent employees 3 Number of employe full- time equiva- lent em ployees Full- time only syste ployee Percent of total TOTAL. ALABAMA: BIRMINGHAM GADSDEN. . HUNTSVILLE MOBILE . . MONTGOMERY TUSCALOOSA AKIZONA: GLENDALE . MESA . . . PHOENIX. . SCOTTSDALE TEMPE. . . TUCSON . . ARKANSAS: FORT SMITH . LITTLE ROCK. NORTH LITTLE ROCK PINE BLUFF . CALIFORNIA: ALAMEDA. . ALHAMBRA . ANAHEIM. . BAKERSFIELD BELLFLOWER BERKELEY . SUtNA PARK BURBANK. . CARSON . . CHULA VISTA COMPTON. . CONCORD. . COSTA MESA DALY CITY. DOWNEY . . EL CAJON . EL MONTE . FREMONT. FRESNO . FULLERTON GARDEN GROvE GLENDALE . HAWTHORNE. HAYWARD. . HUNTINGTON INGLEWOOD. LAKEWOOD . LONG BEACH LOS ANGELES. MODESTO. MOUNTAIN VIEW. NEWPORT BEACh. NORWALK. OAKLAND. ONTARIO. ORANGE . . OXNARD . . PALO ALTO. PASADENA . PICO RIVERA. POMONA . rtEDONDO BEACH. REDWOOD CITY . RICHMOND . . . RIVERSIDE. . . SACRAMENTO . . SALINAS. . . . SAN BERNARDINO SAN BUENAVENTURA SAN CIEGO. . . SAN FRANCISCO. SAN JOSE . . . SAN LEANDRO. . SAN MATEO. . . SANTA ANA. . . 305 656 562 040 0?5 488 660 806 689 656 699 667 1 454 620 40 3 469 428 I 609 687 81 1 513 347 t 001 ?53 593 760 636 600 477 4 38 43? 361 633 2 308 607 640 I 117 305 70? 1 058 825 198 4 595 35 778 674 416 6 38 121 4 392 563 575 666 716 t 409 112 860 503 444 89? 1 3?9 ? 797 548 1 293 491 5 677 17 841 3 659 510 6H6 1 365 903 115 ?90 444 341 176 1?? 129 2 043 164 156 747 121 346 17? 127 119 113 461 207 21 306 15? ?43 126 210 184 ?15 1 36 137 135 149 184 475 183 ?07 ?30 96 188 3?1 ?67 1 050 11 100 160 101 193 1 094 132 183 150 1 37 593 1 ??1 10? 94 ?40 ?96 798 156 ?80 1 1 1 1 547 4 00? 907 1?4 146 451 273 600 901 115 290 444 337 168 119 125 0?2 161 148 731 11* 346 171 125 118 110 389 199 1 ?59 1?3 236 120 208 174 173 106 130 119 126 17? 406 175 18? 2?? 81 176 298 ?47 1 050 ll 096 160 97 184 1 084 1?2 160 139 l?b 2«1 236 291 706 143 280 106 64 6 776 897 174 147 448 901 115 290 444 340 169 120 129 2 029 161 149 737 121 346 171 126 119 110 405 201 5 270 128 ?37 26.5 17.5 11.3 21.8 16.8 8.4 ?4,6 19.5 ?9.S 23.4 22.7 19.9 21.3 23.8 27.6 31.3 25.4 25.7 25.2 29.3 6.2 17.8 36.9 23.7 79? 105 ?63 412 294 161 1 11 117 1 842 152 1^9 685 102 306 161 106 115 110 4 54 201 20 297 151 222 79? 106 26 3 41? 294 159 110 117 827 151 137 671 102 306 151 108 113 108 36? 193 1 ^52 123 216 79? 106 ?63 41? ?94 159 110 117 831 151 137 676 102 305 151 108 115 108 378 195 4 261 127 217 87.9 91.3 91.7 90.7 90.2 93.8 91.9 91.7 88.2 88.3 85.7 96.6 98.? 93.3 97.0 80.0 96.7 99.2 91.6 7 115 11? 5 121 208 176 179 11? 13? 1?6 130 173 441 177 183 ?24 84 178 303 ?48 1 050 11 097 160 20.4 27.7 32.8 29.8 26.2 30.1 29.2 37.0 27.3 19.1 29.2 28.6 20.1 27.5 25.4 28.6 30.1 4.5 22.9 31.0 23.7 23.9 29.0 170 200 181 207 134 137 130 147 178 464 161 205 222 93 176 310 248 1? 933 10 633 154 98 186 115 193 171 166 105 130 118 124 166 393 173 180 214 76 164 287 228 933 10 633 154 94 176 116 198 173 171 HI 13? 123 128 167 4 30 176 181 216 79 166 ?9? 23? 933 10 633 154 96 177 95.9 95.2 98.3 95.5 99.1 100.0 97.6 98.5 96.5 97.5 98.9 98.9 96.4 94.0 93.3 97.0 95.7 1 090 124 164 141 127 ?84 1 203 97 92 7 58 294 796 144 281' 109 1 545 3 866 899 124 147 24.8 22.0 28.5 21.5 17.7 20.2 0.9 23.6 19.3 20.7 26.7 22.1 28.5 26.3 21.7 22.2 ?7.2 21.7 24.6 24.3 25.1 32.9 981 1 51 177 144 130 269 198 92 8 7 ?3? 287 786 138 273 109 1 450 2 503 872 1 19 145 4'<5 971 122 156 133 119 267 ?6o 786 178 775 106 449 594 86 5 1 IV 144 432 977 17 3 159 135 170 260 185 87 8 6 231 286 786 129 273 107 1 449 2 428 865 119 144 433 89.6 99.? 97.0 95.7 93.8 62.8 96.0 98.0 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM distribution of full-time equivalent employees of 394 large city October 1975 105 Legal services and prosecution Public defense Corrections Other criminal justice Number of employees Percent of total criminal justice system employees Number of employees Percent of total criminal justice employees Number of employees Percent of total criminal justice system ployees Number of employees Percent of total criminal justice system ployees | Total Pull- only Full- time equiva- lent Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- lent Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- lent Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- lent 8 954 19 2 5 3 4 3 3 4 81 6 8 34 2 9 5 2 4 3 14 6 1 9 1 13 6 10 3 4 2 5 2 4 11 2 2 8 5 5 11 12 65 467 6 3 4 25 1 6 6 7 16 1 4 3 7 8 8 12 3 7 2 88 186 35 5 3 1 16 8 398 19 2 5 3 1 3 2 2 81 5 5 34 9 5 2 3 2 14 6 7 12 5 10 3 4 1 1 2 4 11 2 2 8 5 5 U 9 65 463 6 3 4 25 4 6 7 16 3 3 5 7 8 9 3 7 2 87 184 34 5 3 16 8 684 19 2 5 3 4 3 3 4 81 5 6 34 2 9 5 2 4 2 14 6 1 9 1 12 5 10 3 4 1 3 2 4 11 2 2 8 5 5 11 10 65 464 6 3 4 5 6 7 16 1 3 3 6 7 8 10 3 7 2 87 185 34 5 3 16 3.1 2.1 1.7 1.7 0.7 1.2 1.8 2.5 3.1 4.0 3.1 4.0 4.6 1.7 2.6 2.9 1.6 3.4 1.8 3.5 3.0 20.0 3.3 0.8 5.1 4.1 4.8 1.7 2.2 0.9 2.4 1.5 2.3 2.5 1.1 1.1 3.6 6.0 2.8 3.6 4.0 6.2 4.2 3.7 3.0 2.2 0.8 3.0 4.3 5.5 5.6 100.0 1.5 3.1 6.5 2.9 2.7 1.3 2.1 2.5 1.8 5.6 4.8 3.8 4.0 2.0 3.6 179 1 6 3 148 63 171 1 63 0.1 0.8 1.6 18 170 59 6 14 11 25 3 3 5 21 7 7 13 8 4 7 52 4 88 8 19 7 654 17 493 59 6 14 11 25 3 3 5 21 7 5 13 8 3 5 52 4 68 8 13 7 603 17 734 59 6 14 11 25 3 3 5 21 7 6 13 8 4 6 52 4 88 8 15 7 625 6.4 6.5 5.2 4.8 2.5 7.4 2.5 0.1 4.1 6.1 4.1 4.8 3.2 3.4 2.2 2.4 5.0 2.2 8.1 2.8 7.4 7.2 16.2 1 123 7 2 2 7 l ! 9 19 1 081 7 2 2 7 _ 12 9 18 1 097 2 2 7 12 9 18 0.4 1.6 0.1 1.2 3,9 6.3 0.6 0.5 i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ' 5 ?6 27 2 'i '9 1 32 33 34 ■*b 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 ^6 47 "8 49 50 51 52 5 3 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 106 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 17. Criminal justice system employment and percent governments, Total criminal ustice sys tem Police protection Judi :ial z Numbe r of employees Percent Number of employees Percent Number of employees Percent 1 City 1 Total full-time of total full- of total criminal of total criminal .:> equivalent Full- time Full- justice Full- justice c 3 employees 2 Full- time equiva- Full- time system Full- system Total time Total time Total time only equiva- lent em- only equiva- only lent ployees lent ployees lent ployees CALIFORNIA — CONTINUED 1 SANTA BARBARA. . . 805 180 172 174 21.6 174 167 169 97.1 . _ _ _ 2 SANTA CLARA. . . . 683 168 132 140 20.5 163 128 135 96.4 _ _ _ _ i SANTA MONICA . . . 936 247 227 232 24.8 225 205 210 90.5 _ _ _ _ 4 SANTA ROSA .... 475 92 84 86 18.1 87 81 83 96.5 . _ _ _ 5 SIMI VALLEY 190 82 81 82 43.2 78 77 78 95.1 „ _ m m 6 SOUTH GATE 244 117 116 117 48.0 110 110 110 94.0 . _ _ _ 7 STOCKTON . t 265 283 283 283 22.4 275 275 275 97.2 - - - - 8 SUNNYVALE. 538 155 153 154 28.6 150 148 149 96.8 _ _ . 9 TORRANCE . 1 120 283 282 282 25.2 262 262 262 92.9 _ _ _ _ 10 VALLEJO. . 38? 122 1?2 122 31.9 118 118 118 96.7 - _ _ _ 11 WEST COVINA 360 136 101 105 29.2 136 101 105 100.0 _ _ . _ 12 WESTMINSTER 353 125 114 116 32.9 121 110 112 96.6 . _ . _ 13 WHITTIER . 345 130 126 127 36.8 130 126 127 100.0 - - - - COLORADO: 11 ARVADA 272 92 90 91 33.5 35 84 84 92.3 4 3 4 4.4 15 AURORA 860 222 213 218 25.3 200 200 200 91.7 14 6 11 5.0 16 BOULDER 858 164 161 163 19.0 148 148 148 90.8 10 7 9 5.5 17 COLORADO SPRINGS . 1 698 409 406 408 24.0 377 377 377 92.4 18 15 17 4.2 18 DENVER 11 297 2 368 2 368 2 368 21.0 1 719 1 719 1 719 72.6 242 242 242 10.2 19 FT. COLLINS. . . . 417 101 90 92 22.1 94 83 85 92.4 3 3 3 3.3 20 LAKEWOOD 588 486 419 428 72.8 445 384 391 91.4 22 18 19 4.4 21 PUEBLO CONNECTICUT: 907 264 261 261 28.8 246 243 243 93.1 8 8 8 3.1 22 BRIDGEPORT . . . . 4 437 525 575 525 11.8 507 507 507 96.6 _ _ _ _ 23 BRISTOL. . 1 454 102 91 94 6.5 99 69 91 96.8 _ _ _ _ 24 DANBuRY. . 1 383 111 107 111 8.0 107 107 107 96.4 _ _ _ _ 25 HARTFORD . 6 006 623 622 622 10.4 604 603 603 96.9 _ _ _ _ 26 MERIDAN. . 1 755 112 112 112 6.4 108 108 108 96.4 - - - - 27 MILFORD. . 1 581 120 119 120 7.6 116 116 116 96.7 _ _ 28 NEw BRITAIN 1 735 192 183 185 10.7 187 179 180 97.3 _ _ _ _ 29 NEW HAVEN. 3 885 472 453 465 12.0 462 450 455 97.8 1 1 1 0.2 30 NORWALK. . ? 300 272 195 223 9.7 259 185 210 94.2 - _ 31 STAMFORD . 3 399 285 284 284 8.4 275 274 274 96.5 _ . _ _ 32 WATERBURY. 3 244 323 319 323 10.0 312 312 312 96.6 1 1 1 0.3 33 WEST HAVEN 1 160 101 101 101 8.7 92 92 92 91.1 - DELAWARE: 34 WILMINGTON .... ? 941 383 378 378 12.9 321 321 321 84.9 38 33 33 8.7 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: '5-; WASHINGTON .... 45 246 9 5?5 9 249 9 353 20.7 5 639 5 409 5 492 58.7 921 913 917 9.8 FLORIDA: 36 CLEARWATER .... 1 148 21? 212 212 18.5 188 188 188 88.7 11 11 11 5.2 37 FORT LAUDERDALE. . ? 127 609 605 606 28.5 558 554 555 91.6 38 38 38 6.3 38 GAINESVILLE. . . . \ 132 206 206 206 18.2 205 205 205 99.5 - - 39 t 027 301 297 298 29.0 283 340 1 071 283 340 1 061 283 340 1 065 95.0 94.4 60.2 2 16 354 1 13 324 0.3 3.6 18.3 ^0 1 281 369 358 360 26. 1 12 292 41 JACKSONVILLE . . . 8 961 1 807 1 730 1 7b8 19.7 4/ MIAMI 3 667 1 223 1 223 1 223 33.4 1 195 1 195 1 195 97.7 m _ _ 43 MIAMI BEACH. . . . 1 671 436 429 430 25.7 400 400 400 93.0 15 15 15 3.5 44 ORLANDO ? 562 664 636 163 639 24.9 19.4 572 154 544 547 154 85.6 93.3 24 24 24 3.H 45 PENSACOLA 850 165 165 154 4 6 ST. PETERSBURG . . 3 116 698 697 697 22.4 648 646 648 93.0 _ _ _ _ 47 TALLAHASSEE. . . . ? 456 194 193 194 7.9 193 193 193 99.5 _ _ _ _ 48 3 95? 842 842 842 21.3 822 822 822 97.6 _ . _ _ 49 WEST PALM BEACH. . 828 217 212 213 25.7 188 185 186 87.3 13 11 11 5.2 GEORGIA! 50 ALBANY 839 189 187 2 066 189 22.5 25.3 24. 1 187 1 794 187 1 794 189 411 260 279 187 1 794 189 411 260 279 98.9 86.6 92.2 68.4 89.3 91.5 0.5 3.8 2.4 16.3 4.5 4.3 5] ATLANTA 8 181 2 079 208 2 071 84 5 76 4 79 5 98 13 13 V 850 204 205 191 413 260 279 5 3 3 867 604 597 601 15.5 21.0 18.3 99 96 54 1 389 291 291 305 291 13 13 13 13 55 1 665 305 305 HAWAII: 56 HONOLULU 8 218 1 981 1 981 1 981 24.1 1 877 1 877 1 877 94.8 IDAHO: 57 BOISE CITY .... 717 173 170 171 23.8 165 162 163 95.3 - - - - ILLINOIS: 58 ARLINGTON HEIGHTS. 373 90 90 90 24.1 88 88 86 97.8 ■' 2 2 2.2 59 AURORA 547 186 164 100 173 31.6 10.9 181 101 163 99 169 100 97.7 96.2 60 247 958 105 104 6] CHAMPAIGN 6,' CHICAGO 46 239 15 853 15 757 15 837 34.3 15 602 98 15 520 93 15 595 94 98.5 94.9 33 19 24 0.2 63 CICERO 386 103 94 99 25.6 64 418 13? 1?9 L29 30.9 129 126 126 97.7 _ - _ -\ Soo footnotes at end of table. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM distribution of full-time equivalent employees of 394 large city October 1975— Continued 107 Public defe Number of employees Number of employe Number of employe systen employe Full- time only system employe Full- time only justic syste Full- time only syste ployee 3.2 4.3 3.3 0.9 9.4 4.2 3.4 0.5 1.6 0.1 0.7 5.2 4.7 14 172 14 172 172 4 2.3 3. 3. 3. 3.6 1.8 0.5 0.3 cution Public defense Corrections Other crif linal justice County 1 Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system IDAHO: ADA 185 279 9 218 724 303 5 88 148 199 loO 219 289 294 231 315 322 192 361 399 273 70 73 660 98 70 236 85 255 105 148 154 486 191 191 481 536 317 294 617 148 160 2^6 644 85 131 141 31 40 26 667 1 1?2 269 1 130 1 554 Vd 1«7 54 1?9 ^72 383 158 576 687 199 228 6.8 14.1 9.1 11.5 8.4 11.4 7.3 10.6 11.9 13.1 8.8 10.6 11.4 10.0 14.6 15.7 11.2 11.3 5.2 5.6 4.4 9.3 4.5 5.2 7.3 7.8 10.2 7.0 7.0 6.7 7.4 10.5 13.5 14.0 6.6 11. 4 12.8 3.0 6.8 4.1 6.3 4.8 3.6 6.7 5.7 2.3 5.2 4.4 6.7 4.5 13.2 4.8 6.4 15.3 6.0 3.2 2.6 4.1 3.9 9.4 3.0 10.8 3.3 2.7 78 84 3 232 308 63 112 36 53 ^6 70 104 91 31 137 48 44 122 125 136 42 39 122 26 48 33 25 111 50 133 159 282 95 120 19 29 84 51 18 116 70 25 37 62 57 1 2 44 250 15 204 34 1 163 82 113 1^0 2.9 5.0 3.2 4.9 1.8 2.2 1.6 2.8 4.2 4.2 3.2 3.3 1.5 4.4 2.2 3.6 3.8 3.5 2.6 3.4 2.2 1.7 1.2 3.5 1.0 2.3 4.4 3.4 6.3 6.9 4.3 5.2 8.5 0.6 0.5 3.9 1.3 0.5 0.9 3.0 1.3 1.5 4.7 7.4 0.2 (2) 1.7 5.0 0.2 2.1 2.0 6.2 1.3 1.9 1.9 945 432 32 428 1 535 1 246 1 234 227 291 237 307 739 833 468 1 331 652 180 361 870 1 860 417 592 1 359 1 411 463 889 260 698 466 711 704 2 875 487 262 570 2 612 1 015 627 3 281 293 1 289 473 1 252 357 427 950 376 132 149 584 1 419 533 1 551 2 293 107 1 089 827 1 841 2 733 2 838 906 6 455 1 866 2 223 3 709 34.7 25.5 32.0 24.5 34.7 24.0 11.2 15.5 17.6 23.7 22.6 30.1 23.2 42.5 29.6 14.7 11.2 24.6 35.7 33.4 33.5 19.1 64.5 34.2 27.6 23.8 27.9 31.3 33.8 30.5 44.0 26.7 18.5 16.5 41.8 36.5 27.3 16.1 13.4 33.3 12.7 9.4 15.2 21.7 38.5 28.3 17.2 25.4 5.8 5.6 26.1 6.6 9.4 16.7 41.5 49.7 37.1 40.8 26. 6 54.0 34.1 29.7 36.5 44.2 394 2 043 17 3d 68 937 56 1 4 12 14 795 39 231 14 84 8 131 312 7 6 183 128 1 1 692 16 29 3 43 3 14.5 ILLINOIS: COOK 2.0 0.3 kane 1 .1 LAKE 1.3 MCHENRY MCLEAN 1.7 0.3 0.4 WINNEBAGO INDIANA: Allen Elkhart LAKE ST. JOSEPH TIPPECANOE VIGO 0.9 IOWA" POLK 1 .3 SCOTT *00DRURY KANSAS: KENTUCKY: 30.3 KENTON LOUISIANA: RAPIDES MAINE! PENOBSCOT YORK MARYLAND: MONTGOMERY PRINCE GEORGES MASSACHUSETTS: BERKSHIRE BRISTOL ESSEX ... hAMpOEN HAMPSHIRE MIDDLESEX NORFOLK _ footnotes at end of table 132 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 19. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total general expenditure Total criminal justice system Police protection Judic ia] County 1 Amount Percent of total general Amount Percent total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system MICHIGAN: BAY 15 764 26 951 1? 926 7" 666 38 378 24 220 17 920 51 367 64 173 14 113 26 402 126 072 12 115 29 279 19 824 22 674 373 133 22 578 20 909 238 512 126 236 57 585 15 585 17 105 14 839 4 524 4 353 46 104 3 591 4 550 107 368 65 426 15 950 13C 130 45 186 6 164 5 124 44 411 112 368 41 417 105 971 21 956 276 668 19 547 112 715 63 808 97 473 80 769 49 168 38 461 70 465 30 ?68 77 400 23 047 171 7u9 69 302 37 178 30 442 5? 537 423 476 ?98 478 654 432 2 365 5 016 3 592 11 493 5 438 3 183 5 360 6 895 11 285 3 059 3 742 17 652 2 082 4 947 ? 820 7 073 53 119 2 885 1 800 19 165 9 446 5 916 1 937 1 549 987 1 480 1 390 12 248 1 063 1 212 21 401 5 748 2 652 26 329 6 298 1 625 934 4 447 12 975 4 193 8 620 2 522 36 969 2 546 13 712 9 521 11 100 5 502 4 786 4 115 11 039 3 366 12 141 2 847 6 28? 2 967 2 317 2 073 4 127 24 338 17 648 126 566 15.4 18.6 27.6 15.4 14.2 13.1 29.9 13.4 17.6 21.7 14.2 14.0 17.2 16.9 14.2 31.2 14.2 12.8 8.6 8.0 7.5 10.3 12.4 9.1 6.7 32.7 31.9 26.6 29.6 26.6 19.9 8.8 16.6 20.2 13.9 26.4 18.2 10.0 11.5 10.1 8.1 11.5 13.4 13.0 12.2 14.9 11.4 6.8 9.7 10.7 15.7 11.1 15.7 12.4 3.7 4.3 6.2 6.8 7.9 5.7 5.9 19.3 590 1 221 776 2 430 1 496 653 1 333 2 151 2 827 1 113 570 4 136 801 1 050 602 2 233 5 635 1 310 482 4 409 1 629 1 118 649 403 488 365 451 1 097 458 473 11 554 1 018 418 17 203 2 306 94 245 385 2 923 801 687 188 3 891 297 3 215 631 1 419 730 1 032 805 765 619 1 106 1 604 892 865 691 605 1 023 4 313 4 399 84 849 24.9 24.3 21.6 21.1 27.5 26.8 24.9 31.2 25.1 36.4 15.2 23.4 38.5 21.2 21.3 31.6 10.6 45.4 26.6 23.0 17.2 16.9 33.5 26.0 49.4 24.7 32.4 9.0 43.1 39.0 54.0 17.7 15. 8 65.3 36.6 5.8 26.2 8.7 22.5 19.1 8.C 7.5 10.5 11.7 23.4 6.6 12.8 13.3 21.6 19.6 6.9 18.4 9.1 56.3 14.2 2°. 2 29.8 29.2 24.8 17.7 24.9 67.0 774 1 421 1 112 3 474 1 803 854 1 035 1 516 3 198 902 1 476 4 548 569 1 443 865 1 585 19 680 609 790 5 856 2 120 1 640 807 699 355 376 472 3 965 324 340 5 522 1 828 879 2 168 1 359 860 470 846 4 220 1 040 2 387 693 11 177 642 4 093 2 222 3 382 1 758 1 162 1 122 4 164 830 3 872 78 1 202 618 507 395 1 167 4 443 3 687 17 439 32.7 28.3 31.0 GENESEE 30.2 33.2 ?6.6 '0.2 KENT 22.0 28.3 MONROE 29.5 39.4 55.8 27.3 29.2 ST. CLAIR 31.4 22.4 WAYNE 37.0 MINNESOTA: 28.0 Dakota 43.9 30.6 RAMSEY 22.4 ST. LOUIS 27.7 MISSISSIPPI: 41.7 HINDS 45.1 36.0 missouri : Clay 25.4 GREENE 34.0 32.5 30.5 28.1 ST. LOUIS 25.8 NEBRASKA: 31.8 33.1 NEVADA: 8.2 WASHOE 21.6 NEW HAMPSHIRE: HILLSBOROUGH 52.9 50.3 NEW JERSEY: ATLANTIC 19.0 BERGEN 32.5 24.8 CAMDEN 27.7 27.5 ESSEX 30.2 25.2 Hudson 29.6 MERCER 23.3 30.5 32.0 MORRIS 24.3 OCEAN 27.3 37.7 SOMERSET 24.7 UNION 31.9 NEW MEXICO: 2.7 NEW YORK: 19.1 BROOME 20.6 CHAUTAUQUA 21.9 CHEMUNG 19.1 DUTCHESS 28.3 ERIE 18.3 MONROE 20.9 NASSAU 13.6 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 133 Table 19. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) michigan! bay BERRIEN Calhoun GENESEE Ingham JACKSON KALAMAZOO KENT MACOMB MONROE MUSKEGON OAKLAND OTTAWA , SAGINAW ST. CLAIR WASHTENAW , WAYNE , MINNESOTA: AnOKA , DAKOTA HENNEPIN , RAMSEY , ST. LOUIS , MISSISSIPPI: HARRISON HINDS Jackson ......... missouri: clay ; GREENE , JACKSON , JEFFERSON , ST. CHARLES , ST. LOUIS , NEBRASKA: DOUGLAS LANCASTER NEVADA! Clark WASHOE NEW HAMPSHIRE: HILLSBOROUGH ROCKINGHAM. , NEW JERSEY! ATLANTIC BERGEN Burlington CAMDEN Cumberland ESSEX Gloucester HUDSON MERCER MIDDLESEX MONMOUTH MORRIS . . . , OCEAN Passaic somerset UNION NEW MEXICO! BERNALILLO NEW YORK: ALBANY BROOME , chautauqua , Chemung Dutchess , ERIE , MONROE NASSAU , See footnotes at end of tabic 205 '125 ?07 1 765 563 299 59': 513 1 291 242 335 1 511 93 418 29d 510 4 667 293 160 1 458 767 344 155 147 1 095 139 129 1 219 798 304 1 567 859 965 2 126 802 1 991 272 4 622 502 2 150 1 358 2 061 902 916 893 1 571 725 2 954 585 312 207 190 448 2 458 1 389 5 527 10.2 8.9 13.1 10.6 21.7 16.4 19.1 23.1 10.8 12.5 19.7 15.7 19.1 21.7 14.2 Public defens 112 179 111 280 283 145 229 201 566 165 122 872 58 279 153 3^9 159 80 783 80 114 384 153 603 361 9.3 242 10.5 115 8.9 98 9.2 53 10.9 217 10.1 793 7.9 550 4.4 1 379 system 2.9 5.0 6.7 5.8 0.3 0.1 0.3 3.9 3.9 4.2 2.6 5.3 3.3 3.1 1 .1 684 1 770 1 386 3 457 1 293 1 032 2 118 2 388 3 359 637 1 239 6 344 538 1 757 882 2 396 18 819 544 786 700 295 301 73 581 317 457 142 270 106 1 720 898 788 386 611 191 2 164 3 431 1 550 3 486 1 369 16 883 1 105 4 254 5 289 4 100 2 109 1 619 1 295 4 219 1 187 4 122 3 361 1 028 814 830 1 272 12 168 6 805 17 243 total crimin 28.9 35.3 38.6 30.1 23.8 32.4 39.5 34.6 29.8 20.8 33.1 35.9 25.8 35.5 31.3 33.9 35.4 14.4 16.0 34.1 50.7 45.6 39.3 22.8 36.4 13.4 22.3 14.5 18.2 22.0 37.6 20.4 48.7 26.4 37.0 40.4 54.3 45.7 43.4 31.0 55.6 36.9 38.3 33.8 31.5 38.2 35.3 34.0 53.5 34.6 35.1 40.0 30.8 50.0 38.6 13.6 126 41 241 23 LO 159 320 87 163 die, 129 Percent of total criminal justice system 1 .8 ('.4 1.4 1.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.7 2.0 2.1 0.8 0.7 0.2 1.0 0.9 2.9 0.7 0.7 t.6 0.1 134 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 19. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total gene Percent of total crimina justice syste NEW YORK — CONTINUED NIAGARA . . . , Oneida Onondaga orange OSWEGO rensselaer Rockland st. lawrence Saratoga schenectady . STEUBEN Suffolk ULSTER westchester north Carolina: buncombe Cumberland. . . Durham foRsyth GASTON GUILFORD MECKLENBURG ONSLOW WAKE OHIO! ALLEN ASHTABULA BUTLER CLARK Clermont columbiana Cuyahoga franklin GREENE Hamilton LAKE LICKING LORAIN LuCAS MAHONING MONTGOMERY PORTAGE RICHLAND STARK summit trumbull oklahoma: Comanche oklahoma tulsa OREGON: Clackamas Jackson lane MARION MULTNOMAH WASHINGTON PENNSYLVANIA: ALLEGHENY BEAVER BERKS BLAIP bucks BuTLER Cambria CENTRE CHESTER Cumberland DAUPHIN DELAWARE ERIE Fayette franklin lackawanna lancaster lawrence LEBANON LEHIGH See footnotes at end of table. 6' 616 185 70 5 65 624 21 7 1 9 61 316 95 472 23 910 21 400 31 117 21 110 461 601 36 759 33o 702 57 433 ,16 986 65 494 101 52 e 53 235 122 346 1.87 447 2a 597 113 013 1 3 ««9 7 478 15 475 13 549 9 6la A 096 241 370 121 5 07 15 087 101 704 26 913 8 674 24 288 47 5b0 34 279 7o 123 22 1^ 9 6/5 22 47R 52 466 19 603 14 501 32 030 26 143 23 oil 16 J44 36 171 13 163 69 648 36 931 208 848 16 852 ."-■ 248 7 219 12 "oq 5 402 14 06 ! «; HO 19 472 8 711 90 543 4M 535 22 295 5 822 5 oa? 17 059 16 388 4 07 8 " 1 27 851 4 248 3 917 12 79 ' 4 054 1 720 2 357 6 098 1 382 1 359 1 931 1 507 81 429 2 257 24 532 1 678 4 581 1 090 3 131 2 060 3 162 6 050 9 76 1 204 2 511 1 316 2 617 2 002 1 116 1 110 26 675 9 865 1 544 16 745 2 6,6^ 1 366 3 125 8 249 3 2 2 ! 10 6f)4 2 025 2 140 5 229 6 081 2 73 5 920 4 169 4 313 3 630 2 270 5 743 2 9oi 19 635 3 840 30 251 3 005 3 370 1 359 6 6 46 1 121 1 562 975 5 176 1 467 4 551 10 4 06 4 66' 1 269 1 058 ,' 2 1 4 3 OH 909 467 2 892 17.6 6.1 5.3 1.7 3.0 3.9 2.6 i.2 3.4 1.1 18.1 17.6 11.6 18.2 11.1 8.1 10.2 16.0 15.8 12.9 17.3 9.4 15.0 8.9 22.1 22.8 11.5 13.8 15.2 13.9 15.9 22.5 28.2 10." 13.3 11.1 14.1 26.6 16.8 17.1 21.5 20.4 21.6 20.8 13.0 18.5 21.0 11.1 10.4 1 110 597 3 005 56 526 288 1 213 351 284 103 242 57 003 357 4 420 773 1 470 639 683 1 090 1 325 2 560 460 012 398 444 5^ 616 364 271 2 641 2 480 538 5 370 929 411 1 101 980 744 2 858 615 508 1 296 1 436 1 040 164 201 375 1 472 690 1 779 839 6 197 1 781 4 776 532 135 20 525 93 394 41 52 1 617 26.1 15.2 23.5 1.4 30.6 12.2 19.9 25.4 20.9 5.3 16.1 70.0 15.8 18.0 46.1 32.1 58.6 22.0 52.9 41.9 42.3 47.1 67.4 15.9 33.7 21.8 30.8 32.6 24.4 9.9 25.1 34.8 35.1 34.5 30.0 35.3 11.9 23.1 27.2 30.4 23.7 24.8 23.6 38.1 20.0 4.8 B.7 40.6 30.4 31.0 28.3 31.6 46.4 15.8 17.7 4.0 1 191 1 052 2 096 1 625 479 530 1 057 377 441 643 345 9 ?3? 6S5 5 4JK 333 1 6 06 89 521 2^6 625 I 182 306 41 545 391 848 6 32 4^5 456 10 553 3 □ 66 5 32 5 411 B67 463 644 2 521 1 190 3 3 52 765 4 96 1 357 2 '57 1 OJO 376 2 136 1 666 793 47f 2 028 7 6 '. 5 549 544 10 203 1 487 1 413 543 2 756 458 806 440 1 608 ^•j: 1 309 3 792 1 313 694 325 1 052 1 197 458 416 1 121 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 135 Table 19. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) County 1 Corrections total crimin NEW YORK — CONTINUED NIAGARA ONEIDA Onondaga ORANGE OSWEGO RENSSELAER ROCKLAND ST. LAWRENCE SARATOGA SCHENECTADY STEUBEN Suffolk ULSTER westchester north Carolina: 8UNC0M9E Cumberland Durham Forsyth GASTON Guilford mecklenburg onslow WAKE OHIO! Allen ashtabula BUTLER CLARK clermont columbiana Cuyahoga franklin GREENE HAMILTON LAKE LICKING LORAIN LUCAS Mahoning montgomery PORTAGE RICHLAND STARK summit trumbull oklahoma: Comanche oklahoma TuLSA OREGON! Clackamas Jackson lane MARION MULTNOMAH WASHINGTON PENNSYLVANIA: ALLEGHENY BEAVER 8ERKS BLAIR bucks butler Cambria CENTRE CHESTER Cumberland dauphin delaware ERIE FAYETTE FRANKLIN LACKAWANNA LANCASTER LAWRENCE LEBANON LEHIGH See footnotes at end of table. 342 354 950 604 137 243 7,10 118 172 203 146 695 297 549 141 128 59 118 1 513 852 126 683 210 116 276 369 285 770 176 209 354 409 171 115 532 536 317 249 767 339 2 015 393 2 141 ?58 276 99 801 104 167 66 858 125 440 1 080 429 111 81 255 200 115 7.3 8,7 9.8 6.8 6.7 6.3 12.5 12.8 12.4 8.7 11.0 13.4 11.4 10.3 10.2 8.2 7.3 123 128 364 195 24 77 243 ■S9 7.6 24 7.1 - 5.4 9 6.4 18 5.3 21 10.6 57 5.7 1 211 8.6 232 8.2 65 4.1 462 7.8 64 8.5 31 8.8 35 4.5 153 199 81 63 232 147 13 3 133 212 119 985 179 43 223 33 29 242 31 120 424 16b 2.9 1 482 3.3 1 070 3.0 6 334 4.8 1 574 1.4 554 3.3 1 219 4.0 2 605 4.3 477 3.5 414 1.9 946 3.7 668 1.7 9 775 3.4 839 3.8 8 724 _ 548 - 484 - 235 - 762 - 365 - 91 3 - 1 308 - 197 _ 275 1.0 1 354 - 378 0.3 657 0.9 553 1.9 24V 5.1 196 4.5 9 212 2.4 2 636 4.2 283 2.8 4 318 2.4 619 2.3 347 1.1 817 1.9 4 140 1.5 9b7 1.5 3 361 2.3 418 1.4 759 1.9 2 095 3.3 1 800 3.0 441 6.8 182 5.6 1 068 3.4 1 3 89 3.7 757 5.9 689 3.7 957 4.0 900 5.0 4 872 4.7 3«3 2.3 12 330 2.7 632 2.0 1 478 3.2 654 3.4 2 293 2.9 4 33 3.8 498 3.0 284 4.7 2 074 2.1 678 2.6 2 361 4.1 4 543 3.6 2 494 3.0 391 4.1 598 3.6 785 2.4 1 4 79 4.2 275 2.2 430 2.9 1 367 34.9 - 27.3 716 49.5 24 38.8 - 32.2 - 51.7 - 46.0 - 34.5 - 30.5 . 49.0 - 44.3 - 12.0 134 37.2 2 35.6 1 672 32.7 _ 10.6 764 21.6 112 24.3 1 066 17.7 290 28.9 175 21.6 913 20.2 - 22.8 15 53.9 _ 28.7 10 25.1 392 27.6 55 22.3 - 17.7 - 34.5 1 535 26.7 - 18.3 - 25.8 1 23.0 - 25.4 _ 26.2 - 50.2 6 29.7 - 32.0 - 20.6 5 35.5 137 40.1 - 29.6 - 16.1 " 19.8 _ 25.6 - 32.2 " 20.9 158 30.4 33 16.7 - 30.4 - 24.8 17 23.3 " 40.8 115 21.0 12 43.9 - 48.1 - 34.8 - 38.6 - 31.9 - 29.1 93 51.9 44.1 54.8 31.1 56.5 35.4 48.8 30.3 44.9 47.3 18.3 0.2 16.7 10.3 34.0 14.1 5.5 15.1 0.2 6.4 4.4 1.5 0.4 0.4 1.6 0.1 136 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 19. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total general expenditure Total criminal justice system Police pi otection Judi cial County 1 Amount Percent oi total general Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system PENNSYLVANIA— CONTINUED LUZERNE ..... 17 707 7 481 ft 944 45 090 17 855 11 270 12 260 21 764 12 519 4 806 26 693 25 872 2? 757 32 6*0 32 054 86 098 72 048 189 447 26 336 5 116 55 511 9 679 6 012 119 267 22 585 20 132 151 793 8 105 10 004 5 211 6 305 34 009 3 190 49 640 2 758 11 436 ? «54 4 748 49 857 5 674 9 889 56 120 140 379 778 66 351 72 391 18 170 160 688 10 049 31 425 29 426 32 143 13 614 6 n48 10 783 26 041 48 519 17 254 18 381 287 2.48 16 423 28 616 18 264 26 301 23 460 2 695 1 564 1 481 8 852 2 844 1 928 2 037 4 202 2 923 1 718 4 681 7 642 2 409 4 476 2 846 8 687 4 416 17 491 1 272 1 509 11 764 1 487 2 050 24 124 4 514 2 395 35 828 2 093 3 094 1 665 1 845 H 982 804 8 733 974 5 579 1 124 734 7 578 688 1 208 99 11 466 19 397 5 662 2 997 3 181 24 747 1 972 7 882 6 129 5 736 2 419 1 385 2 329 2 467 5 848 2 277 1 424 20 249 1 671 3 089 2 288 3 058 1 498 15.2 20.9 21.3 19.6 15.9 17.1 16.6 19.3 23.3 35.7 17.5 29.5 10.6 13.7 8.9 10.1 6.1 9.2 4.8 29.5 21.2 15.4 34.1 20.2 20.0 11.9 23.6 25.8 30.9 32.0 29.3 14.6 25.2 17.6 35.3 48.8 38.1 15.5 15.2 12.1 12.2 176.1 9.5 5.1 8.5 4.1 17.5 15.4 19.6 25.1 20.8 17.8 17.8 22.9 21.6 9.5 12.0 13.2 7.7 7.0 10.2 10.8 12.5 11.6 6.4 91 16 37 691 43 37 96 221 275 499 2 634 1 834 645 1 879 1 335 1 437 986 2 700 627 426 2 202 677 448 5 943 768 641 7 314 381 718 369 426 728 229 1 667 211 1 315 351 348 3 933 213 336 15 8 203 13 592 3 878 1 865 1 306 8 765 710 3 288 2 633 2 149 737 355 363 1 431 2 336 1 020 843 3 569 795 1 284 574 1 264 723 3.4 1.0 2.5 7.6 1.5 1.9 4.7 5.3 9.4 29.0 56.3 24.0 26.8 42.0 46.9 16.5 22.3 15.4 49.3 28.2 16.7 45.5 21.9 24.6 17.0 26.8 20.4 18.2 23.2 22.2 23.1 13.8 28.5 19.1 21.7 23.6 31.2 47.4 51.9 31.0 27.8 15.2 71.5 70.1 68.5 62.2 41.1 35.4 36.0 41.7 43.0 37.5 30.5 25.6 15.6 58.0 39.9 44.8 59.2 17.6 47.6 41.6 25.1 41.3 48.3 1 318 764 603 4 162 1 026 819 964 1 445 1 174 473 1 205 960 452 1 654 1 065 1 504 2 883 4 319 388 375 2 388 436 533 8 605 905 954 12 507 544 1 085 486 450 1 337 267 2 843 397 1 568 346 103 1 no 192 233 73 1 311 3 351 849 607 841 6 151 412 1 454 1 413 1 175 728 545 823 437 1 524 631 306 7 542 420 964 608 882 443 MERCER 47.3 YORK south Carolina: 27.5 25.7 12.6 18.8 37.0 TENNESSEE: 17.3 KNOX 65.3 SHELBY 30.5 TEXAS: BELL BEXAR 29.3 Cameron 26.0 Dallas 35.7 GALVESTON 39.8 HARRIS 34.9 35.1 29.2 NUECES 25.4 SMITH 33.2 TARRANT 32.6 TAYLOR 40.8 TRAVIS 28.1 30.8 UTAH: 14.0 UTAH 27.9 WEBER 19.3 VERMONT: 73.7 VIRGINIA: 11.4 Fairfax 17.3 20.3 WASHINGTON: 26.4 KING KITSAP 20.9 PIERCE 18.4 23.1 20.5 YAKIMA 30.1 WEST VIRGINIA: CABELL 39.4 KANAWHA 35.3 WISCONSIN: BROWN 17.7 DANE 26.1 KENOSHA 27.7 21.5 MILWAUKEE 37.2 OUTAGAMIE 25.1 RACINE 31.2 26.6 WAUKESHA 28.8 WINNEBAGO 29.6 - Hepresents zero or rounds to zero. Z Less than half the unit of measurement 'Data are based on a field compilation shown . rom records of e nch county govern ment shown; see text for data li mltatlons. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 137 Table 19. Percent distribution of criminal justice system total expenditure (direct and intergovernmental) of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal se pros rvices and ecution Publi c defense Corrections Other crim inal justice County Amount Percent of total criminal justice system \moun t Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system PENNSYLVANIA — CONTINUED LUZERNE 271 111 123 891 208 175 210 363 192 42 102 146 50 306 59 148 110 335 58 251 1 319 132 189 1 973 640 228 4 110 279 621 285 149 367 96 1 589 80 520 125 167 759 113 132 688 252 166 250 1 750 196 685 451 449 2*6 123 242 120 627 1P3 77 1 857 157 240 19b 244 136 10.1 7.1 8.3 10.1 7.3 9.1 10.3 8.6 6.6 2.4 2.2 1.9 2.1 6.8 2.1 1.7 2.5 1.9 4.6 16.6 11.2 8.9 9.2 8.2 14.2 9.5 11.5 13.3 20.1 17.1 8.1 7.0 11.9 18.2 8.2 9.3 11.1 22.8 10.0 16.4 10.9 3.4 3.5 4.5 5.5 7.9 7.1 9.9 8.7 7.4 7.8 11.3 8.9 10.4 4.9 10.7 8.0 5.4 9.2 9.4 7.8 8.6 8.0 9.1 106 41 85 390 96 49 55 78 42 10 36 122 48 375 2 38 350 23 45 811 156 47 1 040 11 33 29 90 27 227 48 65 27 2?8 22 60 79 119 1 175 61 238 257 227 6 10 7 59 131 79 20 745 124 283 89 81 70 3.9 2.6 5.7 4.4 3.4 2.5 2.7 1.9 1.1 0.2 0.5 2.7 1.7 2.1 0.2 2.5 3.0 1.5 2.2 3.4 3.5 2.0 2.9 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.6 1.7 3.4 2.6 4.9 1.2 2.4 3.0 3.2 5.0 0.4 3.7 4.7 3.1 3.0 4.2 4.0 0.2 0.7 0.3 2.4 2.2 3.5 1.4 3.7 7.4 9.2 3.9 2.6 4.7 909 632 620 2 718 1 471 848 712 2 079 1 240 704 730 510 189 515 282 5 598 429 9 049 197 419 4 977 186 500 6 736 1 501 494 9 348 850 568 458 791 867 182 2 326 214 2 034 261 116 1 548 148 447 1 335 1 585 683 359 665 6 744 569 2 176 1 333 1 444 662 352 894 420 1 230 364 178 6 466 175 318 821 587 126 33.7 40.4 41.9 30.7 51.7 44.0 35.0 49.5 42.4 41.0 15.6 6.7 7.8 11.5 9.9 64.4 9.7 51.7 15.5 27.8 42.3 12.5 24.4 27.9 33.3 20.6 26.1 40.6 18.4 27.5 42.9 16.5 22.6 26.6 22.0 36.5 23.2 15.8 20.4 21.5 37.0 11.6 8.2 12.1 12.0 20.9 27.3 28.9 27.6 21.7 25.2 27.4 25.4 38.4 17.0 21.0 16.0 12.5 31.9 10.5 10.3 35.9 19.2 8.4 13 16 4 156 1 073 57 8 713 528 33 335 56 544 31 1 509 47 34 1 593 3 81 24 77 14 11 225 102 162 24 41 42 292 70 _ MERCER 0.9 _ SCHUYLKILL _ 0.4 YORK south Carolina: Anderson _ 54.4 44.5 2.0 TENNESSEE: KNOX 0.2 4.1 TEXAS: BELL BEXAR 4.5 2.2 16.3 0.2 12.1 1.3 HARRIS 4.2 1.5 2.0 32.0 SMITH 0.4 0.9 2.5 1.4 1.2 UTAH: DAVIS UTAH. . . . WEBER VERMONT: 11.1 VIRGINIA: 2.0 FAIRFAX HENRICO washington! Clark KING 0.7 KITSAP PIERCE 0.5 0.7 YAKIMA 5.1 west virginia: Cabell WISCONSIN: BROWN KENOSHA _ MILWAUKEE 0.3 RACINE WAUKESHA WINNEBAGO 138 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure Total criminal justice system Police pr otection Judi cial County 1 *~« Percent of total direct Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system 21 138 204 3 469 67 726 9 ?72 18 2Sb 3 076 5 847 116 1.97 149 731 83 9B1 11 491 27" 433 33 875 184 957 155 396 34 097 123 900 2 430 230 60 408 46 491 61 797 ?75 190 179 642 237 478 223 864 331 444 97 945 38 350 139 493 80 812 327 095 48 3b9 44 906 71 180 67 839 70 335 121 371 30 339 25 553 12 793 17 560 28 230 25 679 11 513 18 324 26 562 25 967 16 624 29 118 82 ?02 393 264 23 697 106 394 17 976 9 208 15 535 52 723 53 146 12 037 55 085 26 309 20 663 10 020 21 ?00 10 581 17 621 17 571 39 ?29 71 099 65 160 13 664 2 977 487 820 7 671 2 037 4 028 1 989 1 247 392 33 671 22 917 5 164 56 081 4 318 29 810 19 572 5 311 18 318 359 122 10 689 3 938 10 500 56 365 29 876 40 814 36 168 66 620 14 588 5 352 27 061 15 565 49 508 6 750 7 703 11 436 10 393 8 960 21 721 4 897 2 547 2 439 2 334 2 668 2 873 1 160 1 217 956 4 406 4 644 3 929 11 694 53 107 5 640 12 445 3 031 2 210 1 816 9 696 10 112 2 863 9 937 6 478 4 705 2 546 4 227 3 573 3 645 3 813 6 132 12 241 16 362 3 576 13.9 23.6 11.3 22.0 22.1 24.6 21.3 0.3 22.5 27.3 44.9 20.4 12.7 16.1 12.6 15.6 14.8 14.8 17.7 8.5 17.0 20.5 16.6 17.2 16.2 20.1 14.9 14.0 19.4 19.3 15.1 14.0 17.2 16.1 15.3 12.7 17.9 16.1 10.0 19.1 13.3 9.5 11.2 10.1 6.6 3.6 17.0 24.9 13.5 14.2 13.5 23.8 11.7 16.9 24.0 11.7 18.4 19.0 23.8 16.0 24.6 22.8 25.4 19.9 33.8 20.7 21.7 15.6 17.2 25.1 26.2 930 907 238 2 244 405 928 416 397 6 871 6 240 586 7 510 1 486 6 544 5 660 1 783 5 724 113 002 2 060 1 142 2 934 10 644 8 756 12 996 10 177 13 030 4 351 1 946 5 831 4 389 11 023 2 147 1 370 3 439 2 216 3 104 6 978 1 527 1 437 1 142 839 455 1 530 643 271 384 3 514 2 167 2 218 5 423 26 163 2 774 4 629 1 754 895 1 056 5 639 5 500 1 616 4 913 2 585 3 338 1 192 1 603 1 007 1 218 1 736 3 658 7 020 298 1 356 31.3 29.0 29.3 19.9 23.0 20.9 31.8 20.4 27.2 11.3 13.4 34.4 22.0 28.9 33.6 31.2 31.5 19.3 29.0 27.9 18.9 29.3 31.8 28.1 19.6 29.8 36.4 21.5 28.2 22.3 31. e 17.8 30.1 21.3 34.6 32.1 31.2 56.4 46.8 35.9 17.1 53.3 55.4 22.3 40.2 79.8 40.7 56.5 46.4 49.3 49.2 37.2 57.9 40.5 58.1 58.1 54.4 56.4 49.4 39.9 70.9 46.8 42.7 28.2 33.4 45.5 59.7 57.3 1.8 37.9 784 229 374 3 055 1 006 2 052 892 559 7 934 3 981 848 15 950 1 033 6 194 3 499 1 052 3 712 92 781 2 586 800 1 982 14 905 6 439 6 679 8 154 16 897 2 814 1 233 5 657 2 875 10 303 1 268 2 062 2 451 2 291 1 601 4 610 1 033 196 436 135 769 261 55 95 66 766 903 1 163 3 833 14 634 1 400 3 372 859 885 547 2 135 1 812 889 3 399 868 930 597 1 238 916 1 377 1 000 1 424 2 546 7 759 913 26.3 ALABAMA: 45.6 JEFFERSON 39.8 49.4 50.9 44.6 Tuscaloosa 44.6 ALASKA: ARIZONA: MARICOPA 23.6 PIMA 17.4 ARKANSAS: 16.4 California: 28.4 BuTTE 23.9 20.8 17.9 HUMBOLDT 19.6 K£RN 20.3 25.8 MARIN 24.2 MERCED 20.3 16.9 26.4 21.6 16.4 22.5 SAN DIEGO 25.4 19.3 SAN LUIS OBISPO 23.0 20.9 18.5 20.8 SANTA CRUZ 18.8 SOLANO 26.8 SONOMA 21.4 22.0 17.9 21.2 21.1 COLORADO: 7.7 17.9 5.6 28.8 JEFFERSON 9.1 4.7 PUEBLO 7.8 WELD 9.0 DELAWARE: 17.4 FLORIDA: 19.4 30.1 32.8 DADE 27.6 24.8 27.1 LEE 28.3 40.0 MANATEE 30.1 22.0 palm beach 17.9 PASCO 31.1 34.2 POLK 13.4 19.8 SEMINOLE 23.4 ?9.3 GEORGIA: 25.6 CHATHAM 37.8 Clayton 26.2 COBB 23.2 DE KALB 20.8 fulton 47.4 25.5 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 139 Table 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal servic prosecuti total justic nt of riminal system Public defens nt of rlmina] systen Percent of total crimina justice syste TOTAL ALAdAMA: Calhoun jefferson MADISON MOBILE montgomery Tuscaloosa ALASKA: GREATER ANCHORAGE . , . ARIZONA: MARICOPA PIMA ARKANSAS: PULASKI california: Alameda butte contra costa Fresno Humboldt kern los angeles MARIN MERCED. MONTEREY , ORANGE , riverside , sacramento , san bernardino , san diego , san joaquin , san luis orispo . . . . , san mateo , santa barsara , Santa clara , Santa cruz SOLANO , SONOMA , STANISLAUS , TULARE , VENTURA . . . 1 YOLO COLORADO: ADAMS . . , ARAPAHOE BOULDER EL PASO JEFFERSON , LARIMER PUEBLO , WELD DELAWARE: NEW CASTLE FLORIDA: alachua BREVARD BROWARD DADE ESCAMBIA HILLSBOROUGH LEE LEON , MANATEE , ORANGE , PALM BEACH PASCO PINELLAS , POLK , SARASOTA , SEMINOLE , VOLUSIA GEORGIA: BIBB , CHATHAM CLAYTON , Cobb DE KAL8 ...!..!'. Fulton , richmond , See footnotes at end of tahli 500 207 169 128 65 357 094 11 634 527 3 275 1 679 611 1 774 24 811 885 U?h 1 346 6 051 ? 857 6 695 3 198 6 751 1 477 755 1 763 1 553 5 026 925 593 903 1 186 1 060 ? 358 514 ^S9 504 381 814 710 242 376 300 5.9 6.5 10.2 4.2 6.4 5.2 7.0 9.1 1 690 957 8.3 3 007 12.2 178 11.0 1 233 8.6 986 11.5 120 9.7 5?8 6.9 12 695 8.3 614 10.9 117 12.8 559 10.7 2 265 9.6 1 140 16.4 1 995 8.6 1 119 10.1 3 217 10.1 939 14.1 123 6.5 926 10.0 537 10.2 1 713 13.7 192 7.7 469 7.9 321 11.4 205 11.8 '+35 10.9 764 10.5 286 21.9 20.7 - 16.3 . 30.5 - 24.7 - 20.9 - 30.9 20 31.4 - 136 2.9 24 115 2.9 25 218 1.9 137 671 1.3 160 122 2.2 71 308 2.5 79 106 3.5 17 60 2.7 22 42 2.3 6 206 2.1 25 281 2.8 120 163 5.7 - 215 2.2 _ 112 1.7 4 69 1.5 8 76 3.1 3 165 3.9 5 335 9.4 64 257 7.1 9b 231 6.1 43 224 3.7 121 583 4.8 139 1 671 10.2 336 231 6.5 40 0.3 0.8 5.0 4.2 160 843 402 879 553 226 14 819 5 631 5.4 24 941 4.1 1 094 4.1 12 564 5.0 7 74H 2.3 1 579 2.9 6 580 3.5 114 373 5.7 4 087 3.0 1 451 5.3 3 679 4.1 22 231 3.8 10 684 4.9 12 395 3.1 11 862 4.8 26 41 3 6.4 4 987 2.3 1 288 3.4 12 340 3.5 6 211 J.b 21 153 2.6 2 146 6.1 3 209 2.8 4 322 2.0 4 367 4.9 2 760 3.5 6 698 5.8 1 5 37 _ 355 - 357 - 287 - 630 - 372 - 177 1 326 360 1 991 7 781 1 273 3 942 295 348 165 1 693 2 2^3 195 1 309 936 360 676 1 016 1 245 698 788 705 1 953 19.5 24.0 19.7 21.8 27.8 18.1 44.0 24.6 44.5 39 25.3 - 42.1 - 39.6 - 29.7 166 35.9 - 31.8 1 460 38.2 457 36.8 - 35.0 _ 39.4 249 35.8 - 30.4 54 32.8 1 658 39.6 309 34.2 20 24.1 7 45.6 564 39.9 - 42.7 290 31.8 72 41.7 - 37.8 - 42.0 128 30.8 - 30.8 313 31.4 - 13.9 _ 14.6 - 12.3 692 23.6 - 12.9 - 15.3 43 16.9 17.0 14.7 22.6 31.7 9.7 15.7 9.1 17.5 22.1 6.8 13.2 14.4 26.6 24.0 34.8 19.1 20.7 11.5 16.0 38.5 29.0 28 92 3 698 101 1 973 0.4 4.3 0.1 4.6 0.5 0.1 C.l 0.6 1.1 1.2 1.4 3.7 6.1 2.5 1.9 0.7 0.8 7.0 1.0 30.5 0.2 0.4 140 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total dire expenditur Percent of total direct expenditure IDAHO: ADA illinois: champaign cook Du PAGE KANE lake LA SALLE MCHENRY MCLEAN MACON MADISON , . PEORIA ROCK ISLAND ST. CLAIR sangamon Tazewell WILL WINNEBAGO INDIANA: Allen delaware ELKHART , LAKE LA PORTE MADISON ST. JOSEPH TIPPECANOE , VANDERBURGH , VIGO , IOWA! black hawk , linn , POLK , SCOTT , WOODBURY , KANSAS: JOHNSON SEDGWICK SHAWNEE , Wyandotte , kentucky: jefferson , KENTON , LOUISIANA: CADDO , Calcasieu , jefferson , lafayette , ouachita , Rapides MAINE: Cumberland , penopscot , YORK maryland: anne arundel Baltimore , HARFORD Montgomery prince georges , washington , massachusetts: barnstable , berkshire BRISTOL , Essex HAMPDEN HAMPSHIRE MIDDLESEX , NORFOLK Plymouth , worcester , Sec footnotes at end of tabic 7 905 75? 015 31 bib 12 361 33 356 6 802 7 531 9 421 6 519 10 "76 1C 609 8 903 15 143 7 6 6 4 6 020 13 476 1? 812 3? OOR 8 596 10 838 bO 517 8 196 8 60 1 22 305 8 757 13 492 9 295 7 651 18 714 3? 6->9 1? 717 a 06b 26 619 19 79 = 9 2.10 9 025 75 233 20 QD2 9 589 20 685 10! 791 5 957 6 2«1 6 4 a 9 1 759 1 716 1 220 230 941 36? 239 81 10 9 '14 7 814 424 01)4 55 473 6 703 2 163 6 403 12 617 13 ^67 7 060 34 166 1? 982 1) 037 15 I SI / 1 695 96 341 6 ?75 3 594 5 150 2 007 1 857 1 341 1 678 3 269 2 761 1 978 2 530 2 205 1 224 3 207 3 532 4 874 1 155 1 719 6 655 2 184 1 268 3 220 1 078 2 407 1 476 2 105 2 265 6 071 1 620 1 373 3 442 6 256 2 783 2 296 19 983 2 181 3 854 3 722 13 372 2 355 1 957 2 460 1 328 766 586 9 986 25 181 2 041 2 3 568 24 335 639 2 624 1 664 4 961 6 684 9 906 1 663 18 905 6 331 6 087 6 394 21.4 27.4 16.7 29.1 15.4 29.5 24.7 14.2 25.7 31.2 26.0 22.2 16.7 29.1 20.3 23.8 22.3 13.4 15.9 26.6 14.6 14.4 12.3 17.8 15.9 18.6 13.2 17.0 31.6 30.2 25.4 26.6 10.4 40.2 18.0 4. 3 7.0 2.5 5. 3 5.7 1.2 76.9 77.5 53.0 71.8 23.6 54.2 48.8 55.2 55.2 591 12 661 1 767 1 308 ? I 3b 392 1 005 467 622 1 074 1 088 901 605 762 5 09 1 58 i 1 385 1 380 3 37 631 1 9^4 369 296 999 446 610 3^3 394 466 967 490 216 1 4 39 667 2*3 30 9 8 780 1 240 1 605 2 418 7 779 1 474 1 053 1 021 363 199 125 7 861 21 178 6^5 16 785 18 282 225 404 36 6 2 70 ^8 19 I'M 56 133 68 34.9 13.1 28.2 36.4 41.5 19.5 54.1 34.1 37.1 32.9 39.4 45.6 23.9 34.1 41.6 49.4 39.2 28.3 29.2 36.7 2 0.3 0.4 1.2 11.9 9.6 0.9 1.4 0,5 2.1 11.2 0.3 7.2 0.1 1.1 0.2 142 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) ital dire ^penditur inal justice syste total di expendi t- ICHlGAN: BAY BERRIEN Calhoun GENESEE INGHAM JACKSON KALAMAZOO KENT MACOMB MONROE MUSKEGON OAKLAND OTTAWA SAGINAW ST. CLAIR WASHTENAW WAYNE minnesota: anoka Dakota hennepin Ramsey ST. LOUIS mississippi: Harrison HINDS JACKSON missouri : Clay Greene JACKSON JEFFERSON ST. CHARLES ST. LOUIS nebraska: Douglas lancaster NEVADA: Clark WASHOE new hampshire: hillsborough Rockingham new jersey: Atlantic BERGEN Burlington CAMDEN Cumberland ESSEX Gloucester Hudson mercer middlesex monmouth MORRIS OCEAN PASSAIC SOMERSET UNION MEW MEXICO: BERNALILLO NEW YORK: ALBANY BROOME chautaucua Chemung DuTCHESS Erie MONROE Nassau See footnotes nt end of tabic 15 092 25 069 12 926 74 6dft 38 0o3 24 017 17 467 47 631 6? 549 13 935 2ft ?76 123 ?62 12 C01 28 913 L9 2»B 21 998 358 597 22 578 20 426 230 469 12« 653 57 576 15 4JQ 15 592 11 195 4 6^4 4 353 4*3 743 3 536 4 490 85 ?38 59 006 15 252 120 235 41 /v3 ^ 164 5 124 42 lie 106 4V3 40 867 103 059 21 366 '67 172 18 944 102 953 61 393 94 266 7.-'. tus 49 168 37 704 6 7 132 191 73 531 17 584 106 967 hi 134 52 510 27 902 52 349 360 167 ,.' 6 U 52 3 637 988 281 811 558 921 428 072 6 827 11 083 2 979 3 566 17 464 2 017 4 854 2 760 7 006 50 572 2 885 1 721 18 932 9 446 5 348 1 937 1 549 987 1 478 1 386 12 184 1 060 1 212 21 401 5 748 2 581 26 329 6 298 1 524 872 4 447 12 975 4 193 8 620 2 522 36 969 2 546 13 712 9 521 11 100 5 482 4 786 4 115 11 039 3 366 12 141 5 950 2 830 2 250 2 018 3 939 22 823 16 191 001 15.1 19.2 27.5 30.1 14.3 17.7 14.3 31.8 14.1 7.6 9.3 9.9 7 . 32.7 31.8 26.6 30.0 27.0 25.1 12 24.7 17.0 10.4 12.2 10.3 8.4 11.8 13.8 13.4 13.3 15.5 11.8 7.0 9.7 10.9 16.4 5.6 4.6 6.9 7.2 7.5 6.3 6.1 19.4 590 ] 144 776 2 428 1 4 96 853 1 333 2 151 2 827 1 100 516 4 136 801 1 050 602 2 233 5 6 55 1 310 482 4 409 1 629 1 118 649 403 488 365 451 1 097 458 4^3 11 554 1 1 8 418 17 203 2 306 80 245 385 2 923 801 687 188 3 891 297 3 215 631 1 419 730 1 032 805 7-,6 619 1 1-16 H65 691 605 1 023 4 313 4 399 84 649 25.9 23.8 21.8 22.2 27.6 27.8 25.4 31.5 25.5 36.9 14.5 23.7 39.7 21.6 21.8 31.9 11.1 45.4 28.0 23.3 17.2 20.9 33.5 26.0 49.4 17.7 16.2 65.3 36.6 5.2 26.1 8.7 22.5 19.1 6.6 12.8 13.3 21.6 19.6 6.9 18.4 15.0 30.6 30.7 30.0 26.0 16.9 27.2 68.4 774 1 417 1 106 3 435 1 803 864 1 055 1 512 3 187 876 1 476 4 525 569 1 443 685 1 572 19 300 809 7 54 5 356 2 120 1 6 32 807 699 3:5 376 472 3 985 324 340 5 522 1 828 87C 2 168 1 359 773 410 846 4 220 1 04 2 1 D 7 693 11 177 642 4 093 2 222 3 382 1 768 1 162 1 122 4 164 830 3 872 1 201 618 507 395 1 167 4 443 3 6d7 17 439 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 143 Table 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Percent of total criminal justice system total justic MICHIGAN: BAY BERRIEN Calhoun GENESEE Ingham JACKSON Kalamazoo .... KENT MACOMB MONROE MUSKEGON OAKLAND OTTAWA Saginaw ST. CLAIR .... WASHTENAW .... WAYNE MINNESOTA: ANOKA Dakota hennepin RAMSEY ST. LOUIS .... MISSISSIPPI: HARRISON HINDS JACKSON MISSOURI: CLAY GREENE JACKSON ..... JEFFERSON .... ST. CHARLES . . . ST. LOUIS .... NEBRASKA: DOUGLAS LANCASTER .... NEVADA: Clark WASHOE new hampshire: hillsborough. . . Rockingham. . . . new jersey: Atlantic 6ERGEN BURLINGTON. . . . CAMDEN Cumberland. . . . Essex Gloucester. . . . Hudson mercer middlesex .... monmouth MORRIS OCEAN Passaic Somerset UNION NEW MEXICO: BERNALILLO. . . . NEW YORK: Albany BROOME Chautauqua. . . . CHEMUNG Dutchess ERIE MONROE NASSAU See footnotes at end 205 425 206 1 719 563 299 595 513 1 294 242 335 1 511 93 418 298 510 4 667 293 159 1 45b 767 344 l c 5 144 1 095 139 129 1 219 798 304 567 8S9 96b 2 126 602 1 991 272 4 622 502 2 150 1 358 2 061 902 91b 893 1 571 725 2 954 585 312 207 190 448 ? 458 1 389 5 527 10.8 7.3 9. a 13.1 10.6 5.7 21.7 16.4 19.1 23.1 10.8 12.5 19.7 15.7 14.3 18.6 16.5 19.1 21.7 14.2 21.5 24.3 109 179 111 280 283 145 229 201 566 165 122 472 58 279 153 339 159 28 783 HO 114 381 153 603 361 242 115 "0 53 217 793 550 379 4.8 603 3.7 1 646 3.1 1 359 2.6 2 972 5.2 1 283 4.7 921 4.4 2 013 2.9 2 324 5.1 3 173 5.5 596 3.4 1 117 5.0 6 179 2.9 484 5.7 1 664 5.5 822 4.8 2 34? 8.2 16 652 2.0 414 1.6 288 4.1 6 311 0.6 4 786 2.1 2 140 2.0 P95 5.3 301 2.8 73 0.2 579 0.2 316 - 4 393 - 139 - 2 70 ~ 3 106 6.7 1 720 5.9 827 2.3 4 788 5.7 1 386 _ 611 ~ 189 _ 2 164 - 3 431 - 1 550 - 3 486 - 1 369 0.4 16 883 - 1 105 - 4 254 - 5 289 0.3 4 100 0.1 2 089 0.3 1 619 - 1 295 - 4 219 0.1 1 187 - 4 122 3 030 891 747 775 1 084 10 653 5 348 14 678 26.4 34.2 38.2 27.2 23.6 30.0 38.3 34.0 28.6 20.0 31.3 35.4 24.0 34.3 29.8 33.4 32.9 14.4 16.7 33.3 50.7 40.0 15.2 19.4 7.4 39.2 22.8 36.1 13.1 22.3 14.5 29.9 32.0 4«.7 26.4 37.0 40.4 55.6 36.9 38.1 33.8 31.5 38.2 35.3 34.0 50.9 31.5 33.2 33.0 11.8 126 41 241 12 10 159 87 275 42 3?0 1.8 0.4 1.4 0.6 0.1 0.3 0,6 0.7 163 818 2.0 2.1 0.8 0.7 0.2 1.0 0.9 2.9 0.7 11.2 0.7 5.1 0.1 144 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure total direc NEW YORK — CONTINUED NIAGARA ONEIDA Onondaga ORANGE oswego rensselaer Rockland st. lawrence Saratoga schenectady STEUBEN Suffolk ulster westchester north Carolina: buncombe Cumberland Durham Forsyth GASTON GUILFORD MECKLENBURG OnSLOW WAKE ohio: allen ashtabula butler CLARK Clermont Columbiana Cuyahoga franklin GREENE HAMILTON LAKE LICKING LORAIN Lucas mahoning montgomery PORTAGE RICHLAND STARK summit trumbull oklahoma: Comanche oklahoma Tulsa OREGON: Clackamas JACKSON lane MARION Multnomah washington pennsylvania: allegheny BEAVER BERKS blair bucks BUTLER Cambria CENTRE Chester Cumberland dauphin delaware ERIE fayette franklin Lackawanna lancaster lawrence LEBANON LfcHIGH See footnotes at end of table 68 075 61 9b6 166 116 65 02? 21 028 60 924 94 518 27 365 20 ?39 30 633 20 511 46? ?86 3 C 7^4 329 44P, 55 ?2? 83 53 3 63 148 102 0b3 52 124 1 18 665 18? 0/7 28 328 106 326 13 71? 7 4 40 1^ 975 13 356 9 533 6 071 ?37 701 ] 18 ?^ft 14 479 93 604 26 863 8 ?19 21 760 47 369 34 115 68 714 ?? 591 9 635 2? 147 51 203 19 73? 14 146 27 040 22 54? 22 822 15 027 35 049 12 401 65 496 36 549 178 530 16 852 19 563 7 Oil 28 416 7 879 13 565 4 B51 1* 133 8 226 24 735 4 5 095 21 095 5 505 4 068 16 456 If) 535 4 166 8 473 2 6 262 3 951 3 680 11 839 3 791 1 614 2 217 6 035 1 368 1 250 1 766 1 397 81 207 2 177 24 377 1 616 4 512 1 090 3 064 1 895 3 162 5 757 971 1 121 2 505 1 316 2 617 2 002 1 108 1 110 24 518 9 658 1 544 15 311 2 689 ■1 368 3 017 8 135 3 208 10 032 1 927 2 060 5 199 6 055 2 733 795 3 462 3 696 3 630 2 270 5 743 2 961 19 514 3 840 24 029 2 941 3 001 1 276 6 435 1 084 1 517 961 5 113 1 376 4 284 9 726 4 174 1 202 963 2 093 2 829 865 937 2 644 5.9 7.1 5.8 7.7 3.6 6.2 5.8 2.9 5.4 1.7 3.0 3.6 2.7 5.2 3.4 1.1 16.4 15.0 11.6 18.3 10.3 8.2 10.7 16.4 10.0 16.6 12.4 17.2 23.3 11.8 13.9 5.6 12.8 15.9 14.2 16.0 23.9 29.8 10.5 13.5 17.5 15.3 18.2 22.6 13.8 11.2 19.8 27.9 16.7 17.3 21.6 19.8 21.8 19.8 12.7 18.2 20.8 11.1 10.1 1 110 507 3 005 56 526 288 1 213 351 284 103 242 57 003 357 4 420 711 1 401 639 088 925 1 325 2 267 460 744 398 444 570 616 364 271 2 641 2 480 538 4 686 929 411 995 980 729 2 858 615 507 1 296 1 436 1 040 18 4 201 3^5 1 472 690 1 779 839 6 197 1 781 4 776 532 1 '>6 20 525 93 M 13 394 41 321 517 82 25 10 47 82 23 28.1 16.2 25.4 1.5 32.6 13.0 19.9 25.7 22.7 5.8 17.3 70.2 16.4 18.1 44. C 31.1 58.6 22.3 48.8 41.9 39.4 47.4 66.4 15.9 33.7 21.8 30.8 32.9 24.4 10.8 25.7 34.8 30.6 34.5 30.0 33.0 12.0 22.7 28.5 31.9 24.6 24.9 23.7 38.1 40.6 30.4 31.0 28.3 31.8 46.4 3.0 7.5 1 1 190 052 2 096 1 623 479 530 1 044 377 44 1 643 395 9 Soi 685 5 420 333 1 805 89 521 2d6 625 1 182 306 41 545 391 "48 6 3? 426 468 10 563 3 666 63' 5 411 867 40? 6v4 2 c 96 1 190 3 J62 765 445 1 357 2 ?37 1 030 347 1 933 1 "17 793 4 76 2 028 764 5 428 694 10 203 1 447 1 41 i 543 2 7-J6 438 806 490 1 6 )8 592 1 309 3 79? 1 313 8v4 325 1 05? 1 197 458 418 1 121 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 145 Table 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) County 1 Legal s pros Public defe total cr justice NEW YORK — CONTINUED NIAGARA ONEIDA Onondaga ORANGE OSWEGO rensselaer Rockland st. lawrence Saratoga schenectady STEUBEN SUFFOLK ULSTER westchester north Carolina: buncombe Cumberland DURHAM FORSYTH GASTON SulLFORD MECKLENBURG ONSLOW WAKE OHIO: Allen ashtabula BuTLER CLARK Clermont Columbiana Cuyahoga franklin GREENE HAMILTON LAKE LICKING LORAIN . . . . LUCAS MAHONING MONTGOMERY PORTAGE RICHLAND STARK summit trumbull oklahoma: comanche oklahoma tulsa . . . . OREGON: Clackamas JACKSON LANE MARION multnomah washington pennsylvania: Allegheny BEAVER BERKS BLAIR BUCKS BUTLER Cambria CENTRE Chester Cumberland dauphin delaware ERIE fayette franklin lackawanna lancaster Lawrence LEBANON LEHIGH See footnotes at end of table. 342 354 950 604 137 243 780 118 17? 203 14b H95 ?Q7 349 57 124 141 128 59 118 1 513 652 1?6 683 210 lib 2^6 348 2^5 770 176 209 324 317 249 767 339 01b 393 2 141 258 276 99 801 104 167 66 858 125 440 1 080 429 111 81 255 200 1)5 72 296 4.8 13.6 13.7 1.3 1.4 3.0 3.0 3.9 1.5 1.3 5.4 7.6 7.1 5.4 6.4 5.3 10.6 6.2 8.8 8.2 4.5 7.8 9.1 4.3 8.9 7.7 8.7 11.0 13.4 11.4 10.3 10.2 9.6 11.0 6.9 16.8 9.1 10.3 11.1 10.3 9.2 8.2 12.2 7.1 13.3 7.7 11.2 123 128 384 195 24 77 243 59 48 1 370 77 939 18 21 57 211 232 65 482 31 35 153 47 153 46 31 97 199 81 232 147 133 133 212 119 985 179 606 82 88 43 223 33 60 29 242 31 120 424 16b 38 43 80 73 38 3.1 3.5 3.2 3.5 4.0 3.8 2.0 4.0 1 186 833 5 380 1 313 446 1 079 2 805 463 305 781 556 9 553 759 8 577 848 484 235 715 365 913 308 192 275 1 348 378 657 553 239 196 7 055 2 429 283 4 068 619 347 817 4 056 957 2 889 325 731 2 095 1 774 441 182 1 066 1 389 757 689 957 900 4 872 893 6 108 570 1 109 571 2 130 396 453 270 2 Oil 587 2 094 3 913 2 118 334 523 659 1 277 231 410 1 119 30.0 22.6 45.4 34.6 27.8 48.7 46.1 33.8 24.4 44.2 39.9 11.8 34.9 35.2 33.9 10.7 21.6 23.2 19.3 28.9 22.7 19.8 24.5 53.8 28.7 25.1 27.6 21.6 17.7 28.8 25.2 18.3 26.6 23.0 25.4 27.1 49.9 29.8 28.3 16.9 35.5 40.3 29.3 16.1 22.9 30.8 37.6 20.9 30.4 16.7 30.4 25.0 23.3 25.4 19.4 37.0 44.7 33.1 36.5 29.9 28.1 39.3 716 24 134 2 1 672 764 112 1 066 290 175 913 10 392 55 1 535 1 158 33 115 12 16.9 10.3 34.6 15.3 5.5 15.9 0.8 15.0 2.7 6.3 (Z) 4.4 1.5 0.5 0.4 1.6 0.1 43.8 42.3 146 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 20. Percent distribution of criminal justice system direct expenditure of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total direct expenditure Total criminal justice system Police pr otection Judi :ial County 1 Amount Percent of total direct Amount Percent of total criminal justice system Amount Percent of total criminal justice system PENNSYLVANIA— CONTINUED 17 015 6 900 6 719 41 094 17 157 10 569 11 808 20 39ft 11 760 4 647 26 435 25 030 21 463 3? 430 32 054 73 179 54 126 126 357 20 908 5 116 54 334 9 629 6 012 119 151 21 835 20 132 151 163 R 104 10 004 4 855 6 263 34 009 3 190 49 363 ? 694 11 436 2 794 4 748 49 857 5 674 9 668 56 110 095 368 455 66 322 71 788 16 555 124 188 9 094 28 573 26 738 29 ?87 11 879 5 901 10 516 25 44? 47 642 It 667 18 149 ?77 800 15 850 28 359 17 816 25 045 21 727 2 602 1 468 1 223 8 643 2 665 1 456 1 801 3 884 2 761 1 718 4 681 7 629 2 405 4 354 2 748 8 687 4 416 17 192 1 272 1 509 11 764 1 454 2 050 24 124 4 514 2 395 35 828 2 093 3 054 1 631 1 845 4 980 804 8 733 950 5 502 1 124 702 7 578 688 1 208 99 11 010 19 089 5 656 2 884 3 181 24 747 1 972 7 801 6 129 5 736 2 419 1 385 2 329 2 377 5 612 2 159 1 360 19 998 1 538 2 966 2 191 2 942 1 410 15.3 21.3 18.2 21.0 15.5 13.6 15.3 19.0 23.5 37.0 17.7 30.5 11.2 13.4 6.6 11.9 8.2 13.6 6.1 29.5 21.7 15.1 34.1 20.2 20.7 11.9 23.7 25.8 30.5 33.6 29.5 14.6 25.2 17.7 35.3 48.1 40.2 14.8 15.2 12.1 12.5 176.1 10.0 5.2 8.5 4.0 19.2 19.9 21.7 27.3 22.9 19.6 20.4 23.5 22.1 9.3 11.8 13.0 7.5 7.2 9.7 10.5 12.3 11.7 6.5 91 16 37 691 43 37 96 221 275 499 2 634 1 834 645 1 773 1 301 1 437 986 2 476 627 426 2 202 677 448 5 943 768 641 7 314 381 718 369 426 728 229 1 667 211 1 315 351 348 3 933 213 336 15 8 203 13 592 3 878 1 865 1 306 8 765 710 3 288 2 633 2 149 737 355 363 1 428 2 238 1 014 843 3 558 793 1 280 567 1 242 720 3.5 1.1 3.0 8.0 1.6 2.5 5.3 5.7 10. 29.0 56.3 24.0 26.8 40. 7 47.3 16.5 22.3 14.4 49.3 28.2 18.7 46.6 21.9 24.6 17.0 26.8 20.4 18.2 23.5 22.6 23.1 13.8 28.5 19.1 22.2 23.9 31.2 49.6 51.9 31.0 27.6 15.2 74.5 71.2 68.6 64.7 41.1 35.4 36.0 42.1 43.0 37.5 30.5 25.6 15.6 6C.1 39.9 47.0 62.0 17.8 51.6 43.2 25.9 42.2 51.1 1 318 764 603 4 162 1 026 819 854 1 445 1 174 473 1 205 947 448 1 654 1 058 1 504 2 883 4 319 388 375 2 388 436 533 8 605 905 954 12 507 544 1 065 486 450 1 336 267 2 843 397 1 5b8 346 103 1 110 192 233 73 690 3 147 849 504 841 6 151 412 1 454 1 413 1 175 728 545 823 369 1 411 579 269 7 542 315 874 555 810 392 50.7 LyCOMING 52.0 MERCER 49.3 48.2 38.5 56.3 48.0 WESTMORELAND 37.2 42.5 south carolina! Anderson 27.5 25.7 GREENVILLE 12.4 18.6 38.0 38.5 TENNESSEE: 17.3 KNOX 65.3 25.1 30.5 TEXAS: 24.9 20.3 30.0 CAMERON 26.0 35.7 20.0 Galveston 39.8 HARRIS 34.9 hidalgo 26.0 35.5 LUBBOCK 29.8 24.4 NuECES 25.4 SMITH 33.2 32.6 TAYLOR 41.8 28.5 WICHITA 30.8 UTAH! 14.7 14.6 UTAH 27.9 WEBER 19.3 VERMONT: 73.7 VIRGINIA! 8.1 16.5 HENRICO 15.0 PRINCE WILLIAM 17.5 washington! Clark 26.4 KING ?4.9 KITSAP 20.9 PIERCE 18.6 SNOHOMISH 23.1 SPOKANE 20.5 YAKIMA 30.1 WEST VIRGINIA: 39.4 35.3 WISCONSIN: 15.5 DANE 25.1 26.8 19.6 37.7 OUTAGAMIE 20.5 29.5 ROCK 25.3 WAUKESHA 27.5 27.8 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. 7, Less thon half tho unit of measurement shown. *Dota are bnsori on a field comp J 1 -tion from ret RAL' . L'WN it volu:- - i/> ..... GEORGIA: HUH;. ...... CHATHAM ..... CLAYTON CODU. ...... DE KALB FULTOI RICHMOND. ..... ■ • rooti no ■■! i 'i i. 160 384 9 361 1 199 6 246 5 229 1 625 5 074 76 229 1 791 1 481 2 316 10 373 5 495 6 553 7 873 11 945 4 443 1 466 4 290 2 970 9 928 1 509 1 347 3 078 2 550 2 049 4 719 1 211 074 506 7 34 103 248 563 688 550 873 1 837 2 910 18 181 1 101 5 745 1 232 631 753 2 475 2 985 7 39 2 479 2 588 742 699 1 141 563 1 SO t, ,. 0< ' 919 686 048 i 692 211 2 584 263 1 563 1 236 314 1 035 18 644 567 283 656 3 286 1 597 2 128 2 225 3 680 938 300 1 324 9 02 2 499 396 444 612 623 li,i. 162 !.,, 267 240 94 107 'i. 296 '.'.(, 845 I 1 ' i 399 988 .' IH 218 l'i •■ 7 33 ,2,1 251 807 424 260 2 08 383 253 313 320 531 903 192 : te 1 632 1 173 2 451 230 1 420 1 091 299 946 18 066 508 247 601 3 H 1 535 1 980 2 032 3 364 851 289 1 227 833 2 219 367 421 532 567 533 1 184 308 166 147 159 266 240 90 97 . "1 327 816 713 389 986 27 3 218 II!, 7 '< 678 247 791 421 250 205 353 201 312 300 489 895 144 334 2 498 252 1 490 1 140 303 984 18 234 533 622 3 210 1 557 2 032 2 104 3 491 89 294 1 257 860 2 309 377 4 32 ,63 >84 561 1 199 32 3 ] 66 152 161 267 240 91 101 533 827 / 14 39 11,7 275 . It'. if." r\ 681 . 48 /■>:• 4.V . 1 1. .'10 113 .mi i 508 899 1 180 336 21.0 23.9 18.6 19.4 31. 26.7 20.0 20. 25.0 32.1 22.9 27.4 16.2 14.7 25.1 29.6 22.8 33.6 32.1 16.3 34.0 29.5 24.7 22.9 360 366 300 106 358 3; t. 107 349 5 059 98 £ 3 177 669 470 723 657 694 246 252 534 124 81 I 8 3 177 L95 426 L04 1'.' 175 380 976 210 343 171 107 118 370 420 i n 451 248 169 1. ; L85 75 : 1 1 167 311 500 1 5 1 1 55 360 360 385 95 347 321 105 315 021 92 63 1 11 638 465 688 632 237 463 '. 1 ! 58 49 3 3 30 155 175 378 1 976 210 343 1< .' 1 07 1 1. 368 420 ; ; ■ 450 248 168 1. 173 V". no II. I 305 '.00 r,y 131 360 362 387 100 354 323 105 326 027 94 6< 177 646 466 698 600 655 239 250 486 1 2 2 79 162 163 184 425 102 155 175 378 976 210 343 L69 107 1 1 7 370 420 177 450 248 168 128 7 r ". Ill 166 300 500 157 133 15.5 39.7 23.8 28.3 34.7 33. 27.6 17.6 25. S 29.1 21.0 35.6 38.3 53.8 34.8 3 03 :. 65 292 225 „ ,: 2 150 333 511 047 107 5 7 o 0] 1 ! 1 111 117 1 231 53 135 : 9 1 013 1. 202 B5 54.3 60.8 . 38 03 1 01 113 60 14; 1 '7 464 04 r '. C 292 271 195 2 2 1 2 03 142 5" 1; 852 301 296 441 I - I 169 70 293 177 485 82 i 1 100 101 . 126 264 1 Oil 111 292 8 4 81 296 281 206 338 146 1 34 B73 314 313 401 898 178 ' ' : D6 112 1 1 6 7 1 : 3 56 108 1 '.' 439 94 i2 130 2 7 5 1 2 1 1. 2 02 ■'I ' 1 248 2.2". 'H 81 I 1 -. 58 123 1 7 3 U 1 ; 94 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM of full-time equivalent employees of 334 large county 149 Octo ber] L975 Leg a 1 servic 3S and pros ecution Public defense Con ections Other crin inal justi ce Number of employees Percent Number of employees Percent of total Number of employees Percent of total Number of employees Percent a Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- criminal justice system Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- criminal justice system Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- criminal justice Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- justice system J lent employees lent employees lent employees lent employees 17 420 16 197 16 748 9.0 3 061 2 857 2 974 1.6 58 064 53 998 55 286 29.6 865 795 831 0.4 l 6 5 5 7.0 _ . _ _ 15 15 15 21.1 2 50 26 47 6.3 3 - 3 0.4 171 165 169 22.7 - - _ _ 3 20 9 20 11.0 - - - - 49 49 49 27.1 - - _ _ 4 20 2 10 2.6 - - - - 71 70 70 18.2 - - _ - 5 22 14 17 8.4 - - - - 66 64 65 32.2 - - - - 6 3 3 3 2.0 ~ " " " 43 41 41 27.7 - " _ " 7 - - " - - " - - - - " - - " " - 8 156 156 156 9.3 92 91 91 5.4 558 545 549 32.6 9 137 129 131 11.0 53 52 52 4.4 351 339 344 29.0 1 1 1 0.1 10 48 48 48 18.2 8 8 8 3.0 78 78 78 29.5 - " " - 1 J 231 220 224 9.0 165 158 160 6.4 1 286 1 187 1 221 48.9 12 31 31 31 12.3 - - - - 61 52 56 22.2 _ - - _ 13 208 193 198 13.3 66 64 65 4.4 639 545 592 39.7 - - _ _ 14 157 142 148 13.0 46 40 41 3.6 482 393 422 37.0 - - - _ 15 35 35 35 11.6 7 7 7 2.3 101 96 97 32.0 4 4 4 1.3 16 108 99 102 10.4 27 27 27 2.7 363 332 349 35.5 - - _ _ 17 1 921 1 899 1 9 02 10.4 586 586 586 3.2 6 550 6 357 6 381 35.0 _ _ _ _ IP. 44 44 44 8.3 23 23 23 4.3 222 191 199 37.3 30 16 27 5.1 1') 33 33 33 12.9 5 5 5 2.0 93 87 88 34.4 - - - - : o 79 79 79 12.7 25 23 24 3.9 226 197 2 08 33.4 _ _ _ _ 21 317 312 313 9.8 96 95 95 3.0 1 307 1 263 1 275 39.7 8 8 8 0.2 :■:■ 157 154 155 10.0 40 39 39 2.5 601 576 583 37.4 - - - _ 23 304 291 296 14.6 71 69 70 3.4 697 636 655 32.2 - - - _ 24 187 183 185 8.8 61 60 60 2.9 805 747 764 36.3 4 4 4 0.2 25 385 347 366 10.5 - - - - 1 622 1 484 1 545 44.3 32 24 27 0.8 26 111 104 106 11.9 52 49 50 5.6 342 292 317 35.6 _ _ _ _ 27 42 39 40 13.6 - - - - 93 88 90 30.6 - _ _ - 28 120 116 117 9.3 - - " - 620 565 580 46.1 3 3 3 0.2 29 82 76 79 9.2 25 24 24 2.8 346 307 321 37.3 _ _ _ _ 30 276 260 263 11.4 91 86 88 3.8 1 008 917 942 40.8 11 8 9 0.4 31 59 53 55 14.6 - - - - 121 110 112 29.7 1 1 1 0.3 32 35 35 35 8.1 21 19 19 4.4 196 189 194 44.9 _ _ _ _ 33 65 59 60 10.7 13 13 13 2.3 235 203 222 39.4 - _ - _ 34 93 91 92 15.8 13 13 13 2.2 218 190 199 34.1 5 5 5 0.9 35 71 61 63 11.2 24 24 24 4.3 187 170 180 32.1 _ _ _ _ 36 129 122 124 10.3 28 27 28 2.3 388 373 377 31.4 25 22 23 1.9 37 32 30 31 9.6 15 13 14 4.3 128 100 107 33.1 - - - - 38 37 37 37 22.3 _ _ . _ 23 23 23 13.9 39 18 18 18 11.8 - - - - 29 22 24 15.8 - - _ _ 40 34 29 30 18.6 - - - - 48 48 48 29.8 _ - _ _ 41 80 80 80 30.0 - - - - 68 68 68 25.5 - _ _ _ 42 53 53 53 22.1 - - - - 29 29 29 12.1 _ _ _ - 43 19 18 18 19.8 - - - - 17 17 17 18.7 - _ _ _ 44 32 31 32 31.7 - - - - 18 17 17 16.8 4 4 4 4.0 45 22 21 21 25.9 - - - - 21 21 21 25.9 2 2 2 2.5 46 10 10 10 3.2 " - - - - - - - - - - - 47 3 3 3 1.0 _ _ _ _ 82 78 79 27.1 3 3 3 1.0 48 - - - - - - - - 24 24 24 7.3 2 2 2 0.6 49 18 18 18 2.2 - - - - 150 150 150 18.1 6 6 6 0.7 50 31 31 31 0.8 16 16 16 0.4 566 566 566 15.2 113 113 113 3.0 51 3 2 2 0.5 - - - - 66 66 66 16.9 _ _ _ _ 52 12 12 12 1.2 5 4 4 0.4 330 329 330 33.4 6 6 6 0.6 53 5 5 5 1.8 - - - - 17 17 17 6.2 - - - - 54 3 3 3 1.4 - - - - 27 27 27 12.4 - - - - 55 - - - - - - - - 21 21 21 11.1 _ _ _ _ 56 - - - - - - - - 114 114 114 15.6 _ _ - _ 57 12 12 12 1.8 - - - - 168 166 166 24.4 - - _ _ 58 - - - - - - - - 24 24 24 9.7 - - - _ 59 12 12 12 1.5 - - - - 100 99 99 12.5 6 6 6 0.8 60 6 6 6 1.4 - - - - 77 77 77 18.2 - - - - 61 - - - - - - - - 23 23 23 9.1 - - - - 62 - - - - - - - - 29 28 28 13.6 - - - - 63 7 7 7 1.9 " " - - 93 85 88 23.8 - - - - 64 26 16 20 9.1 _ . 44 43 43 19.6 65 23 23 23 7.3 - - - - 66 66 66 21.1 _ _ _ _ 66 20 17 18 5.9 - - - - 73 61 63 20.8 _ _ _ _ 67 25 25 25 4.9 - - - - 53 51 51 10.0 _ _ _ _ 68 48 47 48 5.3 8 8 8 O.o 170 170 170 18.9 _ _ _ _ 69 124 114 122 10.3 21 14 19 1.6 426 420 423 35.8 _ _ _ _ 70 21 21 21 6.3 - - - - 88 88 88 26.2 - - - - 71 150 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 21. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution governments, County : Tota full-t lent nployees il justice syste Number of employee Full- time only Full- t Lme Percent of total full-time quivalent employees Police protecti Number of employees Percent of total criminal justice system employees Number of employee Full- time only IDAHO: ADA . ILLINOIS: CHAMPAIGN COOK. . . DU PAGE . KANE. . . LAKE. . . LA SALLE. MCHENRY . MCLEAN. . MACON . . . MADISON . . PEORIA. . . ROCK ISLAND ST. CLAIR . SANGAMON. . TAZEWELL. . WILL. . . . WINNEBAGO . INDIANA: ALLEN . . . DELAWARE. . ELKHART . . LAKE. . . . LA PORTE. . MADISON . . ST. JOSEPH. TIPPECANOE. VANDERBURGH VIGO. . . . iowa: black hawk. LINN. . . . POLK. . . . SCOTT . . . WOODBURY. . KANSAS: JOHNSON . SEDGWICK. SHAWNEE . WYANDOTTE KENTUCKY: JEFFERSON KENTON. . LOUISIANA: CADDO . . CALCASIEU JEFFERSON LAFAYETTE OUACHITA. RAPIDES . Maine: cumberland, penobscot . YORK. . . . Maryland: anne arundel. . baltimore . . . HARFORD . . . . MONTGOMERY. . . PRINCE GEORGES. I VbHINGTON. . . 417 20 317 1 621 532 1 837 284 384 393 362 658 624 678 1 024 531 302 790 964 1 494 409 614 2 599 374 399 1 163 443 660 683 622 604 1 419 397 4 01 9 06 1 306 484 595 683 345 i,'.] 814 432 498 595 581 8 498 19 364 3 540 18 506 22 164 2 707 II .SACHUSETTS: BARNSTABLE. . . . BERKSHIRE .... BRISTOL CSS EX HAMPOCN ..... HAMPSHIRE .... MI00LESEX .... NORFOLK PLYMOUTH WORCESTER .... .e footnotes ot end of table. l .; 523 250 894 819 567 944 1 8 1 8 1 5 557 289 432 106 161 126 165 311 244 190 276 225 L31 266 312 3 97 114 16; 629 115 123 298 93 220 140 168 224 543 127 106 287 439 312 255 296 4 04 1 225 223 192 224 593 1 610 133 1 224 1 483 '.: l ; ' 98 318 516 447 119 06" 405 352 5 ':.3 137 381 492 280 407 92 149 io;: 136 269 235 174 262 202 101 247 297 362 89 123 596 99 114 278 157 121 134 186 474 125 84 255 384 256 217 267 329 1 141 170 70 154 587 1 590 115 1 217 1 456 '.4 287 432 594 97 061 '.(,.) 514 l'lt. 606 521 283 415 100 158 110 150 294 240 179 266 213 111 256 -.04 379 105 146 (.14 104 119 ; 88 84 190 138 150 202 500 125 93 265 404 272 277 360 1 183 197 167 170 588 1 602 128 1 219 1 467 56 1 065 390 330 22.6 35.2 41.1 23.8 23.6 27.8 29.8 24.8 19.0 28.8 20.2 29.2 30.9 27.9 27.2 40.1 44.2 21.8 39.6 28.1 29.3 793 150 117 10 r ' 536 35 105 294 t./o 103 84 134 432 1 327 43 934 1 093 74; L46 43.8 , 1 58.8 - 9°.0 - 81.8 - 79.0 - 1 40.8 - 56.2 - 47.6 - 58.2 5 ! 56.1 - 1 114 102 1 05 ; 4 3 t 0. 99 96 432 1 327 43 9 34 1 089 22 761 146 132 31 27 26.0 19 16.0 64 22.2 31 36.9 49 25.8 32 23.2 105 262 614 10.1 432 1 327 43 934 1 090 22 29.8 16.3 11.4 15.8 37.9 72.8 51.9 51.3 50.3 35.3 20.0 73.5 82.8 33.6 76.6 74.8 39.3 716 181 35.3 63 26.5 101 38.3 57 37.4 49 32.0 76 39.9 48 34.2 50 104 227 91 124 128 ; 05 171 255 207 . t- ■„,, . . 4 161 8 4 370 147 1. 4 18.. 1 193 173 13; :< 5 68 91 83 87 35 42 37 38 225 237 31 31 91 l; ■ io; I -~ . 3t. II S 25 354 212 146 268 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM of full-time equivalent employees of 334 large county October 1975— Continued 151 Lega t service s and pros acution Publi c defense Cor rections Other criminal justice Number of employees Percent of tctal Number of en ployees of total Number of employees Percent of total Number of employees Percent of total 1 a Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- criminal justice system Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- criminal justice system Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- criminal justice system Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- criminal justice system a lent employees lent employees lent employees lent employees 21 20 20 10.2 - - - - 47 41 43 21.8 - - - - i 18 18 18 12.3 7 5 6 4.1 50 38 42 28.8 _ _ _ _ 2 525 516 520 7.9 248 240 242 3.7 1 531 1 513 1 527 23.1 - - - - 3 66 62 63 12.1 22 19 20 3.8 136 116 125 24.0 2 2 2 0.4 4 24 24 24 8.5 4 4 4 1.4 103 99 101 35.7 2 1 1 0.4 5 47 47 47 11.3 9 9 9 2.2 111 110 no 26.5 21 21 21 5.1 6 16 14 16 16.0 3 - 3 3.0 24 24 24 24.0 - - - - 7 17 17 17 10.8 5 5 5 3.2 31 31 31 19.6 - - - - 8 12 12 12 10.9 - " - - 23 20 22 20.0 - - - - 9 17 15 15 10.0 4 _ n 2.7 26 21 23 15.3 _ _ _ _ 10 33 18 32 10.9 11 5 n 3.7 84 76 78 26.5 - - - - 11 27 27 27 11.2 - - - - 68 67 67 27.9 - - - - 12 23 23 23 12.8 3 - 3 1.7 45 45 45 25.1 - - - - 13 33 33 33 12.4 15 13 14 5.3 63 61 61 22.9 - - - - 14 28 26 27 12.7 6 - 6 2.8 55 54 55 25.8 - - - - 15 15 12 14 12.6 4 4 4 3.6 20 20 20 18.0 - - - - 16 33 27 30 11.7 12 3 8 3.1 31 31 31 12.1 1 1 1 0.4 17 28 28 28 9.2 10 10 10 3.3 94 86 90 29.6 - " " " 18 11 11 11 2.9 13 6 13 3.4 148 136 140 36.9 _ _ _ _ 19 9 2 7 6.7 3 - 3 2.9 30 30 30 28.6 - - - - 2 13 - 12 8.2 4 - 3 2.1 40 31 35 24.0 - - - - 21 76 73 75 12.2 13 13 13 2.1 103 102 102 16.6 13 13 13 2.1 22 12 10 11 10.6 - - - - 43 32 35 33.7 - - - - 23 12 11 12 10.1 - - - - 38 33 35 29.4 - - - - 24 26 21 26 9.0 - - - - 91 85 88 30.6 11 10 10 3.5 25 - - - - 2 1 1 1.2 29 23 26 31.0 - - - - 26 28 2 17 8.9 6 4 6 3.2 52 41 47 24.7 26 17 21 11.1 27 12 2 12 8.7 5 5 5 3.6 44 41 42 30.4 - - - " 28 14 3 14 9.3 _ . _ _ 54 50 51 34.0 . _ _ _ 29 17 9 17 8.4 - - - - 80 74 76 37.6 - - - - 30 36 34 35 7.0 13 12 12 2.4 238 212 221 44.2 - - - - 31 15 15 15 12.0 - - - - 30 29 29 23.2 - - - - 32 15 8 13 14.0 - - - - 20 11 13 14.0 - - - - 33 40 40 40 15.1 . . _ . 59 53 55 20.8 . . _ 34 45 44 44 10.9 - - - - 99 70 82 20.3 - - - - 35 28 20 22 8.1 - - - - 109 90 95 34.9 52 46 48 17.6 36 26 23 24 10.5 - - - - 64 59 60 26.3 3 3 3 1.3 37 60 60 60 5.8 _ . . . 324 313 313 30.5 . . _ . 38 15 13 13 13.8 - - - - 17 16 16 17.0 - - - ~ 39 17 8 17 6.1 _ _ _ _ 107 107 107 38.6 . . _ . 40 23 15 23 6.4 - - - - 38 38 38 10.6 - - - - 41 75 58 70 5.9 - - - - 88 83 84 7.1 8 e 8 0.7 42 12 10 11 5.6 2 2 2 1.0 42 31 35 17.8 - - - - 43 22 16 22 13.2 1 - - - 40 37 38 22.8 - - - - 44 15 15 15 8.8 - - - - 26 22 22 12.9 - - - " 45 6 1 3 3.5 . . 31 28 29 34.1 . . _ _ 46 5 5 5 10.0 - - - - 15 14 14 28.0 - - - - 47 1 1 1 2.1 - - - - 38 18 22 46.8 - - _ ~ 48 45 45 45 7.7 . _ 37 37 37 6.3 . 49 84 84 84 5.2 - - - - 108 99 101 6.3 - - - - 50 23 10 21 16.4 - - - - 28 28 28 21.9 - - - - 51 65 64 65 5.3 - - - - 96 94 94 7.7 1 l 1 0.1 52 98 98 98 6.7 - - - - 87 87 87 6.0 - - - - 53 11 6 7 12.5 - - - " 13 12 12 21.4 - - - - 54 8 8 8 4.7 _ _ _ _ 81 79 79 46.2 . _ _ _ 55 - - - - - - - - 53 46 48 53.3 - - - - 56 17 12 13 4.4 - - - - 130 125 126 42.6 - - - - 57 20 19 20 4.1 8 8 8 1.7 233 212 218 45.2 - - - - 58 29 25 27 6.5 - - - - 211 198 2 03 49.2 - - - - 59 13 13 13 12.7 2 2 2 2.0 78 57 62 60.8 - - - - 60 35 35 35 3.3 27 27 27 2.5 455 447 449 42.2 - - - - 61 39 38 38 9.7 6 6 6 1.5 136 133 134 34.4 - - - - 62 9 9 9 2.7 - - - - 177 168 170 51.5 - - - - 63 20 20 20 3.8 - - - - 249 240 242 45.7 - - - - 64 152 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 21. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution governments, riminal justic equiva lent employe Number of employee Full- time only Percent of total full-time equivalent mploye Number of employee Full- time only Full- time equiva- lent system employee Full- time only Full- time equiva- lent justice system employees MICHIGAN: BAY . . . BERRIEN . CALHOUN . GENESEE . INGHAM. . JACKSON . KALAMAZOO K ENT . . . MACOMB. . MONROE. . MUSKEGON. OAKLAND . OTTAWA. . SAGINAW . ST. CLAIR WASHTENAW WAYNE . . 756 858 747 821 835 839 779 123 7 03 921 032 56" 249 743 168 006 174 353 273 683 403 235 39 500 674 221 237 053 171 338 262 503 576 161 308 249 6 06 363 213 361 429 639 204 209 946 150 284 178 445 542 168 332 261 645 383 226 375 4 58 646 215 224 991 160 310 108 472 550 23.7 24.3 24.8 40.4 28.3 169 321 155 32 158 32 127 103 2 09 145 73 105 119 100 338 106 176 122 112 1 092 196 138 io; i: r ' 126 1 097 MINNESOTA: ANOKA . . DAKOTA. . HENNEPIN. RAMSEY. . ST. LOUIS 594 412 512 915 083 170 118 1 159 729 352 169 103 126 705 326 170 115 1 141 714 332 28.6 27.9 18.2 15.9 33 242 30 232 42.9 27.8 20.6 352 241 117 349 237 104 352 239 107 MISSISSIPPI: HARRISON. . . HINDS .... JACKSON . . . MISSOURI: CLAY GREENE. . . . JACKSON . . . JEFFERSON . . ST. CHARLES . ST. LOUIS . . NEBRASKA: DOUGLAS . . . LANCASTER . . NEVADA: CLARK .... WASHOE. . . . NEW HAMPSHIRE: HILLSBOROUGH. ROCKINGHAM. . 627 1 026 1 048 288 383 097 288 268 428 3 629 959 301 141 518 430 192 109 104 168 149 1 079 124 138 1 722 394 143 1 511 384 154 101 4 128 121 964 110 115 1 644 353 120 502 367 164 102 146 127 1 046 118 126 1 684 361 132 1 507 371 9.9 13.8 35.0 17.3 20.3 16.7 894 132 66 868 894 126 894 130 36.6 30.4 52.6 129 00 26 41 365 NEW JERSEY: ATLANTIC 2 047 377 BERGEN. 4 980 976 BURLINGTON 1 839 345 CAMDEN 4 384 803 CUMBERLAND 1 098 230 ESSEX 9 040 2 366 GLOUCESTER 900 255 HUDSON 4 463 999 MERCER 2 236 554 MIDDLESEX 3 765 878 MONMOUTH. ..... 2 463 483 MORRIS . . 2 343 413 OCEAN 1 597 374 PASSAIC 2 430 800 SOMERSET 1 299 294 UNION 2 018 813 NEW MEXICO: BERNALILLO. . . . NEW YORK: ALBANY 2 768 386 BROOME 2 106 251 CHAUTAUQUA 1 249 170 CHEMUNG 1 104 157 DUTCHESS 1 708 351 ERIE 10 626 1 524 MONROE 5 414 1 045 NASSAU 19 436 6 901 I mil <■ ■ .il i>ml ill I nlili . 367 951 328 790 212 324 221 990 545 846 473 372 361 780 252 809 367 199 138 135 287 347 002 420 370 954 332 792 217 2 333 232 992 548 853 476 389 36 5 789 264 810 37 5 213 157 147 310 1 396 1 013 6 565 38 211 36 210 18.1 18.1 19.8 25.8 25.8 22.2 24.5 22.7 19.3 22.9 32.5 18.1 13.1 337 323 4 764 ] 06 r -6 310 4 333 308 312 4 462 22. 3. 13.4 19.9 12.4 12.0 8.5 17.8 76 272 103 228 55 637 308 168 257 163 100 92 254 312 192 898 165 253 161 304 189 892 166 254 16. 68 90 253 307 191 894 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM of full-time equivalent employees of 334 large county October 1975— Continued 153 Leg a 1 servic es and prosecution Public defense Coi rections Other criminal justice Number of employees Percent of total criminal Number of em Dloyees Percent of total criminal Number of employees Percent Number of employees Percent of total criminal 1 Full- Full- Full- criminal Full- a Full- Full- Full- Full- time time justice time justice time justice a Total time Total time Total time Total time 3 only equiva- system only equiva- system only equiva- system only equiva- system lent employees lent employees lent e-nployees lent employees 14 13 13 7.7 7 7 7 4.2 48 42 44 26.2 1 30 28 29 8.7 - - - - 124 104 114 34.3 - - _ _ 2 14 11 11 4.2 - - - - 108 103 106 40.6 _ - _ _ 3 100 94 96 14.9 - - - - 216 180 197 30.5 3 3 3 0.5 4 53 48 49 12.8 - - - - 112 100 103 26.9 - - _ _ 5 27 27 27 11.9 - - - - 76 67 70 31.0 - _ _ _ 6 38 38 38 10.1 - - - - 144 138 140 37.3 - _ _ _ 7 32 30 30 6.6 " - - - 203 151 169 36.9 - - - - 8 85 83 84 13.0 17 15 15 2.3 204 191 194 30.0 5 5 5 0.8 " 13 13 13 6.0 - - - - 48 45 46 21.4 - _ _ - 10 15 15 15 6.7 - - - - 67 51 57 25.4 - - _ _ 11 95 87 90 9.1 - - - - 403 364 375 37.8 5 5 5 0.5 12 7 7 7 4.4 2 2 2 1.2 3$ 27 30 18.8 _ _ _ _ 13 27 26 27 8.7 - - - - 113 83 95 30.6 _ _ _ _ 14 17 15 15 7.6 - - - - 84 66 69 34.8 _ _ - _ 15 35 33 34 7.2 21 19 19 4.0 146 126 135 28.6 _ _ - _ 16 255 253 253 9.9 15 2 5 0.2 876 872 872 34.2 3 3 3 0.1 17 25 25 25 14.7 1 1 1 0.6 26 25 25 14.7 18 15 13 14 12.2 - - - - 22 22 22 19.1 _ _ _ _ 19 91 86 88 7.7 58 54 56 4.9 411 400 405 35.5 5 5 5 0.4 20 50 45 47 6.6 8 8 8 1.1 337 325 329 46.1 _ _ _ _ 21 27 27 27 8.1 1 1 1 0.3 136 123 126 38.0 - - - " 22 8 7 7 4.3 _ _ _ . 28 26 27 16.5 23 4 4 4 3.9 - - - - 16 12 12 11.8 _ _ _ _ 2*1 3 3 3 3.2 1 1 1 1.1 21 19 19 20.0 - - - - 25 22 15 21 15.3 _ _ . 65 49 52 38.0 26 16 12 13 10.2 - - - - 28 17 18 14.2 _ _ _ _ 27 110 91 110 10.5 - - - - 482 421 460 44.0 _ _ _ _ 28 16 12 13 11.0 - - - - 15 9 14 11.9 _ _ _ _ 29 10 10 10 7.9 - - - - 22 13 19 15.1 - _ _ _ 30 74 74 74 4.4 " " - - 295 253 272 16.2 - - - - 31 52 42 43 11.9 20 20 20 5.5 138 123 126 34.9 32 28 26 26 19.7 9 9 9 6.8 19 14 16 12.1 - - - " 33 116 116 116 7.7 36 36 36 2.4 336 333 334 22.2 34 52 52 52 14.0 19 19 19 5.1 89 83 84 22.6 2 2 2 0.5 35 8 6 8 7.6 _ _ _ _ 55 45 49 46.7 36 3 1 3 4.2 " " - - 14 13 14 19.4 - - - - 37 74 74 74 20.0 _ _ . 184 181 181 48.9 5 3 5 1.4 38 188 187 187 19.6 - - - - 293 275 275 28.9 12 9 11 1.2 30 61 61 61 18.4 - - - - 168 155 159 47.9 - _ _ _ 40 139 137 137 17.3 - - - - 348 341 343 43.3 8 8 8 1.0 4 1 30 29 29 13.4 - - - _ 126 126 126 58.1 _ _ 42 313 298 300 12.9 9 9 9 0.4 1 089 1 067 1 073 46.0 3 3 3 0.1 43 36 36 36 15. e - - - _ 104 93 97 41.8 _ _ 44 163 160 160 16.1 - - ~ - 329 326 32 7 33.0 - - - - 45 92 92 92 16.8 _ _ _ _ 247 246 246 44.9 2 2 2 0.4 46 164 158 159 18.6 - - - - 345 323 328 38.5 6 6 6 0.7 47 56 54 54 11.3 - - - - 205 2 02 203 42.6 _ _ _ 48 65 61 62 15.9 - - - - 154 140 145 37.3 _ _ _ _ 40 58 57 57 15.6 - - - - 152 143 146 40.0 _ _ _ _ 50 110 110 110 14.0 - - - - 360 342 350 44.4 9 9 9 1.1 51 45 45 45 17.0 - - - - 129 108 114 43.2 4 3 4 1.5 52 172 172 172 21.2 " _ ~ - 290 288 289 35.7 1 1 1 0.1 H 2 2 2 1.0 - - " - " - - - - - - - 54 40 37 39 10.4 21 20 20 5.3 158 148 152 40.5 55 19 19 19 8.9 8 8 8 3.8 96 68 74 34.7 3 3 3 1.4 56 18 7 15 9.6 9 2 9 5.7 57 50 51 32.5 _ _ _ _ 57 17 8 13 8.8 5 3 5 3.4 68 62 66 44.9 _ _ _ _ 58 31 28 29 9.4 26 10 15 4.8 132 101 109 35.2 _ _ _ _ 59 164 158 159 11.4 - - - - 695 571 606 43.4 16 16 16 1.1 60 87 83 84 8.3 33 33 33 3.3 373 350 356 35.1 37 37 37 3.7 61 266 263 264 4.0 - - - - 962 921 934 14.2 11 U 11 0.2 62 154 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 21. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution governments, County 1 Total full-ti lent employees of employees Percent of total full-time equivalent employees Number of employe justice system employee Number of employees justice system employees NEW YORK — CONTINUED NIAGARA ONEIDA ONONDAGA ORANGE OSWEGO RENSSELAER. . . . ROCKLANO ST. LAWRENCE. . . SARATOGA SCHENECTADY . . . STEUBEN ..... SUFFOLK ..... ULSTER. ..... WESTCHESTER . . . NORTH CAROLINA: BUNCOMBE CUMBERLAND. . . . DURHAM FORSYTH GASTON GUILFORD MECKLENBURG . . . ONSLOW WAKE. OHIO: ALLEN ASHTABULA .... BUTLER CLARK CLERMONT COLUMBIANA. . . . CUYAHOGA FRANKLIN GREENE HAMILTON LAKE LICKING LORAIN LUCAS MAHONING MONTGOMERY. . . . PORTAGE RICHLAND STARK SUMMIT TRUMBULL OKLAHOMA: COMANCHE OKLAHOMA TULSA OREGON: CLACKAMAS .... JACKSON LANE MARION. ..... MULTNOMAH .... WASHINGTON. . . . PENNSYLVANIA: ALLEGHENY .... BEAVER BERKS BLAIR BUCKS BUTLER CAMBRIA CENTRE CHESTER CUMBERLAND. . . . DAUPHIN DELAWARE ERIE FAYETTE FRANKLIN LACKAWANNA. . . . LANCASTER .... LAWRENCE LEBANON LEHIGH eo footnotes at end of table 4 863 2 206 967 1 769 2 532 750 866 1 322 789 11 292 1 727 7 050 279 403 363 599 818 298 922 905 801 750 592 860 699 46! 559 12 025 3 407 581 4 200 1 588 499 994 2 363 1 559 3 450 1 354 589 1 852 2 680 1 227 676 067 290 ,"U 857 315 653 122 771 9 083 547 1 234 545 1 532 715 ,'if, 323 1 165 581 948 3 466 1 090 545 354 920 1 331 292 619 1 451 3 00 249 969 221 131 193 3; 3 122 128 159 142 621 200 307 126 212 70 150 142 230 65 157 103 224 157 109 120 1 791 737 173 1 125 204 113 282 571 5 54 84 1 22) 147 407 569 : 35 281 297 216 470 274 040 298 107 322 .' 17 121 48 5 ! 1 ! ] 70 77 448 150 56 I 975 312 : ■■" 1 ii ; 23 ! '.0/ in in - 294 2 50 224 845 193 119 150 300 115 101 102 82 6. 1 173 292 121 210 65 145 140 209 346 65 75 178 123 83 91 601 661 120 058 170 93 225 493 279 737 156 119 34: 508 195 49 281 . rtr. 228 190 406 231 ■it',', 268 OH I 246 281 10. 'I ,4 89 127 52 110 939 286 124 !■.!. . 1 5 . ! '. 6 74 274 .2 30 899 205 123 168 30(. 116 110 123 104 621 186 296 123 2 1 1 68 146 14 1 216 352 140 97 200 I'll 10] 116 1 669 703 144 1 104 180 257 54 299 799 173 133 38 1 533 211 2 37 151 416 ; 41 00! 271 098 . 7 . n. 114 470 95 145 64 598 129 311 946 294 128 93 225 . i i 15.8 12.8 20.2 21.9 20.8 13.9 20.6 24.8 26.3 11.3 21.6 25.9 22.9 19.2 23.2 12.8 22.6 20.9 19.9 26.3 22.6 20.9 30.7 13.3 24.3 19.8 34.2 22.2 32.8 27.3 27.0 23.5 26.3 24.5 20.2 21. 1 20 132 3.9 135 2.0 47 2.6 44 3.7 73 3.0 103 3.5 166 3.4 40 254 140 64 59 159 334 127 3 132 245 14 • 1 7 117 5 3 22 1 132 30 247 140 518 1 1 8 24.6 1.0 29.3 29.1 67.8 16.1 64.0 67.6 30.1 28.6 24.7 22.5 27.7 29.7 17.2 14.8 19.9 31.9 24.0 20.6 30.6 24.1 11.3 33.8 23.3 41.8 52.3 34.6 29.5 31.8 43.5 2.1 3.1 10.1 3.9 7.7 • . : 1.6 4.3 0.9 1 . 1 48 63 922 319 6 3 455 82 42. Ill 1 6 3 362 95 45 1 T 4 . 67 106 146 142 893 137 189 590 L31 69 37 '. L6 I i > 39 19 613 789 278 189 14-1 291 10' 226 12 146 138 53 46 151 63 2 821 46 107 38.. 1 L( 31 1 12 84 2 307 1 04 219 131 3 59 1 54 248 14 146 144 153 66 88 4 127 1 31 14 ' 384 1 16 15.4 3.7 33.6 40.2 41.0 38.3 41.6 54.3 50.4 43.7 37.5 41.2 41.7 41.7 40.5 40.6 50.5 27.5 52. C 49.3 24.5 31.8 36.8 45.8 50.0 46.3 53.8 43.4 47.3 40.6 41.2 52.3 31.2 49.8 36.1 51.8 40.9 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM of full-time equivalent employees of 334 large county October 1975— Continued 155 Lega 1 services and pros scution Public defense Cor rections Other criminal justi ce Number of employees Percent Number of er lployees Percent Number of employees Percent of total Number of employees Percent | Full- Full- Full- criminal Full- Full- Full- Full- Full- justice justice time justice time justice Total time Total time Total time Total time r ! only equiva- only equiva- system only equiva- system only equiva- system lent i-mployeo lent employees lent employees lent employees 24 18 24 8.8 11 2 11 4.0 84 80 81 29.6 1 24 19 22 9.6 7 7 7 3.0 91 76 76 33.0 _ - _ _ 2 8b 80 84 9.3 - - - - 512 412 455 50.6 3 3 3 0.3 3 29 29 29 14.1 - - - - 94 75 84 41.0 _ _ _ 4 11 10 11 8.9 - - - - 53 45 47 38.2 _ _ _ _ 5 18 12 16 9.5 8 3 7 4.2 80 68 71 42.3 _ _ _ _ 6 58 53 56 18.3 17 15 15 4.9 81 81 81 26.5 - - - - 7 10 9 9 7.8 2 2 2 1.7 50 48 48 41.4 _ 8 17 6 10 9.1 - - - - 38 33 35 31.8 _ _ _ _ 9 16 5 13 10.6 - - - - 80 54 60 48.8 _ _ _ _ 10 13 8 11 10.6 2 1 2 1.9 60 51 54 51.9 _ _ _ _ 11 232 232 232 5.0 - - - - 630 630 630 13.6 14 14 14 0.3 12 19 14 17 9.1 1 - 1 0.5 117 102 108 58.1 _ _ _ 13 204 203 2 03 15.7 ~ - " - 503 501 501 38.7 9 7 7 0.5 14 3 3 3 2.4 _ _ _ _ 35 31 33 26.8 15 3 2 3 1.4 - - - - 49 49 49 23.2 - - _ _ Ld 1 1 1 1.5 - - - - 19 19 19 27.9 - - _ _ 17 5 5 5 3.4 - - - - 60 55 56 38.4 _ - _ _ 18 3 2 3 2.1 - - - - 42 42 42 29.8 3 3 3 2.1 19 4 4 4 1.9 - - - - 88 78 82 38.0 - - - _ 2 " - - - - - - - 89 86 87 24.7 38 33 36 10.2 21 - - - - - - - - 15 15 15 23.1 . - _ _ 2 2 4 2 2 2.4 ~ " " " 23 15 19 23.2 - - - - ..3 21 14 16 11.4 _ _ _ . 42 34 37 26.4 24 10 8 9 9.3 - - - - 26 25 25 25.8 _ _ _ _ 2 5 16 14 15 7.5 - - - - 67 54 58 29.0 _ _ _ _ 26 11 7 10 7.1 - - - - 48 36 38 27.0 _ _ _ _ 27 9 4 8 7.9 5 2 4 4.0 17 17 17 16.8 _ _ _ _ 28 13 13 13 11.2 5 1 5 4.3 17 14 15 12.9 _ _ _ _ 29 109 108 108 6.5 - - - - 506 459 472 28.3 _ _ _ _ 30 60 48 53 7.5 - - - - 218 195 203 28.9 _ _ _ _ 31 24 16 18 12.5 - - - - 29 22 26 18.1 _ _ _ _ 32 52 50 51 4.6 - _ - - 341 333 333 30.2 _ _ _ _ 33 19 17 18 10.0 - - - - 55 47 50 27.8 - - - - 34 11 11 11 10.2 - - _ _ 19 19 19 17.6 35 25 25 25 9.7 - - - - 71 63 66 25.7 _ _ _ _ 3o 33 33 33 6.1 - - - - 252 211 227 42.0 _ _ _ _ 37 37 24 31 10.4 - - - - 75 56 64 21.4 _ _ _ _ 38 68 66 67 8.4 - - - - 252 2 23 236 29.5 _ _ _ _ 39 17 14 15 8.7 4 3 3 1.7 60 29 38 22.0 _ _ _ _ 4 18 14 15 11.3 - - - - 35 29 30 22.6 _ _ _ _ 41 34 26 29 7.5 6 5 5 1.3 130 123 129 33.3 _ _ _ _ 42 36 36 36 6.8 - - - - 148 133 135 25.3 _ _ _ _ 43 14 12 13 6.2 " " - " 42 41 41 19.4 - - - - 4 4 - - - - _ _ _ _ 16 16 16 31.4 45 " - - - 16 16 16 5.7 108 108 108 38.4 _ _ _ _ 46 ~ 10 10 10 3.4 108 108 108 37.0 - - - - 4 7 23 23 23 9.7 _ _ . 76 54 57 24.1 4 2 19 17 18 11.9 - - - - 62 48 a 4.0 _ _ _ _ 49 58 50 51 12.3 - - - - 74 66 68 16.3 _ _ _ _ 50 33 29 31 12.9 - - - - 88 69 7 3 30.3 _ _ _ _ 51 154 153 154 15.4 - - - - 258 235 242 24.2 _ _ _ _ '>,. 32 32 32 11.8 ~ " " - 93 73 75 27.7 - - - - 3 235 235 235 11.2 67 67 67 3.2 483 483 483 23.0 21 21 21 1.0 54 31 24 25 9.3 10 10 10 3.7 68 51 55 20.4 _ 55 31 24 27 9.4 10 10 10 3.5 108 106 106 37.1 _ _ _ _ 56 10 10 10 8.8 5 1 5 4.4 41 38 40 35.1 _ _ _ _ '2 7 68 61 63 13.4 20 20 20 4.3 117 116 116 24.7 _ _ _ _ 22. 19 9 11 11.6 3 3 3 3.2 29 25 26 27.4 _ _ _ _ 59 22 15 16 11.0 8 6 7 4.8 45 33 41 28.3 _ _ _ _ 60 6 2 6 9.4 1 - 1 1.6 23 18 20 31.3 _ _ _ _ 61 59 42 45 11.3 18 18 18 4.5 162 141 151 37.9 _ _ _ _ 62 16 9 10 7.8 7 6 6 4.7 56 44 52 40.3 - - - - 63 52 36 41 13.2 16 15 16 5.1 99 98 99 31.8 64 133 133 133 14.1 34 34 34 3.6 345 322 322 34.0 _ _ _ 65 33 24 27 9.2 15 15 15 5.1 118 116 116 39.5 _ _ 66 20 13 14 10.9 5 5 5 3.9 43 40 40 31.3 _ _ _ _ 67 8 6 7 7.5 4 4 4 4.3 54 48 49 52.7 _ _ _ 22; 32 24 30 13.3 9 9 9 4.0 73 72 72 32.0 _ _ _ 69 25 17 19 7.1 13 13 13 4.8 145 134 137 50.9 _ _ _ _ 70 19 9 13 15.3 5 4 4 4.7 26 21 22 25.9 _ _ _ _ 71 8 6 6 6.8 2 2 2 2.3 49 37 42 47.7 _ _ _ _ 72 36 24 28 10.4 9 8 9 3.3 122 112 116 43.0 - - - - | 73 156 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 21. Criminal justice system employment and percent distribution governments, County 1 Tot a full-t lent employees Number of employee equivalent employees Number of employees Percent of total criminal Number of employees Full- time only system employees PENNSYLVANIA — CONTINUED LUZERNE . . . . LYCOMING. . . . MERCER MONTGOMERY. . . NORTHAMPTON . . SCHUYLKILL. . . WASHINGTON. . . WESTMORELAND. . YORK SOUTH CAROLINA: ANDERSON. . . . CHARLESTON. . . GREENVILLE. . . LEXINGTON . . . RICHLAND. . . . SPARTANBURG . , TENNESSEE: HAMILTON. . . . KNOX SHELBY SULLIVAN. . . . TEXAS: BELL BEXAR BRAZORIA. . . . CAMERON . . . . DALLAS EL PASO . . . . GALVESTON . . . HARRIS HIDALGO . . . . JEFFERSON . . . LUBBOCK . . . . MCLENNAN. . . . NUECES SMITH TARRANT . . . . TAYLOR TRAVIS WICHITA . . . . UTAH: DAVIS SALT LAKE . . . UTAH WEBER VERMONT: CHITTENDEN. . . VIRGINIA: ARLINGTON . . . FAIRFAX . . . . HENRICO . . . . PRINCE WILLIAM. WASHINGTON: CLARK . . KING. . . KITSAP. . PIERCE. . SNOHOMISH SPOKANE . YAKIMA. . WEST VIRGINIA: CABELL. . . , KANAWHA . . , WISCONSIN: BROWN . . DANE. . . KENOSHA . MARATHON. MILWAUKEE OUTAGAMIE RACINE. . ROCK. . . WAUKESHA. WINNEBAGO 1 393 108 321 1 731 730 946 559 1 069 811 2 35 5 1 5 114 299 350 095 5 051 2 847 7 626 1 761 289 4 175 460 577 5 481 1 592 1 275 8 143 534 649 332 547 2 117 239 2 984 166 83 248 3 116 329 658 4 220 17 682 4 422 4 107 888 630 601 096 986 (.8 345 525 926 1 424 714 9 09 9 297 739 1 009 992 1 213 796 266 i 38 126 750 231 169 195 296 298 164 58 l 345 152 389 239 398 356 1 122 110 146 960 150 195 446 352 238 419 164 262 153 58'"' 110 719 H4 566 077 435 238 267 1 628 164 529 404 429 ,'V> 1 'ii, 418 1 55 148 1 208 107 186 247 130 123 95 610 196 155 172 267 2 ; 9 137 327 310 140 35 188 346 326 072 132 905 139 178 440 346 200 330 ] 54 251 140 1 56 ,'8, 79 680 83 482 106 578, 62 94 494 074 434 237 237 491 149 459 392 392 250 8,'i 160 172 31, , 185 99 1 198 96 81. , 6 1 141 107 690 206 161 182 278 ; 54 i 48 351 316 145 361 197 355 337 1 083 101 138 927 143 187 441 351 215 376 156 260 145 167 282 81 694 87 501 1 06 520 074 434 237 246 ',.-3 152 507 395 405 89 17 / 180 58 1 1 30 1 10 200 mi 219 i /'I 241 119 39.9 28.2 17.0 32.6 26.0 30.2 23.2 28.4 48.5 7.0 11.8 47.8 22.2 31.1 32.4 26.3 22.0 16.9 29.2 40.1 43.7 30.5 13.3 33.9 23.3 52.4 58.9 52.4 23.8 19.4 21.9 31.3 39.2 24.1 31.7 36.0 41.1 37.1 25.8 33.7 26.8 18.2 1 3 7 100 146 113 210 53 456 29 158 '.8 6 769 32 S 150 196 1. 6 ll.l 1 1 1 I'l s 182 173 140 90 114 113 210 3 33 23 357 ?69 150 193 12 6 L48 1 iu 1 52 18. 17 1 117 113 210 366 769 322 150 166 129 16. Ill i S6 ',i, 250 29.7 51.9 54.1 33.0 33.5 14.1 21.9 24.1 21.0 21.6 33.3 22.8 19.5 61.7 35.7 50.0 50.9 20.8 51.5 47.9 28.2 101 138 159 118 118 1! 6 1 06 1 03 i n 3 5'1 125 29 ..6" 43 181 39 180 39 53 431 43 L22 113 99 68 84 123 100 49 135 102 158 354 35 123 158 3( ',8 39 130 125 53 141 73 ! 02 163 354 119 l i o '6. ,8 1 1 - 33 ■'I ■; 26 48.4 52.2 46.8 36.6 39.1 37.1 30.4 23.8 36.4 36.6 25.6 43.7 37.8 32.1 33.1 44.8 33.1 35.8 8. 1 16.8 26.6 25.7 23.5 27.8 22.7 25.8 25.4 24.5 36.5 25.7 30.6 27.0 32.0 31.1 - Represents zei 1 Ha In are based rounds to zero, fiold oompi i"i lo of each county government shown; see text for dutn llmitatio CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM of full-time equivalent employees of 334 large county October 1975— Continued 157 Lega 1 service s and pros scution Public defense Cor rections Other crim inal justi Number of emp loyees Percent Number of employees Percent Number of em ployees Percent Number of employees Percent | of total of total of total of total a Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- justice system Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- justice system Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- justice system Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- criminal justice a lent employees lent employees lent c-nip Loyoes lent employees 36 31 33 12.6 16 16 16 6.1 75 73 73 28.0 i 15 9 12 8.5 4 4 4 2.8 83 59 72 51.1 - - - - 2 12 10 10 9.3 6 6 6 5.6 37 32 36 33.6 - - - - 3 88 71 78 11.3 29 29 29 4.2 194 186 190 27.5 - - - - 4 29 20 22 10.7 6 6 6 2.9 93 83 86 41.7 - - - - 5 26 15 18 11.2 11 11 11 6.8 52 52 52 32.3 - - - - 6 19 19 19 10.4 8 8 8 4.4 55 47 50 27.5 - - - - 7 40 32 35 12.6 9 9 9 3.2 70 65 66 23.7 - - - - 8 24 16 18 7.1 6 6 6 2.4 85 74 78 30.7 _ _ " ~ 9 8 8 8 5.4 1 1 1 0.7 60 54 55 37.2 _ _ _ _ 1 o 13 5 9 2.6 - - - - 72 62 67 19.1 - - - - Ii 21 21 21 6.6 - - - - 38 37 37 11.7 - - - - 12 2 2 2 1.4 - - - - 31 29 30 20.7 2 2 2 1.4 13 23 23 23 6.4 12 12 12 3.3 43 40 42 11.6 - - - - L'-i 4 4 4 2.0 3 3 3 1.5 26 25 25 12.7 " " " " 15 22 9 13 3.7 _ _ _ 124 121 123 34.6 _ . _ _ 16 11 4 6 1.8 - - - - 61 51 55 16.3 - - - - 17 62 12 23 2.1 36 36 36 3.3 449 449 449 41.5 11 11 11 1.0 18 4 1 2 2.0 - - - - 10 10 10 9.9 " " " " 10 27 26 26 18.8 _ _ _ _ 39 37 38 27.5 _ _ _ _ 20 132 125 127 13 = 7 - - - - 363 332 348 37.5 8 8 8 0.9 21 11 11 11 7.7 - - - - 21 21 21 14.7 - - - - 22 18 18 18 9.6 - - - - 65 61 64 34.2 - - - - ,:3 123 123 123 8.5 - - - - 432 432 432 30.0 - - - - 24 39 37 38 10.8 - - - - 109 109 109 31.1 33 33 33 9.4 25 16 16 16 7.4 - - - - 42 42 42 19.5 19 11 15 7.0 26 224 224 224 9.4 - - - - 691 677 684 28.8 114 114 114 4.8 27 22 22 22 14.1 - - - - 62 62 62 39.7 - - - - 28 42 42 42 16.2 _ _ _ _ 75 75 75 28.8 _ _ _ _ 29 25 25 25 17.2 - - - - 35 35 35 24.1 - - - - 30 16 15 15 9.0 - - - - 78 71 73 43.7 - - - - 31 29 28 28 9.9 - - - - 73 70 70 24.8 - - - - 32 10 10 10 12.3 - - - - 17 16 16 19.8 - - - - 33 111 111 111 16.0 5 5 5 0.7 195 173 180 25.9 7 7 7 1.0 34 9 9 9 10.3 - - - - 22 22 22 25.3 - - - - 3b 50 44 46 9.2 - - - - 213 195 204 40.7 - - - - 36 16 15 15 13.8 - - - - 30 30 30 27.5 - - - - 3 7 15 15 15 25.4 . _ 6 6 6 10.2 . . 38 58 58 58 9.6 - - - - 136 108 115 19.0 - - - - 39 12 11 11 15.3 - - - - 19 13 15 20.8 - - - - 40 13 13 13 13.4 34 34 34 35.1 41 42 43 18 16 18 3.5 95 74 81 15.6 15 12 13 2.5 37 37 37 3.4 - - - - 86 83 83 7.7 5 5 5 0.5 44 18 18 18 4.1 - - - - 55 55 55 12.7 - - - - 45 17 17 17 7.2 - " - " 31 31 31 13.1 - " - - 46 19 18 18 7.3 12 7 10 4.1 78 62 67 27.2 _ 47 129 118 122 8.0 6 6 6 0.4 559 470 489 32.1 3 3 3 0.2 48 14 14 14 9.2 7 7 7 4.6 48 38 40 26.3 - - - - 49 51 45 47 9.3 7 7 7 1.4 145 129 132 26.0 8 8 8 1.6 50 29 26 27 6.8 3 3 3 0.8 128 123 124 31.4 2 2 2 0.5 51 32 29 30 7.4 16 16 16 4.0 117 109 111 27.4 4 3 4 1.0 52 21 20 20 7.9 - _ - - 84 81 82 32.5 - " - - 53 12 10 10 11.2 _ . _ 25 25 25 28.1 54 19 19 19 10.7 - - - - 72 63 66 37.3 - - - - 55 11 8 11 6.1 _ _ _ 36 22 24 13.3 56 44 33 35 9.2 - - - - 109 94 97 25.5 - - - - 57 14 14 14 10.8 - - - - 19 17 18 13.8 - - - - 58 7 7 7 6.4 - - - - 46 15 20 18.2 - - - - 59 106 106 106 8.8 - - - - 406 406 406 33.8 - - - - 60 10 10 10 9.9 3 3 3 3.0 12 9 10 9.9 - - - - 61 21 20 21 9.6 - - - - 35 23 26 11.9 - - - - 62 17 17 17 9.8 - - - - 64 60 61 35.1 - - - - 63 22 18 21 8.7 - - - - 46 46 46 19.1 - - - - 64 13 13 13 10.9 L - - - 12 10 11 9.2 - - - - 65 158 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 22. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll of 334 large county governments, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total October pay ro 1 1 Total criminal justice system Police p rotectron Judic ial County 1 October payroll Percent of total October payroll October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system 824 444 177 3 327 349 729 407 364 3 416 ?. 834 33a 10 300 1 139 7 lb8 5 103 1 530 5 393 92 311 2 155 1 386 2 470 12 349 5 951 7 387 8 370 12 911 4 472 1 615 5 152 3 198 11 792 1 558 1 541 3 055 2 293 1 891 5 157 1 005 668 430 599 833 1 044 430 503 1 061 1 611 652 1 238 2 497 18 043 801 4 683 798 435 528 1 98? 2 416 412 ? 164 2 094 575 471 834 400 787 794 1 654 1 351 2 438 611 200 272 50 715 126 296 155 105 1 715 1 163 199 3 385 237 1 872 1 294 451 1 228 26 588 698 242 699 4 084 1 782 2 589 2 487 4 396 998 336 1 722 1 043 3 130 419 512 645 542 578 1 483 298 169 143 151 211 242 82 78 59 348 262 249 745 4 130 356 945 218 173 143 653 695 172 732 384 235 157 274 174 241 243 416 835 1 141 216 24.3 28.4 21.5 36.0 40.7 38.1 26.8 31.7 40.7 59.0 32.9 20.8 26.1 25.4 29.5 22.8 28.8 32.4 17.5 28.3 33.1 29.9 35.0 29.7 34.0 22.3 20.8 33.4 32.6 26.5 26.9 33.2 21.1 23.7 30.6 28.8 29.6 19.4 33.4 25.3 25.3 23.2 19.1 15.5 5.5 21.6 40.2 20.1 29.8 22.9 44.4 20.2 27.3 38.0 27.1 32.9 28.8 41.7 33.8 18.3 40.9 33.3 32.1 43.5 30.6 30.6 25.2 24.9 46.4 35.4 67 281 14 213 24 72 33 42 419 368 48 519 86 451 386 161 448 8 330 140 67 202 850 520 934 778 884 300 115 412 315 709 141 96 197 132 209 547 97 94 73 67 33 142 45 24 23 273 141 153 400 2 525 200 381 137 89 95 384 472 129 437 255 170 107 139 62 91 138 263 497 144 96 33.6 28.5 29.8 18.9 24.4 21.2 39.7 24.4 31.7 24.2 15.3 36.4 24.1 29.8 35.6 36.5 31.3 20.0 27.8 28.9 20.8 29.2 36.1 31.3 20.1 30.1 34.2 23.9 30.2 22.7 33.6 18.7 30.6 24.3 36.1 36.9 32.6 55.5 51.0 44.1 15.8 58.7 55.2 30.4 39.5 78.4 53.8 61.6 53.7 61.1 56.2 40.3 62.7 51.4 66.3 58.8 67.9 74.8 59.7 66.3 72.4 68.4 50.6 35.5 37.8 56.7 63.1 59.5 12.6 44.3 51 035 23 279 59 162 64 34 431 255 46 650 55 324 218 70 199 5 929 163 53 128 1 043 330 365 510 1 062 1S1 63 361 195 638 87 114 109 106 94 251 55 12 24 12 61 15 5 8 5 63 38 74 191 841 91 239 60 61 35 173 66 29 178 66 48 31 72 60 86 42 93 145 462 56 25.5 ALABAMA: 45.3 39.1 MADISON 46.9 54.8 MONTGOMERY 41.3 32.2 ALASKA: ARIZONA: 25.1 21.9 arkansas: Pulaski 23.3 California: alameda 19.2 E'UTTE ?3.2 17.3 16.9 15.5 16.2 22.3 23.4 MERCED 22.0 16.3 ORANGE 25.5 18.5 14.1 20.5 SAN DIEGO 24.2 18.1 SAN LUIS OBISPO 18.7 20.9 SANTA BARBARA 18.7 20.4 20.9 22.3 SONOMA 16.8 19.5 16.2 16.9 YOLO 18.4 COLORADO: 6.9 ARAPAHOE 16.6 7.7 28.8 6.3 6.0 10.5 WELD 8.7 DELAWARE: 18.2 FLORIDA: 14.4 29.6 25.6 DADE 20.4 25.6 HILLSBOROUGH ?5.3 LEE 27.6 35.3 MANATEE 24.6 26.5 9.6 PASCO 16.6 PINELLAS 24.4 17.2 SARASOTA 20.3 19.8 VOLUSIA 26.3 GEORGIA: BIBB 34.5 Chatham 35.8 Clayton 17.1 cohb 22.3 DE KALft 17.3 40.5 25.8 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 159 Table 22. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Legal s >rvices and ■cutlon Public defense Corrections Other cri ninal justice County 1 October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system TOTAL 20 988 4 53 13 13 16 3 217 148 44 366 40 264 101 62 141 2 898 73 35 106 492 20« 395 261 556 130 59 170 119 418 68 53 82 97 77 187 37 43 26 30 o7 56 17 31 15 12 4 ?4 50 4 16 7 4 15 16 8 9 20 21 l - ? 20 43 142 12 10.5 7.2 7.4 10.2 4.3 10.3 3.0 12.6 12.7 22.2 10.8 16.7 14.1 14.8 13.7 11.5 10.9 10.4 14.5 15.2 12.1 11.8 15.2 10.5 12.7 13.0 17.5 9.8 11.4 13.4 16.3 10.4 12.8 17.9 13.3 12.6 12.6 25.2 18.0 19.7 31.6 24.0 21.3 39.6 25.3 3.4 1.7 3.3 1.2 1.2 1.7 3.2 2.3 2.2 2.4 2.2 3.3 11. S 8.9 7.0 4.6 5.1 12.5 5.7 4 229 2 119 64 11 261 97 61 13 50 1 136 38 7 36 163 63 103 98 69 43 141 26 24 15 29 53 17 16 5 - 9 27 2.1 0.3 7.0 5.5 5.3 7.7 5.2 4.7 2.9 4.0 4.3 5.4 2.7 5.2 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.9 6.9 4.1 4.5 5.2 3.8 2.8 5.0 3.6 5.9 0.4 0.5 1.1 2.4 55 941 10 167 30 49 42 26 529 327 50 1 589 56 736 438 140 390 8 296 255 80 227 1 525 659 792 834 1 869 317 100 776 371 1 211 122 223 233 187 170 419 91 21 20 43 50 27 14 10 14 76 20 123 584 60 297 14 19 13 96 141 15 91 55 17 18 54 32 42 47 41 141 365 52 27.9 19.1 23.4 24.0 16.5 27.2 25.1 30.9 28.1 25.0 46.9 23.7 39.3 33.8 31.0 31.8 31.2 36.5 33.0 32.5 37.4 37.0 30.6 33.5 42.5 31.8 29.6 45.1 35.6 38.7 29.1 43.5 36.1 34.5 29.4 28.2 30.6 12.5 14.1 28.5 23.8 11.0 17.5 13.2 23.4 28.9 8.0 16.5 14.1 16.9 31.4 6.5 11.0 9.1 14.7 20.3 8.6 12.4 14.3 7.4 11.7 19.8 18.2 17.4 19.2 9.8 16.9 32.0 24.2 799 1 6 30 10 8 25 4 12 1 6 27 5 2 3 2 7 114 7 8 ALABAMA: MADISON ALASKA: ARIZONA: - PIMA 0.1 ARKANSAS: California: bUTTE 1.3 toAKIN 4.3 ORANGE 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.2 SANTA BARBARA 0.4 0.2 Sonoma 1.1 1.8 COLORADO: EL PASO 6.3 3.1 DELAWARE: FLORIDA: 1.2 0.8 0.9 2.8 ESCAMBIA 0.7 LEE palm beach fasco PINELLAS . . POLK ' SEMINOLE VOLUSIA GEORGIA: eiBB Chatham Cobb DE KALP Fulton _ 160 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 22. Percent distribution of criminal justice system payroll of 334 large county governments, October 1975 — Continued (Doliar amounts in thousands) Total October payroll Total criminal j ustice system Police pr otection Judic ial County 1 October payroll Percent of total October payroll October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system October payroll Percent of total criminal justice system IDAHO: ADA 304 290 20 800 1 483 453 1 434 191 297 265 263 498 401 431 727 339 236 511 700 1 116 251 399 1 944 243 239 714 250 403 390 467 503 1 128 308 318 677 966 349 401 2 676 233 407 473 3 385 285 424 361 79 35 52 8 190 22 524 3 464 24 429 25 846 2 464 346 130 229 542 474 204 1 734 710 479 841 142 120 6 691 510 225 343 80 145 64 114 238 195 144 219 171 90 228 275 334 65 108 557 74 74 215 63 148 87 128 167 474 108 89 226 287 198 160 884 73 225 238 820 108 132 141 61 31 30 612 1 822 149 1 703 1 648 41 164 87 281 453 38« 99 1 087 375 305 530 46.7 41.2 32.2 34.4 49.7 23.9 41.9 48.9 31.6 43.3 47.8 48.6 33.3 30.1 50.7 35.2 44.7 39.3 29.9 26.0 27.2 28.7 30.2 31.1 30.1 25.0 36.8 22.2 27.4 33.2 42.0 35.0 28.1 33.4 29.7 56.7 39.9 33.0 31.5 55.3 50.3 24.2 37.9 31.0 37.0 76.6 87.9 56.4 7.5 8.1 4.3 7.0 6.4 1.7 47.6 67.0 122.9 83.7 81.9 48.4 o2.7 52.8 63.8 63.0 51 41 902 163 30 119 32 78 31 48 72 87 59 73 73 38 110 116 132 18 48 173 23 15 46 26 41 22 33 41 58 31 22 79 45 23 26 530 27 112 163 423 58 72 88 23 7 6 464 1 508 53 1 338 1 212 14 24 5 36.2 33.9 13.5 32.0 35.5 34.7 39.6 53.7 36.4 42.6 30.3 44.9 4C.9 33.1 42.4 41.8 48.3 42.3 39.5 27.2 43.9 31.0 31.5 19.8 21.4 42.3 27.4 25.3 25.9 24.5 12.2 28.4 24.3 34.7 15.8 11.5 16.3 60. 36.8 49.8 66.6 51.6 53.7 54.4 62.4 38.4 21.8 19.5 75.9 82.8 35.5 78.5 73.5 34.9 14.5 1.5 4■<■ bo led npi la t ion from records ol onch text for data limitations. Section III. POLICE PROTECTION 174 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 24. Police protection expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expend it ure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments STATES-LOCAL/ TOTAL. . . COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES . . . 8 325 537 1 577 889 6 817 005 1 303 993 5 574 033 89 348 22 396 67 139 11 128 56 024 27 090 16 734 10 483 1 789 10 433 117 976 32 671 85 312 19 532 65 846 36 732 10 969 25 829 6 383 19 613 1 137 706 230 906 916 488 273 764 663 913 100 830 16 128 84 729 10 765 73 999 117 236 23 881 95 319 95 513 22 064 10 101 11 978 3 529 8 449 97 056 97 056 97 056 314 507 48 275 266 271 94 726 171 595 142 785 30 838 111 991 36 719 77 205 8 325 537 1 512 130 6 813 407 1 294 838 5 518 569 89 348 22 387 66 961 10 986 55 975 27 090 16 616 10 474 50 10 424 117 976 32 671 85 305 19 516 65 788 36 732 10 941 25 791 6 362 19 429 1 137 706 221 591 916 115 273 270 642 845 100 830 16 102 84 728 10 765 73 964 117 236 22 596 94 640 94 640 22 064 10 101 11 963 3 514 8 449 97 056 97 056 97 056 314 507 48 275 266 232 94 722 171 510 142 785 30 838 111 947 34 915 77 032 7 898 748 1 390 719 6 508 029 1 209 505 5 298 524 83 730 20 476 63 254 10 194 53 060 25 690 15 564 10 126 50 10 076 101 357 27 644 73 713 17 039 56 674 32 275 8 538 23 737 5 913 17 824 1 081 368 204 691 876 677 258 210 618 467 93 687 14 363 79 324 10 119 69 205 112 499 21 141 91 358 91 358 20 680 9 015 11 665 3 320 8 345 93 030 93 030 93 030 288 123 43 075 245 048 85 524 159 524 132 259 27 915 104 344 32 147 72 197 426 788 121 411 305 377 85 333 220 044 5 618 1 911 3 707 792 2 915 1 400 1 052 348 348 16 619 5 027 11 592 2 477 9 114 4 457 2 403 2 054 449 1 605 56 338 16 900 39 438 15 060 24 378 7 143 1 739 5 404 646 4 759 4 737 1 455 3 282 3 282 1 384 1 086 298 194 104 4 026 4 026 4 026 26 384 5 200 21 184 9 198 11 986 10 526 2 923 7 603 2 768 4 835 130 379 65 759 64 620 9 155 55 465 201 9 192 142 49 1 866 118 1 748 1 740 9 74 74 16 58 233 28 205 21 184 30 878 9 315 21 563 494 21 068 62 26 36 35 2 158 1 285 873 873 15 15 15 89 89 4 85 1 977 1 977 1 804 173 3 565 (X) 3 565 1 464 2 101 178 (X) 178 142 36 9 (X) 9 9 8 (X) 8 1 7 38 (X) 38 15 23 373 (X) 373 313 60 1 (X) 1 1 679 (X) 679 679 15 (X) 15 15 (X) 39 (X) 39 39 44 (X) 44 2 43 126 814 65 759 61 055 7 692 53 364 22 9 COUNTIES 13 ALASKA 13 1 858 STATE 118 BOROUGHS 1 740 1 740 ARIZONA 67 STATE COUNTIES 67 15 ARKANSAS 52 195 STATE 28 COUNTIES 167 6 161 30 504 STATE 9 315 COUNTIES 21 189 181 COLORADO 21 008 61 STATE 26 COUNTIES 35 35 1 479 STATE 1 285 DELAWARE 194 194 STATE counties - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE - FLORIDA 50 STATE COUNTIES 50 4 GEORGIA 46 1 933 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES 1 933 1 802 131 See footnotes at end of table. POLICE PROTECTION 175 Table 24. Police protection expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expendit ure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments HAWAII 36 608 228 36 380 9 479 26 908 20 224 4 799 15 495 5 311 10 350 513 159 63 807 452 018 39 895 412 887 131 775 33 409 98 371 15 238 83 156 68 954 19 107 49 935 9 435 41 094 55 592 11 154 44 462 9 529 36 098 85 285 24 116 62 822 17 859 45 509 135 579 32 889 102 759 38 066 64 847 25 982 8 297 17 686 2 283 15 427 185 916 62 904 147 569 71 654 76 271 281 883 40 860 242 663 1 135 241 561 391 059 66 905 326 131 44 151 285 807 36 608 228 36 380 9 472 26 908 20 224 4 73? 15 492 5 308 10 184 513 159 61 186 451 973 39 833 412 140 131 775 33 409 98 366 15 231 83 135 68 954 19 032 49 922 9 426 40 495 55 592 11 154 44 438 9 511 34 927 85 285 22 463 62 822 17 383 45 439 135 579 32 835 102 744 38 027 64 717 25 982 8 297 17 685 2 282 15 403 185 916 38 653 147 263 71 064 76 199 281 883 39 220 242 663 1 131 241 532 391 059 64 954 326 105 43 962 282 143 35 404 182 35 222 9 076 26 146 18 898 4 244 14 654 4 880 9 774 493 166 58 612 434 554 37 498 397 056 121 796 29 009 92 787 13 562 79 225 63 448 16 427 47 021 8 957 38 064 52 629 10 356 42 273 8 787 33 487 77 351 19 318 58 033 15 053 42 980 127 000 30 162 96 838 35 991 60 847 24 354 7 738 16 616 2 111 14 504 180 421 36 219 144 202 68 672 75 530 273 582 37 633 235 949 1 072 234 877 372 012 59 604 312 408 41 636 270 772 1 205 46 1 159 397 762 1 326 488 838 427 411 19 993 2 574 17 419 2 335 15 084 9 979 4 400 5 579 1 669 3 910 5 506 2 605 2 901 469 2 431 2 963 798 2 165 725 1 440 7 934 3 145 4 789 2 330 2 459 8 579 2 673 5 906 2 036 3 870 1 629 559 1 070 171 899 5 495 2 434 3 061 2 392 669 8 301 1 587 6 714 59 6 655 19 047 5 350 13 697 2 326 11 371 7 7 7 237 67 170 4 166 3 430 2 621 809 62 747 27 27 7 21 681 75 606 8 598 1 188 1 188 17 1 171 2 199 1 653 546 476 70 224 54 170 39 130 25 25 1 24 24 912 24 251 661 590 71 1 673 1 640 33 4 29 5 804 1 951 3 853 189 3 664 (X) 3 (X) 3 1 2 45 (X) 45 45 5 (X) 5 5 13 (X) 13 3 10 24 (X) 24 3 21 (X) 15 (X) 15 6 9 1 (X) 1 1 306 (X) 306 306 (X) 26 (X) 26 22 3 7 STATE 7 7 IDAHO 234 STATE 67 COUNTIES 167 3 164 3 385 2 621 764 62 STATE COUNTIES INDIANA 702 23 STATE COUNTIES 23 7 IOWA 16 668 STATE 75 593 5 KANSAS 588 1 165 STATE 1 165 15 KENTUCKY 1 150 2 199 1 653 546 476 STATE MUNICIPALITIES 70 209 STATE 54 155 34 MAINE 121 24 STATE COUNTIES 24 MARYLAND 24 24 607 STATE 24 251 COUNTIES 356 284 71 1 673 1 640 33 n STATE MICHIGAN 29 5 778 1 951 3 827 167 3 660 STATE COUNTIES See footnotes at end of table. 176 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 24. Police protection expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Di rect expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments MINNESOTA 110 812 22 184 92 748 HO 812 18 087 92 725 104 842 17 080 87 762 5 970 1 007 4 963 5 318 4 097 1 221 23 (X) 23 5 295 4 097 1 196 22 242 71 704 22 082 70 643 19 695 68 067 2 387 2 576 160 1 061 23 160 1 038 53 383 20 267 33 133 53 383 20 267 33 116 46 369 16 668 29 701 7 014 3 599 3 415 74 74 16 (X) 16 57 STATE 57 8 652 24 537 8 641 24 476 7 038 22 663 1 602 1 813 12 62 4 12 8 49 164 416 24 603 140 243 164 416 24 188 140 228 157 220 22 300 134 920 7 196 1 888 5 308 1 107 415 692 15 (X) 15 1 093 STATE 415 678 20 704 120 216 20 639 119 589 19 587 115 333 1 052 4 256 65 628 4 10 61 617 19 400 4 189 15 271 19 400 4 134 15 266 17 548 3 797 13 751 1 852 337 1 515 201 55 146 5 (X) 5 196 STATE 55 141 COUNTIES 5 919 9 493 5 917 9 349 5 540 8 211 377 1 138 2 144 1 4 1 140 NEBRASKA 40 445 9 488 30 984 40 445 9 488 30 957 38 099 8 531 29 568 2 346 957 1 3e9 219 219 26 (X) 26 193 STATE 193 5 715 25 461 5 711 25 246 5 267 24 301 444 945 4 215 26 4 188 NEVADA 39 690 3 911 35 779 39 690 3 911 35 779 36 368 3 431 32 937 3 322 480 2 842 10 590 10 590 (X) 10 590 STATE 10 590 COUNTIES 23 405 22 963 23 405 12 373 22 728 10 209 677 2 164 10 590 - _ 10 590 NEW HAMPSHIRE 22 794 6 858 17 177 22 794 5 619 17 175 21 760 5 192 16 568 1 034 427 607 1 259 1 239 20 3 (X) 3 1 256 STATE 1 239 17 COUNTIES 1 085 16 110 1 068 16 107 994 15 574 74 533 17 3 3 17 1 NEW JERSEY 383 058 65 905 324 866 383 058 58 446 324 612 369 397 51 605 317 792 13 661 6 841 6 820 8 361 7 459 902 254 (X) 254 8 107 STATE 7 459 648 COUNTIES 19 991 305 523 19 991 304 621 18 863 298 929 1 128 5 692 902 254 ■ 648 NEW MEXICO 37 885 10 729 27 469 37 885 10 416 27 469 36 082 9 844 26 238 1 802 572 1 230 429 313 116 (X) 429 STATE 313 116 COUNTIES 5 282 22 302 5 190 22 279 4 847 21 391 343 888 93 23 ™ 93 23 NEW YORK 1 180 757 110 434 1 071 843 1 180 757 108 999 1 071 758 1 149 471 105 023 1 044 448 31 286 3 976 27 310 8 264 1 435 6 829 85 (X) 85 8 179 STATE 1 435 6 744 COUNTIES 174 617 903 970 174 568 897 190 168 651 875 797 5 917 21 393 49 6 780 85 49 6 695 1"4 227 144 227 132 688 11 539 1 392 100 1 292 STATE 39 977 104 850 39 477 104 750 34 867 97 821 4 610 6 929 500 892 (X) 100 500 792 COUNTIES 26 958 78 684 26 264 78 486 24 086 73 735 2 178 4 751 694 198 8 92 686 106 NORTH DAKOTA 12 512 2 357 10 161 12 512 2 355 10 157 11 935 2 109 9 826 577 246 331 139 2 187 4 (X) 4 186 STATE 2 LOCAL, TOTAL 184 COUNTIES 2 500 7 844 2 495 7 662 2 334 7 492 161 170 5 183 4 1 183 See footnotes at end of table. POLICE PROTECTION 177 Table 24. Police protection expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expendit ure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 323 254 49 148 274 476 38 177 237 901 63 255 18 043 45 320 5 412 39 942 80 607 20 653 60 799 19 518 41 902 422 000 107 324 315 595 10 098 306 875 32 369 6 697 26 519 26 519 71 150 23 642 47 801 18 340 29 483 14 637 4 651 9 987 2 634 7 582 109 7 05 17 878 92 126 14 862 77 357 347 277 68 765 278 663 45 178 234 025 33 014 8 866 24 455 6 443 18 028 12 084 5 670 6 421 37 6 450 153 929 49 416 106 760 39 994 66 966 323 254 49 147 274 107 36 811 237 296 63 255 17 935 45 320 5 412 39 907 80 607 19 829 60 778 19 511 41 267 422 000 106 408 315 59? 10 075 305 517 32 369 5 850 26 519 26 519 71 150 23 642 47 508 18 108 29 399 14 637 4 650 9 987 2 529 7 458 109 705 17 878 91 827 14 614 77 214 347 277 68 760 278 517 45 053 233 464 33 014 8 559 24 455 6 437 18 017 12 084 5 670 6 414 37 6 377 153 929 47 169 106 760 39 989 66 771 304 691 45 500 259 191 32 555 226 636 59 240 16 782 42 458 5 325 37 133 78 129 18 725 59 404 18 690 40 714 407 037 101 287 305 750 9 622 296 128 31 167 5 633 25 534 25 534 64 150 20 465 43 685 15 943 27 742 14 362 4 617 9 745 2 486 7 259 98 155 14 714 83 441 13 436 70 005 325 310 64 550 260 760 40 155 220 605 30 678 7 633 23 045 5 986 17 059 11 694 5 441 6 253 33 6 221 147 113 45 874 101 239 37 542 63 697 18 563 3 647 14 916 4 256 10 660 4 014 1 153 2 861 87 2 774 2 478 1 104 1 374 821 553 14 963 5 121 9 842 453 9 389 1 202 217 985 985 7 000 3 177 3 823 2 165 1 657 274 33 241 42 199 11 550 3 164 8 386 1 178 7 209 21 967 4 210 17 757 4 898 12 859 2 336 926 1 410 452 958 389 229 160 4 156 6 816 1 295 5 521 2 447 3 074 1 972 1 1 971 1 366 605 143 108 35 35 1 465 824 641 7 634 2 297 916 1 381 23 1 358 847 847 315 315 231 84 230 1 229 105 124 392 392 249 144 691 5 686 125 561 323 307 16 6 10 74 74 74 2 447 2 247 200 5 195 369 (X) 369 369 (X) 21 (X) 21 21 3 (X) 3 3 28 . 28 605 605 581 24 24 - _ - _ - SANGAMON 752 752 714 38 38 - _ - . - 509 509 479 30 30 - - - _ - WILL 1 583 1 385 1 583 1 385 1 382 1 341 201 44 201 44 ~ ■ - - _ - INDIANA! ALLEN 1 380 1 380 1 243 137 137 - _ _ _ - 337 337 330 7 7 _ _ _ _ - Elkhart 631 631 559 72 72 - _ . _ - 1 964 359 1 964 359 1 886 317 78 42 78 42 " - - ~ — - MAOl T 296 296 242 54 54 _ _ _ _ _ 1 005 999 874 125 125 - _ 6 _ 6 TIPPECANOE 448 448 394 54 54 - _ . _ - ViNDERBuRGH 610 610 549 61 61 . _ _ - - VIGO 353 353 326 27 27 - - - - - IOWA! 394 394 373 21 21 - - . . - LINN 486 687 490 486 687 490 476 677 442 10 10 48 10 10 48 - - - " : m POLK _ SCOTT - WOODBURY 216 216 207 9 9 - - - - - KANSAS: Johnson 1 439 1 439 1 293 146 146 - - - _ - 887 887 720 167 167 - _ . . - SHAWNEE 283 283 253 30 30 - _ . _ - WYANDOTTE 3^9 359 327 32 32 - - - - - KENTUCKY! 9 177 8 780 7 528 1 252 1 252 - - 397 _ 397 1 240 1 240 490 750 422 328 - - - - ' lei footnotes at end ol i .1 Ij le. POLICE PROTECTION 181 Table 25. Police protection expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) County ' Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- ments local govern- ments louisiana: Caddo . . calcasieu jefferson lafayette Ouachita. Rapides . MAINE: Cumberland, penobscot . YORK. . . , maryland: anne arundel. . baltimore . . . harford .... montgomery. . . prince georges, washington. . . MASSACHUSETTS: BARNSTABLE. BERKSHIRE . BRISTOL . . ESSEX . . . HAMPDEN . . HAMPSHIRE . MIDDLESEX . NORFOLK . . Plymouth. . worcester . MICHIGAN: BAY . . . BERRIEN . CALHOUN . GENESEE . INGHAM. . JACKSON . KALAMAZOO KENT. . . MACOMB. . MONROE. . MUSKEGON. OAKLAND . OTTAWA. . SAGINAW . ST. CLAIR WASHTENAW WAYNE . . MINNESOTA: ANOKA . . DAKOTA. . HENNEPIN. RAMSEY. . ST. LOUIS MISSISSIPPI HARRISON. HINDS . . JACKSON . missouri: clay. . . . Greene. . . JACKSON . . JEFFERSON . ST. CHARLES ST. LOUIS . 817 489 779 H7H 063 021 364 199 125 7 861 21 178 635 16 841 18 282 225 404 36 62 72 80 39 151 56 133 68 590 1 221 776 2 430 1 496 853 1 333 2 151 2 827 1 113 570 4 136 801 1 050 602 2 233 5 635 1 310 482 4 409 1 629 1 118 649 40 3 488 365 451 1 097 458 473 11 554 i 803 2 488 7 779 1 474 1 053 1 021 363 199 125 7 861 21 178 635 16 785 18 282 225 404 36 62 70 78 19 151 56 133 68 590 1 144 776 2 428 1 496 853 1 333 2 151 2 827 1 100 516 4 136 801 1 050 602 2 233 5 635 1 310 482 4 409 1 629 1 118 649 403 488 365 451 1 097 458 473 11 554 1 598 2 354 6 969 1 241 995 956 35i 125 125 7 548 20 701 609 16 419 17 728 213 348 35 62 70 73 19 151 56 131 68 559 057 626 361 410 733 233 879 762 962 464 036 748 002 575 081 622 988 422 4 251 1 580 1 078 569 338 437 353 374 1 096 397 «Ul 10 899 205 131 810 233 58 65 12 74 313 477 26 366 554 12 56 1 31 87 150 6? 86 120 50 272 65 138 52 100 53 48 27 152 13 322 60 158 49 40 80 65 51 12 77 1 61 62 655 145 134 810 233 50 65 8 66 313 127 26 95 554 12 56 1 31 87 150 66 72 120 50 272 65 60 52 100 53 48 27 152 13 322 60 158 49 40 80 65 5 1 12 67 1 61 62 628 350 271 1 14 14 1 10 10 1 10 56 56 77 2 13 54 74 2 13 54 See footnotes at end of table. 182 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 25. Police protection expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) See footnotes at end of table. Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure County 1 Capital outlay To State To Total Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments NEBRASKA: 1 018 1 018 912 106 106 _ _ _ _ - 418 418 372 46 46 - - - - - NEVADA: 17 203 17 203 16 952 251 251 - - _ _ - 2 306 2 306 2 147 159 159 - - - - - NEW HAMPSHIRE: 94 80 71 9 9 _ _ 14 _ 14 245 245 234 11 11 - - - - NEW JERSEY: 385 385 385 - _ - - _ _ - 2 923 2 923 2 779 144 79 65 _ _ _ _ 801 801 172 629 _ 629 - _ . - 687 687 687 - _ _ - _ _ _ 188 188 164 24 24 _ - _ _ . 3 891 3 891 3 803 88 58 30 - _ _ _ 297 297 297 - - - - . _ - 3 215 3 215 3 169 46 46 - - - - - 631 631 631 _ _ _ _ m _ 1 419 1 419 1 353 66 10 56 - . _ - MONMOUTH 730 730 668 62 _ 62 _ _ _ _ 1 032 1 032 982 50 50 - - - _ - 805 805 795 10 10 - - _ _ 765 765 765 - _ ■ . _ _ 619 619 615 4 4 . - _ _ 1 106 1 106 1 106 - - - - - - - NEW MEXICO: 1 604 1 604 1 476 128 128 - - - - - NEW YORK: ALBANY. . .... 892 892 863 29 29 . . _ _ . 865 865 824 41 41 - - _ _ - 691 691 651 40 40 - - _ _ - CHEMUNG 605 605 489 116 116 _ - _ _ . Dutchess 1 023 1 023 985 38 38 - - _ _ - ERIE 4 313 4 399 4 313 4 399 4 131 4 186 182 213 132 213 - : - - MONROE - 84 849 84 849 83 113 1 736 1 651 85 _ - _ - 1 110 1 110 1 048 62 62 . _ _ _ - 597 597 560 37 37 - _ _ _ - 3 005 3 005 2 605 400 169 231 - - - - 56 56 56 _ _ _ _ — m _ oswego 526 526 341 185 16 169 _ _ _ . 288 288 269 19 19 - - - _ - 1 213 1 213 1 159 54 54 - _ _ _ - 351 351 326 25 25 - _ _ _ . 284 284 257 27 27 . _ _ _ - 103 103 96 7 7 . _ _ _ - 242 242 218 24 24 - _ _ _ . Suffolk 57 003 57 003 55 187 1 816 1 816 - _ _ _ - 357 357 346 U 11 . _ _ _ - 4 420 4 420 4 141 279 225 54 - - - - NORTH CAROLINA: 773 711 682 29 29 . _ 62 _ 62 Cumberland 1 470 1 401 1 193 208 208 - _ 69 _ 69 Durham 639 639 551 88 88 _ . _ _ . 688 688 588 100 100 . _ _ _ - GASTON 1 090 925 833 92 92 - _ 165 _ 165 Guilford 1 325 1 325 1 162 163 135 4 24 _ _ _ MECKLENBURG 2 560 2 267 2 261 6 6 _ - 293 _ 293 ONSLOW 460 460 423 37 37 - - _ _ - WAKE 812 744 689 55 55 - - 68 . 68 POLICE PROTECTION 183 Table 25. Police protection expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Di rect expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Capital outlay To To County 1 Total Direct State local Total Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments 0HI0» 398 398 357 41 41 - - - - 444 444 324 120 120 - - - - - 570 570 538 32 32 - - - - - 616 616 473 143 55 3 85 - - - 364 364 308 56 56 - - - - - 271 271 252 19 19 - - - - - 2 641 2 641 2 461 180 180 _ _ _ _ _ 2 480 2 480 1 743 737 735 2 - - - - 538 538 439 99 99 - - - - - 5 870 4 686 4 376 310 310 - - 1 184 . 1 184 929 929 570 359 359 - - - - - 411 411 378 33 33 - - - - - 1 101 995 713 282 282 _ _ 106 „ 106 980 980 900 80 80 - - - _ - 744 729 542 187 187 - - 15 . 15 2 858 2 858 2 810 48 48 - - - _ - 615 615 507 108 108 - - - . - 508 507 467 40 40 - - 1 - 1 1 296 1 296 1 002 294 294 _ _ _ _ _ 1 436 1 436 1 417 19 19 - - - - - TRUMBULL 1 040 1 040 897 143 143 - - - - - OKLAHOMA! 184 184 179 5 5 - - . . - 201 201 176 25 25 - - _ _ - 375 375 373 2 2 - - - - - OREGON: Clackamas 1 472 1 472 1 248 224 183 41 - - - - JACKSON . 690 690 646 44 44 - - - . - LANE. . . 1 779 1 779 1 762 17 17 - - - . - MARION. . 839 839 824 15 15 - - - - - Multnomah 6 197 6 197 6 123 74 46 28 - - . - WASHINGTON 1 781 1 781 1 752 29 29 - - - - - PENNSYLVANIA: ALLEGHENY 4 776 4 776 4 690 86 86 - - _ _ - BEAVER. . 532 532 526 6 6 - - - . - BERKS . . 135 135 134 1 1 - - - . - BLAIR . . 20 20 20 - - - - - . - BUCKS . . 525 525 525 - - - - . - - BUTLER. . 93 93 92 1 1 - - _ _ - CAMBRIA . 31 31 31 - - - - . - - CENTRE. . 13 13 13 - - - - _ - - CHESTER . 394 394 344 50 50 - - - - - Cumberland 41 41 41 _ _ _ „. _ _ _ dauphin . 321 321 121 200 200 - - _ _ - DELAWARE. 517 517 515 2 2 - - . _ - ERIE. . . 82 82 73 9 9 _ - _ _ - Fayette . 25 25 25 .. _ . - - _ - FRANKLIN. 10 10 10 - - _ . _ _ - LACKAWANNA 47 47 47 - _ - - _ _ - LANCASTER 82 82 8? - _ _ _ _ _ - LAWRENCE. 23 23 23 - - - - - - - LEBANON . 16 16 16 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LEHIGH. . 25 25 25 - _ - - _ _ - LUZERNE . 91 91 91 - _ _ - _ _ . Lycoming. 16 16 16 - _ _ - _ _ - mercer. . 37 37 25 12 12 - - _ _ - MONTGOMERY 691 691 629 62 4 58 - _ _ - NORTHAMPTO! >J 43 43 42 1 1 _ - _ _ - SCHUYLKILL 37 37 37 - - . - _ _ - WASHINGTON 96 96 96 - - _ - _ . - WESTMORELAND 221 221 220 1 1 - - - . - YORK. . . 275 275 271 4 4 - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. 184 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 25. Police protection expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expen diture Intergovernmental ex )enditure Direct Capital outlay To State To local Total Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments SOUTH CAROLINA! 499 499 434 65 65 . - _ _ - CHARLESTON 2 634 2 634 2 469 165 152 13 _ _ _ _ 1 834 1 834 1 669 165 165 _ - _ _ . 645 645 553 92 92 - - . _ - 1 879 1 773 1 352 421 310 Ill - 106 106 - SPARTANBURG 1 335 1 301 819 482 26 - 456 34 34 - TENNESSEE; 1 437 1 437 1 416 21 21 . . _ _ . KNOX 986 2 700 986 2 476 920 2 302 66 174 66 174 - " 224 224 _ 627 627 596 31 31 - - - - - TEXAS: BELL. . 426 426 231 195 195 - - - _ - BEXAR 2 202 2 202 1 966 236 216 20 - _ _ - 677 677 520 157 157 _ - _ _ - CAMERON 448 448 318 130 130 _ _ m _ - DALLAS 5 943 5 943 5 447 496 486 10 . _ _ - 768 768 739 29 29 . . _ _ - 641 641 633 8 8 - - . . - 7 314 7 314 6 744 570 570 - - _ _ - 381 381 284 97 97 - - ~ - - 718 718 677 41 41 _ _ _ m _ 369 369 316 53 53 - - _ _ _ 426 426 399 27 27 . - - _ - NUECES 728 728 685 43 43 - . _ _ - 229 229 209 20 2 18 . _ _ - 1 667 1 667 1 497 170 170 . . _ _ . 211 211 152 59 59 - - - _ - 1 315 1 315 960 355 355 - - - _ - WICHITA 351 351 297 54 54 - - " - - UTAH! 348 348 325 23 23 - - - _ - SALT LAKE 3 933 3 933 3 732 201 201 - - . _ - UTAH 213 336 213 336 176 310 37 26 37 26 - - " - _ WEBER - VERMONT! 15 15 13 2 2 - - - - - VIRGINIA: 8 203 8 203 8 040 163 22 141 - _ _ - 13 592 13 592 13 248 344 344 - - . _ - HENRICO 3 878 3 878 3 348 530 438 1 91 _ _ . PRINCE WILLIAM. . . . 1 865 1 865 1 750 115 115 - - " - - WASHINGTON! 1 306 1 306 1 306 - - - - _ . - KING 8 765 710 8 765 710 8 248 685 517 25 37 6 25 141 m " - - 3 288 3 288 2 690 598 597 1 - _ _ - 2 633 2 633 1 950 683 683 - m _ . - 2 149 2 149 1 926 223 223 . - _ _ - 737 737 666 71 71 - ~ " - - WEST VIRGINIA: 355 355 331 24 24 . . _ _ - 363 363 345 18 18 - " ~ - - WISCONSIN: BROWN 1 431 1 428 1 353 75 75 - - 3 3 - DANE 2 336 1 020 2 238 1 014 2 066 913 172 101 172 101 - " 98 6 20 6 78 843 843 762 81 81 - - _ . - MILWAUKEE 3 569 3 558 3 468 90 81 9 - 11 11 - 795 793 742 51 51 - . 2 2 - 1 284 1 280 1 186 94 94 - - 4 4 - 574 567 567 - - - . 7 7 - 1 264 1 242 1 150 92 92 - - 22 13 9 WINNEBAGO 723 720 689 31 31 3 3 - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a field compilation from records of each county government shown; see text for data limitations. POLICE PROTECTION 185 Table 26. Police protection expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) City 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- ments local govern- ments TOTAL. ALABAMA: BIRMINGHAM GADSDEN. . HUNTSVILLE MOBILE . . MONTGOMERY TUSCALOOSA ARIZONA: GL END ALE .... MESA PHOENIX. .... SCOTTSDALE . . . TEMPE. ..... TUCSON ARKANSAS: FORT SMITH ... LITTLE ROCK. . . . NORTH LITTLE ROCK PINE BLUFF . . . , CALIFORNIA*. ALAMEDA , ALHAMBRA . . . . ANAHEIM , BAKERSFIELD. . . , BELLFLOWER . . . , BERKELEY . . . . , BUENA PARK . , . , BURBANK. . . . . , CARSON , CHULA VISTA. . . . COMPTON. . . . . , CONCORD , COSTA MESA . . . . DALY CITY. . . . , DOWNEY EL CAJON . . . . , EL MONTE . . . . , FREMONT , FRESNO . FULLERTON. . . . , GARDEN GROVE . . , GLENDALE . . . . . HAWTHORNE. . . . , HAYWARD , HUNTINGTON BEACH , INGLEWOOD. . . . , LAKEWOOD . . . . , LONG BEACH . . . , LOS ANGELES. . . , MODESTO , MOUNTAIN VIEW. . , NEWPORT BEACH. . , NORWALK. . . . . , OAKLAND , ONTARIO ORANGE ...... OXNARD , PALO ALTO. . . . , PASADENA . . . . , PICO RIVERA. . . , POMONA , REDONDO BEACH. . , REDWOOD CITY . . , RICHMOND . . . . , RIVERSIDE. . . . , 3 629 211 11 175 100 870 741 814 912 1 405 4 370 30 989 2 602 2 157 12 298 918 3 250 1 093 1 165 2 141 1 898 7 311 5 181 1 037 4 332 1 989 5 001 2 833 3 610 311 11 175 1 100 2 870 5 741 3 814 1 912 1 405 4 370 30 989 2 596 2 157 12 298 918 3 250 1 093 1 153 1 911 2 943 3 004 3 935 1 970 2 800 1 853 2 193 2 991 522 617 116 950 545 032 151 567 475 17 279 187 632 2 576 1 731 3 646 1 415 17 969 2 018 2 967 428 090 704 129 949 119 667 323 202 3 479 573 10 745 1 029 2 799 5 566 3 461 1 808 1 401 1 376 27 526 141 888 306 181 80 332 986 987 911 862 004 927 970 791 853 186 991 8 522 3 617 108 950 538 032 148 567 350 17 279 187 632 2 576 1 731 3 637 17 969 2 007 2 960 414 090 7 04 1 949 093 667 323 202 567 990 862 3 085 1 010 1 032 103 881 885 825 80 281 971 956 1 855 2 797 2 942 3 823 1 940 2 653 1 753 2 051 2 828 8 433 2 783 060 941 521 947 932 350 296 17 019 182 014 2 456 1 616 3 176 17 537 1 987 2 924 382 077 692 2 902 2 017 1 619 4 262 5 046 130 738 430 71 71 175 353 104 4 2 994 3 463 29 167 661 56 165 83 121 38 7 421 1 356 51 15 31 56 65 62 104 30 138 100 135 163 89 834 48 9 17 85 216 217 54 260 5 618 120 115 461 432 20 36 32 13 12 1 47 77 48 61 156 76 257 430 71 67 175 353 104 4 71 1 078 29 161 360 56 123 83 121 38 7 407 106 51 13 31 56 54 62 103 27 138 100 115 134 89 168 36 9 17 7 211 63 54 128 3 112 35 115 133 432 18 36 16 13 12 1 47 68 42 60 152 49 735 2 913 2 126 6 301 14 1 148 20 29 666 12 78 5 L54 132 2 448 85 4 746 18 900 10 259 12 10 5 957 3 14 2 833 7 3 1 125 9 1 415 11 7 14 1 128 26 93 12 10 5 957 3 14 2 833 7 3 1 125 9 1 415 1 128 26 See footnotes at end of table. 186 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 26. Police protection expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Cityi Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To local govern- ments Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land CALIFORNIA — CONTINUED 12 138 12 138 12 100 38 38 - - - - - 2 041 1 981 1 853 128 128 - - 60 - 60 SAN BERNARDINO .... 4 764 4 724 4 512 212 2 09 3 - 40 - 40 SAN BUENAVENTURA . . . 2 085 2 076 1 946 130 41 89 - 9 - 9 SAN DIEGO. . 22 710 22 710 22 082 628 547 81 - - - - SAN FRANCISCO. „ . . . 49 290 49 290 48 241 1 049 939 110 - - - - 18 147 18 147 17 461 686 686 - - - - - 1 762 1 762 1 711 51 39 12 - - - - 2 411 2 411 2 298 113 91 22 _ _ _ _ 6 271 6 246 5 882 364 362 2 - 25 - 25 3 108 3 104 2 748 356 202 154 - 4 - 4 3 283 3 283 2 765 518 54 464 - - - - SANTA MONICA 4 014 3 982 3 839 143 139 4 32 - 32 1 532 1 532 1 438 94 94 - - - - - SIMI VALLEY 1 306 1 306 1 289 17 17 - - - - - 2 067 2 059 1 919 140 83 57 - 8 - 8 5 4 30 5 430 5 372 58 17 41 - - _ - 2 264 2 264 2 238 26 26 - - - - - 5 512 5 494 5 388 106 106 - - 18 - 18 2 310 2 310 2 295 15 15 - - - - -< 2 105 2 098 2 077 21 21 - - 7 - 7 1 872 1 864 1 854 10 10 - - 8 - 8 WHITTIER 2 551 2 549 2 486 63 63 - - 2 - 2 COLORADO: 1 512 1 512 1 432 80 80 - - - - - 2 875 2 875 2 823 52 52 - - - - - 1 754 1 754 1 735 19 19 - - - - - COLORAOO SPRINGS . . . 4 959 4 959 4 610 349 349 - - - - - 29 120 29 120 26 917 2 203 258 450 1 495 - - - 1 262 1 262 1 040 222 214 8 - - - - LAKEWOOD 6 910 6 910 6 833 77 77 - - - - - 3 142 3 142 3 035 107 107 - - - - - CONNECTICUT: 8 013 8 013 7 925 88 47 41 - - - - 1 483 1 483 1 437 46 45 1 - - - - 1 7 00 1 700 1 669 31 1 30 - - - - 8 373 8 373 8 365 8 8 - - - - - 1 400 1 399 1 398 1 1 - - 1 1 - 1 736 1 736 1 681 55 55 - - - - - 2 795 2 795 2 727 68 68 _ _ - _ _ 6 486 6 486 6 417 69 69 - - - - - 2 648 2 648 2 607 41 41 - - - - - 4 719 4 705 4 610 95 83 12 - 14 14 - 4 717 4 717 4 383 334 334 - - - - - 1 577 1 577 1 525 52 52 - - - - - DELAWARE: 4 843 4 843 4 803 40 40 - - - - - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: 97 056 97 056 93 030 4 026 128 3 887 11 - - - FLORIDA - . CLEARWATER 2 724 2 724 2 165 559 44 515 - - - - FORT LAUDERDALE. . . . 6 905 6 905 6 808 97 97 - - - - - 3 569 3 569 2 504 1 065 70 - 995 - - - 3 670 3 670 3 232 438 438 - - - - - 4 223 4 223 4 189 34 34 - - - - - 16 784 16 784 13 321 3 463 435 3 028 - - - - 16 615 6 333 16 615 6 333 15 709 6 328 9 06 5 28 5 186 692 _ . 6 777 6 777 6 728 49 49 - - - - - 2 196 2 192 1 970 222 222 - - 4 4 - ST. PETERSBURG .... 8 535 8 535 8 099 436 436 - - - - - 2 390 2 390 2 305 85 82 3 - - - - 10 140 2 530 10 140 2 530 9 828 2 448 312 82 312 82 - - - - _ WEST PALM BEACH. . . . - See footnotes at end of table. POLICE PROTECTION 187 Table 26. Police protection expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) City 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- ments local govern- ments Georgia: ALBANY. . . . . . ATLANTA AUGUSTA COLUMBUS MACON SAVANNAH HAWAII: HONOLULU IDAHO: BOISE CITY. . . . ILLINOIS: ARLINGTON HEIGHTS AURORA BERWYN CHAMPAIGN . . . . CHICAGO CICERO DECATUR DES PLAINES . . . EAST ST. LOUIS. . ELGIN EVANSTON JOLIET OAK LAWN OAK PARK PEORIA ROCKFORD ROCK ISLAND . . . SKOKIE SPRINGFIELD . . . WAUKEGAN INDIANA: ANDERSON EVANSVILLE. . . . FORT WAYNE. . . . GARY HAMMOND INDIANAPOLIS. . . MUNCIE south bend. . . . terre haute . . . iowa: cedar rapids. . . council bluffs. . davenport . . . . des moines. . . . DUBUQUE SIOUX CITY. . . . WATERLOO KANSAS: KANSAS CITY . . . OVERLAND PARK . . TOPEKA WICHITA KENTUCKY: COVINGTON . . . . LEXINGTON . . . . LOUISVILLE. . . . OWENSBORO . . . . 2 288 24 515 1 927 4 479 2 993 3 676 26 908 1 644 2 574 27 1 494 243 332 470 755 694 920 625 817 806 7 32 3 c j0 941 184 252 407 030 558 1 800 3 335 4 565 5 589 3 250 21 508 1 827 846 334 2 363 1 470 1 867 5 865 1 159 1 815 1 849 5 023 1 441 3 726 6 682 1 794 6 553 17 000 1 353 2 288 24 515 1 927 4 479 2 993 3 676 1 644 2 574 27 1 481 243 332 1 470 1 755 1 694 2 920 1 625 817 806 7 32 359 941 184 252 4 07 030 'j44 1 800 3 335 4 565 5 589 3 250 21 508 1 827 3 846 363 470 867 865 159 782 849 5 023 1 441 3 726 6 662 1 794 6 553 17 000 1 353 2 175 22 916 1 835 4 229 2 659 3 575 1 606 2 375 1 427 238 077 1 461 1 697 1 630 2 784 1 580 2 656 2 798 1 687 2 255 4 551 4 479 1 216 2 328 2 385 2 339 1 770 3 156 410 37?. 06 4 5 3 20 503 1 713 497 227 2 238 1 340 1 761 5 691 1 118 1 707 1 743 4 713 1 357 3 597 6 570 1 744 6 138 15 787 1 336 113 599 92 250 334 101 38 199 27 54 255 9 58 64 136 45 161 8 45 104 390 7 05 36 79 645 205 30 179 155 217 190 005 114 340 107 125 130 106 174 41 75 106 310 84 129 92 50 415 1 213 17 113 1 202 92 230 200 101 687 38 112 27 54 014 9 58 64 78 45 161 8 45 343 80 4 79 107 205 30 179 155 217 190 005 114 349 107 125 128 106 141 41 75 106 310 84 129 92 50 280 492 13 12 20 134 385 241 13 13 104 47 625 32 c ,33 2 33 70 721 65 'I See footnotes at end of table . 188 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 26 Police protection expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditure Intergovernmental ex penditure Capita 1 outlay To To City 1 Total Direct Total State current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments ments LOUISIANA: 9 090 9 063 8 467 596 341 255 - 27 - 27 LAFAYETTE 1 350 1 350 1 248 102 102 - - - - - 1 040 1 024 906 118 118 - - 16 - 16 MONROE 1 392 1 392 1 277 115 115 - - - - - 27 083 27 083 25 628 1 455 1 455 - - - - - 6 161 6 161 5 239 922 922 - - - - - Maine: 2 871 2 871 2 545 326 152 174 - - - - MARYLAND: 63 041 63 041 62 703 338 294 34 10 - - - MASSACHUSETTS: 62 860 62 860 60 844 2 016 2 001 15 - - - - 3 981 3 981 3 971 10 10 - - - - - 5 319 5 319 5 192 127 119 8 - - - - 1 776 1 776 1 693 83 41 42 - - - - 4 355 4 355 4 315 40 40 - - - - - 1 734 1 734 1 658 76 76 - - - - - 2 130 2 130 2 123 7 7 - - - - - 3 126 3 126 3 068 58 58 _ _ _ _ _ 4 128 2 136 4 128 2 136 4 126 2 136 '2 2 ~ _ _ _ _ - 2 451 2 451 2 424 27 27 - - - - - 4 177 4 177 4 085 92 90 2 - - - - 4 460 4 460 4 031 429 429 - - - - - 1 688 1 688 1 537 151 151 - - - - - 4 949 4 949 4 779 170 170 - - - - - 2 327 2 327 2 315 12 12 - - - - - 6 358 6 358 6 153 205 205 - - - - - 2 613 2 613 2 549 64 64 - - - - - 7 678 7 678 7 475 203 153 50 - - - ~ MICHIGAN: 3 585 3 585 3 581 4 4 - - - - - 4 052 4 052 3 987 65 65 - - - - - DEARBORN HEIGHTS . . . 2 662 2 597 2 177 420 182 238 - 65 - 65 107 198 107 198 104 547 2 651 2 313 338 - - - - FARMINGTON HILLS . . . 1 39 3 1 393 1 311 82 72 10 - - - - 8 385 6 790 8 369 6 790 8 325 6 672 44 118 15 113 29 5 - 16 - 16 - 3 012 3 012 2 925 87 84 3 - - - - 5 045 5 045 4 858 187 187 - - - - - 1 575 1 512 1 439 73 73 - - 63 - 63 3 246 3 213 2 964 249 249 - - 33 - 33 4 918 4 918 4 800 118 118 - - - - - 2 087 2 087 2 017 70 70 - - - - - 2 201 2 201 2 199 2 2 - - ~ ~ _ 4 211 4 210 4 172 38 38 - - 1 1 - ST. CLAIR SHORES . . . 2 228 2 223 2 168 55 37 18 - 5 - 5 3 550 3 541 3 187 354 306 48 - 9 - 9 STERLING HEIGHTS . . . 2 955 2 955 2 757 198 197 1 - - - - 2 543 2 539 2 061 478 168 310 - 4 2 2 5 301 5 301 5 113 188 188 - - - - - 3 731 3 637 2 031 1 606 178 1 428 - 94 - 94 1 924 1 897 1 430 467 98 369 27 ~ 27 MINNESOTA: 2 324 2 324 2 286 38 38 - - - - - 2 336 2 336 2 272 64 64 - - - - - 15 019 15 019 14 760 259 259 - - - - - 1 624 1 624 1 460 164 122 42 - - - - 10 344 10 344 10 153 191 126 65 - ~ ~ ~ MISSISSIPPI: 955 955 808 147 142 - 5 - - - 4 686 4 686 4 410 276 236 40 - - " ~ See footnotes at end of table. POLICE PROTECTION 189 Table 26. Police protection expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) City Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- ments local govern- ments MISSOURI: COLUMBIA . . . FLORISSANT . . INDEPENDENCE . KANSAS CITY. . ST. JOSEPH . , ST. LOUIS. . . SPRINGFIELD. . MONTANA: BILLINGS . . . GREAT FALLS. . NEBRASKA: LINCOLN. . . . OMAHA NEVADA: LAS VEGAS. . . RENO NEW HAMPSHIRE: MANCHESTER . . NASHUA . . . . NEW JERSEY: BAYONNE. . . . BLOOMFIELD . . CAMDEN . . . . CLIFTON. . . . EAST ORANGE. . ELIZABETH. . . IRVINGTON. . . JERSEY CITY. . NEWARK . . . . PASSAIC. . . . PATERSON . . . TRENTON. . . . UNION C ITY . . VINELAND . . . NEW MEXICO: ALBUQUERQUE. . NEW YORK: ALBANY . . . . BINGHAMTON . . BUFFALO. . . . MOUNT VERNON . NEW ROCHELLE . NEW YORK CITY. NIAGARA FALLS. ROCHESTER. . . ROME SCHENECTADY. . SYRACUSE . . . TROY UTICA WHITE PLAINS . YONKERS. . . . NORTH CAROLINA: ASHEVILLE. . . CHARLOTTE. . . DURHAM . . . . FAYETTEVILLE . GREENSBORO . . HIGH POINT . . RALEIGH. . . . WILMINGTON . . WINSTON-SALEM. 1 173 1 284 2 429 25 329 1 582 42 016 2 667 1 819 1 816 3 803 10 443 10 274 4 671 2 241 1 851 520 07 1 6 58 593 215 274 611 17 432 32 07 2 618 6 905 7 879 2 287 1 517 5 2 21 3 3 7 07 3 847 118 298 088 223 008 363 12 395 766 10'.) 687 874 375 695 32 1 714 10 369 4 046 1 767 6 556 2 052 4 639 1 655 6 822 1 173 1 284 2 429 25 319 1 582 42 016 2 667 1 819 1 816 3 803 10 443 14 4 671 2 241 1 851 2 520 2 071 7 658 2 593 5 215 5 274 2 611 17 432 32 070 2 618 6 905 7 879 2 287 1 517 10 304 5 847 2 118 21 298 3 088 3 223 7 07 008 3 363 12 395 766 2 195 7 687 1 874 2 375 3 695 9 320 1 672 10 369 4 046 1 767 6 556 2 052 4 630 1 654 6 822 1 123 1 204 2 254 24 658 1 525 40 815 2 550 1 655 1 100 3 525 10 037 2 143 1 759 491 064 658 543 192 251 611 17 432 31 819 570 905 879 256 517 5 792 1 986 20 980 3 062 3 162 691 850 3 338 12 395 742 040 473 6 38 323 619 116 1 618 9 761 3 717 1 681 6 368 1 855 4 330 1 545 6 044 50 80 175 661 57 1 201 117 164 716 278 4 06 14 32 3 98 92 29 7 5 23 23 251 48 180 55 132 318 26 61 15 158 25 24 155 214 236 52 7 6 204 54 608 329 86 188 197 300 109 778 50 66 152 10 57 1 201 117 164 65 275 4 06 14 283 29 119 48 55 132 215 26 61 4 108 25 24 55 214 185 52 76 2 04 54 278 329 86 188 197 300 97 315 L4 23 567 40 10 103 100 51 330 463 10 260 See footnotes at end of table. 190 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 26. Police protection expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Capita L outlay To To City 1 Total Total Direct current Total State govern- ments Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments NORTH DAKOTA: 1 484 1 484 1 428 56 56 - - - - - OHIO: AKRON o . 8 106 8 106 7 852 254 254 - - - - - CANTON. ....... 3 389 3 386 3 364 22 22 - - 3 - 3 CINCINNATI 24 076 24 076 22 690 1 386 584 802 - - - - CLEVELAND 25 578 25 578 23 686 1 892 - 1 892 - - - - CLEVELAND HEIGHTS . . 1 427 1 427 1 394 33 33 - - - - - 20 833 20 833 20 316 517 474 10 33 - - - 9 387 9 387 9 078 309 309 - - - - - 966 966 927 39 39 - - - - - 1 817 1 817 1 650 167 156 11 - - - - HAMILTON 1 881 1 881 1 823 58 58 - - - - - KETTERING 1 271 1 271 1 218 53 53 _ _ _ _ _ 1 252 1 252 1 246 6 6 - - - - - 1 251 1 261 1 251 1 250 1 212 1 227 39 23 39 23 _ " 11 11 _ - 2 010 2 010 1 765 245 245 - - - - - 1 598 1 598 1 460 138 138 - - - - - 2 001 2 001 1 861 140 140 - - - - - 13 425 13 413 12 977 436 288 148 - 12 - 12 1 523 1 523 1 340 183 183 - - - - - YOUNGSTOWN 4 107 4 107 4 064 43 43 - - - - - OKLAHOMA: 1 598 1 598 1 517 81 80 1 - - - - 832 832 832 - - - - - - - NORMAN 1 462 1 462 1 333 129 129 - - - - - OKLAHOMA CITY .... 8 684 8 684 8 094 590 590 - - - - - 8 126 8 126 7 251 875 478 397 - - - - OREGON: 3 182 3 182 3 156 26 26 - - - - - 16 940 16 940 16 870 70 70 - - - - - 3 322 3 322 3 311 11 11 - - - - - PENNSYLVANIA: 2 987 2 987 2 794 193 193 - - - - - ALTOONA 1 235 1 235 1 206 29 29 - - - - - 2 030 2 030 1 881 149 149 - - - - - CHESTER 2 474 2 474 2 429 45 45 - - - - - 2 985 2 7 03 2 985 2 7 03 2 798 2 607 187 96 186 76 1 20 ~ _ ~ _ HARRISBURG - 1 913 1 913 1 868 45 45 - - - - - 145 303 145 303 142 458 2 845 2 541 304 _ _ - _ 18 156 18 156 18 121 35 35 - - - - - 2 439 2 439 2 323 116 116 - - - - - 2 048 2 048 2 048 - - - - - - - WILKES-BARRE 1 357 1 357 1 322 35 32 3 - - - - 1 458 1 458 1 458 _ RHODE ISLAND: 1 958 1 958 1 801 157 132 25 - - - - 2 122 2 122 2 059 63 63 - - - - - 5 962 5 962 5 895 67 67 - - - - - 2 467 2 467 2 383 84 84 - - - - - SOUTH CAROLINA: 2 187 2 175 2 015 160 160 - - 12 12 - 3 471 3 471 3 165 306 290 16 - - - - 2 188 2 188 1 934 254 254 - - - - - SOUTH DAKOTA: SIOUX FALLS ..... 1 545 1 545 1 489 56 56 - - - - - TENNESSEE: 6 091 6 057 4 403 1 654 1 610 44 - 34 - 34 5 392 5 392 5 140 252 247 5 - - - - 23 106 23 106 21 559 1 547 1 339 208 - - - - NASHVILLE-DAVIDSON. . 15 746 15 746 14 736 1 010 726 284 - - - - See footnotes at end oi table. POLICE PROTECTION 191 Table 26. Police protection expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City 1 Total Direct current Capita 1 outlay Total To State govern- ments To local govern- ments Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land TEXAS: 1 385 1 385 1 331 54 54 - - - - - 2 518 2 518 2 459 59 59 - - - - - 2 798 2 798 2 565 233 233 - - - - - 8 242 8 242 8 049 193 193 - - - - - 2 688 2 688 2 408 280 70 210 - - - - 1 009 1 009 962 47 47 - - - - - CORPUS CHRISTI .... 4 249 4 249 3 993 256 256 - - - - - 32 531 32 531 31 826 705 622 83 - - - - 7 032 7 032 7 001 31 31 - - - - - 13 674 13 674 13 467 207 155 52 - _ _ - 1 272 1 272 1 246 26 26 - - - - - 1 670 1 670 1 539 131 131 - - - - - 996 996 951 45 45 - - - - - 53 527 53 527 49 498 4 029 133 3 896 - - - - 1 883 1 883 1 738 145 145 - - - - - 698 698 611 87 87 - - - - - LUBBOCK. ....... 3 028 3 028 2 780 248 248 - - - - - 1 539 1 539 1 265 274 166 108 - - - - 1 611 1 611 1 387 224 97 127 - - - - 1 575 1 575 1 517 58 58 _ - - - - 1 887 1 887 1 800 87 26 61 - - - - 1 069 1 069 981 88 67 6 15 - - - 1 018 1 018 933 85 24 61 - - - - 1 423 1 423 1 304 119 90 - 29 - - - 20 301 20 301 19 255 1 046 807 239 - - - - 1 237 2 901 1 578 1 237 2 901 1 578 1 119 2 848 1 392 118 53 186 99 53 186 - 19 - - — _ - UTAH: 1 783 858 7 970 1 779 858 7 970 1 760 787 7 758 19 71 212 19 71 212 - - 4 - 4 SALT LAKE CITY .... - VIRGINIA: 4 488 4 488 4 326 162 162 - - - - - 2 838 2 838 2 620 218 218 - - - - - 3 317 3 317 3 100 217 217 - - - - - 1 644 1 644 1 562 82 82 - - - - - 4 353 4 353 3 584 769 88 681 - - - - 8 428 8 428 8 059 369 369 - - - - - 3 151 3 151 3 146 5 5 - - - - - 10 814 10 814 10 757 57 57 - - - - - 2 518 2 518 2 451 67 53 14 - - - - VIRGINIA BEACH . . . . 5 059 5 059 5 033 26 26 - - - - - WASHINGTON: 1 6 04 1 604 1 522 82 82 - - - - - 1 683 1 677 1 670 7 7 - - 6 - 6 22 786 22 786 22 388 398 107 291 - - - - 5 013 4 887 4 800 87 87 - - 126 - 126 5 344 5 344 5 049 295 267 28 - - - - WEST VIRGINIA: 2 316 2 316 2 265 51 51 - - - - - HUNTINGTON 2 101 2 101 1 919 182 182 - - - - - WISCONSIN: 1 622 1 622 1 295 327 34 293 - - - - 2 132 2 132 2 124 8 8 - - - - - 2 304 2 304 2 201 103 103 - - - - - 1 156 1 156 1 126 30 30 - - - - - 5 857 5 857 5 699 158 158 - - - - - 37 044 37 044 36 253 791 547 244 - - - - 1 224 1 224 1 197 27 27 - - - - - 3 229 3 229 3 149 80 80 - - - - - 1 803 1 803 1 803 - - - - - - - 2 226 2 226 2 197 29 29 - - - - - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a field compilation from records of each city government shown; see text for data limitatic Section IV. JUDICIAL JUDICIAL 193 Table 27j Judicial expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Di feet expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government ' Total Direct current Capj tal outlay Total To State governments To local governments STATES-LOCAL, TOTAL. . . MUNICIPALITIES . . . ALABAMA 1 902 332 561 291 1 412 763 1 013 652 408 246 21 851 6 197 15 931 14 059 1 974 12 587 12 482 187 77 110 21 188 3 236 17 952 15 509 2 476 7 532 2 097 5 450 4 452 1 246 266 837 28 446 239 517 228 633 11 054 26 601 18 733 7 872 2 125 5 749 22 960 22 829 382 389 8 604 7 178 1 548 995 553 19 112 19 112 19 112 85 405 31 639 53 783 46 459 7 326 37 801 7 112 30 700 27 846 2 980 1 902 332 497 660 1 404 672 1 006 601 398 072 21 851 6 197 15 654 14 059 1 594 12 587 12 482 105 105 21 188 3 236 17 952 15 485 2 467 7 532 2 097 5 435 4 386 1 049 266 837 27 546 239 291 228 245 11 046 26 601 18 733 7 868 2 120 5 747 22 960 22 580 380 380 8 604 7 056 1 548 995 553 19 112 19 112 19 112 85 405 31 639 53 766 46 442 7 323 37 801 7 112 30 689 27 793 2 897 1 822 941 487 879 1 335 062 959 162 375 901 21 332 6 073 15 259 13 683 1 576 12 196 12 091 105 105 19 257 3 001 16 256 13 807 2 449 7 348 2 019 5 329 4 284 1 045 251 925 27 461 224 464 213 485 10 979 25 174 17 423 7 751 2 039 5 711 21 263 20 890 373 373 8 405 6 875 1 530 986 544 19 112 19 112 19 112 82 856 31 073 51 783 44 760 7 023 36 457 7 046 29 411 26 534 2 877 79 391 9 781 69 610 47 439 22 171 519 124 395 376 19 392 391 1 1 1 932 235 1 697 1 678 18 184 78 106 102 4 14 912 85 14 827 14 760 67 1 427 1 310 117 81 36 1 696 1 690 6 6 198 181 17 9 8 2 548 566 1 982 1 682 300 1 344 66 1 278 1 259 19 80 857 63 631 17 226 7 052 10 175 380 380 380 82 82 77 4 33 33 24 9 264 264 66 198 1 296 900 396 388 8 6 6 4 1 258 249 9 9 122 122 19 19 16 2 137 137 53 84 8 091 (X) 8 091 4 323 3 767 278 (X) 278 278 82 (X) 82 77 4 (X) 16 (X) 16 9 7 225 (X) 225 225 4 (X) 4 4 2 (X) 2 2 (X) (X) 17 17 15 2 11 (X) 11 11 72 767 63 631 9 136 2 728 6 407 102 STATE . COUNTIES 102 ALASKA 102 STATE BOROUGHS - ARIZONA 33 STATE 33 24 9 248 STATE COUNTIES 248 57 191 1 071 900 171 163 8 1 STATE COUNTIES COLORADO STATE COUNTIES 1 MUNICIPALITIES 1 256 249 7 7 122 122 STATE DELAWARE , . STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE MUNICIPALITIES 1 STATE COUNTIES 1 1 126 GEORGIA 126 42 84 MUNICIPALITIES See footnotes at end of table. 194 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 27. Judicial expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments HAWAII 8 461 8 461 8 461 8 461 8 351 8 351 no 110 - (X) STATE _ - COUNTIES - - - ~ — - 5 908 3 247 2 661 5 908 3 247 2 661 5 597 3 199 2 398 311 48 263 106 106 (X) 106 STATE _ 106 2 611 156 2 606 55 2 349 48 257 6 5 101 . 5 101 ILLINOIS 87 365 30 340 57 034 87 365 30 332 57 033 86 022 30 152 55 870 1 343 180 1 163 259 8 251 2 (X) 2 257 STATE 8 249 56 847 437 56 596 437 55 433 437 1 163 251 2 249 - 24 386 5 009 19 853 24 386 4 635 19 751 23 962 4 541 19 421 424 94 330 641 374 267 102 (X) 102 539 STATE 374 165 14 122 5 896 13 883 5 868 13 570 5 851 313 17 239 28 82 21 157 8 17 794 5 918 11 921 17 794 5 918 11 876 17 676 5 899 11 777 118 19 99 473 473 44 (X) 44 428 STATE 428 12 324 25 11 870 6 11 772 5 98 1 454 19 43 2 411 17 KANSAS 15 927 5 377 10 551 15 927 5 377 10 550 14 395 4 266 10 129 1 533 1 111 422 16 16 1 (X) 1 15 STATE 15 COUNTIES 9 318 1 248 9 302 1 248 8 890 1 238 412 10 16 1 15 KENTUCKY 19 288 6 588 12 818 19 288 6 470 12 818 18 748 6 463 12 285 540 7 533 121 118 3 (X) 121 STATE 118 3 COUNTIES 10 462 2 359 10 46? 2 356 10 056 2 229 406 127 3 ~ — 3 LOUISIANA 29 162 5 615 23 547 29 162 5 615 23 547 28 647 5 615 23 032 515 515 - (X) _ STATE _ - PARISHES 12 155 11 392 12 155 11 392 12 031 11 001 124 391 - ™ - - MAINE 6 115 3 714 2 529 6 115 3 586 2 529 5 854 3 462 2 392 261 124 137 342 128 214 (X) 342 STATE 128 214 2 511 232 2 511 18 2 375 18 137 214 : — 214 35 422 21 018 15 430 35 422 19 992 15 430 34 050 19 828 14 222 1 372 164 1 208 1 030 1 026 4 (X) 1 030 STATE 1 026 4 COUNTIES ... 9 998 5 436 9 994 5 436 8 787 5 436 1 208 4 - 4 - MASSACHUSETTS 62 368 12 646 52 136 62 368 11 215 51 153 56 249 11 196 45 053 6 119 19 6 100 4 117 1 431 2 686 983 (X) 983 3 134 STATE 1 431 1 703 37 054 16 786 37 043 14 111 31 138 13 915 5 905 195 11 2 675 983 11 1 692 MICHIGAN 94 065 18 719 78 240 94 065 16 224 77 841 91 340 16 088 75 252 2 724 136 2 588 4 596 2 495 2 101 399 (X) 399 4 197 STATE 2 495 1 702 COUNTIES 58 700 21 242 58 121 19 720 56 928 18 324 1 193 1 395 579 1 523 28 371 551 1 152 See footnotes at end of table. JUDICIAL 195 Table 27.i Judicial expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergove rnmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 27 247 4 722 22 542 21 939 911 10 797 2 960 7 843 7 232 614 35 109 12 306 23 246 15 230 8 052 4 544 1 135 3 409 3 066 344 12 064 5 929 6 140 5 053 1 098 6 771 1 306 5 471 4 444 1 028 5 100 1 535 3 754 2 669 1 091 74 209 17 846 58 026 44 999 13 162 6 916 5 564 1 352 285 1 068 269 380 73 902 221 890 61 981 160 287 35 415 25 936 9 484 9 486 2 3 902 1 103 2 799 2 479 320 27 247 4 722 22 525 21 646 879 10 797 2 960 7 837 7 228 609 35 109 11 891 23 218 15 167 8 051 4 544 1 135 3 409 3 065 344 12 064 5 929 6 135 5 037 1 097 6 771 1 306 5 465 4 437 1 028 5 100 1 535 3 565 2 487 1 079 74 209 16 318 57 891 44 999 12 893 6 916 5 564 1 352 284 1 068 269 380 47 828 221 552 61 751 159 801 35 415 25 936 9 479 9 478 1 3 902 1 103 2 799 2 479 320 26 826 4 623 22 203 21 328 875 10 720 2 920 7 800 7 191 609 34 092 11 353 22 739 14 851 7 888 4 448 1 114 3 334 2 991 343 11 936 5 910 6 026 4 936 1 090 6 634 1 296 5 338 4 329 1 009 4 871 1 522 3 349 2 272 1 077 73 775 16 173 57 602 44 717 12 885 6 703 5 353 1 350 284 1 066 251 596 47 658 203 938 60 084 143 854 32 069 25 608 6 461 6 460 1 3 880 1 094 2 786 2 467 319 421 99 322 318 4 77 40 37 37 1 017 538 479 316 163 96 21 75 74 2 127 19 108 101 7 137 10 127 108 13 229 13 216 214 2 435 145 290 282 8 213 211 2 2 17 784 170 17 614 1 667 15 947 3 346 328 3 018 3 018 22 9 13 11 2 325 325 293 32 9 9 4 5 479 415 64 63 1 1 1 16 16 15 1 7 7 7 195 195 183 12 1 797 1 528 269 269 1 1 1 26 791 26 074 717 231 486 8 8 7 1 17 (X) 17 17 5 (X) 5 3 3 29 (X) 29 29 (X) 5 (X) 5 5 7 (X) 7 7 189 (X) 189 183 6 135 (X) 135 135 (X) 338 (X) 338 213 125 5 (X) 5 5 (X) 307 STATE 307 276 MISSISSIPPI 32 3 STATE COUNTIES 3 1 MISSOURI 2 450 STATE 415 COUNTIES 35 35 1 STATE COUNTIES 1 11 STATE COUNTIES 11 10 NEVADA 1 STATE - 6 STATE COUNTIES 6 6 1 663 1 528 135 STATE 135 1 STATE 1 1 NEW YORK 26 453 26 074 379 18 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES STATE 361 3 COUNTIES 3 2 NORTH DAKOTA 1 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES - MUNICIPALITIES - See footnotes at end of table. 196 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 27. Judicial expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 84 707 12 496 74 558 84 707 10 183 74 524 82 299 9 884 72 415 2 408 299 2 109 2 984 2 313 671 33 (X) 33 2 950 STATE 2 313 637 51 646 23 548 51 461 23 063 49 760 22 655 1 701 408 186 485 23 10 163 475 14 862 6 349 9 140 14 862 6 335 8 527 14 514 6 291 8 223 348 44 304 710 14 696 614 (X) 614 97 14 83 7 628 1 595 6 932 1 595 6 646 1 577 286 18 696 614 83 20 381 5 494 15 180 20 381 5 253 15 128 20 126 5 253 14 873 255 255 413 241 172 52 (X) 52 361 241 120 14 214 1 086 14 054 1 074 13 804 1 069 250 5 160 12 40 12 120 114 127 49 847 88 338 114 127 25 847 88 280 112 501 25 847 86 654 1 626 1 626 24 160 24 000 160 58 (X) 58 24 102 24 000 102 49 519 38 921 49 360 38 920 48 102 38 552 1 258 368 159 1 58 101 1 8 207 7 906 301 8 207 7 906 301 8 123 7 823 300 84 83 1 - (X) _ STATE _ - 301 301 300 1 " " ™ 15 106 15 106 13 800 1 306 52 27 25 STATE 1 934 13 199 1 934 13 172 1 789 12 Oil 145 1 161 52 (X) 27 - 25 COUNTIES 12 040 1 184 12 000 1 172 11 123 888 877 284 40 12 14 12 25 - 4 529 2 065 2 569 4 529 2 065 2 464 4 416 2 003 2 413 113 62 51 248 248 105 (X) 105 143 STATE _ 143 COUNTIES 2 470 242 2 242 222 2 201 212 41 11 228 20 100 5 128 15 TENNESSEE 30 012 6 565 23 502 30 012 6 565 23 447 27 197 6 043 21 154 2 815 522 2 293 1 096 1 096 55 (X) 55 1 041 STATE - 1 041 COUNTIES 18 074 6 469 18 027 5 420 15 809 5 345 2 218 75 47 1 049 47 8 - 1 041 TEXAS 74 738 10 880 65 299 74 738 9 668 65 070 72 054 9 650 62 404 2 684 18 2 666 1 462 1 212 250 229 (X) 229 1 232 1 212 20 54 400 10 920 54 302 10 769 52 880 9 524 1 422 1 245 98 152 89 140 9 12 6 416 2 148 4 352 6 416 2 064 4 352 6 181 2 054 4 127 235 10 225 100 84 16 (X) 100 STATE 84 16 2 420 1 947 2 404 1 947 2 221 1 906 183 41 16 - 16 - VERMONT 3 359 3 196 163 3 359 3 196 163 3 300 3 155 145 59 41 18 20 20 (X) 20 STATE - 20 163 20 163 145 18 20 - - 20 33 204 14 571 21 351 33 204 14 571 18 633 31 454 14 571 16 883 1 750 1 750 2 897 2 897 2 718 (X) 2 718 178 STATE - 178 COUNTIES 10 542 10 987 9 435 9 198 8 518 8 365 917 833 1 107 1 789 1 084 1 634 23 155 See footnotes at end of table. JUDICIAL 197 Table 27. Judicial expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 24 720 4 548 20 226 16 938 3 456 8 702 2 816 6 541 6 294 247 28 526 8 661 21 357 20 825 953 2 546 970 1 577 1 362 216 24 720 4 502 20 218 16 934 3 284 8 702 2 163 6 539 6 292 247 28 526 8 461 20 065 19 510 555 2 546 970 1 576 1 360 216 24 051 4 422 19 629 16 428 3 201 8 324 2 076 6 248 6 001 247 28 323 8 412 19 911 19 364 547 2 514 970 1 544 1 343 201 669 80 589 506 83 378 87 291 291 203 49 154 146 8 32 32 17 14 221 46 175 4 171 654 653 1 1 1 913 200 1 713 1 315 398 1 1 1 8 (X) 8 8 1 (X) 1 1 1 293 (X) 1 293 1 293 1 (X) 1 1 214 STATE 46 168 4 WEST VIRGINIA 164 653 STATE 653 WISCONSIN 620 STATE 200 COUNTIES 420 22 398 STATE COUNTIES - MUNICIPALITIES - - Represents zero or rounds to zero . X Not applicable. 'Data for municipalities, and the local governments totals which include municipal data, are estimates subject to sampling variation; data for counties (boroughs, parishes) are based on a canvass of all county governments and therefore are not subject to sampling variation; see text for data limitations. 2 For each State, and the United States summary, the expenditure figures shown on the "Local, total" line and the combined State-local total line (the data shown opposite the names of the individual States) exclude duplicative intergovernmental expend- iture amounts. This was done to avoid the artificial inflation which would result if an intergovernmental expenditure amount for one government is tabulated and then counted again rfien the recipient government ( s ) ultimately expend(s) that amount. 198 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 28. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of State governments, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total direct current expenditure Appellate courts Courts of general jurisdiction Courts of limited jurisdiction State ' Total Courts of last resort Intermediate appellate courts Miscellaneous 487 879 6 073 12 091 3 001 2 019 27 461 17 423 20 890 6 875 31 073 7 046 8 351 3 199 30 152 4 541 5 899 4 266 6 463 5 615 3 462 19 828 11 196 16 088 4 623 2 920 11 353 1 114 5 910 1 296 1 522 16 173 5 353 47 658 25 608 1 094 9 884 6 291 5 253 25 847 7 823 1 789 2 003 6 043 9 650 2 054 3 155 14 571 4 422 2 076 8 412 970 96 321 1 467 909 1 804 426 9 603 1 267 602 221 3 922 1 767 1 139 651 6 379 1 227 947 1 030 918 2 499 545 1 740 2 055 5 747 1 466 716 2 790 333 546 508 374 2 634 702 12 070 1 370 352 3 837 1 379 1 658 5 180 1 055 462 496 1 612 3 948 258 315 1 274 2 006 532 1 271 312 47 866 874 909 777 426 2 189 708 602 221 1 926 860 1 139 651 1 750 502 947 1 030 918 835 545 865 1 270 2 408 1 466 716 1 102 333 546 508 374 993 417 1 906 688 352 1 713 1 136 1 213 2 797 1 055 462 496 747 1 581 258 315 1 274 951 532 1 271 312 48 455 593 1 027 7 414 559 1 996 907 4 629 725 1 664 875 785 3 339 1 688 1 641 285 10 164 682 2 124 243 445 2 383 865 2 367 1 055 240 643 2 564 6 143 980 1 380 14 782 13 751 7 665 1 472 18 780 4 298 3 062 2 244 21 564 3 011 4 474 2 993 2 569 2 659 722 3 034 2 330 3 555 2 473 1 945 3 093 760 1 545 724 821 6 564 3 032 21 906 15 674 600 5 893 4 878 3 455 13 439 2 568 1 169 1 507 3 695 5 289 1 031 899 3 512 1 468 1 402 6 633 636 87 211 2 047 1 332 9 937 4 328 2 641 342 1 784 13 477 5 418 4 000 3 961 2 862 ?66 1 145 5 092 6 908 115 7 045 2 525 765 1 521 9 700 63 704 2 042 2 992 217 213 3 076 1 073 2 686 854 8 371 981 1 509 304 2 209 303 478 243 2 976 115 411 1 577 1 393 2 786 684 259 1 509 21 957 64 61 6 975 474 8 590 1 656 142 154 34 25 183 1 675 158 736 413 _ 420 85 948 142 508 22 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. 1 Data are based on a field compilation from records of each State government; see text for data limitations JUDICIAL 199 Table 29. Judicial expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditure intergovernmental ex aenditure Capital outlay To To County Total Direct State local Total Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments 788 017 784 229 745 344 38 885 9 352 27 471 2 062 3 788 2 262 1 526 ALABAMA I 374 374 373 1 1 - - - - - JEFFERSON 3 055 3 055 2 969 86 86 - - - - - MADISON 1 006 1 006 891 115 23 92 - - - - 2 052 2 052 2 005 47 47 - - - . - 892 892 880 12 12 - - - . - 559 559 534 25 25 - - - - - ALASKA: greater anchorage . . 77 - - - - - - 77 77 - ARIZONA: 7 934 7 934 6 806 1 128 139 989 - - - - PIMA 4 002 3 981 3 517 464 75 389 21 21 ARKANSAS: 848 848 765 83 75 R - - - - CALIFORNIA! 16 170 15 950 11 505 4 445 52 4 39 3 - 220 220 - 1 033 1 033 1 025 8 4 4 - - . - 6 194 6 194 5 975 219 124 95 - . - - 3 499 3 499 3 464 35 28 7 - - - - 1 052 1 052 1 045 7 7 - - - - - KERN 3 712 92 781 3 712 92 781 3 111 88 565 601 4 216 2 6 417 575 3 615 184 - - m - MARIN ........ 2 586 2 586 2 569 17 17 - - - - - MERCED 800 800 795 5 5 _ _ _ _ _ 1 982 1 982 1 943 39 39 - - - . - 14 905 14 905 14 620 285 1.47 138 - - - - RIVERSIDE 6 601 6 439 5 628 811 2 12 599 - 162 - 162 6 679 6 679 6 304 375 55 32 - - - - SAN BERNARDINO. . . . 8 154 8 154 8 047 107 107 - - - - - 16 897 16 897 16 793 104 90 14 - - - - 2 814 2 814 2 802 12 1? ~ - - - - SAN LUIS OBISPO . . . 1 233 1 233 1 164 69 9 60 _ _ _ _ 5 657 5 657 5 549 108 49 59 - - - - SANTA BARBARA .... 2 875 2 875 2 856 19 12 7 - - - - 10 303 10 303 9 359 944 49 895 - . - - 1 268 1 268 1 247 21 21 _ - - - - 2 062 2 062 1 847 215 19 196 - - - - SONOMA 2 451 2 451 1 518 933 10 923 - - _ - 2 291 2 291 2 047 244 36 160 48 - - - TULARE 1 601 1 601 1 365 236 23 213 _ - - - 4 610 4 610 4 010 600 67 533 - . . - YOLO 1 033 1 033 1 028 5 5 " _ COLORADO: ADAMS 196 196 196 - - - - _ . - ARAPAHOE 436 436 359 77 - 77 _ _ m - 135 135 135 - - - - - _ - 769 769 769 - - _ - _ _ - 261 261 261 - - - . . _ - 55 55 55 - _ _ - . _ - 95 95 95 - - - - - - - WELD 86 86 86 " ™ _ DELAWARE: 766 766 764 2 2 - - - " - FLORIDA: ALACHUA 903 903 562 341 26 315 . . _ - 1 183 1 183 1 165 18 18 - - - . - 3 833 3 833 3 411 422 122 300 - . - - 14 634 1 400 14 634 1 400 14 393 1 373 241 27 217 27 24 - - - — ESCAMBIA _ 3 372 3 372 3 308 64 64 - - . - - LEE 859 885 859 885 774 851 85 34 85 34 _ _ - _ _ - See footnotes at end of table. 200 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 29. Judicial expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental ex penditure County 1 Total Direct Capita L outlay To State To local current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments Florida— continued 547 547 532 15 15 - - _ _ - 2 135 2 135 2 085 50 50 - - - _ - 1 812 1 812 1 789 23 23 - - - _ - 889 889 851 38 38 - - _ _ - 3 399 3 399 3 357 42 42 - - - _ - POLK 868 930 868 930 816 849 52 81 52 57 24 - - - m . 597 597 585 12 12 - - . _ - 1 238 1 238 1 232 6 6 - - - - GEORGIA: BIBB 916 1 427 916 1 377 879 1 329 37 48 37 48 - - 50 10 _ CHATHAM 40 1 000 1 000 977 23 23 - - - . - cobb 1 424 2 546 1 424 2 546 1 342 2 521 82 25 82 25 - : - - _ - 7 759 7 759 7 281 478 232 246 _ _ _ - 913 913 892 21 21 - - - - - IDAHO: ADA 512 512 488 24 24 " ™ ILLINOIS: champaign 349 349 347 2 2 - - - . - 41 776 1 924 41 552 1 924 40 584 1 902 968 22 22 1 22 7U7 - 224 - 224 KANE 636 1 012 289 636 1 012 267 632 957 263 4 55 4 4 55 4 - - 22 ; _ LAKE 22 331 331 325 6 6 - _ - _ - MCLEAN 439 439 432 7 7 - - - - - 370 370 370 _ _ _ _ „ _ _ 1 014 1 014 986 28 16 12 - - _ - 455 455 455 - - - _ _ . - ROCK ISLAND 362 362 353 9 9 - - - . - 747 747 747 - _ - - - _ - 430 430 429 1 1 - - . . - 295 295 292 3 3 - - - _ - WILL 771 753 771 753 771 741 12 12 ™ - - " — - INDIANA: 1 567 1 557 1 533 24 24 - _ 10 _ 10 367 363 363 - - - _ 4 _ 4 428 426 406 20 20 - - 2 - 2 LAKE 2 209 295 2 178 290 2 167 283 11 7 11 7 - - 31 5 3 31 2 478 464 457 7 7 _ _ 14 _ 14 1 024 1 024 1 024 - - • - - - - TIPPECANOE 275 275 271 4 4 - - - - - 600 551 528 23 23 - - 49 9 40 VIGO 503 488 468 20 20 - - 15 - 15 IOWA: 719 719 715 4 4 - - - - - LINN 802 2 069 556 762 2 069 495 756 2 069 492 6 3 6 3 - - 40 61 - 40 POLK 61 WOODBURY 627 627 627 - - - - - - - KANSAS: 937 933 878 55 55 - - 4 - 4 SEDGWICK 2 061 2 061 2 010 51 51 . - - - 856 856 825 31 31 - - - - 1 012 1 012 1 012 - - - - - - KENTUCKY: 1 130 1 130 1 107 23 23 - - - - - KENTON 416 416 296 120 5 115 - - - - See footnotes at end of table. JUDICIAL 201 Table 29. Judicial expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental ex jendituie County 1 Capital outlay To State To Total i ect Total local current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments LOUISIANA: • 556 556 495 61 16 45 - - . - CALCASIEU 507 507 504 3 3 - . _ - 3 453 3 453 3 453 - _ _ . _ _ - 369 369 367 2 2 - - . . 321 321 315 6 1 5 - _ _ . RAPIDES 319 319 319 - - - - - - - MAINE: 496 496 368 128 6 122 - _ _ . 337 337 337 - _ _ - . - - YORK 285 285 282 3 3 " ™ _ MARYLAND: anne arundel 874 874 835 39 39 _ _ _ „ - 1 462 1 462 1 451 11 11 _ - . _ - 606 604 574 30 30 _ - 2 _ 2 2 408 2 408 1 998 410 14 39 6 ~ - _ - PRINCE GEORGES. . . . 2 190 2 190 2 174 16 16 - _ _ _ » 211 209 170 39 4 35 - 2 - 2 MASSACHUSETTS: 904 901 894 7 7 _ - 3 _ 3 BERKSHIRE 744 744 717 27 7 20 - - . - 2 679 2 679 2 564 115 59 56 - _ _ - 3 602 3 594 3 573 21 19 2 - 8 _ 8 HAMPDEN 6 403 6 403 3 035 3 368 - 3 368 - - - - 564 564 564 _ _ _ _ m _ _ 10 515 10 515 9 456 1 059 11 1 048 _ - _ - 3 626 3 626 3 603 23 23 - - . _ „ 3 419 3 419 2 269 1 150 39 1 111 - - _ . 4 229 4 229 4 096 133 12 121 - - - - MICHIGAN: bay 774 1 421 774 1 417 761 1 377 13 40 13 38 2 - 4 - _ 4 1 112 1 106 1 094 12 12 - - 6 _ 6 3 474 3 435 3 420 15 15 _ . 39 _ 39 1 803 1 803 1 788 15 10 5 - _ _ - 854 854 839 15 15 _ . _ _ . 1 085 1 085 1 082 3 3 - _ _ _ . KENT 1 516 3 198 1 512 3 187 1 417 3 178 95 9 31 9 64 4 11 ™ 4 11 902 876 851 25 25 • - 26 _ 26 1 476 1 476 1 233 243 12 231 - _ _ . 4 548 4 525 4 481 44 44 _ - 23 _ 23 OTTAWA 569 569 556 13 13 _ _ _ _ _ saginaw . 1 443 1 443 1 431 12 12 . . „ _ - 885 885 879 6 6 _ _ _ _ - 1 585 1 572 1 546 26 26 _ - 13 _ 13 WAYNE 19 680 19 300 19 225 75 75 - - 380 - 380 MINNESOTA: 809 809 801 8 8 . - _ _ - 790 764 764 - _ _ . 26 _ 26 5 856 5 856 5 790 66 66 _ - _ _ - Ramsey 2 120 2 120 2 106 14 14 . m _ _ - 1 640 1 632 1 616 16 16 - ~ 8 - 8 MISSISSIPPI: HARRISON 807 807 800 7 7 . - _ _ - HINDS 699 699 696 3 3 _ _ _ _ _ 355 355 352 3 3 - ~ - - - MISSOURI: clay 376 472 376 472 371 462 5 10 5 1 9 ~ - - _ Greene _ 3 985 3 985 3 892 93 93 _ _ _ _ _ 324 324 319 5 5 . _ m - 340 340 338 2 2 _ _ „ _ ST. LOUIS 5 522 5 522 5 440 82 30 52 ~ - - - See footnotes at end of table. 202 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 29. Judicial expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental ex penditure County 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land local govern- ments NEBRASKA: 1 828 1 828 1 805 23 23 - . _ „ . 879 879 871 8 8 - - - " - NEVADA: 2 168 2 168 2 105 63 63 - - _ _ - 1 359 1 359 1 350 9 9 - - - " - NEW HAMPSHIRE; 860 773 661 112 a 104 . 87 87 . 470 410 385 25 25 - - 60 60 - NEW JERSEY! 846 846 846 - - - - - _ - 4 220 4 220 4 210 10 10 - - _ _ - 1 040 1 040 1 040 - - . - _ _ - 2 387 2 387 2 387 - _ . . _ _ - 693 693 676 17 17 . - _ _ . 11 177 11 177 11 140 37 37 - _ _ _ - 642 642 642 - _ - - _ _ - 4 093 4 093 4 093 - - - - - - - 2 222 2 222 2 222 . _ _ m — _ 3 382 3 382 3 368 14 14 - - . _ - 1 758 1 758 1 758 - _ - - - . - 1 162 1 162 1 154 8 8 - - - _ - 1 122 1 122 1 122 - _ - . . _ - 4 164 4 164 4 164 - _ _ - . _ - 830 830 785 45 6 39 - - . - 3 872 3 872 3 773 99 88 11 - - - - NEW MEXICO: 78 78 78 - - - - - - - NEW YORK: ALBANY. . . . . . 1 202 1 201 1 174 27 27 . - 1 1 - BROOME 618 618 605 13 13 - - _ _ - CHAUTAUQUA 507 507 466 21 21 - - - _ - 395 395 385 10 2 3 - _ _ - 1 167 1 167 1 159 8 8 - - - . - ERIE 4 443 3 687 4 443 3 687 4 326 3 567 117 120 117 120 : : - - MONROE . 17 439 17 439 17 052 387 2?7 160 _ - _ - 1 191 1 190 1 156 34 34 - - 1 - 1 1 052 1 052 951 101 10 91 _ _ - - 2 096 2 096 1 880 216 2.2 194 - - - - 1 625 1 623 1 606 17 17 _ _ 2 2 . OSWEGO 479 479 471 8 7 1 _ - _ - RENSSELAER 530 530 522 8 8 - . . - 1 057 1 044 98? 62 19 43 _ 13 - 13 ST. LAWRENCE 377 377 374 3 3 _ _ _ _ - 441 441 439 2 2 - - - _ - 643 643 615 28 28 - _ _ _ - 395 395 383 12 5 7 - - _ - SUFFOLK 9 252 9 252 9 158 94 94 _ - - . - ULSTER 685 685 463 222 10 212 _ _ _ - WESTCHESTER 5 428 5 420 5 392 28 28 - - 8 4 4 NORTH CAROLINA: 333 3 33 316 17 6 - a . ■ - 1 805 1 805 354 1 451 3 - 1 448 - . - 89 89 77 12 12 - - - _ - 521 521 521 - - - - - - 258 258 222 36 8 _ 28 - _ - 625 625 600 25 25 - - - . - 1 182 1 182 934 248 16 232 - - - - 306 306 113 193 - 193 - - . - 41 41 25 16 16 - - - ™ - See footnotes at end of table. JUDICIAL 203 Table 29. Judicial expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental e? penditure County ' Capita 1 outlay To State To local Total Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments OHIO! A|_LEN 545 545 505 40 40 - - - - - 391 391 388 3 3 - - - - - 848 848 783 65 65 - - - - - 632 632 545 87 13 74 - - - - 425 425 410 15 15 - - - - - 468 468 462 6 6 - - - - - 10 563 10 563 10 490 73 73 570 - - . - 3 665 3 665 3 065 600 30 - - - - - 532 532 520 12 12 - - - - - 5 411 5 411 5 348 63 63 - - - - - LAKE 867 463 867 463 849 440 18 23 18 23 — - - - - - 894 894 885 9 9 _ _ _ _ - 2 601 2 598 2 556 42 42 - - 3 3 - 1 190 1 190 1 187 3 3 - - - - - 3 362 3 362 3 362 - - - - - - - 765 765 765 - - - - - - - 496 445 445 - - - - 51 - 51 1 387 1 387 1 309 73 78 _ _ _ _ . 2 237 2 237 2 227 10 10 - - - - - 1 000 1 000 997 3 3 - - - - - OKLAHOMA: 376 347 320 27 27 - - 29 29 - 2 136 1 933 1 839 94 89 5 - 203 203 - 1 866 1 717 1 595 122 42 80 - 149 146 3 OREGON: 793 793 707 86 11 75 - - - - 476 476 466 10 10 - - - - - LANE 2 028 764 2 028 764 1 990 759 38 5 38 5 — ~ ■ - - MARION. ....... - 5 549 5 428 5 382 46 18 8 20 121 38 83 594 594 587 7 7 - - - - - PENNSYLVANIA: 10 203 10 203 9 832 371 37 1 - - - - - 1 487 1 487 1 458 29 29 - - - - - 1 413 1 413 1 359 54 54 - - • _ - 543 543 536 7 7 - - - - - 2 756 2 756 2 667 89 27 62 - - - - 458 458 454 4 4 - - - • - 806 806 790 16 16 - - - - - 490 490 485 5 5 - - - - - 1 608 1 608 1 577 31 31 - - - - - 592 592 587 5 5 _ _ _ _ - 1 309 1 309 1 295 14 14 - - - - - 3 792 3 792 3 766 26 26 - - - - - ERIE 1 313 694 1 313 694 1 289 591 24 103 2 4 27 76 m : - _ - 325 325 325 - - - - - - - LACKAWANNA 1 052 1 052 1 006 46 - 46 - _ - - LANCASTER 1 197 1 197 1 191 6 6 - - _ - - 458 458 444 14 6 3 - - - - 418 418 409 9 9 _ _ _ _ - LEHIGH 1 121 1 121 1 094 27 27 - - - - - 1 318 1 318 1 294 24 12 12 - _ - - 764 764 756 8 8 - - _ - - MERCER 603 603 559 44 7 37 - _ - - MONTGOMERY 4 162 4 162 4 119 43 29 14 - _ . - 1 026 1 026 1 020 6 6 - - _ - - SCHUYLKILL 819 819 721 98 2 96 - _ . - 964 864 861 3 3 - - 100 - 100 WESTMORELAND 1 445 1 445 1 405 40 40 - - - - - YORK 1 174 1 174 1 162 12 12 - - - - _ See footnotes at end of table. 204 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 29. Judicial expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) County Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion State govern- ments local govern- ments south carolina! anderson. . . Charleston. . greenville, . lexington . . richland. . . spartanburg . TENNESSEE: HAMILTON. KNOX. . . SHELBY. . SULLIVAN. TEXAS: BELL. . . BEXAR . . BRAZORIA. CAMERON . DALLAS. , EL PASO . GALVESTON HARRIS. . HIDALGO . JEFFERSON LUBBOCK , MCLENNAN. NUECES. . smith . . TARRANT . TAYLOR. . TRAVIS. . WICHITA . UTAH: DAVIS . . SALT LAKE UTAH. . . WEBER . . VERMONT: CHITTENDEN. VIRGINIA: ARLINGTON . . . FAIRFAX . . . . HENRICO . . . . PRINCE WILLIAM. washington: Clark . . KING. . . KITSAP. . PIERCE. . SNOHOMISH SPOKANE . YAKIMA. . WEST VIRGINIA: CABELL. . . KANAWHA . . WISCONSIN: BROWN . . DANE. . . KENOSHA . MARATHON. MILWAUKEE OUTAGAMIE RACINE. . ROCK. . . WAUKESHA. WINNEBAGO 473 1 205 960 452 1 654 1 065 1 504 2 883 4 319 388 375 2 388 436 533 8 605 905 954 12 507 544 1 085 486 450 1 337 267 2 843 397 1 568 346 103 1 110 192 ?37 73 1 311 3 351 849 607 841 6 151 412 1 454 1 413 1 175 728 545 823 437 1 524 631 306 7 542 420 964 608 882 HH3 473 1 205 947 448 1 654 1 058 1 504 2 883 4 319 388 375 2 388 436 533 8 605 905 954 12 507 544 1 085 486 450 1 336 267 2 843 397 1 568 346 103 1 110 192 233 73 890 147 849 504 841 6 151 412 1 454 1 413 1 175 728 545 823 369 1 411 579 269 7 542 315 874 5^ 810 30? 431 1 172 907 447 1 599 960 1 488 1 308 4 308 386 372 2 299 431 532 8 456 891 899 11 954 538 1 082 483 450 1 225 267 2 794 392 1 518 346 103 1 101 187 231 64 755 2 890 764 494 815 5 846 405 1 452 1 381 1 151 717 545 817 361 403 557 265 519 315 874 555 798 39? 16 1 575 11 2 3 89 5 1 149 14 55 553 6 3 3 111 49 5 50 135 257 85 10 26 305 7 2 32 2 4 11 1? 3 19 5 1 13 ' 1 3 553 6 39 13 4 1 562 1 1 124 45 - 47 38 10 - 4 22 f.n 245 7 - 2 - 32 - 24 . 11 - 4?1 204 107 421 204 103 68 68 113 113 52 52 37 37 105 105 90 90 53 53 7? 72 r ^l 51 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. 'Data are based on a field compilation from records of each county government shown; see text for data limitations. JUDICIAL Table 30. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) 205 County 1 Total direct current Courts of general jurisdiction Courts of limited jurisdiction Miscellaneous 744 893 373 2 969 891 2 005 880 534 6 806 3 517 765 11 505 1 025 5 975 3 464 1 045 3 HI 88 565 2 569 795 1 943 14 620 5 628 6 304 8 047 16 793 2 802 1 164 5 5 49 2 856 9 359 1 247 1 847 1 518 2 047 1 365 4 010 1 028 196 359 135 769 261 55 95 86 764 562 1 165 3 411 14 39 3 1 373 3 308 774 851 532 2 085 1 789 851 3 357 347 402 189 1 07 1 445 700 353 272 5 429 2 7 32 464 2 225 251 1 250 1 096 95 926 47 743 387 162 674 2 825 1 185 1 892 2 142 3 168 500 381 1 620 1 491 2 532 401 291 356 334 244 1 021 194 32 55 74 4 451 984 2 129 4 540 8 38 1 775 553 435 342 1 119 1 259 759 2 166 246 473 163 1 419 270 812 349 2 34 1 377 432 34 6 181 354 3 025 1 767 506 1 207 38 338 936 432 1 154 9 521 2 004 2 681 3 520 6 788 1 500 522 2 109 1 306 4 078 626 765 685 844 7 38 1 488 386 30 24 18 3 39 3 235 117 684 19 401 164 7 45 1 107 151 018 Alabama: 21 479 176 493 178 28 Alaska: Arizona: 353 Arkansas: 267 California: 3 099 420 CONTRA COSTA 1 700 601 444 978 2 484 1 246 MERCED . 201 115 2 274 RIVERSIDE 2 439 1 731 SAN BERNARDINO 2 385 6 837 802 SAN LUIS OBISPO 261 1 820 59 2 749 220 791 477 STANISLAUS 869 383 1 501 448 COLORADO: 164 274 135 695 261 55 91 86 DELAWARE : 764 FLORIDA: 87 163 943 6 618 418 HILLSBOROUGH 849 202 15 26 966 523 47 84 See footnotes at end of table. 206 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 30. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) County 1 Total direct current Courts of general jurisdiction Courts of limited jurisdiction Miscellaneous FLORIDA — CONTINUED 816 849 585 1 2 32 879 1 329 977 1 342 2 521 7 281 892 488 347 40 584 1 902 6 32 957 263 325 432 37 986 455 353 747 429 292 771 741 1 533 363 406 2 167 283 457 1 024 271 528 468 715 756 2 069 492 627 878 2 010 825 1 012 1 107 296 495 504 3 453 367 315 319 368 337 282 594 795 408 689 37 812 513 477 1 007 2 398 190 418 282 40 000 1 876 618 943 263 320 432 370 860 428 338 747 411 292 771 725 1 526 357 406 1 965 254 444 329 27 1 513 468 680 743 1 872 441 620 386 551 274 335 325 41 202 291 318 196 161 159 294 254 239 117 130 355 484 515 292 670 1 416 2 697 387 202 93 362 924 364 533 736 216 121 65 5 35 73 32 56 64 80 38 105 54 47 188 25 2 172 195 98 2 186 315 70 65 584 26 14 14 Georgia: IDAHO : Illinois: 5 126 27 15 18 16 Indiana: 6 29 13 602 15 iowa: 35 13 197 51 Kansas: 130 535 187 144 Kentucky: 46 39 Louisiana: 172 148 2 600 LAFAYETTE 98 122 104 MAINE: 10 3 5 See footnotes at end oi table. JUDICIAL Table 30. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) 207 County 1 Total direct current Courts of general jurisdiction Courts of limited jurisdiction Miscellaneous Maryland: 835 1 451 574 1 998 2 174 170 894 717 2 564 3 573 3 035 564 9 456 3 603 2 2 69 4 096 761 1 377 1 094 3 420 1 788 839 1 082 1 417 3 178 851 1 233 4 481 556 1 431 879 1 546 19 225 801 764 5 790 2 106 1 616 800 696 352 37 1 462 3 892 319 338 5 440 1 805 87 1 2 105 1 350 661 385 846 4 210 1 040 2 387 676 11 140 610 891 177 1 081 1 082 36 2 34 277 1 027 1 138 1 095 2 39 3 240 1 431 824 1 454 297 481 432 1 914 995 415 503 794 1 810 320 442 2 217 193 617 313 902 9 988 666 154 2 298 1 316 479 344 338 154 185 317 3 278 143 100 1 060 1 280 399 1 074 715 392 252 346 1 469 385 1 092 313 2 335 12 42 1 39 35 8 618 398 1 432 2 342 1 862 296 6 059 2 127 1 37 4 2 542 396 864 622 1 265 765 415 542 568 1 327 493 627 1 984 334 800 507 520 8 062 443 3 492 393 909 327 284 177 111 145 614 119 101 3 589 206 83 572 252 59 32 226 1 477 260 412 162 2 204 213 518 396 126 Massachusetts: 42 42 105 93 78 29 157 45 PLYMOUTH 71 100 Michigan: 68 32 CALHOUN 40 GENESEE 28 9 37 55 41 38 164 280 29 14 59 WASHTENAW 124 WAYNE 1 175 Minnesota: 135 167 397 228 Mississippi : 129 74 21 MISSOURI : 75 JEFFERSON 57 137 791 Nebraska: 319 389 Nevada: 459 383 NEW HAMPSHIRE : 210 101 new jersey: 274 1 264 395 883 201 6 601 See footnotes at end of table. 208 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 30. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) County* Total direct current Courts of general jurisdiction Courts of limited jurisdiction Miscellaneous NEW JERSEY — CONTINUED 642 4 093 2 222 3 368 1 758 1 154 1 122 4 164 785 3 773 78 1 174 605 486 385 1 159 4 326 3 567 17 052 1 156 951 1 880 1 606 47 1 522 982 374 439 615 383 9 158 463 5 392 316 354 77 521 222 600 934 113 25 505 388 783 545 410 462 10 490 3 065 520 5 348 849 440 885 2 556 1 187 3 362 765 445 1 309 2 227 997 320 1 839 1 595 221 1 779 1 015 653 378 557 378 694 375 2 494 218 56 36 27 21 764 758 3 093 72 256 HO 23 70 15 31 31 45 84 46 1 326 84 137 355 203 572 440 237 287 7 279 1 734 350 4 094 632 329 593 2 080 540 2 185 279 384 947 1 399 607 231 1 122 1 179 128 1 291 177 675 486 450 198 1 001 141 1 190 45 590 396 348 255 570 1 869 2 231 11 125 673 430 941 570 240 275 624 2 49 247 398 220 6 635 389 1 937 8 69 53 110 44 83 118 855 260 90 233 87 33 81 183 226 321 283 141 204 221 293 1 023 1 030 2 040 894 147 546 2 469 269 89 NEW MEXICO: 33 new york: 366 153 102 103 568 1 693 578 2 834 411 265 829 1 013 161 232 327 94 147 133 117 1 197 74 3 37 1 north Carolina: 316 217 77 521 214 600 934 113 25 ohio: 81 132 101 61 90 57 2 356 1 071 80 1 021 130 78 211 293 421 856 203 61 221 624 169 Oklahoma: 39 717 416 See footnotes at end of table. JUDICIAL Table 30. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) 209 County i Total direct current Courts of general jurisdiction Courts of limited jurisdiction Miscellaneous Oregon: 707 466 1 990 759 5 382 587 9 832 1 458 1 359 5 36 2 667 454 790 485 1 577 587 1 295 3 766 1 289 591 325 1 006 1 191 444 409 1 094 1 294 756 559 4 119 1 020 721 861 1 405 1 162 431 1 172 907 447 1 599 960 1 488 1 308 4 308 386 372 2 299 431 5 32 8 456 891 899 11 954 5 38 1 082 483 450 1 225 267 2 794 392 1 518 346 199 152 1 429 298 2 134 201 7 840 654 828 369 1 584 291 497 262 1 084 390 724 2 562 743 362 171 748 662 300 253 679 948 543 390 2 555 718 552 512 1 018 684 76 158 78 72 178 106 806 311 1 139 176 160 1 052 189 217 3 058 374 372 3 393 254 487 198 108 280 100 47 1 95 509 149 114 71 52 123 1 975 200 967 181 263 89 653 95 185 130 354 106 321 731 267 91 58 181 385 64 61 198 192 99 101 817 174 83 215 289 252 195 688 658 282 992 497 396 568 1 637 56 149 493 203 90 2 484 311 302 2 633 149 529 137 156 750 98 881 250 776 131 394 243 509 338 1 273 186 Pennsylvania: 1 025 623 268 78 430 68 108 93 139 91 250 473 279 138 96 77 144 80 95 217 154 114 mercer 68 747 128 86 WASHINGTON 134 98 226 south Carolina: 160 CHARLESTON 326 GREENVILLE 171 93 429 357 TENNESSEE I 286 429 1 532 154 TEXAS: 63 754 BRAZORIA 39 CAMERON 225 DALLAS 2 914 EL PASO 206 225 5 928 135 JEFFERSON 66 148 186 195 69 1 442 47 233 66 See footnotes at end of table. 210 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 30. Detail of direct current expenditure for judicial activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) County 1 Total direct current Courts of general jurisdiction Courts of limited jurisdiction Miscellaneous utah: 103 1 101 187 231 64 755 2 890 764 494 815 5 846 405 1 452 1 381 1 151 717 545 817 361 1 403 557 265 7 519 315 874 555 798 392 12 265 71 109 60 130 480 319 10 245 2 430 261 867 466 757 358 146 169 361 1 391 385 265 7 519 273 854 432 798 392 29 479 56 11 246 1 139 144 8 340 1 845 132 473 577 35 3 235 293 563 62 357 60 111 VERMONT: 4 VIRGINIA: 379 1 271 301 476 Washington: 230 1 571 12 112 338 41 124 west Virginia: 106 85 Wisconsin: brown 12 172 42 20 123 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. x Data are based on a field compilation from records of each ity government shown; see text for data limitations. JUDICIAL 211 Table 31. | Judicial expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total D irect expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City 1 Total Direct current Capita] outlay Total To State govern- To Total Equip- Construc- local govern- ment tion ments ments 340 975 336 659 316 507 20 152 2 150 17 975 27 4 316 1 562 2 754 ALABAMA: BIRMINGHAM 449 449 449 - - - _ - - - GADSDEN . . . 27 27 27 - - - - - - - HUNTSVILLE. . 80 80 80 - - - - - - - MOBILE. . . . 289 192 187 5 5 - - 97 - 97 MONTGOMERY. . 379 136 131 5 5 - - 243 24 3 - TUSCALOOSA. . 117 117 110 7 - 7 - - - - ARIZONA: GLENDALE 47 47 47 - - - - - - - MESA „ 78 78 78 - - - - - - - PHOENIX . . . . 1 239 1 239 1 229 10 3 7 - - - - SCOTTSDALE. . . 88 88 88 - _ _ - - - - TEMPE .... . 111 111 106 5 5 _ _ - - - TUCSON. . . . • 374 374 37 4 - - - - - - - ARKANSAS: FORT SMITH 109 100 100 - _ - - 9 - 9 LITTLE ROCK 191 94 93 1 1 - - 97 - 07 NORTH LITTLE ROCK . . 137 89 89 - - - - 43 - 48 PINE BLUFF 78 64 64 - - - - 14 2 12 CAL ifornia: ALAMEDA - - - - - - - - - - ALHAMBRA. . . - - - - - - - - - - ANAHEIM . . . - - - - - - - - - - BAKERSFIELD . - - - - - - - - - - BELLFLOWER. . - - - - - - - - - - BERKELEY. . . - - - - - - - - - - BUENA PARK. . - - - - - - - - - - BURBANK . . . - - - - _ - - - - - CARSON. . . . - - - - - - - - - - CHULA VISTA . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ COMPTON . . . - - - - _ _ _ - - - CONCORD . . . - - - - _ _ _ - - - COSTA MESA. . - - - - _ _ _ - - - DALY C ITY . . - - - - _ _ _ - - - DOWNEY. . . . - - - - _ _ _ - - - EL CAJON. . . - - - - _ _ _ - - - EL MONTE. . . - - - - _ _ _ - - - FREMONT . . . - - - - - - - - - - FRESNO. . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FULLERTON . . - - - _ _ _ - - - - GARDEN GROVE. - - - - _ - - - - - GLENDALE. . . - - - - - - - - - - HAWTHORNE . . - - - - _ - _ - - - HAY WARD . . . - - - - - - _ - - - HUNTINGTON BEA( "H. - - - - _ - - - - - INGLEWOOD . . - - - _ _ _ _ - _ - LAKEWOOD. . . - - - - - - - - - - LONG BEACH. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LOS ANGELES . - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - MODESTO . . . - - - - - _ _ _ _ - MOUNTAIN VIEW - - - - - - - - - - NEWPORT BEACH - - - - - - - - - - NO RIVAL K . . . - - - - - - - - - - OAKLAND . . . - - _ - - - - _ _ - ONTARIO . . . - - - - - - - - - - ORANGE. . . . - - - - - - - - - - OXNARD. . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PALO ALTO . . - - - _ - - - - _ - PASADENA. . . - - - - - - - - - - PICO RIVERA . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - POMONA. . . . - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - REDONDO BEACH - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - REDWOOD CITY. - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - RICHMOND. . . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RIVERSIDE . . - - - - - - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. 212 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 31. Judicial expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments CAL IFORNIA — CONT INUED SACRAMENTO. ..... - - - - - - - - - - SALINAS .... - - - - - - - - - - SAN 3ERNARDINO. - - - - - - - - - - SAN BUENAVENTURA - - - - - - - - - - SAN DIEGO . . . - - - - - - - - - - SAN FRANCISCO . 11 003 10 995 10 928 67 67 - - 8 - 8 SAN JOSE. . . . - - - - - - - - - - SAN LEANDRO . . - - - - - - - - - - SAN MATEO . . . _ _ - _ - - - _ - - SANTA ANA . . . - - - - - - - - - - SANTA BARBARA . - - - - - - - - - - SANTA CLARA . . - - - - - - - - - - SANTA MONICA. . - - - - - - - - - - SANTA ROSA. . . - - - - - - - - - - SIM I VALLEY . . - - - - - - - - - - SOUTH GATE. . . - - - - - - - - _ - STOCKTON. . . . B - _ _ _ _ - _ - - - SUNNYVALE . . . - - - - - - - - - - TORRANCE. . . . - - - - - - - - - - VALLEJO .... - - - - - - - - - - WEST COVINA . . - - - - - - - - - - WESTMINSTER . . - - - - - - - - 1 - WHITTIER. . . . - - - - - - - - - - COLORADO: 61 130 151 236 61 130 151 236 60 130 146 233 1 5 3 1 5 3 - - - - — _ _ COLORADO SPRINGS. . . - 3 401 44 3 401 44 3 390 44 11 11 ~ ~ ~ _ _ FORT COLLINS - 355 82 355 82 353 82 2 2 - - - - _ _ CONNECTICUT: BRIDGEPORT 63 63 63 - - - - - - - 6 3 6 3 1 3 5 5 - - - - — _ HARTFORD - 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - MILFORD - 7 7 7 _ _ _ _ - - - NEW HAVEN 12 12 12 - - - - - - - 5 5 5 - - - - - - - 37 37 37 _ - - - - - - 15 15 15 - - - - - - - 1 1 1 - - - - - - - DELAWARE: 386 386 378 8 8 - - - - - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: 19 112 19 112 19 112 - - - - - - - FLORIDA: CLEARWATER 76 76 75 1 1 - - - - - FORT LAUDERDALE 406 406 4 06 - - - - - - - GAINESVILLE . . - - - - - - - - - - HIALEAH .... 11 11 11 - - - - - - - HOLLYWOOD . . . 138 138 138 - - - - - - - JACKSONVILLE. . 4 406 4 406 4 134 272 200 72 - - - - MIAMI - - - - - - - - - - MIAMI BEACH . . 222 222 222 _ _ _ _ - - - ORLANDO .... 2 07 207 204 3 3 - - - - - PENSACOLA . . . - - - - - - - - - - ST. PETERSBURG. - - - - - - - - - - TALLAHASSEE . . - - - - - - - - - - TAMPA - - - - - - - - - - WEST PALM BLrtCH 87 87 87 - - - - - - " See footnotes at end oi table. JUDICIAL 213 Table 31. Judicial expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- ments local govern- georgia: ALBANY. . ATLANTA . AUGUSTA . COLUMBUS. MACON . . SAVANNAH. HAWAII: HONOLULU. IDAHO: BOISE CITY. ILLINOIS: ARLINGTON HEIGHTS AURORA. . . . BERWYN. . . . CHAMPAIGN . . CHICAGO . . . CICERO. . . . DECATUR . . . DES PLAINES . EAST ST. LOUIS ELGIN .... EVANSTON. . . JOLIET. . . . OAK LAWN. . . OAK PARK. . . PEORIA. . . . ROCKFORb. . . ROCK ISLAND . SKOKIE. . . . SPRINGFIELD . WAUKEGAN. . . INDIANA: ANDERSON. . . EVANSVILLE. . FORT WAYNE. . GARY. .... HAMMOND . . . INDIANAPOLIS. MUNCIE. . . . south bend. . terre haute . iowa: cedar rapids, council bluffs davenport des moines DUBUQUE . SIOUX CITY WATERLOO. KANSAS: KANSAS CITY . OVERLAND PARK TOPEKA. . . . WICHITA . . . KENTUCKY: COVINGTON . LEXINGTON . LOUISVILLE. OWENSBORO . 13 1 037 52 1 135 139 130 271 38 126 3 1' '4 218 7 08 106 57 156 78 64 251 57 923 517 42 13 958 52 1 135 139 130 156 78 64 251 57 923 517 42 13 953 51 1 125 139 128 11 38 38 126 126 324 321 218 216 7 08 3 7 08 106 106 148 78 63 251 55 816 516 41 2 107 1 1 See footnotes at end of table. 214 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 31. Judicial expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Cityi Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- ments local govern- ments LOUISIANA: BATON ROUGE. . . LAFAYETTE. . . . LAKE CHARLES . . MONROE NEW ORLEANS. . . SHREVEPORT . . . MAINE: PORTLAND .... MARYLAND: BALTIMORE. . . . MASSACHUSETTS: BOSTON BROCKTON .... CAMBRIDGE. . . . CHICOPEE .... FALL RIVER . . . HOLYOKE .... LAWRENCE .... LOWELL LYNN MALDEN MEDFORD NEW BEDFORD. . . NEWTON PITTSFIELD . . . QUINCY SOMERVILLE . . . SPRINGFIELD. . . WALTHAM WORCESTER. . . . MICHIGAN: ANN ARBOR. . . . DEARBORN .... DEARBORN HEIGHTS DETROIT FARMINGTON HILLS FLINT GRAND RAPIDS . . KALAMAZOO. . . .. LANSING LINCOLN PARK . . LIVONIA PONT I AC ROSEVILLE. . . . ROYAL OAK. . . . SAGINAW ST. CLAIR SHORES SOUTHFIELD . . . STERLING HEIGHTS TAYLOR WARREN WESTLAND .... WYOMING MINNESOTA: BLOOMINGTON. . . DULUTH MINNEAPOLIS. . . ROCHESTER. . . . ST. PAUL .... MISSISSIPPI: BILOXI JACKSON 6 00 125 45 95 129 3 36 13 439 517 182 394 468 79 515 748 323 543 98 8 1 'I 456 187 8 04 102 521 197 1 3 133 302 219 19 218 609 125 45 95 129 336 517 18,-' 394 7 846 79 515 748 323 98 214 456 L87 203 102 521 197 130 1 133 297 219 1" 218 470 122 45 95 024 3 1 5 13 246 5 03 180 194 7 814 79 496 746 301 512 96 211 434 187 2 02 89 494 193 130 292 97 139 3 105 21 L4 2 200 32 19 2 22 16 2 3 13 27 4 760 5 122 137 3 20 21 14 2 200 32 19 1 2 3 22 622 3 10 o 25 4 - 26 7 34 5 - 1 121 19 .18 See footnotes at end of table. JUDICIAL 215 Table 31. Judicial expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) City 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- local govern- ments MISSOURI: COLUMBIA. • . FLORISSANT. . INDEPENDENCE. KANSAS CITY . ST. JOSEPH. . ST. LOUIS . . SPRINGFIELD , MONTANA! BILLINGS. . . GREAT FALLS . NEBRASKA: LINCOLN OMAHA . NEVADA: LAS VEGAS . . RENO. . . . . new hampshire: Manchester. . NASHUA. . . . NEW jersey: BAYONNE . . . BLOOMFIELD. . CAMDEN. . . . CLIFTON . . . EAST ORANGE . ELIZABETH . . IRVINGTON . . JERSEY CITY . NEWARK. . . . PASSAIC . . . PATERSON. . . TRENTON . . . UNION CITY. . V IN EL AND. . . NEW MEXICO: ALBUQUERQUE . NEW YORK: ALBANY. . . . BINGHAMTON. . BUFFALO . . . MOUNT VERNON. NEW ROC H ELL E. NEW YORK C ITY NIAGARA FALLS ROCHESTER . . ROME SCHENECTADY . SYRACUSE. . . TROY. .... UTICA .... WHITE PLAINS. YONKERS . . . north Carolina: asheville . . charlotte . . DURHAM. . . . FAYETTEVILLE. GREENSBORO. . HIGH POINT. . RALEIGH . . . WILMINGTON. . WINSTON-SALEM 38 24 88 134 54 262 127 379 716 345 174 154 111 ^3 60 238 89 404 134 105 494 1 494 96 205 172 115 73 251 150 1 844 228 252 140 333 213 683 62 105 397 1 L8 240 249 695 38 24 88 134 54 262 127 378 716 345 174 154 111 93 60 238 89 404 134 105 494 1 494 96 205 172 115 73 251 150 1 844 228 252 140 333 213 683 62 105 397 118 240 249 695 37 23 87 083 54 241 122 375 712 342 168 154 111 93 60 238 89 404 134 105 494 1 493 06 205 172 115 73 250 1 150 - 182 662 223 5 252 - 089 14 244 212 1 683 _ 62 - 105 - 395 2 112 6 240 - 249 - 695 - See footnotes at end of table. 216 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 31. Judicial expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) City' Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- ments govern- ments north Dakota: FARGO . . . ohio: AKRON CANTON CINCINNATI. . • . CLEVELAND .... CLEVELAND HEIGHTS COLUMBUS. .... DAYTON ELYRIA EUCLID HAMILTON KETTCRING . LAKEWOOD. . LIMA. . . . LORAIN. . . MANSFIELD . PARMA . . . SPRINGFIELD TOLEDO. . . WARREN. . . YOUNGSTOWN. OKLAHOMA: LAWTON. . . . MIDWEST . . . NORMAN. . . . OKLAHOMA C ITY TULSA .... OREGON: EUGENE. . PORTLAND. SALEM . . PENNSYLVANIA ALLENTOWN ALTOONA . BETHLEHEM CHESTER . ERIE. . . HARRISBURG LANCASTER PHILADELPHIA. PITTSBURGH. . READING . . . SCRANTON. . . WILKES-BARRE. YORK RHODE ISLAND: CRANSTON. . PAWTUCKET . PROVIDENCE. WARWICK . . SOUTH CAROLINA: CHARLESTON. . COLUMBIA. . . GREENVILLE. . SOUTH DAKOTA: SIOUX FALLS TENNESSEE: CHATTANOOGA . . . . KNOX7II..LE MEMPHIS ...... NASHVILLE-DAVIDSON. 849 382 2 791 4 022 92 2 552 883 252 135 1 38 183 138 278 195 321 319 328 1 041 328 533 116 35 96 394 265 181 6 1 37 357 366 9 19 172 5 39 508 62 < r,i\ 82 1 624 3 540 59 849 382 540 GZ2 92 552 883 230 135 138 183 136 278 195 321 315 328 012 328 633 116 3') 96 304 265 181 61 37 357 366 19 172 5 39 6 08 62 84 6 370 2 540 4 022 92 2 503 883 219 134 134 168 136 267 187 321 3 08. 326 1 012 325 529 L09 36 96 388 26 4 179 61 37 001 364 184 182 82 82 638 626 540 3 483 3 66 2 19 - 171 1 5 - 38 1 255 253 60 2 2Q3 2 34 4 29 63 986 Sep footnotes at end ot table. JUDICIAL 217 Table 31. Judicial expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land local govern- ments TEXAS: ABILENE 6: 61 59 2 2 - - - - - AMARILLO. . . 147 147 146 1 1 - - - - - ARLINGTON . . 223 223 219 4 4 - - - - - AUSTIN. . . . 461 461 461 - - - - - - - BEAUMONT. . . 86 86 86 - - - - - - - BROWNSVILLE . 30 30 30 - - - - - - - CORPUS CHRISTI 245 245 239 6 6 - - - - - DALLAS. . . . 1 364 1 364 1 350 14 14 - - - - - EL PASO . . . 271 271 271 - - - - - - - FORT WORTH. . 453 453 453 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GALVESTON . . . 97 97 97 - - - - - - - GARLAND . . . . 49 49 47 2 2 - - - - - GRAND PRAIRIE . 49 49 49 - - - - - - - HOUSTON . . . . 2 697 2 697 1 516 1 181 2 1 179 - - - - IRVING. . . . . 112 112 111 1 1 - - - - - LAREDO. . . . . 49 35 35 - - - - 14 14 - LUBBOCK . . . . 176 176 173 3 3 - - - - - MESQUITE. . . . 29 29 28 1 1 - - - - - MIDLAND . . . • 68 68 67 1 1 - - - - - ODESSA. . . . t 112 112 102 10 10 _ _ _ _ _ PASADENA. . . . 95 95 94 1 1 - - - - - PORT ARTHUR . . 34 34 33 1 1 - - - - - RICHARDSON. . . 55 55 55 - - - - - - - SAN ANGELO. . . 61 61 61 - - - - - - - SAN ANTONIO . „ 786 786 786 - - - - - - - TYLER .... . 51 51 50 1 1 - - - - - WACO . 50 50 50 - - - - - - - WICHITA FALLS • • 90 90 89 1 1 - - - - - UTAH: 242 242 241 1 1 - - _ _ - 95 95 92 3 3 - - - - - SALT LAKE C ITY. . . . 7 09 7 09 687 22 - 22 - - - - VIRGINIA: ALEXANDRIA. ..... 742 522 511 11 11 - - 220 220 - 510 355 349 6 6 - - 155 155 - 705 490 271 219 3 216 - 215 215 - 166 85 62 23 7 - 16 81 81 - 994 843 824 19 19 - - 151 151 - 1 404 1 404 1 383 21 21 _ - - - - 895 713 427 286 262 24 - 182 182 - RICHMOND. ...... 2 113 2 113 2 113 - - _ - - - - 910 617 539 78 69 9 - 293 293 - VIRGINIA BEACH. . . . 710 710 698 12 12 - - - - - WASHINGTON: BELLEVUE. . 56 56 56 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EVERETT - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ SEATTLE ..... 1 655 1 655 1 587 68 3 65 _ _ _ - 223 223 222 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ 363 363 363. - - - - - - - WEST VIRGINIA: CHARLESTON 43 43 43 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ HUNTINGTON 27 27 27 - - - - - - - WISCONSIN: APPLETON - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GREEN BAY .... 29 29 29 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 41 41 40 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ 12 12 12 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Madison . . . . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 370 5 5 _ _ _ _ 365 _ 365 OSHKOSH . . . . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 23 23 17 6 6 _ _ _ _ _ WAUWATOSA . . . 14 14 14 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 17 17 17 - - - - - - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a field compilation from records of each city government shown; see text for data limitations. 218 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 32. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of State governments, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total j Jdicial Appellate courts Number of employees October payroll 2 Total appellate courts Courts of last resort Intermediate appellate courts State 1 Total Full- time only Full- time equiva- lent 2 Number of employees October payroll Numb sr of empl oyees Number of employees Total Full- time Full-time equiva- Total Full- time Full-time equiva- payroll Total Full-time only only lent only lent TOTAL . . 26 402 24 183 25 579 37 372 4 698 4 618 4 633 7 091 2 348 2 305 2 314 3 282 2 350 2 313 ALABAMA .... 332 116 326 428 76 75 75 114 46 45 45 66 30 30 553 427 456 703 36 33 34 66 36 33 34 66 - - ARIZONA .... 151 85 145 227 85 85 85 133 34 34 34 50 51 51 ARKANSAS. . . . 68 88 88 155 28 28 28 33 28 28 28 33 (x) (X) CALIFORNIA. . . 906 495 9 06 2 347 341 331 335 707 80 77 78 159 261 254 COLORADO. . . . 1 130 1 074 1 082 1 258 79 78 78 113 4 40 40 56 39 38 CONNECTICUT . . 1 141 1 111 1 121 1 169 35 35 35 53 35 35 35 53 (X) (X) DELAWARE. . . . 492 492 492 485 12 12 12 19 12 12 12 19 (X) (X) FLORIDA .... 1 228 1 136 1 160 1 96i 2 06 2 06 2 06 257 93 93 93 104 113 113 GEORGIA .... 349 315 342 5 09 100 100 100 146 48 48 48 65 52 52 534 534 534 604 43 43 43 63 43 43 43 63 (X) (X) 184 178 180 254 60 56 57 63 60 56 57 63 (X) (x) ILLINOIS. . . . 1 383 1 371 1 373 2 893 313 311 311 485 86 85 85 117 227 226 INDIANA .... 294 112 294 459 93 90 90 107 42 39 39 46 51 51 361 187 229 468 42 41 41 57 42 41 41 57 (X) (X) KANSAS. .... 223 190 191 296 44 44 44 65 44 44 44 65 (x) (X) KENTUCKY. . . . 284 284 284 423 50 50 50 67 50 50 50 67 (x) - (x) LOUISIANA . . . 379 327 345 494 151 151 151 2 04 41 41 41 57 no 110 223 2 06 2 08 211 12 12 12 19 12 12 12 19 (x) (x) MARYLAND. . . . 1 154 1 072 1 098 1 39 80 79 79 130 31 30 30 53 49 49 MASSACHUSETTS . 606 599 600 736 100 96 96 145 68 64 64 93 32 32 MICHIGAN. . . . 590 590 590 1 086 236 2 36 236 385 75 75 75 129 161 161 MINNESOTA . . . 139 139 139 305 59 59 59 94 59 59 59 94 (x) (X) MISSISSIPPI . . 129 114 116 221 41 41 41 51 41 41 41 51 (x) (x) MISSOURI. . . . 909 880 883 1 032 195 192 192 241 88 88 88 101 107 104 MONTANA .... 52 49 49 87 22 20 21 26 22 20 21 26 (X) (X) NEBRASKA. . . . 473 419 431 488 31 28 29 43 31 28 29 43 (X) (X) 66 61 62 114 29 28 28 41 29 28 28 41 (X) (x) NEW HAMPSHIRE . 85 85 85 124 17 17 17 26 17 17 17 26 (X) (X) NEW JERSEY. . . 814 809 810 1 130 124 12" 124 185 43 43 43 65 81 81 NEW MEXICO. . . 488 487 487 424 42 42 42 57 20 20 20 27 22 22 NEW YORK. . . . 1 951 1 951 1 951 3 887 611 611 611 977 115 115 115 160 496 496 NORTH CAROLINA. 2 210 2 210 2 210 1 804 70 70 70 97 36 36 36 50 34 34 NORTH DAKOTA. . 64 64 64 100 25 25 25 30 25 25 25 30 (X) (X) 435 122 373 744 140 120 122 250 60 60 60 103 80 60 OKLAHOMA. . . . 42 5 425 425 530 96 96 96 106 82 82 82 87 14 14 237 210 217 42 5 77 74 75 105 52 50 51 69 25 24 PENNSYLVANIA. . 1 085 1 067 1 085 1 921 209 2 09 209 322 103 103 103 156 106 106 RHODE ISLAND. . 441 437 438 464 50 46 47 54 50 46 47 54 (X) (X) SOUTH CAROLINA. 88 87 87 132 29 29 29 36 29 29 29 36 (X) (X) SOUTH DAKOTA. . 418 367 376 338 24 24 24 31 24 24 24 31 (X) (X) TENNESSEE . . . 322 322 322 495 90 90 90 116 51 51 51 55 39 39 463 457 458 962 2 08 204 2 05 344 87 87 87 138 121 117 129 111 116 161 21 14 15 22 21 14 15 22 (X) (X) VERMONT .... 166 152 156 170 14 14 14 21 14 14 14 21 (X) (X) VIRGINIA. . . . 1 398 1 396 1 397 1 505 58 58 58 79 58 58 58 79 (X) (X) WASHINGTON. . . 234 225 227 343 97 95 96 162 48 46 47 74 49 49 WEST VIRGINIA . 97 96 96 128 25 25 25 39 25 25 25 39 (X) (X) WISCONSIN . . . 449 402 424 700 55 54 54 78 55 54 54 78 (x) (X) WYOMING .... 50 50 50 81 17 17 17 26 17 17 17 26 (X) (X) See footnotes at end of table. JUDICIAL 219 Table 32. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of State governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Appellate Conti courts- Court , of gene, al jurisd ction Court 3 of limited jurisd ction Miscellaneous Numb ?r of emp] oyees Numb ?r of employees Number of employees Intermedial e appellate courts — Continued Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent October payroll Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent October payroll Total Full- time only Full-time equiva- lent State ' Number of employees- Continued October payroll October payroll Full-time equiva- lent TOTAL . . 2 321 3 809 11 790 10 198 11 419 20 095 7 018 6 787 6 859 7 001 2 900 2 580 2 698 3 185 ALABAMA .... 30 48 99 _ 157 2 06 _ _ _ _ 157 41 114 108 - - 2 04 184 189 313 114 102 105 140 199 108 129 184 ARIZONA o . . . 51 83 66 - 60 94 - - - - - - - - ARKANSAS. . . . (X) (X) 55 55 55 116 - - - - 5 5 5 6 CALIFORNIA. . . 257 548 480 81 399 1 508 " - " - 85 83 84 132 COLORADO. . . . 38 57 930 878 885 1 012 84 84 84 92 37 34 35 41 CONNECTICUT . . (X) (X) 321 315 317 4 09 593 593 593 563 192 168 177 144 DELAWARE. . . . (X) (X) 100 100 100 128 352 352 352 314 28 28 28 24 FLORIDA .... 113 153 635 543 565 1 079 - - - - 387 387 387 625 GEORGIA .... 52 81 201 178 201 323 - - - - 48 37 40 40 (X) (X) 246 246 246 305 230 230 230 220 15 15 15 16 (X) (X) 124 122 123 191 (X) (X) (X) (X) - - - - ILLINOIS. . . . 226 368 1 027 1 024 1 024 2 351 (X) (X) (X) (X) 46 36 38 57 INDIANA .... 51 61 179 - 292 331 - - - - 22 22 22 21 IOWA. ..... (X) (X) 292 123 158 388 (x) (X) (x) (X) 27 23 23 23 (X) (X) 134 134 134 216 _ _ _ _ 45 12 13 15 KENTUCKY. . . . (X) (X) 86 86 86 187 - - - - 148 148 148 169 LOUISIANA . . . 110 147 174 164 167 249 50 8 20 35 4 4 4 6 (x) (X) 56 49 49 71 149 139 142 115 6 6 6 6 MARYLAND. . . . 49 77 85 85 85 270 954 873 9 04 945 35 35 35 45 MASSACHUSETTS . 32 52 85 82 82 173 419 419 419 416 2 2 2 2 MICHIGAN. . . . 161 256 138 138 138 311 183 183 183 335 33 33 33 55 MINNESOTA . . . (x) (X) 72 72 72 203 - - - - 8 8 8 8 MISSISSIPPI . . (X) (X) 76 64 65 162 - - - - 12 9 10 8 MISSOURI. . . . 104 140 265 257 258 387 336 318 320 330 113 113 113 74 MONTANA . . . . (X) (X) 28 28 28 60 _ _ _ _ 2 1 1 1 NEBRASKA. . . . (x) (X) 48 48 48 128 333 282 298 241 61 61 61 76 (x) (x) 34 30 31 70 - - - - 3 3 3 3 NEW HAMPSHIRE . (x) (x) 36 36 36 73 30 30 30 23 2 2 2 2 NEW JERSEY. . . 81 120 331 330 330 495 - - - - 359 355 355 450 NEW MEXICO. . . 22 30 274 274 274 249 126 126 126 83 46 45 45 35 NEW YORK. . . . 496 817 760 760 760 2 008 242 242 242 495 338 338 338 407 NORTH CAROLINA. 34 47 1 340 1 340 1 340 1 012 685 685 685 582 115 115 115 113 NORTH DAKOTA. . (X) (X) 30 30 30 56 - - - - 10 9 9 14 OHIO. ..... 64 147 293 - 246 491 - - - - 2 2 2 3 OKLAHOMA. . . . 14 19 327 327 327 421 _ _ _ _ 2 2 2 3 OREGON 24 36 153 131 136 312 5 5 5 7 2 - - 1 PENNSYLVANIA. . 106 166 291 273 283 950 578 578 578 639 7 7 7 10 RHODE ISLAND. . (X) (X) 96 96 96 123 158 158 158 174 137 137 137 113 SOUTH CAROLINA. (X) (X) 50 50 50 86 " - - - 9 8 8 10 SOUTH DAKOTA. . (X) (X) 394 343 352 307 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TENNESSEE . . . 39 61 185 185 185 350 _ - - - 47 47 47 29 118 2 06 231 231 231 594 - - - - 24 22 23 24 (X) (X) 57 49 51 91 51 48 49 48 - - - - VERMONT .... (X) (X) 27 27 27 37 109 95 99 96 16 16 16 16 VIRGINIA. . . . (X) (X) 101 101 101 317 1 237 1 237 1 237 1 108 2 _ 2 1 WASHINGTON. . . 49 88 99 99 99 141 - - - - 38 31 33 40 WEST VIRGINIA . (X) (X) 65 65 65 84 - _ _ - 7 6 7 5 WISCONSIN . . . (X) (X) 379 334 355 603 - - - - 15 14 14 19 WYOMING .... (X) (X) 31 31 31 54 - - - - 2 2 2 1 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. X Not applicable. 1 Data are based on a field compilation from records 2 Because of rounding, the detail figures may not ad 2h State government ; s isely to totals shown . text for data limitati 220 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) County 1 TOTAL . ALABAMA: CALHOUN JEFFERSON MADISON MOBILE MONTGOMERY TUSCALOOSA ALASKA: GREATER ANCHORAGE . . . ARIZONA: MARICOPA PIMA ARKANSAS: PULASKI CALIFORNIA: ALAMEDA BUTTE CONTRA COSTA FRESNO HUMBOLDT KERN . LOS ANGELES MARIN ......... MERCEO MONTEREY ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN BERNARDINO SAN DIEGO SAN JOAQUIN SAN LUIS OBISPO .... SAN MATEO SANTA BARBARA SANTA CLARA SANTA CPUZ SOLANO SONOMA STANISLAUS TULARE VENTURA YOLO COLORADO: ADAMS ARAPAHOE BOULDER EL PASO JEFFERSON LARIMER PUEBLO WELD DELAWARE: NEW CASTLE FLORIDA: ALACHUA BREVARD BROWARD DADE ESCAMBIA HILLSBOROUGH LEE LEON MANATEE ORANGE PALM BEACH PASCO ... PINELLAS POLK SARASOTA SEMINOLE VOLUSIA See footnotes at end of tabic 526 303 292 225 60 188 528 150 149 889 329 333 511 947 187 73 320 197 579 91 111 116 117 122 231 72 53 135 291 1 013 120 292 85 8 1 .■4" . 38 Full-ti only 480 292 271 195 52 173 4 203 142 59 125 852 301 296 446 877 169 70 293 177 485 82 101 100 52 1. 6 264 1 Oil 111 292 84 81 49 247 224 ■>u Vt 526 296 281 206 55 180 4 338 146 64 ; 34 873 3 ! 'I 313 491 008 178 186 521 87 105 106 112 110 222 69 5; 130 275 1 012 112 , 92 84 248 83 Octobe payrol 431 255 3; « 218 70 199 5 929 163 53 128 1 043 330 365 510 1 062 181 3d: 195 638 8 7 : 14 109 106 38 74 191 843 91 239 35 173 178 Courts of general jurisdicti Number of employee Full-ti only 116 33 (x) 416 236 137 37 8 3 76 li 1 100 112 50 1. 1 394 90 1'j6 33 L60 16 114 ; 6 (x) 3 7(1 227 29 069 18 46 107 26 58 t 1 I 1 / 49 112 207 vi4 8 1 r>< 70 44 15 8 ■,(, i 36 66 Full-time equivalent 16 115 33 (X) 416 2 3 1 3 3 49 1 L6 216 394 83 156 70 44 32 1 5 I 4] L38 JUDICIAL 221 Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Courts of limited jur Full-ti only Full-ti equival October payroll Full-ti only Full-ti equival Octobe payrol TOTAL .... ALABAMA: CALHOUN JEFFERSON .... MADISON MOBILE MONTGOMERY. . . . TUSCALOOSA. . . . ALASKA: GREATER ANCHORAGE ARIZONA - . MARICOPA PIMA ARKANSAS: PULASKI CALIFORNIA: ALAMEDA BUTTE CONTRA COSTA. . . FRESNO HUMBOLDT KERN LOS ANGELES . . . MARIN MERCED MONTEREY ORANGE RIVERSIDE .... SACRAMENTO. . . . SAN BERNARDINO. . SAN DIEGO . . . . SAN JOAQUIN . . . SAN LUIS OBISPO . SAN MATEO .... SANTA BARBARA . . SANTA CLARA . . . SANTA CRUZ. . . . SOLANO SONOMA STANISLAUS. . . . TULARE. ..... VENTURA YOLO COLORADO: ADAMS ARAPAHOE BOULDER " EL PASO ..... JEFFERSON .... LARIMER PUEBLO. ..... WELD DELAWARE: NEW CASTLE. . . . FLORIDA: ALACHUA BREVARD BROWARD DADE ESCAMBIA HILLSBOROUGH. . . LEE LEON MANATEE ORANGE PALM BEACH. . . . PASCO PINELLAS POLK SARASOTA SEMINOLE VOLUSIA 135 28 89 (X) 110 43 144 125 83 584 127 126 219 379 110 36 128 63 83 132 28 89 (X) 106 41 134 110 83 2 066 68 584 122 121 191 362 106 36 123 (X) 137 113 40 33 73 584 124 122 202 370 107 36 125 94 13 116 (x) 162 122 136 144 217 436 110 32 141 98 316 48 59 49 49 106 71 10 123 14 63 271 109 35 11 161 153 117 194 398 59 9 113 21 3 112 37 12 162 156 119 2 03 404 61 at end of table. 222 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) County 1 si orgia: BIBB CHATHAM . . . . CLAYTON . . . . COBB. . . . . . OE KALB . . . . FULTON RICHMOND. . . . IDAHO: ADA ILLINOIS: CHAMPAIGN . . . COOK. . . . . . DU PAGE . . . . KANE LAKE LA SALLE. . . . MCHENRY . . . . MCLEAN MACON MADISON . . . . PEORIA ROCK ISLAND . . ST. CLAIR . . . SANGAMON. . . . TAZEWELL. . . . WILL WINNEBAGO . . . INDIANA: ALLEN DELAWARE. . . . ELKHART . . . . LAKE LA PORTE. . . . MADISON . . . . ST. JOSEPH. . . TIPPECANOE. . . VANDERBURGH . . VIGO IOWA: BLACK HAWK. . . LINN POLK SCOTT WOODBURY. . . . KANSAS: JOHNSON . . . . SEDGWICK. . . . SHAWNEE . . . . WYANDOTTE . . . KENTUCKY: JEFFERSON . . . KENTON LOUISIANA: CADDO CALCASIEU . . . JEFFERSON . . . LAFAYETTE . . . OUACHITA. . . . RAPIDES . . . . MAINE: CUMBERLAND. . . PENOBSCOT . . . YORK MARYLAND: ANNE ARUNDEL. . BALTIMORE . . . HARFORD . . . , MONTGOMERY. . . PRINCE GEORGES. WASHINGTON. . . Total judicial activiti Number of employe Full-ti only 142 177 464 716 181 41 240 104 . ... / 49 434 91 •>" 128 205 16 67 113 56 108 170 439 370 147 37 225 u ■ 33 ;y.i, I / .'J 80 34 124 1.", 14 Full-time equivalent 2 123 173 459 33 >56 38 237 1.") 192 October payroll 93 145 462 255 131 ; 04 161 '■; 41 14' . o; 10 Courts of general jurisdicti Number of employe Full-ti only 76 157 214 161 41 3 337 146 66 Full-ti equival 41 Octobe payrol See footnotes at end of table JUDICIAL 223 Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) County ' GEORGIA: BIBB CHATHAM . . . CLAYTON . . . COBB DE KALB . . . FULTON. . . . RICHMOND. . . IDAHO: ADA ILLINOIS: CHAMPAIGN . . COOK DU PAGE . . . KANE LAKE LA SALLE. . . MCHENRY . . . MCLEAN. . . . MACON .... MADISON . . . PEORIA. . . . ROCK ISLAND . ST. CLAIR . . SANGAMON. . . TAZEWELL. . . WILL WINNEBAGO . . INDIANA: ALLEN .... DELAWARE. . . ELKHART . . . LAKE LA PORTE. . . MADISON . . . ST. JOSEPH. . TIPPECANOE. . VANDERBURGH . VIGO IOWA: BLACK HAWK. . LINN POLK SCOTT .... WOODBURY. . . KANSAS: JOHNSON . . . SEDGWICK. . . SHAWNEE . . . WYANDOTTE . . KENTUCKY: JEFFERSON . . KENTON. . . . LOUISIANA! CADDO .... CALCASIEU . . JEFFERSON . . LAFAYETTE . . OUACHITA. . . RAPIDES . . . MAINE: CUMBERLAND. . PENOBSCOT . . YORK MARYLAND: ANNE ARUNDEL. BALTIMORE . . HARFORD . . . MONTGOMERY. . PRINCE GEORGES WASHINGTON. . Courts of limited jurisdicti 45 46 (X) Full-ti only 42 46 32 60 89 190 (X) Full-time equivalent 43 46 32 60 Octobe payrol (X) 101 28 60 2 02 28 (X) 16 (Z) 22 69 127 ruii-ti only 10 62 69 127 Full-time equivalent 69 127 Octobe payrol See footn at end of table. 224 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Number of employees Full-ti only October payroll Courts of general jurisdicti Full-ti only Full-time equivalent Octobe payrol MASSACHUSETTS: BARNSTABLE. , BERKSHIRE . BRISTOL . . ESSEX ... HAMPDEN . . HAMPSHIRE . MIDDLESEX . NORFOLK . . . PLYMOUTH. . , WORCESTER . , MICHIGAN: BAY . . . . , BERRIEN . . , CALHOUN . . , GENESEE . . , INGHAM. . . , JACKSON . . , KALAMAZOO . , KENT. . . . , MACOMB. . . , MONROE. . . , MUSKEGON. . , OAKLAND . . , OTTAWA. . . , SAGINAW . . , ST. CLAIR . . WASHTENAW . , WAYNE t . . , MINNESOTA: ANOKA . . . , DAKOTA. . . . HENNEPIN. . , RAMSEY. . . , ST. LOUIS . . MISSISSIPPI: HARRISON. . , HINDS . . . . JACKSON . . , MISSOURI: CLAY GREENE. . . , JACKSON • . , JEFFERSON . , ST. CHARLES , ST. LOUIS . . NEBRASKA: DOUGLAS . . . LANCASTER . , NEVADA: CLARK . . . , WASHOE. . . , NEW HAMPSHIRE: HILLSBOROUGH. ROCKINGHAM. . NEW JERSEY: ATLANTIC. . , BERGEN. . . , BURLINGTON. , CAMDEN. . . . CUMBERLAND. , ESSEX . . . , GLOUCESTER. , HUDSON. . . , MERCER. . . , MIDDLESEX . , MONMOUTH. . , MORRIS. . . , OCEAN . . . , PASSAIC . . , SOMERSET. . , UNION . . . , 65 45 171 255 207 26 566 224 161 284 103 209 145 7 3 105 119 225 79 100 338 61 127 80 132 1 106 352 241 117 37 4 71] 129 90 272 103 .■.-•a -, i id ! 68 257 1(,3 I 00 ". .:'.4 68 277 1.50 193 171 25 552 192 1 3. : 65 lib 122 93 1 10 67 88 283 48 LOU 67 112 1 092 349 2 57 104 ! 3 8 3 (» v, 63 308 K.O L6] 77 49 275 157 ; 36 183 25 554 2 I 2 146 . 68 196 138 10; 119 352 239 \ 7 127 84 271 99 225 44 .. -.'. 68 K.(, . '.'I 162 88 90 253 54 . /'> 39 144 215 164 25 Vjt 189 1 36 269 207 214 63 121 1 502 111 83 269 86 . 08 297 155 244 1 27 85 80 246 51 .""1 151 89 36 14 31 33( 26 135 49 138 23 30 134 65 489 151 88 34 29 326 ;. 5 41 43 42 42 19 19 2 20 31 31 77 78 32 32 91 91 12 14 88 88 11 11 18 118 65 65 39 39 24 24 3« 34 17 17 'I'l 44 2 7 27 7 1 171 See footn ot oml of tabic JUDICIAL 225 Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) County 1 Courts of limited jurisdiction Full-ti only Full-time equivalent Octobe payrol Full-ti only Full-time equivalent Octobe payrol MASSACHUSETTS: BARNSTABLE. BERKSHIRE . BRISTOL . o ESSEX . . . HAMPDEN . . . HAMPSHIRE . MIDDLESEX . , NORFOLK . . PLYMOUTH. . , WORCESTER . , MICHIGAN: BAY . . . . , BERRIEN . . CALHOUN . . GENESEE . . . INGHAM. . , . JACKSON . . . KALAMAZOO . KENT. ... MACOMB. . . . MONROE. . . . MUSKEGON. . , OAKLAND . . , OTTAWA. . . SAGINAW . . ST. CLAIR . WASHTENAW . ■ WAYNE . . . . MINNESOTA: ANOKA . . . . DAKOTA. . . , HENNEPIN. . . RAMSEY, o . , ST. LOUIS . . MISSISSIPPI: HARRISON. . HINDS ... JACKSON . . MISSOURI: CLAY. . . . GREENE. . . . JACKSON . . . JEFFERSON . ST. CHARLES ST. LOUIS . NEBRASKA: DOUGLAS . . LANCASTER . NEVADA: CLARK . . . WASHOE. . . NEW HAMPSHIRE: HILLSBOROUGH ROCKINGHAM. NEW JERSEY: ATLANTIC. . BERGEN. . . BURLINGTON. CAMDEN. . . CUMBERLAND. ESSEX . . . GLOUCESTER. HUDSON. . . MERCER. . . MIDDLESEX . MONMOUTH. . MORRIS. . . OCEAN . . . PASSAIC . . SOMERSET. . UNION . . . 107 178 148 18 422 147 102 206 201 100 144 114 410 141 27 200 98 53 21 21 53 52 4 7 45 43 40 27 26 74 73 412 145 167 33 28 200 99 54 149 107 397 127 165 28 32 250 122 24 18 24 120 18 17 53 42 14 9 66 200 16 11 27 111 82 164 13 105 19 69 49 81 14 381 36 79 162 19 69 49 81 14 381 42 63 81 162 92 17 46 135 12 See footnotes at end of table 226 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) County 1 NEW MEXICO: BERNALILLO. , NEW YORK: ALBANY. . . . BROOME. . . , CHAUTAUQUA. , CHEMUNG . . , DUTCHESS. . , ERIE. . . . , MONROE. . . , NASSAU. . . , NIAGARA . . . ONEIDA. . . , ONONDAGA. . . ORANGE. . . . OSWEGO. . . , RENSSELAER. , ROCKLAND. . , ST. LAWRENCE, SARATOGA. . , SCHENECTADY . STEUBEN . . , SUFFOLK . . . ULSTER. . . . WESTCHESTER . NORTH CAROLINA: BUNCOMBE. . . CUMBERLAND. . DURHAM. . . , FORSYTH . . . GASTON. . . i GUILFORD. . . MECKLENBURG . ONSLOW. . . . WAKE. . . . i OHIO: ALLEN . . . , ASHTABULA . , BUTLER. . . , CLARK . . . , CLERMONT. . , COLUMBIANA. , CUYAHOGA. . , FRANKLIN. . , GREENE. . . , HAMILTON. . , LAKE. . . . , LICKING . . , LORAIN. . . , LUCAS . . . , MAHONING. . MONTGOMERY. PORTAGE . . RICHLAND. . STARK ... SUMMIT. . . TRUMBULL. . OKLAHOMA: COMANCHE. . OKLAHOMA. . TULSA . . . OREGON: CLACKAMAS . JACKSON . . LANE. . . . MARION. . . MULTNOMAH . WASHINGTON. PENNSYLVANIA: ALLEGHENY . BEAVER. . . BERKS . . . BLAIR . . . Number of employees 84 62 35 22 78 312 192 898 100 73 140 94 33 57 65 63 922 319 63 455 1 11 222 163 362 134 267 106 15 146 149 68 53 164 72 294 46 893 137 132 63 Full-time only 73 304 189 892 69 72 134 8Q 30 613 27 306 15 24 21 28 63 149 291 67 34 106 226 146 138 r )3 46 151 63 284 46 121 130 Full-time equivalent 2 307 191 894 77 72 136 90 31 46 65 23 33 45 28 613 30 306 42 63 842 104 219 151 3 3'1 134 2 4)1 146 144 153 66 287 884 127 131 Octobe payrol 314 211 273 75 133 108 Courts of general jurisdicti Number of employees 33 28 60 2 31 4 3 444 120 268 257 39 699 80 87 16 63 41 20 35 i 01 194 59 Full-ti only 157 31 89 L76 98 107 19 131 Full-time equivalent 162 39 3"0 87 176 33 35 I 1 183 58 98 L13 132 14 Octobe payrol Soe footno )1' tabic JUDICIAL 227 Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Courts of limited jurisdiction Miscell meo»s Total Nun ber of employe County 1 Number of employees October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent NEW MEXICO : 5 39 40 25 m 39 135 108 618 65 32 76 33 17 25 45 16 15 28 19 478 28 112 2 7 8 22 7 4 21 122 24 17 22 12 6 9 20 40 50 45 16 29 35 (X) ( X ) ( X ) 10 8 7 16 135 18 82 23 38 13 5 38 30 18 13 34 129 107 616 40 32 71 33 14 24 45 16 15 27 13 478 24 112 2 8 7 12 20 7 7 9 10 3 2 30 12 24 8 12 I X ) ( X ) ( X) 9 4 7 11 123 18 82 19 36 11 5 38 32 20 13 37 131 108 617 46 32 73 33 15 24 45 16 15 27 15 478 26 112 2 8 18 21 51 24 14 22 10 9 20 32 36 27 26 25 (X) ( X ) ( X ) 9 5 7 14 130 18 82 21 37 13 4 35 32 25 16 47 166 128 875 47 37 79 50 19 26 51 20 19 29 15 567 29 168 1 4 4 11 4 3 12 57 20 9 22 6 3 6 13 20 39 22 11 19 19 ( X ) ( x : (X) 7 3 5 a 106 14 53 10 2.1 5 42 14 9 8 39 146 45 126 34 28 55 61 16 28 19 7 16 27 28 43 5 194 15 25 3 41 19 35 64 10 6 9 18 10 7 24 188 125 5 43 15 7 45 33 36 126 16 10 17 44 12 3 4 8 31 4 3 34 55 34 25 14 104 46 19 17 41 14 9 8 39 144 43 122 29 28 54 56 16 15 19 7 16 12 6 43 3 194 15 24 41 19 28 63 10 6 15 8 5 15 18 1 113 2 43 9 4 30 32 32 122 12 6 17 42 9 2 4 4 31 31 33 52 33 25 14 104 38 19 7 41 14 9 8 39 144 44 123 30 28 54 57 16 19 19 7 16 19 16 43 4 194 15 2 4 2 41 19 31 64 10 3 6 16 8 5 18 183 117 43 10 4 36 32 33 126 13 7 17 4? 10 48 31 35 33 53 33 25 14 104 40 19 11 NEW YORK : 6 17 north Carolina: 6 ohio : 10 1 18 Oklahoma: 39 2 6 oregon: 40 23 29 12 PENNSYLVANIA ! 85 See footnote end of table 228 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) County : PENNSYLVANIA — CONTINUED BUCKS BUTLER CAMBRIA CENTRE CHESTER ....... CUMBERLAND DAUPHIN DELAWARE ERIE FAYETTE FRANKLIN LACKAWANNA. . . . . . LANCASTER LAWRENCE LEBANON LEHIGH LUZERNE LYCOMING MERCER MONTGOMERY NORTHAMPTON SCHUYLKILL WASHINGTON WESTMORELAND. . . . . YORK SOUTH CAROLINA: ANDERSON CHARLESTON GREENVILLE LEXINGTON RICHLAND. ...... SPARTANBURG ..... TENNESSEE: HAMILTON KNOX SHELBY SULLIVAN TEXAS: BELL BEXAR BRAZORIA. ...... CAMERON . DALLAS EL PASO GALVESTON HARRIS HIDALGO JEFFERSON LUBBOCK ....... MCLENNAN NUECES SMITH TARRANT ....... TAYLOR. ....... TRAVIS WICHITA UTAH: DAVIS ... SALT LAKE ...... UTAH. . . WEBER ........ VERMONT: CHITTENDEN. . . . . . VIRGINIA: ARLINGTON FAIRFAX HENRICO PRINCE WILLIAM. . . . Number of employe Full-ti only 44 156 1 31 69 101 138 159 1 16 114 154 106 103 171 354 108 9 34 125 29 245 107 382 31 112 90 123 100 1 02 158 354 37 217 4. i.. 526 90 90 859 55 123 . 6 226 35 IV, 36 35 180 Full-time equivalent 2 : 4 ' 584 29 112 36 lit. 13 1 2 ; j > 102 163 354 . o 42 ; ; i 45 68 57 1 90 94 898 . 33 39 1M, October payroll 96 Number of employees 36 93 S3 ; 29 1 I', 39 551 907 36 30 90 23 219 27 143 24 I'-l 53 54 23 96 33 115 268 7 15 1 3 1 21 . t, 221 47 36 315 11 ■ .-.1 36 , ;u. 22 39 19 13 Full-time equivalent 34 171 36 315 Octobe payrol .;,-, l •... i ii end of tabic. JUDICIAL 229 Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Courts of limited jurisdi County 1 Number of employe Full-time Full-time only equivalent Oc to be i payroll Kull-ti only Ch'tobej payroll PENNSYLVANIA — CONTINUED BUCKS BUTLER CAMBRIA CENTRE CHESTER CUMBERLAND DAUPHIN DELAWARE ERIE . FAYETTE FRANKLIN LACKAWANNA LANCASTER LAWRENCE LEBANON LEHIGH LUZERNE LYCOMING MERCER MONTGOMERY NORTHAMPTON SCHUYLKILL WASHINGTON WESTMORELAND YORK south Carolina: anderson charleston ...... greenville lexington richland spartanburg tennessee ! hamilton KNOX SHELBY SULLIVAN TEXAS: BELL BEXAR BRAZORIA ....... CAMERON. ....'... DALLAS EL PASO GALVESTON HARRIS HIDALGO JEFFERSON LUBBOCK MCLENNAN NUECES SMITH TARRANT TAYLOR TRAVIS WICHITA UTAH : DAVIS SALT LAKE UTAH WEBER VERMONT : CHITTENDEN VIRGINIA : ARLINGTON FAIRFAX HENRICO PRINCE WILLIAM .... 131 29 129 29 15fl 14 172 29 114 10 35 1 ]'! 40 457 102 10 35 119 See fo end of table 230 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total judicial activities Courts of genera 1 jurisdictio Number of employees October payroll 2 Number of employe es County 1 Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent 2 Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll WASHINGTON: 63 431 43 122 113 99 68 27 47 38 122 36 27 445 30 72 51 82 47 55 397 38 77 109 87 64 26 45 32 no 30 22 436 22 65 42 66 29 56 405 39 119 110 92 65 26 46 34 113 33 27 438 26 67 47 77 37 53 402 33 103 92 92 54 23 37 22 108 31 22 516 20 56 36 61 28 16 136 22 69 23 62 29 12 24 38 121 25 27 445 26 72 41 82 47 15 131 19 45 23 59 27 11 22 32 109 19 22 436 19 65 33 66 I-- 15 132 20 69 23 60 27 11 23 34 112 22 27 438 23 67 38 77 37 17 64 25 60 26 WEST VIRGINIA: 9 14 WISCONSIN: 22 107 18 22 516 18 56 27 61 28 - Represents zero or X Not applicable. Z Less than half the *Data are based on a 2 Because of rounding . field compilation f the detail figures of each county government shown; d precisely to the totals shown. text for data limitati JUDICIAL 231 Table 33. Detail of judicial employment and payrolls of 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Courts of limited jurisdiction Miscellaneous Total Number of employees County 1 Number of employees October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent WASHINGTON ! 25 161 21 47 63 35 25 11 1? ( X ) (X) (X) (X ) (X) (X ) (X) (X) (X ) ( X ) 19 136 19 30 60 26 2 3 11 12 ( X ) (X) ( X) (X) (X! ( X ) ( X ) (X) ( X ) (X) 19 141 19 37 61 30 23 11 12 ( XI ( X) ( X ) (X) ( X) ( X ) (X) ( X J ( X ) ( X ) 20 132 14 35 49 30 19 11 15 ( X ) ( X ] ( X ) ( X ) ( X) (X) ( X) ( X ) ( X ) (X) 22 134 6 27 2 14 4 11 1 11 4 10 21 130 2 26 2 14 4 11 1 1 1 3 9 21 133 3 26 2 14 4 11 1 11 3 9 9 WEST VIRGINIA.: Wisconsin: Section V. LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION LEGAL SERVICES AND PROSECUTION 233 "able 34. Legal services and prosecution expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expc nditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments STATES-LOCAL/ TOTAL. . . MUNICIPALITIES . . . ALABAMA 755 651 219 247 542 440 319 540 223 282 6 424 3 097 3 341 1 984 1 360 5 588 4 070 1 518 601 917 10 145 1 745 8 400 5 636 2 775 2 763 944 1 829 1 176 655 137 385 21 628 115 757 88 479 27 290 12 876 2 760 10 116 5 375 4 852 8 989 5 659 3 480 3 480 1 949 1 346 603 186 418 6 736 6 736 6 736 29 541 20 741 8 803 3 709 5 105 10 632 3 478 7 157 5 284 1 875 755 851 215 997 539 854 316 765 223 090 6 424 3 097 3 327 1 984 1 344 5 588 4 070 1 518 601 917 10 145 1 745 8 400 5 636 2 764 2 763 944 1 819 1 176 643 137 385 21 628 115 757 88 478 27 279 12 876 2 760 10 116 5 264 4 852 8 989 5 512 3 477 3 477 1 949 1 346 603 186 417 6 736 6 736 6 736 29 541 20 741 8 800 3 701 5 100 10 632 3 478 7 154 5 279 1 875 746 226 213 141 533 085 311 540 221 545 6 287 3 036 3 251 1 914 1 337 5 541 4 047 1 494 591 903 9 969 1 707 8 262 5 526 2 736 2 755 937 1 818 1 176 642 134 334 21 510 112 824 86 009 26 815 12 692 2 701 9 991 5 195 4 797 8 927 5 461 3 466 3 466 1 850 1 256 594 183 411 6 736 6 736 6 736 28 965 20 301 8 664 3 608 5 056 10 516 3 459 7 057 5 195 1 862 9 625 2 856 6 769 5 224 1 545 137 61 76 70 6 47 23 24 10 14 176 38 138 110 28 8 7 1 1 3 051 118 2 933 2 469 464 184 59 125 70 55 62 51 11 11 99 90 9 3 6 576 440 136 93 43 116 19 97 84 13 6 217 3 250 2 967 2 775 193 16 16 16 11 11 11 12 12 1 11 12 12 1 12 110 110 110 150 147 3 3 1 1 1 14 14 9 5 5 5 5 2 586 (X) 2 586 2 497 89 14 (X) 14 14 (X) (X) 10 (X) 10 1 9 (X) (X) 3 (X) 3 3 (X) (X) 2 (X) 2 2 4 (X) 4 4 3 632 3 250 382 278 104 3 STATE ALASKA . . 3 3 STATE - ARIZONA 11 STATE COUNTIES 11 ARKANSAS . . 11 2 STATE COUNTIES 2 CALIFORNIA ?. 12 STATE. COLORADO 12 1 12 110 STATE. ... 110 110 147 147 1 STATE DELAWARE state 1 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA state 1 Florida 11 state 11 GEORGIA 5 1 STATE 1 1 See footnotes at end of table. 234 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 34. Legal services and prosecution expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 4 039 1 655 2 384 614 1 770 2 357 628 1 729 1 248 481 35 892 10 183 27 204 18 133 9 072 10 406 4 214 6 232 3 479 2 761 6 607 1 836 4 771 3 310 1 495 8 557 3 745 4 813 3 376 1 438 9 074 4 007 5 067 3 066 2 001 10 862 5 420 5 442 2 784 2 667 2 020 1 423 598 225 374 12 977 1 791 11 186 6 194 4 991 16 567 5 216 11 355 2 883 8 472 34 012 7 422 26 593 17 254 9 384 4 039 1 655 2 384 614 1 770 2 357 628 1 729 1 248 481 35 892 8 688 27 204 18 132 9 072 10 406 4 214 6 192 3 449 2 743 6 607 1 836 4 771 3 310 1 462 8 557 3 745 4 812 3 374 1 438 9 074 4 007 5 067 3 066 2 001 10 862 5 420 5 442 2 783 2 659 2 020 1 423 597 224 373 12 977 1 791 U 186 6 194 4 991 16 567 5 216 U 351 2 879 8 472 34 012 7 422 26 590 17 205 9 384 4 025 1 655 2 370 607 1 763 2 330 619 1 711 1 230 481 35 681 8 635 27 046 17 994 9 052 10 278 4 155 6 123 3 396 2 727 6 540 1 784 4 756 3 300 1 456 8 209 3 503 4 706 3 283 1 423 8 962 3 917 5 045 3 062 1 983 10 673 5 310 5 363 2 739 2 624 2 002 1 408 594 221 373 12 930 1 791 11 139 6 148 4 991 16 477 5 188 11 289 2 864 8 426 33 699 7 359 26 340 16 991 9 349 14 14 7 7 27 9 18 18 211 53 158 138 19 128 59 69 53 16 67 52 15 10 5 348 242 106 91 15 112 90 22 4 17 189 110 79 43 36 18 15 3 3 46 46 46 89 28 61 15 46 313 63 250 214 36 1 496 1 495 1 1 47 47 30 18 33 33 33 2 2 1 9 9 1 8 2 2 1 1 4 4 4 49 49 49 (X) (X) (X) 40 (X) 40 27 14 • » o 101 101 97 4 4 - - _ _ _ ARLINGTON . 193 193 190 3 3 - - _ _ _ AUSTIN. . . 361 361 361 - - - - - _ _ BEAUMONT. . 99 99 96 3 3 - - _ _ _ BROWNSVILLE 30 30 30 - - - - - _ _ CORPUS CHRIS r i 253 253 2 39 14 14 - - - - _ DALLAS. . . 1 000 1 000 984 16 16 - - - - - EL PASO . . 121 121 121 - - - - - - - FORT WORTH. 318 318 312 6 6 _ _ _ _ _ GALVESTON . 54 54 50 4 4 - - _ _ _ GARLAND . . 143 143 139 4 4 - - - - - GRAND PRAIRI 49 49 47 2 2 - - - - - HOUSTON . . 858 858 851 7 7 - - - - - IRVING. . . 96 96 96 - - - - - _ _ LAREDO. . . 50 50 50 - - - - _ _ _ LUBBOCK . . 146 146 141 5 5 - - _ _ _ MESQUITE. . 40 40 39 1 1 - - _ _ _ MIDLAND . . 56 56 53 3 3 - - - - - ODESSA. . . 50 50 50 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PASADENA. . 105 105 101 4 4 - - - - - PORT ARTHUR 55 55 52 3 3 - - _ _ _ RICHARDSON. 16 16 16 - - - - - - - SAN ANGELO. 37 37 35 2 2 - - - - - SAN ANTONIO 560 560 557 3 3 - - _ - - TYLER . . . 50 50 46 4 4 - - _ - - WACO. . . . 83 83 80 3 3 - - _ - - WICHITA FALLS 66 66 66 - - - - - - - UTAH: OGDEN 68 68 68 - - - - _ _ _ PROVO 43 43 43 - - - - _ _ _ SALT LAKE CITY. . . . 238 238 238 - - - - - - - VIRGINIA: ALEXANDRIA 295 295 295 - _ _ _ _ _ _ CHESAPEAKE. 167 167 166 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ HAMPTON . . 245 196 196 - _ _ _ 49 49 _ LYNCHBURG . 123 123 122 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ NEWPORT NEWS 261 261 247 14 14 _ _ _ _ _ NORFOLK . . 446 446 432 14 14 - _ - _ _ PORTSMOUTH. 208 208 2 08 - - - - - - - RICHMOND. . 821 821 688 133 - - 133 - -■ - ROANOKE . . 496 496 496 - - - - - - - VIRGINIA BEACH 337 337 337 - - - - - - - WASHINGTON: BELLEVUE 122 122 122 - - - - _ _ - EVERETT . . 83 83 83 - - - - _ - - SEATTLE . . 825 825 816 9 9 - - _ - - SPOKANE . . 218 218 218 - - - - - - - TACOMA. . . 297 297 297 - - - - - - - WEST VIRGINIA: CHARLESTON 172 172 172 - - - - - - - HUNTINGTON 55 55 55 - - - - - - - WISCONSIN: APPLETON 35 35 35 - - - - - - - GREEN BAY . . 62 62 62 - - - - - _ - KENOSHA . . 64 64 63 1 1 - - - - - LA CROSSE . , 42 42 42 - - - - - - - MADISON . . . 277 277 276 1 1 - - - - - MILWAUKEE . 1 343 1 343 1 332 11 11 - - - - - OSHKOSH . . 49 49 49 - - - - - - - RACINE. . . 113 113 112 1 1 - - - - - WAUWATOSA . 45 45 45 - - - - _ _ - WEST ALL IS. 85 85 85 - - - - - - - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a field compilation from records of each city government shown; see text for data limitations. Section VI. PUBLIC DEFENSE 252 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 37. Public defense expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments STATES-LOCAL/ TOTAL. . . LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES . . . 193 253 73 127 127 938 102 280 26 036 1 396 1 243 191 79 111 1 304 1 302 2 2 3 535 3 535 3 247 288 452 20 475 474 8 40 255 1 878 39 152 38 096 1 056 2 977 2 794 183 20 163 2 024 2 007 17 17 560 540 20 20 1 935 1 935 1 935 10 068 9 041 1 028 921 134 2 854 1 316 1 638 1 570 87 193 253 65 481 127 772 101 901 25 871 1 396 1 243 153 71 82 1 304 1 302 2 2 3 535 3 535 3 247 288 452 20 432 430 1 40 255 1 103 39 152 38 096 1 056 2 977 2 794 183 20 163 2 024 2 007 17 17 560 540 20 20 1 935 1 935 1 935 10 068 9 041 1 027 917 110 2 854 1 221 1 633 1 546 87 192 422 65 074 127 348 101 508 25 840 1 396 1 243 153 71 82 1 297 1 295 2 2 3 500 3 500 3 212 288 448 20 428 427 1 40 087 1 103 38 984 37 933 1 051 2 968 2 785 183 20 163 2 024 2 007 17 17 553 533 20 20 1 935 1 935 1 935 9 838 8 825 1 013 907 106 2 827 1 221 1 606 1 519 87 831 407 424 393 31 7 7 35 35 35 3 3 3 168 168 163 5 9 9 7 7 230 216 14 11 4 27 27 27 8 191 7 646 545 379 165 38 38 8 29 51 51 44 7 775 775 28 28 3 25 119 95 24 24 166 (X) 166 134 32 38 (X) 38 8 29 (X) (X) 44 (X) 44 44 (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) 1 (X) 1 1 5 (X) 5 5 8 025 7 646 379 246 133 STATE — - ALASKA - STATE _ - ARIZONA " STATE COUNTIES - ARKANSAS 7 STATE COUNTIES 7 CALIFORNIA 7 775 STATE 775 COUNTIES . , COLORADO " STATE _ - CONNECTICUT " _ DELAWARE - STATE _ - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE - FLORIDA 27 STATE COUNTIES 27 3 GEORGIA 25 114 STATE 95 COUNTIES 19 19 See footnotes at end of table. PUBLIC DEFENSE 253 Table 37. Public defense expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditu re Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments HAWAII 1 269 1 269 3 3 681 681 685 1 7 393 1 712 5 681 5 660 21 1 797 252 1 545 1 335 214 1 736 18 1 718 1 746 1 507 1 337 170 153 18 1 083 1 890 444 450 45 1 169 1 169 691 484 411 150 261 259 2 5 579 5 569 10 10 5 100 3 095 2 083 2 074 9 12 490 6 532 11 437 9 559 1 878 1 269 1 269 681 681 680 1 7 393 1 712 5 681 5 660 21 1 797 252 1 545 1 332 214 1 736 18 1 718 1 718 1 507 1 337 170 152 18 1 083 664 419 419 1 169 1 169 685 484 411 150 261 259 2 5 579 5 569 10 10 5 100 3 017 2 083 2 074 9 12 490 1 060 11 430 9 551 1 878 1 269 1 269 679 679 678 1 7 331 1 681 5 650 5 629 21 1 796 252 1 544 1 330 214 1 734 18 1 716 1 716 1 505 1 335 170 152 18 1 070 651 419 419 1 169 1 169 685 484 407 150 257 255 2 5 523 5 513 10 10 5 099 3 017 2 082 2 074 9 12 488 1 060 11 428 9 549 1 878 2 2 2 62 31 31 31 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 13 13 4 4 4 56 56 2 2 2 3 3 3 5 5 5 4 4 3 29 29 29 1 1 1 1 302 1 226 76 31 45 6 6 6 78 78 5 479 5 472 7 7 3 (X) 3 3 (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) 25 (X! 25 25 (X) (X) (X) (X) 7 (X) 7 7 STATE - IDAHO 5 STATE COUNTIES 5 5 ILLINOIS STATE COUNTIES - INDIANA n STATE COUNTIES 4 3 IOWA 29 COUNTIES 29 29 KANSAS 1 STATE COUNTIES 1 1 KENTUCKY 1 277 1 226 51 6 STATE COUNTIES LOUISIANA 45 6 STATE 6 6 MAINE STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES - MUNICIPALITIES ....... MARYLAND - STATE - MASSACHUSETTS 78 STATE 78 MICHIGAN 5 472 5 472 STATE - See footnotes at end of table. 254 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 37. Public defense expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 2 172 335 1 838 1 920 113 594 594 551 42 2 067 1 781 286 36 250 381 381 370 11 975 975 976 3 1 222 161 1 094 1 081 13 230 230 10 930 10 547 383 236 147 1 845 1 813 32 32 26 295 4 004 22 291 8 106 14 185 4 965 4 965 205 205 205 2 172 335 1 837 1 747 90 594 594 551 42 2 067 1 781 286 36 250 381 381 370 11 975 975 975 1 222 161 1 061 1 048 13 230 230 10 930 10 547 383 236 147 1 845 1 813 32 32 26 295 4 004 22 291 8 106 14 185 4 965 4 965 205 205 205 2 152 335 1 817 1 727 90 594 594 551 42 2 067 1 781 286 36 250 377 377 366 11 968 968 968 1 219 160 1 059 1 046 13 230 230 10 905 10 522 383 236 147 1 835 1 803 32 32 26 261 4 004 22 257 8 072 14 185 4 965 4 965 205 205 205 20 20 20 3 3 3 7 7 7 3 1 2 2 25 25 10 10 34 34 34 196 196 173 23 4 4 1 3 33 33 33 1 1 1 1 (X) 1 1 (X) (X) (X) (X) 33 (X) 33 33 (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) 195 STATE 195 172 23 STATE - - STATE COUNTIES - MUNICIPALITIES MONTANA - STATE COUNTIES - NEBRASKA 4 STATE COUNTIES 4 1 NEVADA 3 STATE - NEW HAMPSHIRE. ........ - - NEW JERSEY - STATE - NEW MEXICO " STATE - NEW YORK " _ COUNTIES - STATE - COUNTIES - NORTH DAKOTA 1 STATE COUNTIES 1 1 See footnotes at end of tablt PUBLIC DEFENSE 255 Table 37. Public defense expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments OHIO 4 282 50 4 235 3 548 695 739 739 704 35 2 660 113 2 547 2 472 77 7 168 7 168 4 042 3 125 420 420 1 049 608 442 429 13 267 267 261 6 1 669 955 714 469 244 4 020 4 020 4 020 15 395 395 382 13 628 628 4 068 3 850 218 111 107 4 282 50 4 232 3 548 684 739 739 704 35 2 660 113 2 547 2 472 75 7 168 7 168 4 042 3 125 420 420 1 049 608 441 428 13 267 267 261 6 1 669 955 714 469 244 4 020 4 020 4 020 395 395 382 13 628 628 4 068 3 850 218 111 107 4 282 50 4 232 3 548 684 737 737 701 35 2 658 113 2 545 2 470 75 7 151 7 151 4 026 3 125 420 42C 1 046 608 438 424 13 267 267 261 6 1 652 955 697 469 227 4 015 4 015 4 015 395 395 382 13 603 603 4 065 3 850 215 111 104 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 16 16 3 3 3 17 17 17 5 5 5 25 25 3 3 3 11 11 11 2 2 2 1 1 1 15 15 15 3 (X) 3 3 (X) (X) (X) (X) 1 (X) 1 1 (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) 8 STATE COUNTIES 8 OKLAHOMA 8 STATE COUNTIES - OREGON 2 STATE COUNTIES 2 2 STATE COUNTIES - RHODE ISLAND - STATE STATE - COUNTIES - SOUTH DAKOTA - STATE - TENNESSEE - STATE COUNTIES - TEXAS 15 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES 15 UTAH 15 STATE COUNTIES - VERMONT - STATE - VIRGINIA - STATE COUNTIES - - See footnotes at end of table. 256 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 37. Public defense expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 3 425 416 3 009 2 580 434 71 71 71 2 687 286 2 407 2 407 253 253 250 2 3 425 416 3 009 2 580 429 71 71 71 2 687 286 2 401 2 401 253 253 250 2 3 405 416 2 989 2 563 426 71 71 71 2 682 281 2 401 2 401 253 253 250 2 20 20 17 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 (X) (X) 5 (X) 5 5 (X) 5 STATE 5 5 STATE - - STATE - - STATE - - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. X Not applicable. 'Data for municipalities, and the local governments totals which include municipal data, are estimates subject to sampling variation; data for counties (boroughs, parishes) are based on a canvass of all county governments and therefore are not subject to sampling variation; see text for data limitations. 2 For each State, and the United States summary, the expenditure figures shown on the "Local, total" line and the combined State-local total line (the data shown opposite the names of the individual States) exclude duplicative intergovernmental expend- iture amounts. This was done to avoid the artificial inflation which would result if an intergovernmental expenditure amount for one government is tabulated and then counted again when the recipient government(s ) ultimately expend(s) that amount. PUBLIC DEFENSE 257 Table 38. Public defense expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Capital outlay To To County l Total TV r rt- State local Total Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments 85 071 84 955 84 668 287 287 - - 116 14 102 ALABAMA! CALHOUN _ . _ - - _ - _ - - JEFFERSON 22 22 22 - - - _ . _ - MaDISON 17 17 17 - - - - _ _ - MOBILE _ . _ - _ - - _ _ - Montgomery _ - _ - . - - _ _ . TUSCALOOSA 8 - - - - - - 8 8 - ALASKA: GREATER ANCHORAGE . . - - - - - - - - - - ARIZONA: 1 690 1 690 1 678 12 12 - - _ _ . PIMA 957 957 934 23 23 " ~ _ ARKANSAS! 128 127 127 - - - - 1 1 - California: 3 007 3 007 2 992 15 15 - - - _ - 178 178 178 - _ - - - . - 1 233 1 233 1 223 10 10 _ _ _ _ _ 986 986 981 5 5 _ _ _ _ - 120 120 120 - _ - - _ _ - 528 528 527 1 1 - - - . - 12 695 12 695 12 686 9 9 _ _ _ _ _ MARIN 614 614 608 6 6 - - - - - 117 117 117 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 559 559 552 7 7 « - _ _ - 2 285 2 285 2 253 32 32 . . _ _ - 1 140 1 140 1 139 1 1 _ - _ _ - Sacramento 1 995 1 995 1 986 9 9 - - _ _ - SAN BERNARDINO. . . . 1 119 1 119 1 116 3 3 - - . . - san diego 3 217 3 217 3 217 - - - - _ _ - 939 939 936 3 3 - - - - - SAN LUIS OBISPO . . . 123 123 123 _ _ _ _ _ ., _ SAN MATEO 926 926 926 - - - - - _ - SANTA BARBARA .... 537 537 534 3 3 _ _ _ _ . Santa clara 1 713 1 713 1 713 - - - - _ _ - 192 192 192 - - - - . _ - SOLANO 469 469 467 2 2 _ - _ _ - 321 321 319 2 2 _ _ _ _ - 205 205 200 5 5 - - - _ - 435 435 434 1 1 - - - . - VENTURA 764 764 764 - - _ - _ m - YOLO 286 286 282 4 a ™ " m ~ m COLORADO: ADAMS _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - ARAPAHOE _ . _ - „ _ _ _ _ . BOULDER _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - EL PASO _ _ _ - _ _ _ .. _ _ JEFFERSON _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LARIMER . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . 20 20 20 _ . _ _ _ _ _ WELD - - - - - - - - - - DELAWARE: NEW CASTLE - - - - - - - - - - FLORIDA: 24 24 24 - _ _ _ _ _ . 25 25 25 - _ _ _ _ _ _ BROWARD 137 137 137 - - - - _ _ - DADE 160 71 160 71 154 71 6 6 - - - ~ _ _ HILLSBOROUGH 79 79 78 1 1 - . _ _ - LEE 17 22 17 22 17 22 — - ™ " - - m LEON See footnotes at end of table. 258 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 38. Public defense expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure County 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments FLORIDA — CONTINUED 6 6 6 - - - - - - - 25 25 25 - - - - - - - PALM BEACH 120 120 120 - - - - - _ - PASCO _ - _ - - - - - . - . - - - - - - . - - 4 8 4 8 4 8 ~ " " m - - _ - 3 3 3 - - - - - _ - VOLUSIA 5 5 5 - - - - - - - GEORGIA: BIBB 64 95 64 95 64 95 ™ - : ~ - - _ - 43 43 43 - - - - . - - Cobb 139 139 121 139 119 139 2 2 - . 18 - 18 336 336 334 2 2 _ - _ _ - 40 40 40 - - - - - - - IDAHO: ADA 78 78 78 " " ~ " _ ILLINOIS: 84 84 84 - - > - . . - 3 232 308 3 232 308 3 219 300 13 8 13 8 - : - - _ - KANE 63 112 36 63 112 36 62 109 36 1 3 1 3 - - - \ _ LAKE — - 53 53 49 4 4 _ _ - . - 56 56 56 - - - - - - - 70 70 70 . . _ _ _ _ _ 104 104 103 1 1 - - - - - 91 91 91 - - - - - - - ROCK ISLAND 31 31 31 - - . - - - - 137 137 137 - - _ - - - - 48 48 48 - - - - - - - 44 44 44 - - - - - . - 122 122 122 - - - - - - - 125 125 124 1 1 - - - - - INDIANA: 136 136 135 1 1 _ - - - - 42 42 42 - - > - - - - 39 39 39 - - - - - - - LAKE 122 26 122 26 122 26 — m _ * - - _ - MADISON 48 48 48 - _ _ _ _ _ _ 33 33 33 - - _ _ - - - 25 25 25 - - . - - . - VANDERBURGH 111 111 HI - - _ - - - - VIGO 50 50 50 - - - - - - - IOWA: 133 133 133 - - - - - - - LINN 159 282 95 159 282 68 159 282 68 - - - - 27 - _ _ 27 120 120 120 - - - - - - - KANSAS: 19 19 19 - - - - - - - 29 29 29 - - _ _ - - - SHAWNEE _ _ _ - - - _ - _ - WYANDOTTE - - - - - - - - - - KENTUCKY: - . _ - - _ - - . - 84 84 84 - - - - - - - See footnotes at end of tablt PUBLIC DEFENSE 259 Table 38. Public defense expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) County 1 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Construc- tion State govern- ments local govern- ments LOUISIANA; CADDO . . CALCASIEU JEFFERSON LAFAYETTE OUACHITA. RAPIDES . MAINE: Cumberland, penobscot , YORK. . . , MARYLAND: ANNE ARUNDEL. . BALTIMORE . . . HARFORD .... MONTGOMERY. . . PRINCE GEORGES. WASHINGTON. . . MASSACHUSETTS: BARNSTABLE. . . BERKSHIRE . . . BRISTOL . . . . ESSEX HAMPDEN .... HAMPSHIRE MIDDLESEX NORFOLK . PLYMOUTH. WORCESTER MICHIGAN: BAY . . . BERRIEN . Calhoun . GENESEE . INGHAM. . JACKSON . KALAMAZOO KENT. . . MACOMB. . MONROE. . Muskegon. OAKLAND . OTTAWA. . Saginaw . ST. CLAIR WASHTENAW WAYNE . . MINNESOTA: ANOKA . . DAKOTA. . HENNEPIN. RAMSEY. . ST. LOUIS MISSISSIPPI: HARRISON. HINDS . . JACKSON . MISSOURI: CLAY. . . . GREENE. . . JACKSON . . JEFFERSON . ST. CHARLES ST. LOUIS . See footnotes at end of table. 51 46 46 18 18 18 116 116 116 70 70 70 25 25 25 37 37 37 6? 62 62 57 57 53 1 1 1 44 250 15 204 34 165 8? 113 160 112 179 111 280 283 145 229 201 566 165 122 872 58 279 153 339 4 159 59 80 783 80 114 44 250 15 204 34 165 82 113 160 109 179 111 280 283 145 229 201 566 165 122 872 58 279 153 339 159 59 28 783 80 114 44 250 15 204 34 165 82 113 160 108 179 111 280 283 145 229 201 566 165 12? 87? 57 279 153 339 4 159 59 28 766 80 114 17 52 52 260 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 38. Public defense expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Capital outlay To To County 1 Total T-j-j -ppf- State local Total Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments NEBRASKA: DOUGLAS 384 384 383 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ LANCASTER 153 153 152 1 1 - - - - - NEVADA: Clark 603 603 602 1 1 _ - _ _ _ WASHOE 361 361 360 1 1 - - - - - NEW HAMPSHIRE: HILLSBOROUGH _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ROCKINGHAM - - - - - - - - - - NEW JERSEY! ATLANTIC _ _ _ - _ « _ _ _ _ BERGEN _ _ _ _ _ _ _ m — _ BURLINGTON _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ m _ Camden _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ m _ CUMBERLAND . . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ ESSEX 151 151 151 - . _ . _ _ _ Gloucester _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ Hudson - - - - - - - - - - mercer — — _ _ m m m _ Middlesex 30 30 30 - _ _ _ _ _ _ MONMOUTH 3 3 3 - _ . _ _ _ _ morris 15 15 15 - _ _ _ _ _ _ OCEAN _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ PASSAIC _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — — _ somerset 5 5 5 - - _ „ _ _ _ union - - - - - - - - - - new Mexico: BERNALILLO - - - - - - - - - - NEW YORK: ALBANY. . .... 242 242 238 4 4 _ . _ _ _ BROOME 115 115 115 - . - _ «. _ . CHAUTAUQUA 98 98 98 - - _ _ _ _ _ Chemung 53 53 53 - _ _ . _ _ - Dutchess 217 217 216 1 1 - - _ _ - ERIE 793 793 793 - - - . _ _ . MONROE 550 550 540 10 10 - - _ _ . NASSAU 1 379 1 379 1 379 - - - - _ _ _ NIAGARA 123 123 123 - . - - _ _ . ONEIDA 128 128 128 - - - - _ _ - ONONDAGA 384 384 384 - - - - - - - ORANGE 195 195 195 _ _ _ _ m _ _ OSWEGO 24 24 24 - _ _ _ _ _ _ RENSSELAER 77 77 77 - . _ _ _ _ - Rockland 243 243 240 3 3 _ - _ _ - ST. LAWRENCE 59 59 58 1 1 _ - _ _ - Saratoga 48 "8 48 - - . - _ _ - SCHENECTADY 36 36 36 - - _ . _ _ . STEUBEN 56 56 55 1 1 _ - _ _ - Suffolk 1 370 1 370 1 360 10 10 . - . _ - ULSTER 77 77 77 - - _ - _ _ - WESTCHESTER 939 939 939 - - - - - - - NORTH CAROLINA: BUNCOMBE _ m _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ CUMBERLAND _ m _ . . _ _ _ _ _ DURHAM _ m _ - _ m _ _ _ _ FORSYTH _ m _ . _ m _ _ _ - GASTON _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ GUILFORD _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ MECKLENBURG _ _ _ - _ m _ _ _ - ONSLOW. ....... _ _ _ m _ _ . _ _ _ WAKE - " - - - " - - - - See footnotes at end of table. PUBLIC DEFENSE 261 Table 38. Public defense expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Capital outlay To To County 1 Total Direct State local Total Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments OHIO: ALLEN 24 24 24 _ - - - . _ - _ _ _ - - . - - _ - 9 9 9 - - - - - . - 18 18 18 - - - - - m - 21 21 21 - - - - - _ - 57 57 57 - - - - - - - 1 211 1 211 1 211 _ _ _ „ _ m _ 232 232 232 - - • - _ _ - 65 65 65 - - - - - _ - Hamilton 462 462 462 - - _ . _ _ - LAKE 64 64 64 - - - - _ _ - 31 31 31 - - - - - ~ - 35 35 35 _ _ _ _ m _ _ 153 153 153 - - _ - _ _ - Mahoning 47 47 47 - . - - _ _ - Montgomery 153 153 153 - - _ - _ _ - 46 46 46 - _ _ - _ _ _ 31 31 31 - - - - - " - 97 97 97 _ _ _ _ m _ _ 199 199 199 » - . - . _ - 81 81 81 - - - - - ~ - OKLAHOMA: Comanche 63 63 63 - - • - _ _ - 232 232 230 2 2 - . _ _ - TULSA 147 147 147 - - - - - " - OREGON: Clackamas 133 133 133 - . _ _ _ _ . Jackson . . 133 133 133 - - - - . _ - lane. . . . 212 212 212 - - . . _ _ - MARION. . . 119 119 119 - - . _ _ _ - Multnomah . 985 985 985 - . _ . _ «, - WASHINGTON. 179 179 179 - - - - - " - PENNSYLVANIA: Allegheny 686 686 684 2 2 . - _ _ - BEAVER. . . 82 82 81 1 1 _ - _ „ - BERKS . . . 68 68 68 - - _ . _ „ . BLAIR . . . 43 43 42 1 1 . - _ . - BUCKS . . . 223 223 223 - - . - . _ - BUTLER. . , 33 33 33 - . _ _ _ _ _ CAMBRIA . . 60 60 60 - . _ - _ _ - CENTRE. . . 29 29 29 . _ _ _ _ _ - CHESTER . . 242 242 237 5 5 - - - > - Cumberland. 31 31 31 _ m m m _ _ DAUPHIN . . 120 120 120 - _ _ . _ _ _ DELAWARE. . 424 424 424 - - . . - _ . ERIE. . . . 166 166 165 1 1 _ - „ _ - Fayette . . 38 38 38 . _ _ • _ _ _ FRANKLIN. , 43 43 43 - _ . _ _ _ _ Lackawanna. 80 80 80 - _ _ _ _ _ _ Lancaster . 73 73 73 - _ _ . _ _ . Lawrence. . 38 38 36 2 2 - - - " - LEBANON . . 21 21 21 _ m — m _ _ LEHIGH. . . 83 83 82 1 1 _ . _ _ - LUZERNE . . 106 106 106 - _ _ _ _ _ _ LyCOMING. . 41 41 41 - _ _ . _ _ - MERCER. . . 85 85 84 1 1 _ . _ _ _ MONTGOMERY. 390 390 389 1 1 _ _ _ _ . NORTHAMPTON 96 96 96 - - _ . _ _ . SCHUYLKILL. 49 49 49 - _ _ _ _ _ _ WASHINGTON. 55 55 55 . _ _ _ _ _ _ WESTMORELAND 78 78 77 1 1 m _ _ „ _ YORK. . . . 42 42 42 - - - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. 262 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 38. Public defense expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure County 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- To Total Equip- Construc- local govern- ment tion ments ments SOUTH CAROLINA: ANDERSON . - _ - - - - . _ - Charleston 10 10 10 - - - - _ - - 36 36 36 - . - . - _ - LEXINGTON - - - - - - - - - - 122 122 122 - - - - _ _ - 48 48 48 - - - - - - - TENNESSEE: . - - - - - - . . - KNOX . - - - - - - - _ - 375 375 375 - - - - - _ - 2 2 2 - - - - - - - TEXAS: BELL 38 350 38 350 38 350 - — — ~ - - _ - 23 23 23 - - - - - - - 45 45 45 - - - - - - - 811 811 811 - - - - - - - 156 156 156 - - - - - - - 47 47 47 - - - - - - - 1 040 1 040 1 040 - - - - - - - 39 39 39 - - - - - - - 55 55 55 - _ _ _ _ _ _ LUBBOCK 33 33 33 - - - - - - - MCLENNAN 29 29 29 - - - - - - - 90 90 90 - - - - - . - 27 27 27 - - - - - - - 227 227 227 - - - - - - - 48 48 48 - - - - - - - 65 65 65 - - - - - - - 27 27 27 - - - - - - - UTAH: . - - - - - - - - - 228 228 228 - - - - - - - UTAH 22 60 22 60 22 60 - "* ™ " - " _ WEBER - VERMONT: Chittenden - - - - - - - - - - VIRGINIA: ARLINGTON _ - - - - - - . - - 79 79 70 - - - - - - - HENRICO _ - - - - - _ - PRINCE WILLIAM. . . . - - - - - - - - - - WASHINGTON: 119 119 119 - - - - - - - KING 1 175 61 1 175 61 1 171 61 4 1 " ~ — - • - 238 238 234 4 4 - - - - - 257 257 251 6 6 - - - - - 227 227 225 2 2 - - - - - 6 6 6 - - - - - - - WEST VIRGINIA: 10 10 10 - - - - - - - KANAWHA 7 7 7 - - - - - - - WISCONSIN: 59 57 57 - - - - 2 2 - DANE 131 79 131 79 131 79 _ : - - _ : _ - 20 20 20 - - - - - - - 745 745 745 - - - - - - - 124 124 124 - _ - - - _ - 283 283 283 - - - - - _ - ROCK 89 81 89 81 89 81 ■ : — _ _ : m - 70 70 70 - - - - - - - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a Held compilation from records of each county government shown; see text for data limitations. INDIGENT DEFENSE 263 Table 39. Indigent defense expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- To local govern- Total Equip- Construc- ment tion ments ments TOTAL . „ . . . . 24 678 24 571 24 548 23 23 - - 107 11 96 ALABAMA: BIRMINGHAM 43 43 43 - - - - - - - GADSDEN .... - - - - - - - - - - HUNTSVILLE. . . 20 20 20 - - - - - - - MOBILE - - - - - - - - - - MONTGOMERY. . . 7 7 7 - - - - - - TUSCALOOSA. . . 11 - - - - - - 11 11 - ARIZONA: GLENDALE - - - - - - - - - - MESA 8 8 8 - - - - - - - PHOENIX .... 230 230 230 - - - - - - - SCOTTSDALE. . . - - - - - - - - - - TEMPE - - - - - - - - - - TUCSON 20 20 20 - - - - - - - ARKANSAS: FORT SMITH. 7 - - - - - - 7 - 7 LITTLE ROCK - - - - - - - - - - NORTH LITTLE ROCK . . - - - - - - - - - - PINE BLUFF - - - - - - - - - - CALIFORNIA: ALAMEDA - - - - - - - - - - ALHAMBRA. . . . - - - - - - - - - - ANAHEIM .... - - - - - - - - - - BAKERSFIELD . . - - - - - - - - - - BELLFLOWER. . . - - - - - - - - - - BERKELEY. . . . - - - - - - - - - - BUENA PARK. . . - - - - - - - - - - BURBANK .... - - - - - - - - - - CARSON - - - - - - - - - - CHULA VISTA . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ COMPTON .... - - - - - - - - - - CONCORD .... - - - - - - - - - - COSTA MESA. . . - - - - - - - - - - DALY CITY . . . - - - - - - - - - - DOWNEY - - - - - - - - - - EL CAJON. . . . - - - - - - - - - - EL MONTE. . . . - - - - - - - - - - FREMONT .... - - - - - - - - - - FRESNO _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FULLERTON . . . - - - - - - - - - - GARDEN GROVE. . - - - - - - - - - - GLENDALE. . . . - - - - - - - - - - HAWTHORNE . . . - - - - - - - - - - HAYWARD .... - - - - - - - - - - HUNTINGTON BEACH - - - - - - - - - - INGLEWOOD . . . - - - - - - - - - - LAKEWOOD. . . . - - - - - - - - - - LONG BEACH. . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LOS ANGELES . . - - - - - - - - - - MODESTO .... - - - - _ - - - - - MOUNTAIN VIEW . - - - - - - - - - - NEWPORT BEACH . - - - - - - - - - - NORWALK .... - - - - - - - - - - OAKLAND .... - - - - - - - - - - ONTARIO .... - - - - - - - - - - ORANGE - - - - - - - - - - OXNARD _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PALO ALTO . . . - - - - - - - - - - PASADENA. . . . - - - - - - - - - - PICO RIVERA . . - - - - - - - - - - POMONA - - - - - - - - - - REDONDO BEACH . - - - - - - _ - - - REDWOOD CITY. . - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ - RICHMOND. . . . - - - - - - _ - - - RIVERSIDE . . . 11 11 11 - - - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. 264 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 39. Indigent defense expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City 1 Total Direct current Capita L outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land local govern- ments C AL IFORN IA — CONT INUED SACRAMENTO « - - - - - - - - - - SALINAS - - - - - - - - - - SAN BERNARDINO. . - - - - - - - - - - SAN BUENAVENTURA. - - - - _ - - - - - SAN DIEGO .... 76 76 76 - _ - - - - - SAN FRANCISCO . . 959 959 955 4 4 - - - - - SAN JOSE - - - - - - - - - - SAN LEANDRO . . . - - - - - - - - - - SAN MATEO .... _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - - SANTA ANA .... - - - - - - - - - - SANTA BARBARA . . - - - - - - - - - - SANTA CLARA . . . - - - - - - - - - - SANTA MONICA. . . - - - - - - - - - - SANTA ROSA. . . . - - - - - - - - - - SIMI VALLEY . . . - - - - - - - - - - SOUTH GATE. . . . - - - - - - - - - ~ STOCKTON _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - SUNNYVALE .... - - - - - - - - - - TORRANCE - - - - - - - - - - VALLEJO - - - - - - - - - - WEST COVINA . . . - - - - - - - - - - WESTMINSTER . . . - - - - - - - - - - WHITTIER - - - - - - - - - - COLORADO*. ARVADA - - - - _ - - - - - AURORA - - - - _ - - - - - BOULDER - - - - - - - - - - COLORADO SPRINGS. - - - - - - - - - - DENVER 146 146 146 - - - - - - - FORT COLLINS. . . - - - - - - - - - - LAKEWOOD - - - - - - - - - - PUEBLO - - - - - _ - - - - CONNECTICUT: BRIDGEPORT - - - - - - - - - - BRISTOL - - - - - - - - - - DANBURY ..... - - - - - - - - - - HARTFORD - - - - - - - - - - MERIDAN - - - - - - - - - - MILFORD - - - - - - - - - - NEW BRITAIN . . . _ _ _ _ - - - - - - NEW HAVEN .... - - - - - - - - - - NORWALK - - - - - - - - - - STAMFORD 12 12 12 - - - - - - - WATERBURY .... - - - - - - - - - - WEST HAVEN. . . . - - - - - - - - - ~ DELAWARE: WILMINGTON - - - - - - - - - ~ DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: WASHINGTON 1 935 1 935 1 9 35 - - - - - - - FLORIDA: CLEARWATER 10 10 10 - - - - - - - FORT LAUDERDALE . 13 13 13 -- - - - - - - GAINESVILLE . . . - - - - - - - - - - HIALEAH - - - - - - - - - - HOLLYWOOD .... 2 2 2 - - - - - - - JACKSONVILLE. . . 19 19 19 - - - - - - - MIAMI - - - - - - - - ~ " MIAMI BEACH . . . 13 13 13 _ - - - - - - ORLANDO 23 - - - - - - 23 - 23 PENSACOLA .... - - - - - - - - - - ST. PETERSBURG. . - - - - - - - - - - TALLAHASSEE . . . - - - - - - - - - - TAMPA - - - - - - - - - - WEST PALM BEACH . - - - - - - - ~ - ~ See footnotes at end of tablt INDIGENT DEFENSE 265 Table 39. Indigent defense expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued Cityi Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- Construc- ment tion State Govern- ments local govern- ments GEORGIA: ALBANY. . . ATLANTA . . AUGUSTA . . COLUMBUS. . MACON . . . SAVANNAH. . HAWAII: HONOLULU. . IDAHO: BOISE CITY. ILLINOIS: ARLINGTON HEIGHTS AURORA. . . . BERWYN. . . . CHAMPAIGN . . CHICAGO . . . CICERO. . . . DECATUR . . . DES PLAINES . EAST ST. LOUIS ELGIN .... EVANSTON. . . JOLIET. . . . OAK LAWN. . . OAK PARK. . . PEORIA. . . . ROCKFORD. . . ROCK ISLAND . SKOKIE. . . . SPRINGFIELD . WAUKEGAN. . . INDIANA: ANDERSON. . . EVANSVILLE. . FORT WAYNE. . GARY HAMMOND . . . INDIANAPOLIS. MUNCIE. . . . south bend. . terre haute . iowa: cedar rapids. . council bluffs, davenport . . , des moines. . . DUBUQUE .... sioux city. . . waterloo. . . . Kansas: kansas city . . overland park , TOPEKA. .... WICHITA .... KENTUCKY: COVINGTON . . , LEXINGTON . . . LOUISVILLE. . , OWENSBORO . . , 45 27 45 27 45 27 7 184 7 184 7 184 See footnotes at end of table. 266 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 39. Indigent defense expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) City' Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay- Equip- ment Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- local govern- louisiana: baton rouge . . lafayette . . . lake charles. . MONROE new orleans . . shreveport. . . Maine: portland. . . . maryland: baltimore . . , massachusetts: BOSTON BROCKTON. . . . CAMBRIDGE . . . CHICOPEE. . . . FALL RIVER. . . HOLYOKE .... LAWRENCE. . . . LOWELL LYNN MALDEN MEDFORD .... NEW BEDFORD . . NEWTON PITTSFIELD. . . QUINCY SOMERVILLE. . . SPRINGFIELD . . WALTHAM .... WORCESTER . . . MICHIGAN: ANN ARBOR . . . DEARBORN. . . . DEARBORN HEIGHTS DETROIT .... FARMINGTON HILLS FLINT GRAND RAPIDS. . KALAMAZOO . . . LANSING .... LINCOLN PARK. . LIVONIA .... PONT I AC .... ROSEVILLE . . . ROYAL OAK . . . SAGINAW .... ST. CLAIR SHORES SOUTHFIELD. . . STERLING HEIGHTS TAYLOR WARREN WESTLAND. . . . WYOMING .... MINNESOTA: BLOOMINGTON . . DULUTH MINNEAPOLIS . . ROCHESTER . . . ST. PAUL. . . . MISSISSIPPI: BILOXI JACKSON .... 165 4 294 68 165 4 294 137 137 1 1 4 4 1 344 1 344 1 1 30 30 17 17 57 57 1 1 9 9 22 22 294 i 3 1 1 4 344 1 30 17 6« 13 10 See footnotes at end of table. INDIGENT DEFENSE 267 Table 39. Indigent defense expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) 1 Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments MISSOURI: COLUMBIA. . . o . . . - - - - - - - - - FLORISSANT. - - - - - - - - - INDEPENDENCE - - - - - - - - - KANSAS C ITY 237 237 237 - - - - - - - ST. JOSEPH. - - - - - - - - - ST. LOUIS . - - - - - - - - - SPRINGFIELD - - - - - - - - - MONTANA: BILLINGS. . 6 6 6 - - - - - - - GREAT FALLS 1 1 1 - - - - - - - NEBRASKA: LINCOLN . . 3 - - - - - - 3 - 3 - - - - - - - - - NEVADA*. LAS VEGAS . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - 13 13 NEW HAMPSHIRE: MANCHESTER. - - - - - - - - - NASHUA. . . - - - - - - - - - NEW JERSEY: BAYONNE . . 8 8 8 - - - - - - - BLOOMFIELD. - - - - - - - - - CAMDEN. . . - - - - - - - - - CLIFTON . . - - - - - - - - - - EAST ORANGE . . . . . - - - - - - - - - ELIZABETH . - - - - - - - - - IRVINGTON . - - - - - - - - - JERSEY CITY _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - PASSAIC . . - - - - - - - - - PATERSON. . - - - - - - - - - 9 9 - - - - - - - UNION CITY. - - - - - - - - - VINELAND. . - - - - - - - - - NEW MEXICO: ALBUQUERQUE - - - - - - - - - NEW YORK: - - - - - - - - - BINGHAMTON. .... - - - - - - - - - 55 55 - - - - - - - MOUNT VERNON .... - - - - - - - - - NEW ROC H ELL E .... - - - - - - - - - NEW YORK CIT X f . . . . 13 846 13 846 13 846 - - - - - - - NIAGARA FALL! - - - - - - - - - ROCHESTER . .... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ROME. . . . .... - - - - - _ _ - _ SCHENECTADY .... - - - - - - _ - - - - - - _ _ - - - TROY. . . . .... - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ - - WHITE PLAINS .... - - - - _ _ _ _ - YONKERS . . .... - - - - - - - - - NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE . .... - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CHARLOTTE . .... - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DURHAM. . . .... - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FAYETTEVILLE .... - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GREENSBORO. .... - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ HIGH POINT. .... - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RALEIGH . . .... - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ WILMINGTON. .... - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ WINSTON-SAL Ef 1 . . . . - - - - - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. 268 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 39. Indigent defense expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Cityi Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To local govern- ments Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land NORTH DAKOTA: FARGO • • - - - - ~ - - - - - OHIO: AKRON . . - - - - - - - - - - CANTON , a - - - - - - - - - - CINCINNATI. . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - CLEVELAND .... . . 191 191 191 - - - - - - - CLEVELAND HEIGHTS . . - - - - - - - - - - COLUMBUS. .... „ , 117 117 117 - - - - - - - DAYTON. . . 140 140 140 - - - - - - - ELYRIA . . - - - - - - - - - - EUCLID. ..... , . - - - - - _ - - - - HAMILTON • • 9 9 9 - - - - - - - KETTERING .... , t - - _ _ - - - - _ _ LAKEWOOD . . - - - - - - - - - - 25 4 8 25 4 8 25 4 8 - - - - - - MANSFIELD .... . . - 36 36 36 ~ - : - ~ ~ _ SPRINGFIELD . . . , # - TOLEDO . . 50 50 50 - - - - - - - WARREN . . - - - - - - - - - - YOUNGSTOWN. . . . • • 23 23 23 - - - - - - - OKLAHOMA: 23 23 23 - - - - _ - _ MIDWEST , # _ NORMAN , . - - - - - ~ - - - - OKLAHOMA CITY . . . . - - - - - - - - - - TULSA • • - - - - - - - - - - OREGON: EUGENE . . 37 37 37 - - - - - - - PORTLAND . . - - - - - - - - - - SALEM • • 12 12 12 - - - - - - - PENNSYLVANIA: ALLENTOWN .... , . - - - - - - - - - - ALTOONA . . - - - - - - - - - - BETHLEHEM .... . . - - - - - - - - - - CHESTER . . - - - - - - - - - - ERIE . . - - - - - - - - - - HARRISBURG. . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - LANCASTER .... • • - - - - - - - - - - PHILADELPHIA. . . g # 3 033 3 033 3 033 _ _ _ _ _ - - PITTSBURGH. . . . . . - - - - - ~ - - - - READING . . - - - - - ~ - - - - SCRANTON . . - - - - - ~ - - - - WILKES-BARRE. . . . . - - - - - ~ - - - - _ RHODE ISLAND: CRANSTON . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - PROVIDENCE. . . . , . - - - - - _ - - - - WARWICK • ' - - - - - - - - - - SOUTH CAROLINA: CHARLESTON. . . . . . - - - - - ~ - - - - COLUMBIA . . - - - - - - - - - - GREENVILLE. . . . • • - - - - - - - - - - SOUTH DAKOTA*. SIOUX FALLS . . . • • - - - - - - - - - - TENNESSEE: CHATTANOOGA . . . . . - - - - - ~ - - - - KNOXVILLE .... . . - - - - - - - - - - MEMPHIS . , - - - - - ~ - - - - NASHV ILLE-DAV IDSON. • 232 232 216 16 16 - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. INDIGENT DEFENSE 269 Table 39. Indigent defense expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments TEXAS: ABILENE - - - - - - - - - - AMARILLO . . - - - - - - - - - - ARLINGTON. . - - - - - - - - - - AUSTIN . . . - - - - - - - - - - BEAUMONT . . - - - - - - - - - - BROWNSVILLE. - - - - - - - - - - CORPUS CHRIST I - - - - - - - - - - DALLAS . . . - - - - - - - - - - EL PASO. . . - - - - - - - - - - FORT WORTH . _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ GALVESTON. . - - - - - - - - - - GARLAND. . . - - - - - - - - - - GRAND PRAIRIE - - - - - - - - - - HOUSTON. . . - - - - - - - - - - IRVING . . . - - - - - - - - - - LAREDO . . . - - - - - - - - - - LUBBOCK. . . - - - - - - - - - - MESQUITE . . - - - - - - - - - - MIDLAND. . . - - - - - - - - - - ODESSA . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PASADENA . . - - - - - - - - - - PORT ARTHUR. - - - - - - - - - - RICHARDSON . - - - - - - - - - - SAN ANGELO . - - - - - - - - - - SAN ANTONIO. - - - - - - - - - - TYLER. . . . - - - - - - - - - - WACO .... - - - - - - - - - - WICHITA FALLS - - - - - - - - - - UTAH: OGDEN 12 12 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ SALT LAKE CITY . . . - - - - - - - - - - VIRGINIA: ALEXANDRIA 29 29 29 - - - - _ _ - CHESAPEAKE . - - - - - - - - - _ HAMPTON. . . 9 9 9 - - - - - - _ LYNCHBURG. . 17 17 17 _ - - - _ . _ NEWPORT NEWS 30 30 30 - - - - - _ - NORFOLK. . . - - - - - - - - - _ PORTSMOUTH . . - - - - - - - - - _ RICHMOND . . , - - - _ - - - - _ _ ROANOKE. . . 8 8 8 - - - - _ - _ VIRGINIA BEACH - - - - - - - - - WASHINGTON: BELLEVUE 10 10 10 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EVERETT. . . - - - - _ _ - _ _ _ SEATTLE. . . 238 238 238 _ - - - _ _ _ SPOKANE. . . - - - _ - - - _ _ _ TACOMA . . . 81 81 78 3 3 - - - - - WEST VIRGINIA: CHARLESTON - - - _ - - _ _ _ _ HUNTINGTON - - - - - - - - - - WISCONSIN: APPLETON - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GREEN BAY. . _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ KENOSHA. . . - - - _ - - - _ _ _ LA CROSSE. . - - _ _ - - - _ _ _ MADISON. . . - - - _ - - - _ _ _ MILWAUKEE. . - _ - _ - - - _ _ _ OSHKOSH. . . - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ RACINE . . . - - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ WAUWATOSA. . - - - _ - - - - _ _ WEST ALL IS . „ - - - - - - - - - - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a field compilation from records of each city government sh own; see text for data limitations. Section VII. CORRECTIONS CORRECTIONS Table 40. Corrections expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) 271 Total 2 Di rect expenditure Intergovernmental expe nditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Tots 1 To State governments To local governments STATES-LOCAL/ TOTAL. . . LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES . . . ALABAMA 3 626 535 2 291 749 1 471 470 1 091 552 400 153 29 246 21 889 8 953 6 966 2 372 20 738 20 717 505 8 497 43 786 20 341 23 445 23 169 492 20 951 13 755 7 200 6 166 1 068 630 900 299 087 366 194 352 138 14 682 41 209 31 167 10 043 3 719 6 356 52 529 52 323 206 207 11 361 11 361 73 114 73 114 73 114 184 802 145 802 39 077 30 461 8 692 86 306 56 185 30 569 25 948 4 873 3 626 535 2 193 000 1 433 535 1 043 818 389 718 29 246 20 293 8 953 6 946 2 007 20 738 20 275 463 463 43 786 20 341 23 445 23 166 278 20 951 13 755 7 196 6 158 1 037 630 900 270 735 360 165 345 904 14 261 41 209 31 167 10 042 3 716 6 327 52 529 52 323 206 206 11 361 11 361 73 114 73 114 73 114 184 802 145 802 39 000 30 382 8 619 86 306 55 785 30 521 25 876 4 646 3 299 215 2 015 826 1 283 389 936 447 346 942 26 287 17 538 8 749 6 750 1 999 12 786 12 323 463 463 33 121 18 117 15 004 14 726 278 12 931 9 644 3 287 2 527 760 603 347 266 447 336 900 323 057 13 843 39 853 30 144 9 709 3 491 6 218 40 217 40 036 181 181 10 634 10 634 58 750 58 750 58 750 155 224 119 073 36 151 28 006 8 145 76 275 49 061 27 214 23 200 4 014 327 321 177 174 150 147 107 371 42 776 2 959 2 755 204 196 8 7 952 7 952 10 664 2 224 8 440 8 440 8 020 4 111 3 909 3 632 278 27 553 4 288 23 265 22 847 418 1 356 1 023 333 224 109 12 312 12 287 25 25 727 727 14 364 14 364 14 364 29 578 26 729 2 849 2 376 473 10 031 6 724 3 307 2 676 631 156 98 58 47 10 1 1 35 28 6 6 919 749 170 734 435 981 596 385 20 365 484 442 42 8 34 217 217 3 214 38 38 8 31 006 352 654 234 421 32 32. 3 29 1 ] 1 153 153 80 73 699 400 299 72 227 37 935 (X) 37 935 34 771 3 164 (X) 42 «X) 42 8 33 (X) 4 (X) 4 4 6 029 (X) 6 029 5 978 51 1 (X) 1 1 (X) (X) 83 (X) 83 83 (X) _ 12 12 12 (X) 7 (X) 7 7 31 (X) 31 22 9 380 (X) 380 380 10 806 (X) 10 806 9 250 1 556 11 (X) 11 11 (X) 1 601 STATE 612 COUNTIES 989 912 76 271 STATE 172 99 | MISSOURI 97 66 66 40 27 46 46 21 25 152 152 83 68 519 511 8 2 6 22 COUNTIES 22 22 NEW JERSEY 8 STATE 8 8 MUNICIPALITIES NEW MEXICO 97 STATE 97 31 67 38 568 STATE 37 958 610 610 STATE 136 136 86 50 27 STATE 27 6 21 See footnotes at end of table. 274 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 40. Corrections expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Di rect expenditure Intergov ernmental expenditure State and type of government 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments OHIO , 160 997 112 280 50 580 41 999 11 952 27 494 22 456 5 042 3 842 1 207 42 275 27 020 15 264 15 137 323 165 947 99 337 87 456 52 545 35 223 11 549 11 549 46 952 38 869 8 083 7 444 674 6 296 4 449 1 849 1 844 59 60 169 39 968 23 796 19 812 4 645 107 776 59 802 47 987 42 081 6 618 12 943 10 938 2 676 2 642 100 8 822 8 775 47 34 13 87 544 74 491 22 290 8 513 14 427 160 997 111 002 49 995 38 450 11 546 27 494 22 454 5 040 3 838 1 202 42 275 27 020 15 255 15 111 144 165 947 91 413 74 534 40 350 34 184 11 549 11 549 46 952 38 869 8 083 7 427 656 6 296 4 449 1 847 1 830 18 60 169 36 385 23 784 19 731 4 054 107 776 59 802 47 974 41 909 6 065 12 943 10 267 2 676 2 592 84 8 822 8 775 47 34 13 87 544 65 317 22 227 8 220 14 006 154 435 110 416 44 019 33 042 10 977 23 976 19 427 4 549 3 386 1 164 38 287 25 814 12 473 12 329 144 159 205 88 631 70 574 37 866 32 708 U 192 11 192 37 201 31 097 6 104 5 634 470 5 062 4 247 815 797 18 46 232 29 043 17 189 13 172 4 017 96 101 53 683 42 418 36 372 6 046 12 125 9 572 2 553 2 475 78 6 508 6 474 34 21 13 82 106 62 809 19 297 7 594 11 703 6 562 586 5 976 5 408 569 3 518 3 027 491 452 38 3 988 1 206 2 782 2 782 6 742 2 782 3 960 2 484 1 476 357 357 9 751 7 772 1 979 1 793 186 1 234 202 1 032 1 032 13 937 7 342 6 595 6 559 36 11 675 6 119 5 556 5 537 19 818 695 123 118 5 2 314 2 301 13 13 5 438 2 508 2 930 626 2 303 5 234 1 278 3 956 3 549 406 11 2 9 4 5 205 205 26 179 21 159 7 924 13 235 12 196 1 039 35 35 17 18 56 56 14 41 4 256 3 583 673 81 592 725 725 172 553 737 671 66 50 16 1 1 1 9 887 9 174 713 293 420 584 (X) 584 584 2 (X) 2 2 9 (X) 9 9 12 922 (X) 12 922 11 883 1 039 (X) (X) 2 (X) 2 2 12 (X) 12 5 6 13 (X) 13 13 (X) (X) 63 (X) 63 63 4 649 STATE 1 278 3 371 2 965 LOCAL, TOTAL ........ COUNTIES OKLAHOMA 406 9 STATE 2 COUNTIES 7 2 5 196 196 26 PENNSYLVANIA STATE 170 8 237 7 924 313 313 STATE 35 35 17 18 54 STATE 54 13 TENNESSEE 41 4 244 STATE 3 583 COUNTIES 661 76 TEXAS 586 712 STATE COUNTIES 712 159 553 737 STATE 671 COUNTIES 66 50 VERMONT 16 1 STATE 1 VIRGINIA 1 9 824 STATE 9 174 COUNTIES 650 293 357 See footnotes at end of table. CORRECTIONS Table 40. Corrections expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) 275 Total 2 D: rect expendit jre Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government ' Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments 65 017 47 658 19 698 18 713 2 827 16 863 11 229 5 634 5 628 200 60 631 46 563 14 828 14 848 53 4 420 3 583 848 643 221 65 017 45 322 19 695 18 308 1 387 16 863 11 229 5 634 5 625 9 60 631 46 533 14 098 14 098 4 420 3 583 837 633 205 62 731 43 963 18 768 17 385 1 383 12 652 9 472 3 180 3 171 ' 9 58 349 44 577 13 772 13 772 4 413 3 583 830 626 203 2 286 1 359 927 923 4 4 211 1 757 2 454 2 454 2 282 1 956 326 326 8 8 7 1 4 181 2 336 1 845 405 1 439 194 194 3 191 833 30 803 750 53 27 27 10 17 3 (X) 3 3 (X) 730 (X) 730 730 10 (X) 10 10 4 177 STATE 2 336 1 841 402 WEST VIRGINIA 1 439 194 STATE COUNTIES 194 3 WISCONSIN 191 103 STATE 30 73 20 WYOMING 53 17 STATE COUNTIES 17 17 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. X Not applicable. 'Data for municipalities, and the local governments totals which include municipal data, are estimates subject to sampling variation; data for counties (boroughs, parishes) are based on a canvass of all county governments and therefore are not subject to sampling variation; see text for data limitations. 2 For each State, and the United States summary, the expenditure figures shown on the "local, total" line and the combined State-local total line (the data shown opposite the names of the individual States) exclude duplicative intergovernmental expend- iture amounts. This was done to avoid the artificial inflation which would result if an intergovernmental expenditure amount for one government is tabulated and then counted again when the recipient government ( s ) ultimately expend(s) that amount. 276 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 41. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of State governments, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total direct current expenditure Institutions Corrections adminis- tration Probation, parole, and pardon State 1 Total For men For women For juveniles Other and combined Miscel- laneous 2 015 826 17 538 12 323 18 117 9 644 266 447 30 144 40 036 10 634 119 073 49 061 6 800 6 428 82 578 30 943 20 564 27 587 19 903 26 743 8 154 79 705 60 012 61 322 26 465 11 227 31 388 6 948 11 584 9 402 5 232 59 201 8 235 213 630 71 297 3 461 110 416 19 427 25 814 88 631 11 192 31 097 4 247 29 043 53 683 9 572 6 474 62 809 43 963 9 472 44 577 3 583 1 550 973 14 255 9 945 14 271 8 845 192 953 21 939 27 599 9 002 78 395 33 104 5 303 5 373 60 192 25 402 17 943 26 608 15 114 18 806 6 840 58 357 49 086 53 548 20 799 9 435 21 951 5 421 9 098 7 626 4 110 51 641 6 113 177 516 53 521 3 167 81 661 14 113 19 239 74 065 8 655 21 937 3 741 24 264 46 088 6 259 4 866 45 346 35 368 8 240 30 635 3 218 989 979 10 644 3 125 2 991 5 711 135 657 15 140 19 7 16 4 832 51 432 21 663 3 804 37 190 19 486 12 168 13 558 10 379 11 212 3 918 35 392 32 023 40 750 13 324 16 034 3 285 6 460 4 826 2 091 25 635 3 598 123 769 39 228 1 533 44 415 10 308 11 267 41 840 6 784 15 578 15 128 32 466 2 47 3 34 939 20 513 5 463 16 722 1 509 44 270 644 124 5 677 2 061 226 204 973 95 1 752 888 608 732 521 726 25 1 620 2 148 637 474 20 439 3 335 53 4 036 1 841 62 2 594 464 414 2 618 524 869 1 459 133 1 685 2 129 219 1 197 44 419 306 2 967 3 527 3 627 3 010 51 619 6 799 3 952 3 211 23 187 10 468 1 427 1 474 21 250 5 028 5 167 4 257 4 003 6 868 2 897 17 028 14 915 12 798 6 838 1 936 5 443 2 116 2 199 2 724 2 019 11 931 2 462 22 564 11 554 1 572 26 513 3 341 7 558 29 607 1 871 5 835 1 238 8 267 12 163 2 103 2 093 8 722 12 726 2 558 10 209 1 665 97 3 7 1 3 3 8 4 7 10 27 8 2 4 2 418 293 653 870 733 572 876 061 211 317 499 76 740 147 898 139 503 023 300 507 155 747 157 397 1 519 83 25 836 1 215 4 849 880 5 790 5 560 270 12 150 1 431 660 309 898 1 632 195 5 661 5 593 2 894 4 702 135 4 842 425 426 1 726 190 11 546 4 196 22 241 3 567 837 2 693 889 2 955 8 933 3 207 138 333 7 994 348 3 342 95 271 824 2 706 1 649 2 216 521 34 707 6 931 6 584 695 34 888 9 815 1 123 1 055 10 236 1 825 1 250 670 3 177 3 559 814 15 443 5 315 4 880 253 1 657 4 366 1 102 2 060 1 776 1 098 5 193 1 932 21 708 10 703 294 5 958 1 747 5 738 10 786 1 648 2 458 333 3 846 4 388 3 129 875 8 416 8 247 1 184 10 600 270 37 282 420 111 195 12 951 59 1 004 57 582 104 2 285 711 714 2 746 305 MISSISSIPPI 244 18 711 229 NEW HAMPSHIRE 24 641 2 860 2 877 556 1 087 3 747 165 46 400 1 053 48 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a field compilation from records of each State government; see text for data limitations. CORRECTIONS 277 Table 42. Corrections expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct ex penditure Intergovernmental ex penditure County 1 Total Direct Capital outlay Total To State To local current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments 916 344 873 389 797 535 75 854 8 146 64 811 2 897 42 955 31 827 11 128 ALABAMA! 167 160 153 7 5 2 „ 7 _ 7 JEFFERSON 1 843 1 843 1 836 7 7 _ _ m 402 402 399 3 3 - _ _ _ _ 879 879 826 53 23 30 _ _ _ _ MONTGOMERY 553 553 548 5 5 „ _ _ „, _ Tuscaloosa 226 226 226 - - - - - - - ALASKA: GREATER ANCHORAGE . . 8 - - - - - - 8 8 - ARIZONA: 14 819 14 819 7 043 7 776 266 7 510 _ _ _ „ PIMA 5 631 5 631 5 336 295 88 207 - - - - ARKANSAS: 3 282 3 279 624 2 655 - 2 655 - 3 3 - CALIFORNIA! 24 991 24 941 23 772 1 169 153 290 726 50 50 . 1 101 1 094 1 080 14 - 14 - 7 7 . 12 581 12 564 11 434 1 130 58 1 000 72 17 17 _ 7 786 7 748 6 849 899 31 711 157 38 20 18 1 579 1 579 1 548 31 11 20 - _ 6 580 6 580 5 892 688 120 568 - _ _ - 119 367 114 373 105 622 8 751 1 166 7 430 155 4 994 4 994 - MARIN 4 091 4 087 4 072 15 15 - - 4 - 4 MERCED 1 455 1 451 1 234 217 35 182 _ 4 4 _ 3 686 3 679 3 384 295 10 285 _ 7 7 . ORANGE 22 270 22 231 21 966 265 265 - _ 39 39 _ 10 684 10 684 10 324 360 74 286 _ _ 12 738 12 395 11 500 895 52 843 - 343 343 _ SAN BERNARDINO. . . . 11 900 11 862 11 747 115 40 75 _ 38 38 _ SAN DIEGO 26 416 26 413 26 187 226 226 _ m 3 3 5 117 4 987 4 961 26 26 - " 130 130 SAN LUIS OBISPO . . . 1 297 1 288 1 250 38 33 5 _ 9 9 _ 12 340 12 340 11 810 530 86 444 . _ _ _ SANTA BARBARA .... 6 236 6 211 5 453 758 392 366 - 25 25 - SANTA CLARA 21 153 21 153 16 933 4 220 96 4 124 _ _ _ 2 157 2 146 2 080 66 3 63 - 11 11 . 3 216 3 209 2 937 272 47 225 _ 7 6 1 SONOMA 4 322 4 322 3 293 1 029 47 982 _ 4 483 4 367 4 308 59 22 37 _ 116 116 . 2 766 2 760 2 729 31 3 11 17 6 6 _ VENTURA 6 930 6 698 6 365 333 101 2 32 - 232 32 200 1 566 1 537 1 425 112 8 104 "" 29 2 27 COLORADO: 355 355 291 64 _ 64 _ _ m _ 357 357 354 3 3 _ _ — m _ 287 287 284 3 3 _ _ _ _ _ 630 630 627 3 3 _ _ _ m _ 372 372 372 - _ _ _ _ m _ 177 177 177 - _ _ «. _ _ _ 381 381 280 101 1 - 100 m _ . WELD 162 162 161 1 1 ™ — " ■ DELAWARE: NEW CASTLE - - - - - - - - - - FLORIDA: 1 326 1 326 820 506 27 479 _ _ m _ 360 360 357 3 3 _ _ _ m _ 1 991 1 991 1 964 27 12 15 . m _ _ DADE 7 781 1 343 7 781 1 273 7 618 985 163 288 84 161 79 127 - 70 70 _ 3 942 3 942 3 864 78 36 42 . _ LEE 295 348 295 348 295 347 1 1 - ~ - - LEON See footnotes at end of tables. 278 Table 42. CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Corrections expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Capital outlay To To Total Direct State Total current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments FLORIDA— CONTINUED 165 165 161 4 4 - - - - - 1 693 1 693 1 690 3 3 - - - - - 2 233 2 233 2 119 114 12 102 - - - - PASCO 195 195 178 17 17 - - - - - 1 309 1 309 1 270 39 - 39 - - - - 936 360 936 360 900 357 36 3 16 3 : 20 ~ _ - - 676 676 286 390 25 365 - - - - 1 016 1 016 989 27 27 - - - - ~ GEORGIA: 1 245 698 1 245 698 697 696 548 2 2 2 98 448 _ " — CHATHAM - 788 788 777 11 11 - - - - - COBB 705 1 953 705 1 953 697 1 950 8 3 8 3 - ~ " - - - 6 298 6 298 5 742 556 31 525 - - - - 1 036 1 036 1 000 36 31 5 - - - - IDAHO: ADA 945 945 297 648 48 600 - ILLINOIS! 432 432 423 9 9 - - - - - 32 428 1 535 27 742 1 535 19 527 1 411 8 215 124 162 1 8 053 123 _ 4 686 ~ 4 686 - KANE 1 246 1 234 227 1 246 1 234 227 1 100 1 225 224 146 9 3 21 8 3 125 1 - - - - LAKE - - 291 269 269 - - - - 22 - 22 237 229 229 - - - - 8 - 8 397 397 397 - - - - - . - 739 736 730 6 6 - - 3 - 3 833 833 714 119 8 Ill - - - - 468 453 446 7 - 7 - 15 - 15 1 331 726 726 - - - - 605 - 605 652 652 634 18 5 13 - - - - 180 180 179 1 1 - - - - - WILL 361 870 358 870 355 863 3 7 3 7 - - 3 : 3 - INDIANA: 1 860 1 528 1 520 8 7 - 1 332 332 - 417 329 318 11 4 7 - 88 88 - 592 545 528 17 17 ~ - 47 47 - LAKE 1 359 1 411 936 1 411 935 570 1 841 1 16 - 825 - 423 423 — - 463 390 389 1 1 - - 73 73 - 889 889 889 - - - - - - - 260 245 236 9 9 - - 15 15 - 698 649 649 - - - - 49 49 - VIGO 466 466 456 10 10 - - - - " IOWA! 711 711 707 4 4 - - - - - LINN 704 2 875 487 704 2 463 368 559 2 463 368 145 13 132 - 412 119 388 119 - 24 - 262 219 209 10 1 9 - 43 43 ■ KANSAS: 570 570 565 5 5 - - - - - 2 612 2 612 1 297 1 315 8 1 307 - - - - 1 015 1 015 891 124 51 73 - - - - 627 624 484 140 - mo - 3 - 3 KENTUCKY: 3 281 3 273 3 251 22 22 - - 8 - 8 293 293 293 - - - - - - ■ See footnotes at end of table. CORRECTIONS 279 Table 42u Corrections expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental ex lenditure County 1 Direct Capital outlay To To Total Total State local current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments LOUISIANA: 1 289 1 289 1 209 80 80 - - - _ - 473 473 473 - - - - - - - JEFFERSON 1 252 1 252 785 467 16 168 283 - . - 357 357 357 - - - - - - - 427 427 427 - - - - . - - Rapides 950 942 363 579 - 579 - 8 - 8 MAINE: Cumberland 376 376 334 42 2 40 - - - - 132 132 117 15 1 14 - - - - YORK 149 149 148 1 1 w, MARYLAND: 584 584 584 - - - - - - - 1 419 1 419 1 418 1 1 - - - - - HARFORD 533 533 463 70 18 52 - - - - 1 551 1 551 1 319 232 4 228 - - - - PRINCE GEORGES. . . . 2 293 2 293 2 259 34 34 - - - _ - 107 107 102 5 5 - - - - - MASSACHUSETTS: 1 089 1 089 1 077 12 11 1 - - - - 827 827 816 11 11 - - - - - BRISTOL 1 841 1 841 1 807 34 13 21 - - - - 2 733 2 733 2 696 37 37 - - - - - HAMPDEN 2 838 2 838 2 838 - - - - - - - HAMPSHIRE 908 908 883 25 25 _ - _ _ _ 6 455 6 455 6 435 20 16 4 - - - - 1 886 1 884 1 866 18 12 6 - 2 2 - 2 223 2 223 2 163 60 60 - - - - - 3 709 3 709 3 590 119 33 86 - - - - MICHIGAN! BAY 684 1 770 603 1 646 587 1 393 16 253 3 55 13 198 _ 81 124 72 116 9 8 1 386 1 359 1 351 8 8 - - 27 27 - 3 457 2 972 2 971 1 1 - - 485 458 27 1 293 1 283 1 281 2 2 . - 10 8 2 1 032 921 890 31 28 3 - 111 111 - 2 118 2 013 1 966 47 47 - - 105 105 - KENT 2 388 3 359 2 324 3 173 2 078 3 171 246 2 44 2 202 64 186 64 181 m 5 637 596 565 31 3 28 - 41 41 - 1 239 1 117 1 111 6 1 5 - 122 122 - 6 344 6 179 5 968 211 8 203 - 165 165 - 538 484 478 6 1 5 - 54 52 2 1 757 1 664 1 620 44 31 13 - 93 93 - 882 822 817 5 5 - - 60 60 - 2 396 2 342 2 326 16 16 - - 54 42 12 18 819 16 652 16 590 62 25 37 - 2 167 1 612 555 MINNESOTA: anoka 414 414 412 2 2 - - - - - 288 288 288 - - - - . - - 6 544 6 311 6 289 22 22 - - 233 - 233 4 786 4 786 4 521 265 20 245 - - - - 2 700 2 140 1 800 340 161 179 - 560 - 560 MISSISSIPPI: 295 295 295 - - - - - . - hinds 301 301 286 15 13 2 - - . - 73 73 73 - - - - - - - MISSOURI! clay 581 317 579 316 565 225 14 91 12 14 79 "" 2 1 2 1 „ - 4 457 4 393 4 320 73 73 - - 64 64 _ JEFFERSON 142 139 139 - - - - 3 3 - 270 270 264 6 6 - - m _ - 3 106 3 106 3 045 61 48 13 " ~ - See footnotes at end of table. 280 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 42. Corrections expenditure of 334 large county governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure County 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments NEBRASKA: 1 720 1 720 1 680 40 40 - - - - - 898 827 782 45 45 - - 71 - 71 NEVADA: 4 788 4 788 4 754 34 34 - - _ - - 1 386 1 386 1 381 5 5 - - - - - NEW HAMPSHIRE: 611 611 608 3 - 3 - - . - 191 189 189 - - - - 2 - 2 NEW JERSEY: 2 164 2 164 1 732 432 8 424 - - - - 3 431 3 431 3 418 13 11 2 - - . - 1 550 1 550 1 550 - - - - - - - 3 486 3 486 3 422 64 - 64 - - - - 1 369 1 369 1 010 359 12 347 - - . - 16 883 16 883 16 809 74 23 51 - - . - 1 105 1 105 1 080 25 - 25 - - . - 4 254 4 254 4 254 - - - - - - - 5 289 5 289 4 394 895 5 890 . _ _ _ 4 100 4 100 3 914 186 - 186 - - - - 2 109 2 089 2 089 - - - - 20 20 - 1 619 1 619 1 605 14 14 - - - - - 1 295 1 295 1 271 24 24 - - - - - PASSAIC 4 219 4 219 4 219 - - - - - _ - 1 187 1 187 1 157 30 30 - - - . - 4 122 4 122 3 566 556 - 245 311 - - - NEW MEXICO: 703 348 328 20 5 - 15 355 355 - NEW YORK: Albany. . .... 3 361 3 030 2 952 78 78 - - 331 331 - 1 028 8 Total Direct State Total Total local current Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments govern- ments SOUTH CAROLINA! 704 704 683 21 21 . - _ _ _ Charleston 730 730 709 21 3 18 - . _ - 510 510 467 43 6 - 37 _ _ - LEXINGTON 189 189 188 1 - 1 - _ _ - 515 499 489 10 10 _ - 16 _ 16 282 282 280 2 2 - - - - - TENNESSEE: 5 598 5 598 867 4 731 39 a 692 - - . - KNOX 429 9 049 429 8 974 424 8 317 5 657 5 97 560 - 75 5 70 197 197 162 35 5 30 - - - - TEXAS: BELL 419 4 977 419 4 977 330 2 908 89 2 069 3 20 37 2 049 49 - - . 186 186 184 2 2 _ - . _ . 500 500 497 3 1 2 - _ _ - 6 736 6 736 6 293 443 115 328 - _ _ - EL PASO 1 501 1 501 1 474 27 - 27 - _ _ - 494 494 325 169 1 168 - - . - 9 348 9 348 9 028 320 216 104 - - - - 850 850 533 317 3 192 122 - - - 568 568 568 - _ _ _ _ _ . 458 458 417 41 6 35 - - _ - 791 791 790 1 1 - - . . - 867 866 740 126 67 - 59 1 . 1 182 182 182 - - - - - . - 2 326 2 326 2 253 73 73 - - - - - 214 214 197 17 17 - - - - - TRAVIS. ....... 2 034 2 034 2 016 18 18 - - - - - 261 261 257 4 4 - - - - - UTAH! 116 84 84 - - - - 32 - 32 1 548 1 548 1 536 12 7 5 - - - - UTAH 148 447 148 447 148 439 8 5 ■ 3 - - «. WEBER - VERMONT: CHITTENDEN - - - - - - - - - - VIRGINIA: 1 335 1 335 1 191 144 3 141 - - - - 1 585 1 481 1 478 3 3 - - 104 _ 104 683 677 614 63 25 38 - 6 _ 6 PRINCE WILLIAM. . . . 359 349 347 2 2 - - 10 - 10 WASHINGTON! 665 665 661 4 4 - - - - - KING 6 744 569 6 744 569 6 640 494 104 75 81 1 23 ~ : : _ - 2 176 2 095 1 969 126 120 6 - 81 _ 81 1 333 1 333 1 305 28 28 - - - _ - 1 444 1 444 1 401 43 43 - - - _ - YAKIMA 662 662 654 8 8 - - - - - WEST VIRGINIA: 352 352 346 6 - 6 - - _ - KANAWHA 894 894 830 64 26 38 - - - - WISCONSIN: BROWN 420 403 394 9 9 - - 17 17 - Dane 1 230 364 1 205 304 1 202 291 3 13 _ 13 - 25 60 25 60 _ KENOSHA - 178 151 148 3 3 - - 27 27 - 6 466 6 226 6 154 72 68 4 - 240 240 - 175 149 148 1 1 - - 26 26 - 318 289 281 8 8 - - 29 29 - ROCK 821 587 784 565 784 565 - ~ : m 37 22 37 22 _ WAUKESHA - 126 92 92 - - - - 34 34 - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a field compilation from records of each county government six see text for data limitations. CORRECTIONS 283 Table 43. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total direct current Institutions Probation and parole County 1 Total For juveniles Other and combined Miscellaneous 797 535 153 1 836 399 826 548 226 7 043 5 336 624 23 772 1 080 11 434 6 849 1 548 5 892 105 622 4 072 1 234 3 384 21 966 10 324 11 500 11 747 26 187 4 961 1 250 11 810 5 453 16 933 2 080 2 937 3 293 4 308 2 729 6 365 1 425 291 354 284 627 372 177 280 161 820 357 1 964 7 618 985 3 864 295 347 161 1 690 2 119 178 1 270 519 031 85 1 363 264 669 457 137 3 306 3 285 530 11 644 758 6 884 4 251 1 022 3 823 62 253 1 643 691 1 964 11 551 4 990 7 172 6 579 13 584 3 080 623 5 533 3 790 14 140 1 220 1 555 2 260 3 085 1 715 3 920 733 291 354 284 627 372 116 268 75 642 357 1 921 7 618 861 3 864 295 347 161 1 690 2 067 178 1 270 169 626 414 70 299 285 1 112 1 625 50 4 063 178 4 711 1 702 152 1 691 21 531 996 114 659 6 043 2 298 2 923 2 972 5 482 847 181 2 398 1 233 7 933 37 3 752 1 021 385 655 768 206 37 5 37 82 1 541 67 794 38 20 16 460 349 349 405 85 949 194 370 172 137 2 194 1 660 480 7 581 580 2 173 2 549 870 2 132 40 722 647 577 1 305 5 508 2 692 4 249 3 607 8 102 2 233 442 3 135 2 557 6 207 847 803 1 239 2 700 1 060 3 152 527 291 354 284 627 372 116 268 38 637 320 1 839 6 077 794 3 070 257 327 145 1 690 1 607 178 921 258 809 68 473 135 157 91 89 3 737 877 94 9 067 322 4 550 2 598 526 2 069 43 369 1 929 543 1 380 9 181 5 334 4 311 5 168 9 820 1 852 626 6 277 1 663 2 744 860 1 153 1 014 1 195 1 014 2 360 582 9 124 42 19 695 Alabama: Alaska: Arizona: 1 174 ARKANSAS: California: 3 061 500 40 1 234 17 2 783 29 1 49 229 19 28 85 110 Colorado: LARIMER 61 PUEBLO 3 86 Delaware: Florida: 178 43 LEON ORANGE 10 See footnotes at end of table. 284 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 43. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total direct current Institutions Probation and parole County i Total For juveniles Other and combined Miscellaneous FLORIDA — CONTINUED 900 357 286 989 697 696 777 697 1 950 5 742 1 000 297 423 19 527 1 411 1 100 1 225 224 269 229 397 730 714 446 726 634 179 355 863 1 520 318 528 935 570 389 889 236 649 456 707 559 2 463 368 209 565 1 297 891 484 3 251 293 1 209 473 785 357 427 363 334 117 148 900 357 271 934 408 623 655 573 1 368 3 203 942 2 30 329 16 765 904 500 842 172 112 138 178 530 451 112 547 449 96 286 635 1 091 237 363 411 66 302 605 172 416 391 176 165 935 262 90 370 607 618 344 2 589 149 1 120 430 694 357 384 297 334 117 148 50 43 57 239 265 366 640 138 226 3 673 386 224 392 69 19 183 111 162 220 285 385 96 42 192 90 74 132 289 24 572 11 40 110 313 354 145 1 311 9 75 145 308 195 125 122 850 314 271 877 408 384 390 573 1 002 2 563 942 92 103 13 092 518 276 450 103 112 138 159 347 340 112 385 229 96 286 350 706 141 321 219 66 212 531 40 416 102 152 165 363 251 50 260 294 264 199 1 278 140 1 045 285 386 162 259 175 334 117 148 289 73 122 124 582 2 539 32 67 94 2 752 507 328 383 52 157 91 219 200 263 334 179 185 83 69 167 429 81 165 524 165 87 284 43 233 65 531 394 1 498 106 119 195 316 233 99 436 72 89 91 43 66 15 55 Georgia: 26 idaho: Illinois: 10 272 61 Indiana: 339 21 iowa: _ 30 SCOTT _ Kansas: 37 4 40 41 KENTUCKY: 226 72 Louisiana: 43 JEFFERSON _ _ _ maine: CUMBERLAND PENOBSCOT _ _ >tee at end of table. CORRECTIONS 285 Table 43. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total direct current Institutions Probation and parole County 1 Total For juveniles Other and combined Miscellaneous Maryland: 584 1 418 463 1 319 2 259 102 1 077 816 1 807 2 696 2 838 883 6 435 1 866 2 163 3 590 587 1 393 1 351 2 971 1 281 890 1 966 2 078 3 171 565 1 111 5 968 478 1 620 817 2 326 16 590 412 288 6 289 4 521 1 800 295 286 73 565 225 4 320 139 264 3 045 1 680 782 4 754 1 381 608 189 1 732 3 418 1 550 3 422 1 010 16 809 584 868 463 1 319 2 060 93 7 32 526 935 1 392 1 304 582 3 169 785 1 148 1 917 403 947 869 2 257 882 644 1 491 1 798 2 340 434 1 036 4 473 352 785 693 1 670 12 002 219 156 3 236 2 618 1 397 295 243 73 450 225 4 320 79 167 2 577 1 430 441 3 609 918 608 189 1 303 2 104 970 2 307 750 12 047 28 5 107 10 128 248 470 581 1 278 244 478 610 561 1 156 191 481 2 666 217 309 398 1 117 5 983 2 325 880 314 115 309 28 2 730 31 27 1 180 124 441 2 020 412 404 468 228 455 87 2 102 584 840 458 1 319 2 060 93 732 526 935 1 285 1 294 582 3 041 785 1 148 1 917 155 477 288 979 638 166 881 1 237 1 184 243 555 1 807 135 476 295 553 6 019 219 156 911 1 738 1 083 180 243 73 141 197 1 590 48 140 1 397 1 306 1 589 506 608 189 899 1 636 742 1 852 663 9 945 550 115 9 345 290 872 1 304 1 523 206 3 266 1 081 1 015 1 673 184 221 441 683 399 235 400 280 790 131 73 1 495 126 250 124 656 4 588 193 132 2 491 1 499 403 43 115 60 97 245 178 125 1 145 463 429 1 314 580 1 115 260 4 762 84 Massachusetts: 11 95 Michigan: BERRIEN 225 41 31 11 75 41 2 585 ST. CLAIR WAYNE Minnesota: ANOKA 562 404 Mississippi : MISSOURI : GREENE JACKSON JEFFERSON 223 NEBRASKA: 72 216 NEVADA: NEW HAMPSHIRE : new jersey: See footnotes at end of table 286 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 43. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total direct current Institutions Probation and parole County 1 Total For juveniles Other and combined Miscellaneous NEW JERSEY — CONTINUED 1 080 4 254 4 394 3 914 2 089 1 605 1 271 4 219 1 157 3 566 328 2 952 875 583 716 1 055 10 608 5 304 14 307 1 174 831 5 251 1 296 434 1 077 1 657 462 304 724 503 9 513 755 7 903 383 449 234 706 333 887 1 305 189 275 304 377 655 399 191 196 6 597 2 422 281 4 048 617 310 814 2 563 919 2 889 325 325 1 094 1 761 340 693 2 681 3 514 2 089 1 525 868 855 2 425 492 1 978 328 2 590 348 314 260 728 5 920 3 430 7 272 744 462 4 032 880 238 795 1 161 189 180 513 268 5 418 585 5 496 383 449 2 34 706 32 3 887 1 113 189 275 197 170 402 212 110 136 4 083 1 308 215 2 302 415 155 244 1 7 38 710 1 706 208 149 834 916 264 212 7 08 488 5 30 260 177 269 787 124 574 328 1 255 43 97 4 875 988 839 39 874 244 12 511 520 15 8 211 9 1 754 11 37 1 41 114 39 89 37 176 216 51 40 9 131 32 56 2 742 520 1 517 228 89 221 899 184 931 71 248 458 66 481 1 973 3 026 1 559 1 265 691 586 1 638 368 1 404 1 335 305 217 260 724 5 045 2 442 6 433 705 462 3 158 636 226 284 641 174 172 302 259 3 664 574 5 125 342 335 195 617 286 711 897 189 224 157 161 27 1 180 110 80 1 341 788 215 785 187 66 23 839 526 775 137 149 586 458 198 387 1 573 798 1 662 564 7 37 416 1 794 665 1 588 362 527 269 432 327 2 030 1 874 7 035 430 333 1 219 416 196 282 496 273 124 211 2 35 4 095 170 2 407 10 192 56 62 253 150 72 60 2 212 1 114 64 1 265 126 155 570 825 209 1 183 117 129 260 7 19 76 82 163 NEW MEXICO: new york: 24 2 658 36 WESTCHESTER north Carolina: ohio: ALLEN 51 145 37 9 302 2 481 76 _ _ 47 _ 126 See footnotes nt end of table. CORRECTIONS Table 43. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) 287 Total direct current Institutions Probation and parole Comity 1 Total For juveniles Other and combined Miscellaneous Oklahoma: 172 1 064 1 133 755 589 916 890 4 852 886 6 085 562 1 083 378 2 073 394 452 269 1 990 585 2 090 3 459 2 107 334 523 659 1 235 2 30 407 1 098 790 5 34 358 2 419 1 082 376 553 624 1 080 683 709 467 188 489 280 867 424 8 317 162 330 2 908 184 497 6 293 1 474 325 9 028 533 568 417 790 740 182 2 253 197 2 016 257 121 539 723 343 331 916 490 3 120 438 4 930 379 882 290 1 667 170 265 150 1 674 410 1 836 2 784 1 449 196 421 543 983 183 321 891 623 386 269 1 691 910 287 387 184 900 677 704 467 188 489 223 688 415 7 777 153 HI 1 915 57 265 3 522 590 210 5 659 318 491 133 305 372 94 1 227 122 689 91 16 168 262 118 307 199 506 112 3 019 118 79 118 682 39 77 29 465 89 932 850 1 084 8 81 142 80 34 123 226 95 341 124 56 94 141 356 128 120 141 285 22 194 21 1 027 173 1 611 82 199 25 94 310 193 105 371 461 343 213 609 291 2 614 326 1 911 261 803 172 985 131 188 121 1 209 321 904 1 934 365 188 340 401 903 149 321 7 68 623 160 174 1 350 786 231 293 43 544 549 584 467 188 489 223 547 415 7 492 131 111 1 721 57 244 2 495 417 210 4 048 2 36 292 133 280 278 94 917 122 496 91 51 525 410 412 258 400 1 540 448 1 155 183 201 88 393 147 187 67 316 175 254 675 537 133 102 116 252 47 86 207 167 148 89 728 172 89 166 440 180 6 5 57 159 9 540 9 219 993 127 2 32 2 771 884 115 3 287 215 77 284 485 368 88 980 75 1 327 166 TULSA Oregon: 192 Pennsylvania: bucks 13 52 CUMBERLAND 121 5 LACKAWANNA WASHINGTON south Carolina: TENNESSEE: 20 texas: 82 46 See footnotes at end of table. 288 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 43. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 334 large county governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total direct current Institutions Probation and parole County 1 Total For juveniles Other and combined Miscellaneous utah: 84 1 536 148 439 1 191 1 478 614 347 661 6 640 494 1 969 1 305 1 401 654 346 830 394 1 202 291 148 6 154 148 281 784 565 92 84 1 536 148 426 618 874 244 236 342 4 439 261 1 327 568 1 221 365 302 651 394 923 291 90 5 091 148 135 687 554 87 486 89 225 180 73 1 823 95 908 207 582 152 112 151 139 286 18 1 336 60 146 84 1 050 59 201 618 694 244 2 36 269 2 616 166 419 361 639 213 190 500 255 637 273 90 3 755 148 75 541 554 87 13 573 604 370 111 319 2 201 233 417 737 180 289 44 179 279 58 488 146 97 11 Vermont: VIRGINIA: Washington: 225 SNOHOMISH SPOKANE _ WEST VIRGINIA: _ WISCONSIN: _ 575 OUTAGAMIE RACINE _ _ _ 5 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. 'Data are based on a field compilation from scords of each county government shown; see text for data limitations. CORRECTIONS 289 Table 44. Corrections expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure City 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land local govern- ments 378 942 371 024 330 179 40 845 1 503 36 136 3 206 7 918 3 006 4 912 ALABAMA: BIRMINGHAM 848 848 848 - - - - - - - 47 47 47 - - - - - - - HUNTSVILLE 219 136 136 - - - - 83 - 83 360 205 197 8 8 - - 155 - 155 MONTGOMERY. „ . . . . 212 212 212 - - - - - - - TUSCALOOSA. ..... 73 67 67 - - - - 6 - 6 ARIZONA: 35 35 35 - - - - - - - MESA - - - - - - - - - - 210 67 67 - - - - 143 - 143 SCOTTSDALE 11 11 11 - - - - - - - TEMPE - - - - - - - - - - TUCSON 15 - - - - - - 15 - 15 ARKANSAS: 101 101 101 - - - - - - - LITTLE ROCK 179 179 179 - - - - - - - NORTH LITTLE ROCK . . 150 150 147 3 3 - - - - - PINE BLUFF 56 56 56 - - - - - - - CALIFORNIA: ALAMEDA - - - - - - - - - - ALHAMBRA - - - - - - - - - - ANAHEIM 100 100 98 2 2 - - - - - BAKERSFIELD 1 - - - - - - 1 - 1 BELLFLOWER - - - - - - - - - - BERKELEY - - - - - - - - - - BUENA PARK - - - - - - - - - - BUR8ANK 118 118 118 - - - - - - - CARSON. ....... - - - - - - - - - - CHULA VISTA _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ COMPTON - - _ - - - - _ _ _ CONCORD - - - - - - - _ - - COSTA MESA 117 66 66 - - - - 51 51 - DALY C ITY ...... - - - - - - - - - - DOWNEY 30 - - - - - - 30 - 30 EL CAJON - - - - - - - - - - EL MONTE - - - - - - - - - - FREMONT - - - - - - - - - - FRESNO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FULLERTON - - - - - - - _ - - GARDEN GROVE - - - - - - - - _ - GLENDALE - - - - - - - - - - HAWTHORNE 2 - - - - - - 2 - 2 HAYWARD - - - - - - - - - - HUNTINGTON BEACH. . . 3 - - _ - - - 3 - 3 INGLEWOOD 146 146 146 - - - - _ _ _ LAKEWOOD - - - - - - - - - - LONG BEACH 969 969 953 16 1 15 _ _ _ _ LOS ANGELES 301 - - - - _ - 301 - 301 MODESTO - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ MOUNTAIN VIEW . . . . - - - - - - - - - - NEWPORT BEACH .... 38 38 36 2 2 _ _ _ _ _ NORWALK - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OAKLAND 1 118 1 118 1 118 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ONTARIO - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ORANGE - - - - - - - - - - OXNARD _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PALO ALTO - - - - - _ - - _ - PASADENA 113 113 112 1 1 _ _ _ - - PICO RIVERA - - - - _ _ - - _ - POMONA 404 404 403 1 1 - _ - _ _ REDONDO BEACH .... 66 66 66 _ _ _ _ - _ - REDWOOD CITYe .... - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ RICHMOND - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RIVERSIDE - - - - - - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. 290 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 44. Corrections expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct ex penditure Intergovernmental ex penditure City 1 Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To local Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments C AL IFORN I A — CONT INUED SACRAMENTO - - - - - - - - - - SALINAS 2 - - - - - - 2 - 2 SAN BERNARDINO. . . . - - - - - - - - - - SAN BUENAVENTURA. . . - - - - - - - - - - SAN DIEGO 415 415 415 - - - - - - - SAN FRANCISCO .... 10 264 10 264 9 870 394 174 220 - - - - SAN JOSE - - - - - - - - - SAN LEANDRO ..... - - - - - - - - - - SAN MATEO - - - - - - - - _ SANTA ANA - - - - - - - - - - SANTA BARBARA .... - - - - - - - - - - SANTA CLARA - - - - - - - - - - SANTA MONICA - - - - - - - - - - SANTA ROSA - - - - - - - - - - SIMI VALLEY - - - - - - - - - - SOUTH GATE 134 134 134 - - - - - - - STOCKTON _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SUNNYVALE - - - - - - - - - - TORRANCE 136 114 114 - - - - 22 - 22 VALLEJO - - - - - - - - - - WEST COVINA - - - - - - - - - - WESTMINSTER 2 - - - - - - 2 - 2 WHITTIER - - - - - - - - - - COLORADO: ARVADA 15 - - - - - - 15 - 15 AURORA - - - - - - - - - - BOULDER 5 5 5 - - - - - - - COLORADO SPRINGS. . . 17 17 17 - - - - - - - 5 309 5 309 5 228 81 81 - - - - - FORT COLLINS - - - - - - - - - - LAKEWOOD 19 19 19 - - - - - - - 243 243 230 13 - 13 - - - - CONNECTICUT: BRIDGEPORT 199 199 174 25 25 - - - - - BRISTOL - - - - - - - - - - DANBURY - - - - - - - - - - HARTFORD - - - - - - - - - - MERIDAN ....... - - - - - - - - - - MILFORD - - - - - - - - - - NEW BRITAIN _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ NEW HAVEN - - - - - - - - - - NORWALK - - - - - - - - - - STAMFORD. ...... - - - - - - - - - - WATERBURY - - - - - - - - - - WEST HAVEN - - - - - - - - - DELAWARE: WILMINGTON - - - - - - - - - - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: 73 114 73 114 58 750 14 364 1 14 363 - - - - FLORIDA: CLEARWATER 56 56 56 - - - - - - - FORT LAUDERDALE . . . 425 425 421 4 4 - - - - - GAINESVILLE 19 19 19 - - - - - - - HIALEAH 138 138 138 - - - - - - - HOLLYWOOD 835 835 778 57 57 - - - - - JACKSONVILLE 4 458 4 458 4 086 372 38 334 - - - - MIAMI - - - - - - - - - - MIAMI BEACH 71 71 71 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ORLANDO 591 591 590 1 1 - - - - - PENSACOLA 97 97 97 - - - - - - - ST. PETERSBURG. . . . 408 408 408 - - - - - - - TALLAHASSEE - - - - - - - - - - TAMPA - - - - - - - - - - WEST PALM BEACH . . . 123 123 123 - - - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. CORRECTIONS 291 Table 44. Corrections expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure Cityi Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land local govern- ments GEORGIA: ALBANY 75 - - - - - - 75 - 75 2 053 1 974 1 938 36 35 1 - 79 - 79 111 111 110 1 1 - - - - - 878 878 872 6 6 - - - - - 575 232 575 223 233 222 342 1 1 342 - 9 - _ 9 HAWAII: 719 719 716 3 3 - - - - - IDAHO: BOISE CITY 35 35 35 - - - - - - - ILLINOIS: ARLINGTON HEIGHTS. . . - - - - - - - - - - AURORA - - - - - - - - - - BERWYN - - - - - - - - - - 13 - - - - - - 13 - 13 677 677 86 591 - 591 - - - - CICERO - - - - - - - - - - DECATUR - - - - - - - - - - DES PLAINES - - - - - - - - - - EAST ST. LOUIS .... 51 51 49 2 - 2 - - - - _ EVANSTON JOLIET - - - - - - - - - - OAK LAWN - - - - - - - - - - OAK PARK - - - - - - - - - - 29 - - - - - - 29 - 29 ROCKFORD - - - - - - - - - - ROCK ISLAND - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 92 92 87 5 5 - - - - - WAUKEGAN - - - - - - - - - - INDIANA: 4 4 4 - - - - - - - EVANSVILLE 14 14 14 - - - - - - - FORT WAYNE - - - - - - - - - - 63 32 63 32 63 32 - _ - - : : _ _ 4 027 3 7 02 3 545 157 12 145 - 32 5 32 5 - MUNCIE 7 7 7 - - - - - - - SOUTH BEND - - - - - - - - - - TERRE HAUTE - - - - - - - - - - iowa: 2 - - - - - - 2 - 2 COUNCIL BLUFFS .... 45 45 45 _ - - - - - - DAVENPORT - - - - - - - - - - DES MOINES 33 22 22 - - - - 11 - 11 59 22 22 - - - _ 37 _ 37 74 74 73 1 1 - - - - WATERLOO - - - - - - - - - - KANSAS: KANSAS CITY 241 241 241 - - - - - - - OVERLAND PARK - - - - - - - - - - TOPEKA 72 44 44 - - - - 28 - 28 373 36 360 - - - - 13 13 - KENTUCKY: COVINGTON 45 45 45 - - - - - - - 1 444 1 441 1 419 22 18 4 - 3 - 3 LOUISVILLE 182 - - - - - - 182 - 182 OWENSBORO 28 - - - - - - 28 - - See footnotes at end of table. 292 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 44. Corrections expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental ex penditure City 1 Total Direct current Capita 1 outlay Total To State govern- ments To local Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land govern- ments LOUISIANA: i 444 1 444 1 412 32 2 30 - - - - 34 - - - - - - 34 - 34 LAKE CHARLES 409 390 3 387 - 387 - 19 - 19 78 78 78 - - - - - - - 8 579 8 579 5 489 3 090 46 167 2 877 - - - SHREVEPORT 181 181 181 - - - - - - - MAINE: - - - - - - - - - - Maryland: 7 701 7 701 7 516 185 26 159 - - - - MASSACHUSETTS: 8 647 8 647 8 556 91 58 33 - - - - BROCKTON - - - - - - - - - - CAMBRIDGE - - - - - - - - - - CHICOPEE - - - - - - - - - - 261 261 258 3 3 - - - - - HOLYOKE - - - - - - - - - - 20 20 20 - - - - - - - LOWELL _ - - - - - - - - - " ~ _ ~ — _ _ : ~ — MALDEN - - - - - - - - - - - NEW BEDFORD - - - - - - - - - - NEWTON - - - - - - - - - - P1TTSFIELD _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SOMERVILLE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WALTHAM - - - - - - - - - - WORCESTER - - - - - - - - ~ ~ MICHIGAN: 83 83 83 - - - - - - - 125 89 89 - - - - 36 - 36 DEARBORN HEIGHTS . . . 12 7 7 - - - - 5 - 5 5 908 5 665 4 966 699 130 569 - 243 - 243 FARMINGTON HILLS . . . 4 - - - - - - 4 - 4 388 270 388 201 387 198 1 3 1 3 - - 69 - - 69 41 41 41 _ - - - - - - 922 922 922 - - - - - - - 47 32 32 - - - - 15 - 15 81 56 56 - - - - 25 - 25 124 24 24 - - - - 100 - 100 ROSEVILLE - - - - - - - - - - 56 56 56 - - - - - - ~ SAGINAW _ _ - - - - - - - - ST. CLAIR SHORES . . . - - - - - - - - - - 157 153 92 61 1 60 - 4 - 4 STERLING HEIGHTS . . . - - - - - - - - - - 24 12 12 - - - - 12 - 12 - - - - - - - - - - 95 67 23 44 - 44 - 28 - 28 54 22 22 - - - - 32 - 32 MINNESOTA: BLOOMINGTON - - - - - - - - - - DULUTH 19 - - - - - 19 - 19 1 682 1 682 1 306 376 7 369 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 22 22 4 18 - 18 - - - - MISSISSIPPI: 47 47 47 - - - - - - 412 411 411 - - - 1 - 1 See iootnotes at end ol table. CORRECTIONS 293 Table 44. Corrections expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) City 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Equip- ment Construc- tion Intergovernmental expenditure State govern- ments local govern- ments missouri: columbia . . florissant . independence: kansas c ity. st. joseph . ST. LOUIS. . SPRINGFIELD. MONTANA: BILLINGS . , GREAT FALLS. NEBRASKA: LINCOLN. OMAHA. . NEVADA: LAS VESAS. RENO . . . NEW HAMPSHIRE: MANCHESTER . NASHUA . . . NEW JERSEY: BAYONNE. . . . BLOOMFIELD . . CAMDEN . . . . CLIFTON. . . . EAST ORANGE. . ELIZABETH. . . IRVINGTON. . . JERSEY CITY. . NEWARK . . . . PASSAIC. . . . PATERSON . . . TRENTON. . . . UNION C ITY . . VINELAND . . . NEW MEXICO: ALBUQUERQUE. . NEW YORK: ALBANY . . . . BINGHAMTON . . BUFFALO. . . . MOUNT VERNON . NEW ROC H ELL E . NEW YORK CITY. NIAGARA FALLS. ROCHESTER. . . ROME SCHENECTADY. . SYRACUSE . . . TROY UTICA. . . . . WHITE PLAINS . YONKERS. . . . north Carolina: asheville. . . charlotte. . . DURHAM . . . . FAYETTEVILLE . GREENSBORO . . HIGH POINT . . RALEIGH. . . . WILMINGTON . . WINSTON-SALEM. 1 485 2 7 992 9 26 117 364 116 3 264 1 485 7 992 17 117 352 56 1 483 7 922 17 117 352 56 260 2 70 97 69 97 69 Q7 6Q 1 286 1 286 1 286 125 561 | 14 921 379 14 542 1 524 328 46 See footnotes at end of table. 294 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 44. Corrections expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergovernmental e> penditure City 1 Total Direct current Capita 1 outlay Total To State govern- ments To local govern- ments Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land NORTH DAKOTA: 8 _ _ _ _ _ _ 8 _ 8 OHIO: 449 333 333 - - - - 116 - 116 343 298 298 - - - - 45 - 45 2 39 2 390 2 343 47 - 47 - - - - 3 377 3 377 3 280 97 - 97 - - - - CLEVELAND HEIGHTS. . . 21 7 7 - - - - 14 - 14 1 344 1 344 1 043 301 20 - 281 - - - 1 385 1 385 1 375 10 10 - - - - - 56 48 48 - - - - 8 - 8 5 - - - - - - 5 - 5 65 25 25 - - - - 40 - 40 92 60 60 _ _ _ _ 32 _ 32 LAKEWOOD ....... - - - - - - - - - - LIMA 131 129 129 - - - - 2 - 2 73 63 63 - - - - 10 - 10 32 30 30 - - - - 2 - 2 PARMA 16 11 11 - - - - 5 - 5 SPRINGFIELD 45 35 35 - - - - 10 - 10 1 268 1 268 1 213 55 1 54 - - - - WARREN 71 71 71 - - - - - - - YOUNGSTOWN 368 368 320 48 - - 48 _ - OKLAHOMA: 66 66 66 - - - - - - - 35 35 35 - - - - - - - NORMAN 4 - - - - - - 4 - 4 OKLAHOMA C ITY 423 423 394 29 27 2 - - - - 476 476 474 2 2 _ OREGON: 97 - - - - - - 97 - 97 PORTLAND - - - - - - - - - - _ PENNSYLVANIA - . ALLENTOWN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - BETHLEHEM - - - - - - - - - - CHESTER - - - - - - - - - - ERIE . - - - - - - - - - - HARRISBURG - - - - - - - - - - LANCASTER - - - - - - - - - - 34 226 33 217 31 783 1 434 157 1 277 _ 1 009 1 009 _ PITTSBURGH - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SCRANTON - - - - - - - - - - WILKES-BARRE - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 _ RHODE ISLAND: CRANSTON - - - - - - - - - - PAWTUCKET - - - - - - - - - - PROVIDENCE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SOUTH CAROLINA: CHARLESTON - - - - - - - - - - COLUMBIA 234 234 233 1 1 - - - - - GREENVILLE 47 47 47 - - - - - - - SOUTH DAKOTA: SIOUX FALLS 9 - - - - - - 9 - 9 TENNESSEE: CHATTANOOGA - - - - - - - - - - 222 222 222 - - - - - - - 1 589 1 090 1 088 2 2 - - 499 6 493 NASHVILLE-DAVIDSON . . 2 377 2 377 2 346 31 31 - - - - - See footnotes at end ol table. CORRECTIONS 295 Table 44. Corrections expenditure of 394 large city governments, by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total Direct expenditure Intergover nmental expenditure City* Total Direct current Capita 1 outlay Total To State govern- ments To Total Equip- ment Construc- tion Land local govern- ments TEXAS: ABILENE 40 40 40 - - - - - - _ AMARILLO . . . . . 122 122 122 - - - - - - - ARLINGTON. . 86 86 86 - - - - - - - AUSTIN . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - BEAUMONT . . . . . 105 105 105 - - - - - - - BROWNSVILLE. . » . 29 - - - - - - 29 - 29 CORPUS CHRIST I . . 275 275 267 8 8 - - - - - DALLAS . . . . . . 1 057 1 057 1 053 4 4 - - - - - EL PASO. . . . . . 64 - - - - - - 64 - 64 FORT WORTH . 1 • . . 412 412 411 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ GALVESTON. . . o . . . 85 85 85 - - - - - - - GARLAND. . . .... 51 51 51 - - - - - - - GRAND PRAIRIE 48 48 48 - - - - - - - HOUSTON. . . 2 940 2 940 2 940 - - - - - - - IRVING . . . 66 66 66 - - - - - - - LAREDO . . . 8 - - - - - - 8 - 8 LUBBOCK. . . 54 54 54 - - - - - - - MESQUITE . . - - - - - - - - - - MIDLAND. . . - - - - - - - - - - ODESSA . . . 47 47 47 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PASADENA . . 91 91 91 - - - - - - - PORT ARTHUR. 5? 53 53 - - - - - - _ RICHARDSON . - - - - - - - - _ _ SAN ANGELO . 32 32 32 - - - - - - - SAN ANTONIO. 350 - - - - - - 350 - 350 TYLER. . . . 8 - - - - - - 8 _ 8 WACO .... . . . . 66 66 66 - - - - _ - - WICHITA FALLS .... 96 96 96 - - - - - - - UTAH: • 3 - - - - - - 3 - PROVO 3 SALT LAKE C ITY «, . . . "0 40 40 - - - - - - - VIRGINIA: ALEXANDRIA 972 9 09 ^03 6 6 - - 63 63 - CHESAPEAKE .... 1 049 1 049 1 021 23 28 - - - _ - HAMPTON. ..... 443 443 424 19 13 6 - - - - LYNCHBURG. .... 399 39° 398 1 1 - - - - NEWPORT NEWS . . . 2 727 2 727 1 257 1 47 24 1 446 - - - - NORFOLK. ..... 1 239 i 239 1 219 20 10 10 - - - - PORTSMOUTH .... 352 334 334 - - - - 18 _ 18 RICHMOND , . 1 561 1 561 1 561 - - - - - _ - ROANOKE . 1 778 1 778 1 0"8 730 11 719 - - - - VIRGINIA BEACH .... 845 845 845 - - - - - - - WASHINGTON: BELLEVUE 134 130 130 _ - - _ 4 _ 4 EVERETT. . . . . . . 19 - - - - - _ 1" _ 19 SEATTLE. . . . . . . 1 553 453 453 - - - - 1 100 - 1 100 SPOKANE. . . . . . . 228 35 35 - - - - 193 - 193 TACOMA .... . . . 344 344 341 3 3 - - - - - WEST VIRGINIA: CHARLESTON 80 - _ _ - _ _ 80 _ 80 HUNTINGTON 37 - - - - - - 37 - 37 WISCONS IN: APPLETON - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ GREEN EAY. . . 3 - _ _ _ _ _ ■% _ 3 KENOSHA. . . . 1 - _ - - _ _ 1 _ 1 LA CROSSE. . . 9 _ _ _ _ _ _ q _ 9 MADISON. . . . 8 - _ _ _ _ _ 8 _ 8 MILWAUKEE. . . 14 - _ _ _ _ _ 14 _ 14 OSHKOSH. . . . . . . 1 - - _ _ _ _ 1 _ 1 RACINE .... . . . 3 - - _ _ _ _ 3 _ 3 WAUWATOSA. . . • . . - - - - - - _ _ _ _ WEST ALL IS . . . . . 1 - - - - - - 1 " 1 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. Data are based on a field compilation from records of each city government shown; see text for data limitations. 296 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 45. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Total Total direct Probation direct Probation and current tions and expendi- ions parole aneous expendi- parole aneous ture ture 330 131 252 372 54 192 23 567 CALIFORNIA — CONT INUED SANTA MONICA - _ _ _ ALABAMA: _ _ _ _ 848 750 93 - _ _ _ _ 47 47 - - 134 134 _ _ 136 136 - - _ _ _ 197 197 - - _ _ _ 212 212 - - 114 114 _ _ 67 67 - - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ ARIZONA: _ _ _ _ 35 - - 35 _ _ _ 67 3 64 - COLORADO: 11 - - 11 _ _ _ _ - - - - 5 5 _ _ COLORADO SPRINGS . . . 17 17 _ _ ARKANSAS: 5 228 3 484 51 1 693 101 101 - - _ _ _ _ 179 144 35 - 19 _ 19 _ NORTH LITTLE ROCK. . . 147 64 83 - 230 119 111 56 56 ~ - CONNECTICUT: CALIFORNIA: 174 _ _ 174 - - - - _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ 98 98 - - _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - _ - - - - _ _ _ _ 118 118 - - _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ - _ - - - - - - - _ - _ _ _ - - - - 66 66 - - DELAWARE: DALY C ITY. ...... - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: - - - - 58 720 48 388 4 915 5 417 - - - _ - - - - FLORIDA: - - - - 56 56 _ _ - - - - FORT LAUDERDALE. . . . 421 421 _ _ - - - - 19 19 - - 138 138 _ - - - - - 778 778 _ - - - - - 4 086 3 805 277 4 HUNTINGTON BEACH . . . - - - - MIAMI. . _ _ 146 146 - _ - - - - 71 71 _ _ 953 953 - - 590 5Q0 _ _ - - - - 97 97 _ _ - - - - ST. PETERSBURG .... 408 302 _ 106 - - - - _ _ _ _ 36 36 - - 123 123 - WEST PALM BEACH. . . . - 1 118 1 118 _ _ GEORGIA: - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - 1 938 1 931 _ 7 . - - - - 110 110 _ _ - - - - 872 718 154 _ 112 112 _ _ 233 222 233 222 - _ 403 158 245 - 66 66 - - HAWAII: - - - - 716 716 _ _ - - - - - - - - IDAHO: 35 35 _ _ - - _ _ - - - - ILLINOIS: SAN BERNARDINO .... - - - - ARLINGTON HEIGHTS. . . _ _ _ _ SAN BUENAVENTURA . . . - - - - _ _ _ _ 415 379 - 36 _ _ _ _ 9 870 6 113 3 757 - _ _ _ _ - - - - 86 _ _ 86 - - - - _ - _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - EAST ST. LOUIS .... 49 _ 21 28 " " - - - - - CORRECTIONS 297 Table 45. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total direct Probati and ILLINOIS — CONT INUED EVANSTON JOLIET OAK LAWN OAK PARK PEORIA ROCKFORD . . . . . ROCK ISLAND. . . . SKOKIE SPRINGFIELD. . . . WAUKEGAN INDIANA: ANDERSON EVANSVILLE . . . . FORT WAYNE . . . . GARY HAMMOND INDIANAPOLIS . . . MUNCIE SOUTH BEND . . . . TERRE HAUTE. . . . IOWA! CEDAR RAPIDS . . . COUNCIL BLUFFS . . DAVENPORT DES MOINES . . . . DUBUQUE SIOUX CITY . . . . WATERLOO . « . . . KANSAS: KANSAS CITY. . . . OVERLAND PARK. . . TOPEKA WICHITA KENTUCKY: COVINGTON LEXINGTON LOUISVILLE . . . . OWENSBORO LOUISIANA: BATON ROUGE. . . . LAFAYETTE LAKE CHARLES . . . MONROE NEW ORLEANS. . . . SHREVEPORT . . . . MAINE: PORTLAND MARYLAND: BALTIMORE MASSACHUSETTS: BOSTON BROCKTON CAMBRIDGE CHICOPEE FALL RIVER . . . . HOLYOKE LAWRENCE LOWELL LYNN MALDEN ...... MED FORD NEW BEDFORD. . . . NEWTON PITTSFIELD . . . . QUINCY SOMERVILLE . . . . SPRINGFIELD. . . . WALTHAM WORCESTER MICHIGAN: ANN ARBOR DEARBORN DEARBORN HEIGHTS . DETROIT FARMINGTON HILLS . 1 412 3 5 489 181 258 20 45 1 192 4 946 181 7 419 5 449 63 32 731 83 89 MICHIGAN— CONTINUED FLINT GRAND RAPIDS . . . KALAMAZOO LANSING LINCOLN PARK . . . LIVONIA PONTIAC ROSEVILLE ROYAL OAK SAGINAW ST. CLAIR SHORES . SOUTHFIELD . . . . STERLING HEIGHTS . TAYLOR ...... WARREN WESTLAND WYOMING MINNESOTA: BLOOMINGTON. . . . DULUTH . MINNEAPOLIS. . . . ROCHESTER ST. PAUL MISSISSIPPI: BILOXI JACKSON MISSOURI: COLUMBIA . . . . . FLORISSANT . . . . INDEPENDENCE . . . KANSAS CITY. . . . ST. JOSEPH . . . . ST. LOUIS SPRINGFIELD. . . . MONTANA: BILLINGS GREAT FALLS. . . . NEBRASKA: LINCOLN OMAHA NEVADA: LAS VEGAS RENO NEW HAMPSHIRE: MANCHESTER . . . . NASHUA NEW JERSEY: BAYONNE BLOOMFIELD . . . . CAMDEN CLIFTON EAST ORANGE. . . . ELIZABETH IRVINGTON JERSEY CITY. . . . NEWARK PASSAIC PATERSON TRENTON VINELANO UNION CITY . . . . NEW MEXICO: AUBUOUERQUE. . . . NEW YORK: ALBANY BINGHAMTON . . . . BUFFALO MOUNT VERNON . . . NEW ROCHELLE . . . NEW YORK CITY. . . NIAGARA FALLS. . . ROCHESTER ROME 41 922 1 483 7 934 17 117 3. ,, -> 56 200 32 '4 1 214 50 24 998 4 635 485 2 800 See footnotes at end of table. 298 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 45. Detail of direct current expenditure for corrections activities of 394 large city governments, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total direct current expendi- ture obati and Total direct current expendi- obati and NEW YORK — CONTINUED SCHENECTADY. . . . SYRACUSE TROY UTICA WHITE PLAINS . . . YONKERS NORTH CAROLINA: ASHEVILLE CHARLOTTE DURHAM FAYETTEVILLE . . . GREENSBORO . . . . HIGH POINT . . . . RALEIGH WILMINGTON . . . . WINSTON-SALEM. . . NORTH DAKOTA: FARGO OHIO: AKRON CANTON CINCINNATI . . . . CLEVELAND CLEVELAND HEIGHTS. COLUMBUS DAYTON ELYRIA ...... EUCLID HAMILTON KETTERING LAKEWOOD LIMA LORAIN MANSFIELD PARMA. ...... SPRINGFIELD. . . . TOLEDO WARREN YOUNGSTOWN . . . . OKLAHOMA: LAWTON ...... NORMAN ...... MIDWEST OKLAHOMA CITY. . . TULSA OREGON: EUGENE PORTLAND SALEM PENNSYLVANIA: ALLENTOWN ALTOONA BETHLEHEM CHESTER ERIE HARR1SBURG . . . . LANCASTER PHILADELPHIA . . . PITTSBURGH . . . . READING SCRANTON . . . . . WILKES-BARRE . . . YORK RHODE ISLAND: CRANSTON PAWTUCKET PROVIDENCE . . . . WARWICK SOUTH CAROLINA: CHARLESTON . . . . COLUMBIA GREENVILLE . . . . 333 298 2 343 3 280 7 1 043 1 375 120 63 50 11 35 1 213 474 1 741 2 220 896 1 297 824 71 278 194 417 .' ^8 587 1 060 ,'DO 30 SOUTH DAKOTA: SIOUX FALLS. . . . TENNESSEE: CHATTANOOGA. . . . KNOXVILLE MEMPHIS NASHVILLE-DAVIDSON TEXAS: ABILENE AMARILLO ARLINGTON. .... AUSTIN BEAUMONT ..... BROWNSVILLE. . . . CORPUS CHRISTI . . DALLAS EL PASO FORT WORTH .... GALVESTON. .... GARLAND GRAND PRAIRIE. . . HOUSTON IRVING LAREDO LUBBOCK MESQUITE MIDLAND ODESSA PASADENA PORT ARTHUR. . . . RICHARDSON .... SAN ANGELO .... SAN ANTONIO. . . . TYLER WACO WICHITA FALLS. . . UTAH: OGDEN PROVO SALT LAKE C ITY . . VIRGINIA: ALEXANDRIA .... CHESAPEAKE .... HAMPTON LYNCHBURG NEWPORT NEWS . . . NORFOLK PORTSMOUTH .... RICHMOND ROANOKE VIRGINIA BEACH . . WASHINGTON: BELLEVUE EVERETT SEATTLE. SPOKANE TACOMA WEST VIRGINIA: CHARLESTON .... HUNTINGTON . . . . WISCONSIN: APPLETON GREEN BAY. KENOSHA. LACROSSE MADISON. MILWAUKEE. OSHKOSH. RACINE . WAUWATOSA. WEST ALLIS 222 1 088 2 346 267 1 053 51 48 2 940 903 1 021 424 398 1 244 1 219 334 1 561 1 048 845 453 35 341 22: 072 346 267 053 48 479 602 1 013 200 312 899 1 079 279 1 510 560 439 149 35 243 224 86 332 51 488 406 130 304 98 - Ropr 'Data rounds field ftch city Kovrrrunont shown; text for data limitations. CORRECTIONS 299 Table 46. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of State governments, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Total correct! Full-ti only Octot payro Number of employees October payroll Number of employees October payroll TOTAL . . ALABAMA . . . . ALASKA ARIZONA . . . . ARKANSAS. . . . CALIFORNIA. . . COLORADO. . . . CONNECTICUT . . DELAWARE. . . . FLORIDA . . . . GEORGIA . . . . HAWAII IDAHO ILLINOIS. . . . INDIANA . . . . IOWA KANSAS KENTUCKY. . . . LOUISIANA . . . MAINE MARYLAND. . . . MASSACHUSETTS . MICHIGAN. . . . MINNESOTA . . . MISSISSIPPI . . MISSOURI. . . . MONTANA .... NEBRASKA. . . . NEVADA NEW HAMPSHIRE . NEW JERSEY. . . NEW MEXICO. . . NEW YORK. . . . NORTH CAROLINA. NORTH DAKOTA. . OHIO OKLAHOMA. . . . OREGON PENNSYLVANIA. . RHODE ISLAND. . SOUTH CAROLINA. SOUTH DAKOTA. . TENNESSEE . . . TEXAS UTAH VERMONT .... VIRGINIA. . . . WASHINGTON. . . WEST VIRGINIA . WISCONSIN . . . WYOMING .... 128 523 1 302 432 1 103 792 13 237 1 7 34 2 624 810 9 147 3 637 37 1 401 4 981 2 081 1 389 126 196 1 268 412 1 103 792 12 455 2 194 1 525 2 466 654 4 826 3 085 3 714 1 568 990 2 339 526 886 578 377 3 384 653 12 392 5 722 278 6 528 2 108 1 639 4 054 694 2 523 283 2 464 4 278 735 433 4 2 39 2 493 762 2 790 292 690 582 789 954 637 37 1 392 981 064 37 2 194 1 525 2 466 634 4 820 3 085 3 651 1 485 914 2 194 496 843 568 37 3 3 327 658 12 269 5 722 268 6 462 2 108 1 624 4 054 694 2 510 254 2 461 4 165 678 413 4 224 2 437 759 2 7 18 283 126 933 1 281 424 1 103 792 12 704 1 702 2 593 791 9 022 3 637 371 394 4 981 2 072 1 377 2 194 1 525 2 466 639 4 822 3 085 3 659 1 524 933 2 217 507 859 572 374 3 362 658 12 299 5 722 274 6 476 2 108 1 631 4 054 694 2 514 266 2 464 4 203 699 418 4 229 2 457 759 2 740 286 1 042 667 1 075 560 16 017 1 896 2 446 760 6 985 2 713 446 334 5 102 1 847 1 307 1 682 1 224 1 959 529 5 176 2 950 4 146 1 387 669 1 631 500 684 637 321 3 274 511 14 4 68 4 644 215 6 790 1 511 1 633 4 342 787 1 987 219 1 87 2 3 604 661 347 3 688 2 487 486 2 812 221 980 333 931 682 10 124 1 104 1 891 673 6 154 2 49 1 276 306 3 970 1 889 1 201 2 091 1 176 1 629 568 3 329 2 454 3 22 1 1 226 808 1 427 420 694 456 29 1 2 926 426 10 349 4 362 247 5 496 1 287 1 192 3 314 496 1 710 2 38 2 036 3 623 458 319 2 857 1 956 644 1 999 253 97 285 961 320 931 682 9 515 1 088 1 866 652 6 001 2 491 276 298 3 970 1 872 1 183 2 091 1 176 1 629 560 3 326 2 454 3 158 1 161 7 32 1 399 39 2 668 451 289 2 875 426 10 226 4 362 2 39 5 430 1 287 1 181 3 314 49 6 1 692 22 3 2 033 3 544 433 300 2 842 1 917 641 1 984 248 969 32g 931 682 9 693 1 09 1 1 372 654 6 057 2 491 27 6 299 3 970 1 880 1 190 2 091 1 176 1 629 563 3 327 2 454 3 166 1 193 751 1 405 402 675 453 290 2 908 426 10 257 4 362 244 5 444 1 237 1 187 3 314 49 6 1 696 229 2 036 3 568 445 304 2 847 1 931 641 1 987 251 94 322 758 517 878 487 11 865 1 281 1 744 640 4 579 1 787 357 246 3 954 1 64" 1 143 1 591 931 1 27 5 461 3 616 2 304 3 533 1 216 542 1 009 39 6 538 501 244 2 835 328 11 926 3 430 188 5 703 883 1 133 3 505 581 1 252 138 1 542 3 016 "16 247 2 487 1 942 395 2 045 189 609 122 170 363 6 648 677 1 311 324 3 742 1 57 2 NA 186 2 543 1 404 773 873 772 903 23 3 2 09 3 1 920 2 487 733 1 005 214 459 306 142 1 264 225 7 049 3 302 110 2 782 908 745 1 891 37 1 066 1 214 2 493 106 1 997 1 065 413 905 99 607 119 170 363 6 403 663 1 293 323 NA ISO 2 543 1 399 763 873 772 903 23 3 2 093 1 920 2 444 705 202 449 302 142 1 251 225 7 049 3 302 103 2 732 908 745 1 89 1 37 1 066 1 214 2 457 98 1 995 1 061 410 897 95 t,03 122 170 363 6 486 666 1 301 323 3 698 1 572 NA 1 403 770 873 772 903 1 920 2 450 7 19 987 207 452 303 142 1 261 225 7 049 3 302 107 2 782 1 891 37 1 066 1 214 2 465 100 1 995 1 063 410 899 97 59 656 473 192 162 256 8 034 830 1 260 349 2 915 1 193 NA 150 2 468 1 227 780 723 660 750 231 2 353 1 39 4 2 725 843 695 218 369 335 124 1 226 172 645 760 055 455 7 7 c , 1 001 2 147 85 1 797 1 083 260 994 See footnotes snd of table 300 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 46. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of State governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) s--Continued Other and combined Number of employe October payroll 2 Full-tlir equiva- lent October payroll Full-ti mly Full-tim equiva- lent October payroll TOTAL . . ALABAMA . . . . ALASKA ARIZONA . . . . ARKANSAS. . . . CALIFORNIA. . . COLORADO. . . . CONNECTICUT . . DELAWARE. . . . FLORIDA . . . . GEORGIA . . . . HAWAII IDAHO ILLINOIS. . . . INDIANA . . . . IOVW KANSAS KENTUCKY. . . . LOUISIANA . . . MAINE MARYLAND. . . . MASSACHUSETTS . MICHIGAN. . . . MINNESOTA . . . MISSISSIPPI . . MISSOURI. . . . MONTANA . . . . NEBRASKA. . . . NEVADA NEW HAMPSHIRE . NEW JERSEY. . . NEW MEXICO. . . NEW YORK. . . . NORTH CAROLINA. NORTH DAKOTA. . OHIO OKLAHOMA. . . . OREGON PENNSYLVANIA. . RHODE ISLAND. . SOUTH CAROLINA. SOUTH DAKOTA. . TENNESSEE . . . TEXAS UTAH VERMONT . . . . VIRGINIA. . . . WASHINGTON. . . WEST VIRGINIA . WISCONSIN . . . WYOMING . . . . 139 16 198 133 198 133 26 139 198 L33 125 67 112 119 •08 104 118 110 118 110 118 110 100 111 329 107 248 309 3 181 457 300 266 2 112 844 107 120 1 298 405 385 345 350 670 285 339 401 734 449 237 375 206 192 14 149 720 189 1 527 831 137 1 923 325 419 1 284 126 593 117 751 1 020 141 192 742 781 213 765 15(1 248 309 823 425 292 246 2 032 844 107 118 1 293 395 373 345 350 670 277 836 401 714 420 232 372 190 178 140 147 696 189 1 404 831 136 1 857 325 410 1 284 126 575 107 748 977 126 181 729 746 213 758 153 319 104 248 309 921 426 294 243 063 844 107 118 298 397 378 345 350 670 279 837 401 717 438 234 37 3 196 182 140 148 189 1 439 831 137 1 87 1 325 415 1 284 126 579 111 751 994 136 184 734 758 213 760 153 252 151 237 224 3 477 451 245 210 I. 423 5 38 107 354 327 252 229 483 230 829 291 308 326 140 282 178 137 157 120 702 147 1 474 6 36 103 1 930 r ■<■■'■ 394 1 303 126 439 82 491 773 113 145 590 748 125 721 1 1 1 104 513 10 664 1 575 96 303 21 104 513 141 67 37 1 1 575 96 104 513 141 67 273 118 298 174 479 117 64 224 29 1 17 end of table CORRECTIONS 301 Table 46. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of State governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) \, parole, and pardo State 1 Full-ti only October payroll Number of employe Full-ti only Full-tim equiva- lent October payroll Full-time equiva- Full-time equiva- lent October payroll TOTAL . . ALABAMA .... ALASKA ARIZONA . . . . ARKANSAS. . . . CALIFORNIA. . . COLORADO. . . . CONNECTICUT . . DELAWARE. . . . FLORIDA . . . . GEORGIA . . . . HAWAII IDAHO ILLINOIS. . . . INDIANA . . . . IOWA KANSAS KENTUCKY. . . . LOUISIANA . . . MAINE MARYLAND. . . . MASSACHUSETTS . MICHIGAN. . . . MINNESOTA . . . MISSISSIPPI . . MISSOURI. . . . MONTANA .... NEBRASKA. . . . NEVADA NEW HAMPSHIRE . NEW JERSEY. . . NEW MEXICO. . . NEW YORK. . . . NORTH CAROLINA. NORTH DAKOTA. . OHIO OKLAHOMA. . . . OREGON PENNSYLVANIA. . RHODE ISLAND. . SOUTH CAROLINA. SOUTH DAKOTA. . TENNESSEE . . . TEXAS UTAH VERMONT .... VIRGINIA. . . . WASHINGTON. . . WEST VIRGINIA . WISCONSIN . . . WYOMING .... 60 924 338 237 30 36* 9 222 314 110 331 10 412 30 9 667 270 418 188 102 319 237 30 368 8 222 314 110 313 10 396 30 667 270 NA 568 418 187 102 51 258 60 900 324 237 30 368 MU 110 318 667 270 418 187 102 10 1 1 140 306 224 258 6 258 313 137 160 926 273 304 165 138 241 10 50 1 595 550 445 655 854 643 140 297 234 317 383 11 172 500 76 171 122 223 1 338 909 31 464 403 259 638 147 298 32 366 385 263 85 832 537 118 564 29 50 1 497 538 438 634 854 297 234 317 383 155 117 223 1 338 909 29 464 403 256 638 147 298 23 366 356 233 832 520 118 525 25 50 536 542 440 63 641 854 68 297 234 317 383 164 1 19 223 1 338 909 638 147 298 366 241 85 832 526 118 538 25 216 120 537 446 100 653 701 143 65 241 209 62 287 333 117 322 68 123 136 173 1 572 804 27 476 324 285 699 148 237 22 275 326 230 72 761 545 91 526 22 38 181 - Represents zer NA Not available X Not applicable 'Data 2 Bee a are based on a field compilation from records of each State government; see text for data limitations, se of rounding, the detail figures may not add precisely to the totals shown. 302 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 47. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of (Dollar amounts Number of employe Full-time equivalent' October payroll 2 Full-ti only Full-t equivalent October payroll Full-time equivalent October payroll TOTAL Alabama: CALHOUN JEFFERSON .... MADISON MOBILE MONTGOMERY. . . . TUSCALOOSA. . . . ALASKA: greater anchorage Arizona: maricopa PIMA ARKANSAS : PULASKI California: ALAMEDA BUTTE CONTRA COSTA. . . FRESNO HUMBOLDT KERN LOS ANGELES . . . MARIN MERCED MONTEREY ORANGE RIVERSIDE .... SACRAMENTO. . . . SAN BERNARDINO. . SAN DIEGO .... SAN JOAQUIN . . . SAN LUIS OBISPO . SAN MATEO .... SANTA BARBARA . . SANTA CLARA . . . SANTA CRUZ. . . . SOLANO SONOMA STANISLAUS. . . . TULARE VENTURA YOLO COLORADO : ADAMS . . ARAPAHOE. BOULDER . EL PASO . JEFFERSOI" LARIMER . PUEBLO. . WELD. . . DELAWARE : NEW CASTLE. . FLORIDA: ALACHUA . . . BREVARD . . . BROWARD . . . DADE ESCAMBIA. . . HILLSBOROUGH. LEE LEON MANATEE . . . ORANGE. . . . PALM BEACH. . PASCO .... PINELLAS. . . POLK SARASOTA. . , SEMINOLE. . . VOLUSIA . . . GEORGIA: BIBB CHATHAM . . . CLAYTON . . . 558 35 1 61 639 482 1<>1 363 550 222 93 226 307 601 697 805 622 342 93 620 346 OOP. 121 196 235 ■ I. .". 187 388 128 1 I 'I 168 545 3 39 52 545 393 96 332 6 357 191 87 197 1 263 576 636 747 1 484 292 88 565 307 917 110 189 203 190 170 37 3 10C 150 566 114 16( 549 544 1 221 56 592 349 381 199 208 1 275 583 653 764 1 545 317 90 580 321 942 112 194 2 2 n 199 180 377 107 150 566 1 1M 167 529 327 1 589 56 736 438 140 390 8 296 255 80 227 1 525 659 792 834 1 869 317 l':i, 776 37 1 1 211 122 223 233 187 170 419 91 123 ' 14 236 263 684 39 349 305 61 211 814 128 677 286 395 448 768 202 43 232 2 17 822 66 95 151 105 i 1 5 219 62 150 566 114 164 233 251 610 30 267 230 56 182 761 105 656 266 344 39e 5l 153 38 243 189 732 1M 566 114 16 ' 2"^4 256 630 34 311 2 5 3 57 197 770 84 47 114 663 271 359 410 706 177 40 253 197 757 59 107 208 150 566 226 238 372 245 85 223 417 111 43 1 :1 7 39 302 432 454 863 178 42 354 in 995 66 111 147 87 100 233 123 584 21 13 114 96 163 138 24 15 gg 91 77 55 251 119 109 1 712 56 307 143 178 252 280 qq 180 36 385 126 138 6 269 45 56 475 215 HI 100 67 44 389 131 149 219 273 68 63 497 102 6 ■ricl "1 I I.. CORRECTIONS 334 large county governments, October 1975 in thousands) 303 Institutio ns — Continued Probation and parole Miscellaneous Other and combined institut ions Number of emplo; October payroll Nu mber of employees October payroll s Number of employees October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent e c Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent -1 23 987 22 562 23 068 22 897 20 147 19 381 19 615 21 337 819 740 770 732 1 7 7 7 4 8 8 8 6 2 73 73 73 77 50 50 50 51 - _ _ _ 3 26 26 26 15 12 12 12 10 - _ _ _ « 27 27 27 19 15 15 15 13 - - _ _ 5 23 23 23 15 5 5 5 5 - - _ _ ' 28 28 28 16 15 13 13 10 - ~ - - 7 - - - - - - - - - " " - 8 146 146 146 141 322 312 315 303 9 119 US 118 96 79 79 79 80 9 9 9 9 10 56 56 56 37 14 14 14 9 - - - " 11 409 385 39 564 502 489 495 637 100 88 98 108 12 24 20 23 21 22 22 22 25 - _ _ _ 13 98 87 96 125 29 278 282 364 _ _ _ _ 14 186 124 142 141 177 163 169 193 - _ _ _ 15 43 42 42 70 40 40 40 55 _ _ _ _ 16 102 90 97 116 152 150 151 167 _ _ _ _ 17 2 102 2 100 2 100 2 632 2 736 2 596 2 610 3 879 - _ _ _ 18 30 30 30 39 101 93 96 126 23 17 19 18 19 40 37 38 35 41 41 41 37 - - - - 20 72 69 70 74 98 92 95 106 _ _ _ _ 21 280 27 1 274 32 6 57 2 549 555 700 58 58 58 86 22 143 140 140 147 315 310 312 357 - _ _ _ 23 217 206 210 253 302 292 294 361 - _ _ _ 24 196 190 193 235 357 351 353 380 - _ _ _ 25 488 387 432 546 631 610 617 828 223 218 222 179 26 113 108 111 116 134 133 134 133 6 6 6 6 27 34 32 33 35 50 50 50 58 - _ _ _ 28 126 119 121 195 338 322 32 6 422 - - - - 29 139 133 135 154 129 118 123 152 _ _ _ _ 30 266 257 261 398 183 182 182 213 3 3 3 3 31 32 32 32 38 55 52 52 56 - - - - 32 45 43 44 56 94 90 92 101 7 7 7 11 33 83 65 69 75 80 78 79 85 4 - _ 1 34 78 59 64 65 111 110 110 99 2 1 1 1 35 52 51 51 52 74 72 73 70 - - - _ 36 153 152 153 177 169 169 169 186 - - - - 37 33 33 33 31 43 43 43 41 23 6 13 6 38 23 23 23 21 39 29 22 24 20 - - - - _ _ _ _ 40 48 48 48 43 - - - - _ _ _ _ 41 68 68 68 50 - - _ - _ _ - - 42 29 29 29 27 - - - - _ - - _ 43 11 11 11 9 - - - - 6 6 6 5 44 18 17 17 10 - - - - - - - - 45 5 5 5 3 " " ~ " 11 11 11 8 46 - -, - - - - - - - - - - 47 53 53 53 55 29 25 26 21 48 24 24 24 20 - _ - - - _ _ _ 49 150 150 150 123 - - - _ _ _ _ _ 50 464 464 464 495 - - - - _ _ - - 51 58 58 58 54 2 2 2 2 _ - _ - 52 267 267 267 248 - - - _ - _ _ - 53 17 17 17 14 - - - - _ _ - _ 54 27 27 27 19 - - - - - - - - 55 21 21 21 13 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 56 114 114 114 96 - _ _ _ _ _ - _ 57 116 116 116 103 4 4 4 3 _ - - - 58 24 24 24 15 - - - - - - - - 59 96 95 95 86 - - - . - - - - 60 77 77 77 55 - - _ - - - - - 61 23 23 23 17 - - _ _ - _ - - 62 29 28 28 18 - - - - - - - - 63 83 80 82 49 - " - - 10 5 6 5 64 20 20 20 13 24 23 23 19 G r > 32 32 32 23 7 7 7 6 - - - - 66 33 32 32 25 21 10 24 10 - - - - 67 304 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 47. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of (Dollar amounts TbtE 1 correct! sns actlviti es Institu tions - - I County 1 Number of employees October Total institutions Institutions for juveniles Number of employees Number of employees Full-time payroll October October 3 only equivalent 2 Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent payroll GEORGIA — CONTINUED 1 53 51 51 41 41 39 39 30 - - - - 2 170 170 170 141 105 105 105 82 46 46 46 32 3 426 420 423 365 237 234 234 196 56 56 56 45 '1 IDAHO: 88 88 88 52 74 74 74 44 5 Illinois: 47 41 43 32 39 33 35 25 29 23 25 17 6 50 38 42 32 40 28 31 24 33 25 27 20 7 cook 1 531 1 513 1 527 1 523 1 218 1 201 1 215 1 245 288 27 1 235 277 9 136 116 125 116 80 61 70 65 38 22 29 27 9 103 99 101 74 56 52 54 39 22 18 20 14 10 111 110 no 81 66 66 66 45 17 17 17 12 1 1 24 24 24 17 15 15 15 11 9 9 9 6 12 31 31 31 24 11 11 11 8 - - - - 1 T - 23 20 22 17 15 12 14 10 - - - - l'l 26 21 23 16 15 10 12 7 5 4 4 2 15 84 76 73 61 56 51 53 39 23 20 21 13 16 68 67 67 51 33 33 33 22 10 10 10 8 17 ROCK ISLAND .... 45 45 45 33 18 18 13 12 - - - - 18 63 61 61 47 41 39 39 30 15 14 14 9 19 55 54 55 38 32 32 32 21 12 12 12 7 20 20 20 20 14 5 5 5 3 - - - - ;u 31 31 31 27 22 22 22 21 - - - - 32 INDIANA : 94 86 90 70 50 46 43 40 24 22 23 16 23 ALLEN 143 136 140 114 103 96 100 79 54 44 47 29 24 DELAWARE. 30 30 30 18 21 21 21 12 12 12 12 6 25 ELKHART . 40 31 35 27 23 17 20 15 7 2 5 4 26 LAKE. . . 103 102 102 89 42 41 41 36 24 23 23 16 ''7 LA PORTE. 43 3? 35 23 5 3 3 2 - - - - 28 MADISON . 38 33 35 20 25 20 23 13 14 9 12 5 ,o ST. JOSEPH 91 85 88 69 61 59 61 47 11 11 11 6 ',0 TIPPECANOE 29 23 2 6 17 21 19 19 12 15 14 14 9 31 VANDERBURGH 52 41 47 37 32 27 29 24 - - - - 32 VIGO. . . . 44 41 42 22 35 32 33 16 28 26 27 1? IOWA : *, •' 54 50 51 41 16 16 16 12 - - - - 34 80 74 76 59 25 25 25 19 4 4 4 3 35 2 38 212 221 193 96 80 84 72 61 53 55 45 36 30 29 29 24 18 17 17 14 - - - - 37 KANSAS : 20 11 13 13 9 1 4 2 6 1 V. .JOHNSON 59 53 55 45 35 34 35 27 15 14 15 9 '.•-, SEDGWICK 99 70 82 49 73 58 64 36 55 40 46 2 6 40 109 90 95 63 70 62 65 44 44 40 41 26 4 1 KENTUCKY : 64 59 60 35 51 47 48 23 20 20 20 9 42 JEFFERSON 32 4 313 320 224 271 260 267 185 146 135 14? 39 4^ LOUISIANA: \i 16 16 13 9 3 .3 7 2 2 2 1 44 CADDO 107 107 107 65 97 97 97 57 13 13 13 5 45 CALCASIEU 38 38 38 24 35 35 35 51 25 25 25 13 46 JEFFERSON 88 83 84 61 80 75 76 54 27 27 27 21 47 LAFAYETTE 42 31 35 16 42 31 35 16 28 13 21 10 48 OUACHITA. 40 37 33 27 35 32 33 24 16 13 14 7 49 RAPinES . 26 22 22 17 20 1.6 16 12 14 10 10 7 MAINE : 50 CUMBERLAND 31 28 29 22 31 28 29 22 - - - - 51 15 14 14 9 15 14 14 9 - - - - 52 YORK MARYLAND: 38 18 22 13 33 18 22 13 ANNE ARUNDEL. . . . 37 37 37 33 37 37 37 33 - - - - 54 BALTIMORE . . 108 99 101 117 62 53 55 69 3 - - 2 55 HARFORD . . . 28 28 28 32 28 23 28 32 - - - - 56 MONTGOMERY. . 96 94 94 lift 96 94 94 116 - - - - 57 PRINCE GEORGES 87 87 87 90 87 37 87 90 - - - - 58 WASHINGTON. . 13 12 12 9 13 12 12 9 ~ _ ~ " Massachusetts: VI 81 79 79 73 51 49 49 50 - - - - 53 46 48 43 30 26 28 28 - - - - .,i 130 125 126 125 55 50 51 54 - - - - 62 233 212 218 212 108 89 94 93 3 8 8 6 '. ' 211 190 203 201 32 75 78 80 - - - - 64 78 57 62 61 47 31 34 37 - - - - 65 455 447 449 47 3 208 200 200 217 6 6 6 5 ,,(, 136 133 134 138 50 47 48 51 - - - - 67 177 168 170 157 71 64 65 64 - - - - 68 WORCESTER 249 240 242 243 107 102 103 107 " " " " end of table CORRECTIONS 334 large county governments, October 1975— Continued in thousands) 305 Institution s — Continued Probation and parole Miscellaneous Other and combined instituti ons Number of employees October Number of employ October « Number of employ ees | October Total Full-time Full-time payroll Total Full-time Full-time payroll 0> Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent payroll only equivalent only equivalent a 41 39 39 30 12 12 12 11 i 59 59 59 50 65 65 65 59 - - - _ 2 10 1 178 178 151 189 186 188 169 - - _ _ 3 74 74 74 44 4 4 4 2 10 10 10 6 4 10 10 10 8 8 8 8 7 " - - - 5 7 3 4 4 10 10 10 8 6 930 930 930 968 313 312 312 278 - - - _ 7 42 39 41 38 56 55 55 51 - _ _ _ 8 34 34 34 25 41 41 41 30 6 6 6 5 9 49 49 49 33 45 44 44 36 - _ _ _ 10 6 6 6 5 9 9 9 7 - - - _ 11 11 11 11 8 20 20 2 16 - - _ _ 12 15 12 14 10 8 8 8 7 - - - - 13 10 6 8 5 11 11 11 9 _ _ _ _ 14 33 31 32 26 28 25 25 22 - - - - 15 23 23 23 14 35 34 34 29 - - - _ 16 18 18 18 12 27 27 27 21 - - - _ 17 26 25 25 21 22 22 22 17 - _ _ _ 18 20 20 20 14 23 22 23 17 - - - _ 19 5 5 5 3 15 15 15 11 - - - _ 20 22 22 22 21 9 9 9 6 - - _ - 21 26 24 25 24 38 34 36 25 6 6 6 5 22 54 52 53 50 40 40 40 35 23 9 9 9 6 9 9 9 6 - _ _ _ 24 16 15 15 11 17 14 15 12 - _ - _ 25 18 18 18 20 61 61 61 53 - _ _ - 26 5 3 3 2 21 16 18 12 17 13 13 9 27 11 11 11 8 13 13 13 7 - _ _ _ 28 50 48 50 41 30 26 27 22 - _ _ _ 29 6 5 5 3 5 3 5 4 3 1 1 1 30 32 27 29 24 20 14 19 13 - - - - 31 7 6 6 4 9 9 9 6 - - - - 32 16 16 16 12 38 34 35 29 33 21 21 21 16 55 49 50 40 - _ _ _ 34 35 27 29 27 138 129 134 118 4 3 3 3 35 18 17 17 14 12 12 12 10 - - - - 36 3 1 2 1 11 10 10 11 " - - - 37 20 20 20 18 24 19 21 18 38 18 18 18 10 26 12 17 13 - - - - 39 26 22 24 18 28 28 28 18 11 _ _ 1 40 31 27 28 19 13 12 12 7 - - - - 41 125 125 125 96 29 29 29 22 24 24 24 17 42 7 6 6 6 8 8 8 6 - - - " 43 84 84 84 52 10 10 10 8 44 10 10 10 8 - - _ _ 3 3 3 3 45 53 48 49 33 8 8 8 7 - - - _ 46 14 13 14 6 - - - _ _ _ - _ 47 19 19 19 17 5 5 5 3 - _ - - 48 6 6 6 5 6 6 6 5 - - - - 49 31 28 29 22 50 15 14 14 9 - - - - _ _ - - 51 38 18 22 13 - - - - - - - - 52 37 37 37 33 53 54 53 53 67 46 46 46 48 _ - - - 54 28 28 28 32 - - - - _ _ - - 55 96 94 94 116 - - - _ _ - _ _ 56 87 87 87 90 - - - - - - - - 57 13 12 12 9 - - - - - - - - 58 51 49 49 50 30 30 30 28 59 30 26 28 28 23 20 21 20 - - - - 60 55 50 51 54 75 75 75 71 - - - - 61 100 81 86 87 125 123 124 119 _ _ - - 62 82 75 78 80 129 123 124 121 - - - - 63 47 31 34 37 21 17 19 17 10 9 10 7 64 202 194 196 212 247 247 247 256 - - _ - 65 50 47 48 51 86 86 86 87 _ - - - 66 71 . 64 65 64 106 104 104 93 - - - - 67 107 102 103 107 142 138 139 136 - - - " 68 306 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 47. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of (Dollar amounts Total correcti Number of employees Full-ti only Full-time equivalent' October payroll 2 Full-time Full-time only equivalent Octobei payroll Full-time Full-ti only equivale Michigan: 3AY BERRIEN . . . CALHOUN . . . GENESEE . . . INGHAM. . . . JACKSON . . . KALAMAZOO . . KENT MACOMB. . . . MONROE. . . . MUSKEGON. . . OAKLAND . . . OTTAWA. . . . SAGINAW . . . ST. CLAIR . . WASHTENAW . . WAYNE . . . . MINNESOTA: ANOKA . . . . DAKOTA. . . . HENNEPIN. . . RAMSEY. . . . ST. LOUIS . . Mississippi : harrison. . . HINDS . . . . JACKSON . . . MISSOURI : CLAY GREENE. . . . JACKSON . . . JEFFERSON . . ST. CHARLES . ST. LOUIS . . NEBRASKA: DOUGLAS . . . lancaster . . Nevada: CLARK . . . . WASHOE. . . . NEW HAMPSHIRE : HILLSBOROUGH. ROCKINGHAM. . NEW jersey: ATLANTIC. . . BERGEN. . . . BURLINGTON. . CAMDEN. . . . CUMBERLAND. . ESSEX . . . . GLOUCESTER. . HUDSON. . . . MERCER. . . . MIDDLESEX . . MONMOUTH. . . MORRIS. . . . OCEAN . . . . PASSAIC . . . SOMERSET. . . UNION . . . . new Mexico: bernalillo. . new york: ALBANY. . . . fiROOME. . . . CHAUTAUQUA. . CHEMUNG . . . DUTCHESS. . . ERIE MONROE. . . . NASSAU. . . . NIAGARA . . . ONEIDA. . . . ONONDAGA. . . ORANGE. . . . OSWEGO. . . . 124 108 144 203 67 403 41 1 337 136 184 293 I--.M 348 126 1 089 104 ', .«i 247 345 205 154 152 360 129 >■'.( 15S 96 5 ' 6 3 1 52 695 373 84 91 104 103 180 100 67 138 151 400 325 123 17 4 ! 1 181 2 7 5 155 341 •U 323 .-■I ■■ > 1 M i , 143 342 108 288 148 68 5(1 62 101 57 1 ■.SIP 921 80 76 412 114 94 81 106 90 73 197 217 158 103 101 75 70 61 51 140 134 109 169 154 174 375 30 135 872 405 329 1 1 6 181 284 159 343 126 1 073 97 246 328 ;..fi3 145 146 350 114 '.■< . 74 51 p'.p, 109 (AM, '55 p, . I',.'| Ml 79 PISS 135 1 131 472 391 121 142 2 62 125 331 M 1 207 - , i 162 120 124 ',■..(. 103 >g - 108 61 605 394 1 15 225 176 128 ] 5 5 101 196 94 768 15 i 200 174 177 140 70 94 189 60 137 151 49 20 514 4 38 51 60 382 60 69 L37 106 130 218 167 125 135 173 155 1 59 son 213 U05 '17 45 M.'l 146 159 68 66 45 38 107 98 144 128 10 ■>_ 2 169 173 160 139 101 137 147 1 1 I 1 1- 425 42 1 219 237 416 507 48 47 49 29 326 287 50 44 CORRECTIONS 334 large county governments, October 1975 — Continued in thousands) 307 Institutions — Continued Probation and parole Miscellaneous Other and combined institut ions Nur iber of employees October Nu mber of employees October Number of employees October payroll Full-time equivalent 1 Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent Total only Total only equivalent payroll J 18 16 17 15 14 12 12 12 1 37 33 35 29 29 25 26 24 14 12 14 14 :> 23 21 22 21 35 34 35 35 - - - - 3 67 66 67 78 58 43 51 58 - - - - 4 45 45 45 47 37 34 35 35 - - - - ', 14 13 13 11 25 25 25 23 - - - - 6 60 60 60 59 35 32 33 36 - - - - 7 123 96 103 93 29 21 25 26 ~ " - " 8 51 50 50 61 63 59 60 67 6 6 6 7 ') 14 12 13 13 15 14 14 13 - - - - 1" 33 33 33 30 9 6 7 6 - - - - 11 105 105 105 103 117 111 112 136 - - _ - 1 13 13 13 12 17 9 12 11 - - - - 1 3 43 33 35 30 23 22 22 21 11 9 10 7 14 26 25 25 26 13 11 11 11 8 8 8 7 l c . 46 46 46 41 57 51 54 60 - - - - 16 37 4 37 2 372 489 288 288 288 38 3 - - - " 17 8 8 8 10 18 17 17 18 18 10 10 10 11 12 12 12 12 - - - - 19 166 161 163 151 186 182 185 251 - - - - 20 114 113 113 142 134 131 133 162 27 27 27 29 2 1 78 67 70 66 40 39 39 39 - - - - 22 13 11 12 8 _ _ _ 23 16 12 12 9 - - - - - - - - 24 4 4 4 2 - - - - - - - - ?l 16 16 16 11 16 16 16 13 26 15 15 15 11 - - - - - - - - 27 136 136 136 93 38 36 37 29 - - - - 28 4 4 4 2 6 - - 4 - - - - 29 6 6 6 4 14 5 11 8 - - - - 30 160 123 139 114 28 28 28 24 10 9 10 10 31 99 88 90 86 18 17 17 16 6 6 6 6 32 - - - - 17 12 14 12 - - - - 33 110 no 110 121 94 94 94 108 _ 34 28 27 27 32 31 28 29 32 - - - - 35 55 45 49 32 _ . . _ _ _ . 36 14 13 14 11 - " - - - - - - 37 79 79 79 68 56 56 56 41 38 116 105 110 112 140 140 140 125 - - - - 39 71 71 ■ 71 57 67 67 67 54 - - - - 40 142 142 142 151 152 148 150 125 - - - - 41 54 54 54 44 32 32 32 25 - - - - 42 632 627 630 699 321 313 314 380 - - - - 43 43 43 43 36 44 44 44 36 - - - - 44 126 123 124 135 129 129 129 123 - - - - 45 143 142 142 123 73 73 73 60 _ _ _ _ 46 116 106 108 107 168 168 168 148 - - - - 47 103 108 108 96 65 63 64 46 - - - - 48 49 48 48 45 84 83 83 63 - - - - 49 45 42 42 50 58 57 57 47 - - - - 50 118 118 118 109 171 171 171 164 - - - - 51 38 30 33 28 69 69 69 66 - - - - 52 78 78 78 89 153 151 152 152 - - - " 53 " " - " - - - - - - - - 54 121 113 116 84 37 35 35 24 55 44 20 25 22 47 47 47 38 - - - - '-■■■ 16 16 16 14 37 34 34 27 - - - - 57 27 21 25 19 41 41 41 36 - - - - 58 93 62 71 54 39 39 39 32 - - - - 59 424 339 366 366 168 168 168 172 13 13 13 12 60 180 164 168 193 137 137 137 157 - - - - 61 365 346 352 440 524 516 518 608 - - - - 62 51 47 48 47 33 33 33 34 - - - - 63 56 43 46 28 31 31 31 28 - - - - 64 342 258 294 260 130 128 129 112 - - - - 65 60 41 50 44 34 34 34 32 - - - - 66 31 23 26 17 21 21 21 19 - - " " 67 308 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 47. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of (Dollar amounts Tot al correcti ons activit ies Institutions t County 1 Number of employees October payroll 2 Total ins titutions Institutions for juvenil es 5 c Full-time Full-time Number of employees October Number of employees October Total a a only equivalent 2 Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent payroll NEW YORK — CONTINUED I RENSSELAER 80 68 71 48 52 40 43 25 13 11 12 8 2 81 81 81 80 37 37 37 34 - - - - 3 ST. LAWRENCE 50 48 48 37 21 19 19 14 - - - - 4 38 33 35 24 26 21 23 14 - - - - c . SCHENECTADY 80 54 60 44 53 27 33 23 - - - - 6 STEUBEN . . 60 51 54 39 34 26 29 19 - - - - 7 630 630 630 664 295 295 295 306 51 51 51 40 8 117 102 108 82 90 75 81 63 2 2 2 1 9 WESTCHESTER 503 501 501 576 313 311 311 356 27 25 25 27 NORTH CAROLINA 10 35 31 33 22 35 31 33 22 7 a 6 3 IX 49 49 49 32 49 49 49 32 7 7 7 6 1? 19 19 19 11 19 19 19 12 3 3 3 2 13 60 55 56 50 60 55 56 50 13 8 10 7 14 GASTON. . . 42 42 42 24 39 39 39 23 12 12 12 6 15 88 78 82 58 88 78 82 58 21 16 18 12 16 MECKLENBURG 89 86 87 73 78 76 77 62 21 19 20 16 17 15 15 15 9 15 15 15 9 - - - - 18 23 15 19 13 23 15 19 13 11 3 7 5 ohio: 19 ALLEN 42 34 37 26 26 22 24 16 13 9 11 7 5 ASHTABULA 26 25 25 18 14 13 13 13 1 1 1 1 1 BUTLER. . 67 54 58 4U 33 30 31 23 15 14 14 9 ? 2 CLARK . . 48 36 38 28 27 19 21 15 7 1 2 1 23 CLERMONT. 17 17 17 12 9 9 9 7 - - - - 24 COLUMBIANA 17 14 15 11 a 7 7 5 - - - - 25 CUYAHOGA. 506 459 472 363 347 300 314 2 30 282 237 250 186 26 FRANKLIN. 218 195 203 183 112 112 112 88 47 47 47 36 27 GREENE. . 29 22 26 21 22 15 19 14 - - - - 28 HAMILTON. 341 333 333 297 226 218 218 179 168 160 160 125 29 LAKE. . . 55 U7 50 45 37 29 32 30 27 21 23 17 ^0 LICKING . 19 19 19 14 6 6 6 3 - - - - ' 1 LORAIN. . 71 63 66 55 27 21 24 19 22 17 20 15 52 LUCAS . . 252 211 227 196 183 143 159 133 88 65 72 62 33 MAHONING. 75 56 64 49 53 34 43 31 24 8 16 11 \.y MONTGOMERY 252 223 236 206 135 122 128 1 1 2 gu 83 8« 71 PORTAGE . 60 29 38 28 50 19 28 20 39 13 20 14 36 RICHLAND. 35 29 30 25 11 11 11 A - - - - 57 STARK . . 139 123 129 113 104 92 97 91 69 62 63 44 38 SUMMIT. . 148 133 135 119 89 74 76 70 53 38 40 34 -,n TRUMBULL. 42 41 41 33 35 3U 34 27 17 17 17 13 OKLAHOMA,: 40 COMANCHE 16 16 16 10 9 9 9 6 1 1 1 1 41 108 108 108 78 48 48 48 34 21 21 21 13 42 TULSA OREGON! 108 108 108 80 75 75 75 51 39 39 39 24 43 CLACKAMAS 76 54 57 63 39 19 21 25 - - - - 44 JACKSON . 62 48 52 46 33 24 26 22 18 10 12 9 45 LANE . . . 74 66 68 61 74 66 68 61 27 19 21 19 4h MARION. . 88 69 73 68 54 39 43 37 24 14 17 15 U7l MULTNOMAH 258 235 242 290 170 149 156 180 35 26 28 28 4' ] j WASHINGTON 93 73 75 72 48 39 ao 34 19 10 11 10 pen ijYlvania 49 ALLEGHENY 4°3 483 48 3 398 381 381 381 31 1 252 252 25? 202 5''! 4F.AVI 1?. . 68 51 55 42 46 29 33 26 19 12 14 10 5I.| BERKS . . 108 106 106 80 87 85 85 63 19 17 17 9 5'l Bl MP . . 41 38 40 22 29 26 29 14 8 8 8 4 V'. 'iiirK 3 . . 117 116 116 96 87 86 86 67 22 21 21 15 54 .HITLER. . 29 25 26 20 14 10 11 7 - - - - 35 CAM8RTA . 45 33 41 26 31 19 28 16 9 2 8 4 56 CENTRE. . 23 18 20 14 15 11 13 8 - - - - 57 CHESTER . 162 141 151 132 130 HO 119 103 31 20 27 19 r.o CUMBERLAND 56 44 52 37 35 25 32 21 - - - - 59 V.UPHIN . 99 98 99 80 71 70 71 59 - - - - 60 DELAWARE. 345 322 336 286 285 262 276 235 93 93 93 79 -j I ERIE. . . 118 116 116 94 65 64 64 48 26 25 25 19 , FAYETTE . 43 40 40 24 26 23 23 14 _ - - - 63 FRANKLIN. 54 48 49 32 4 1 35 36 21 12 10 11 6 64 LACKAWANNA 73 72 72 45 55 54 54 32 16 16 16 8 65 LANCASTER 145 134 137 94 119 108 111 71 14 7 10 5 66 LAWRENCE. 26 21 22 16 18 13 14 11 - - - - 67 LEBANON . 49 37 42 32 38 26 31 23 - - - - 66 LEHIGH. . 12? 112 116 78 95 85 89 59 8 7 8 3 69 LUZERNE . 75 73 73 54 53 51 51 37 - - - - 70 LYCOMING. 83 59 72 51 63 39 53 35 20 15 17 12 7 1 MERCER. . 37 32 36 26 27 24 25 17 10 7 8 6 7 ' MONTGOMERY 194 186 190 166 128 121 124 109 40 33 36 27 73 NORTHAMPTO 93 83 86 71 75 65 68 55 13 11 12 8 nt end of table CORRECTIONS 334 large county governments, October 1975 — Continued in thousands) 309 Institutions — Continued Probation and parole Miscellaneous Other and combined institut ions Nu nber of employees October payroll Number of employees October payroll -2 Number of employees October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent 3 39 29 32 17 28 28 28 23 1 37 37 37 34 44 44 44 46 - _ _ _ 2 21 19 19 14 29 29 29 23 - - _ _ 3 ?.6 21 23 14 12 12 12 10 - _ _ _ 4 53 27 33 23 27 27 27 21 - - - _ 5 3D 26 29 19 26 25 25 20 - - _ _ 6 244 244 ?44 266 335 335 335 358 - _ _ _ 7 88 73 79 62 27 27 27 19 - - - _ 8 . 286 286 286 329 190 190 190 220 " " " " 9 28 27 27 19 . 10 42 42 42 26 - - - - - _ _ _ 11 16 16 16 10 - - - - - _ _ _ 1 ' 47 47 47 43 - - - - - - _ _ 13 27 27 27 17 3 3 3 1 - - _ _ 14 67 62 64 46 - - - - - _ _ _ 15 57 57 57 46 11 10 10 11 - - _ _ 16 15 15 15 9 - - - - - - - - 17 12 12 12 8 - - - - " " " " 18 13 13 13 9 10 7 8 6 6 5 5 4 19 13 12 12 12 7 7 7 4 5 5 5 1 20 18 16 17 14 34 24 27 21 - - - - 21 20 18 18 14 21 17 18 13 - - _ _ 22 9 9 9 7 8 8 8 5 - _ _ _ 23 8 7 7 5 9 7 8 6 - - _ _ 24 65 63 63 44 159 159 159 133 _ _ _ _ 25 65 65 65 52 106 83 89 95 - - _ _ 26 22 15 19 14 7 7 7 7 - _ _ _ 27 58 58 58 54 115 115 115 118 " - - - 28 ■ 10 8 9 13 14 14 14 12 4 4 4 3 29 6 6 6 3 13 13 13 11 - _ _ _ 30 5 4 4 4 44 42 43 36 - _ _ _ 31 95 78 87 71 69 68 68 63 - - - _ 32 29 26 27 20 22 22 22 18 - - - - 33 41 39 40 41 117 101 108 94 - - _ _ 34 11 6 8 6 10 10 10 8 _ - _ _ 35 11 11 11 8 22 16 17 15 2 2 2 2 36 35 30 32 47 35 31 32 22 - _ _ _ 37 36 36 36 36 47 47 47 39 12 12 12 10 38 18 17 17 14 7 7 7 6 - - - - 39 8 8 8 5 7 7 7 4 40 27 27 27 21 60 60 60 44 - _ _ _ 41 -V, 36 36 27 33 33 33 29 - - - - 42 39 19 21 25 37 35 35 38 _ 43 15 14 14 13 29 24 25 24 - - - - 44 47 47 47 42 - - - - _ _ _ _ 45 30 25 26 22 34 30 31 31 - _ _ _ 46 135 123 128 152 74 72 72 93 14 14 14 17 47 29 29 29 24 45 34 35 38 - - - " 48 129 129 129 109 102 102 102 87 49 27 17 19 16 22 22 22 16 - _ _ _ 50 68 68 68 54 21 21 21 17 - _ _ _ 51 21 18 20 10 12 12 12 8 _ _ _ _ 52 65 65 65 52 30 30 30 29 _ _ _ _ 53 14 10 11 7 15 15 15 13 _ - _ _ 54 22 17 21 12 14 14 14 10 _ _ _ _ 55 15 11 13 8 8 7 8 6 _ _ _ _ 56 99 90 93 84 32 31 32 29 _ _ _ _ 57 35 25 32 21 21 19 20 16 _ _ _ _ 58 71 70 71 59 28 28 28 21 _ _ _ _ 59 192 169 183 156 60 60 60 51 _ _ _ - 60 39 39 39 29 53 52 52 46 - - - - 61 26 23 2 3 14 17 17 17 10 _ _ _ _ 62 29 25 26 15 13 13 13 11 _ - _ _ 63 39 38 38 24 18 18 18 13 - _ _ _ 64 105 101 102 66 26 26 26 23 _ _ _ _ 65 18 13 14 11 8 8 8 5 _ _ _ _ 66 38 26 31 23 11 11 11 9 - - - - 67 87 78 82 56 27 27 27 19 - - - _ 68 53 51 51 37 22 22 22 17 - _ _ _ 69 43 24 36 23 20 20 20 16 - - - - 70 17 17 17 11 10 8 11 9 - _ _ - 71 88 88 88 32 66 65 66 57 _ _ _ _ 72 62 54 56 47 18 18 18 16 - - " " 73 310 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 47. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of (Dollar amounts Tot al corrects ies Instit jtions s County * Number of employees October Total ins titutions Institutions for juveniles B Number of employees Number of employees Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent 2 payroll 2 October payroll October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent PENNSYLVANIA — CONTINUED i 52 52 52 34 39 39 39 24 4 4 4 2 2 55 47 50 35 36 28 31 21 8 3 6 2 3 WESTMORELAND. . . . 70 65 66 51 15 11 12 10 11 7 8 5 '4 south Carolina: 85 74 78 58 65 54 58 41 20 10 15 8 5 ANDERSON 60 54 55 36 58 53 54 35 19 16 17 10 6 72 62 67 42 72 62 67 42 13 11 15 8 7 38 37 37 25 33 37 37 25 - - - - 8 31 29 30 15 31 29 30 15 - - _ - 9 43 40 42 27 43 40 42 27 - - - - 10 SPARTANBURG .... TENNESSEE: 26 25 25 18 18 13 18 12 11 124 121 123 80 95 92 94 57 26 24 26 13 12 61 51 55 29 60 50 54 28 _ _ _ _ 13 SHELBY 449 449 449 370 404 404 404 328 31 31 31 18 14 TEXAS: 10 10 10 6 8 8 8 5 15 BELL 39 37 38 22 9 9 9 5 - - - - 16 BEXAR . . 363 332 348 223 260 233 248 147 31 31 31 16 17 BRAZORIA. 21 21 21 13 6 6 6 4 - - - - 18 CAMERON . 65 61 64 31 30 30 30 14 - - - _ 19 DALLAS. . 432 432 432 403 253 253 253 2 18 33 33 83 62 20 EL PASO . 109 109 109 70 67 67 67 41 23 23 23 15 .:■ i GALVESTON 42 42 42 28 28 28 28 18 - - - - 22 HARRIS. . 691 677 684 585 38 3 370 377 301 127 114 123 79 23 HIDALGO . 62 62 62 35 37 37 37 19 12 12 12 5 ? 4 JEFFERSON 75 75 75 58 58 58 58 45 26 26 26 19 25 LUBBOCK . 35 35 35 23 10 10 10 6 - - - - • MCLENNAN. 78 71 73 47 28 27 28 16 5 5 5 2 5 1 NUECES. . 73 70 70 52 39 36 36 23 16 13 13 7 28 SMITH . . 17 16 16 11 7 7 7 4 - - - - 29 TARRANT . 195 173 180 152 120 98 106 77 39 23 29 2 2 30 TAYLOR. . 22 22 22 13 12 12 12 7 - - - - ' ! TRAVIS. . 213 195 204 174 74 69 7! 59 21 18 19 15 32 WICHITA . 30 30 30 24 7 7 7 4 - " " " UTAH : 53 6 6 6 5 6 6 6 5 - - - - '-.'I 136 108 115 100 136 103 115 100 63 40 46 37 35 19 13 15 1 I 19 13 15 11 13 8 10 7 '•6 VERMONT: 34 34 34 25 34 34 34 25 15 15 15 11 57 chittenden Virginia: 38 95 74 81 80 47 40 43 40 - - - - 7 J FAIRFAX 86 83 83 76 29 28 28 19 .19 19 19 16 no 55 55 55 44 25 25 25 18 - - - - .1 PRINCE WILLIAM. . . WASHINGTON : 31 31 31 26 16 16 16 15 4,' 78 62 67 56 40 37 38 28 12 10 10 8 43 559 47 489 513 384 301 318 334 182 123 135 125 .'I 48 38 40 32 35 25 27 20 22 12 14 11 '4 5 145 129 132 124 124 109 112 105 112 97 100 89 46 128 12 3 124 98 68 65 65 50 18 15 15 10 117 117 109 111 103 99 93 94 86 49 45 46 41 48 west Virginia: 84 81 82 64 49 46 47 35 17 14 15 10 49 25 25 16 25 25 25 16 13 13 13 7 V WISCONSIN : 72 63 66 41 71 62 65 41 21 15 16 9 51 36 22 24 20 36 22 22 20 23 9 12 8 5.' 109 94 97 97 89 74 77 73 40 30 33 28 r .'. 19 17 18 21 19 17 18 21 2 - - 1 54 46 15 20 17 6 6 6 5 - - - - 55 406 406 406 436 317 317 317 333 76 76 76 79 56 12 9 10 9 12 9 10 9 - - - - 57 35 23 26 2 2 21 9 14 8 13 6 8 5 58 64 60 61 59 52 48 49 49 15 13 13 12 VI 46 46 46 48 46 46 U6 48 - - - - CO 12 10 11 7 12 10 11 7 - - - - - Represents zero or rounds to zero. 2 Less than half the unit of measurement show *Data are based on a field compilation from r 2 Becauso of rounding, the detail figures may ch county government shown; isely to tho totals shown . text for data limitation. CORRECTIONS 334 large county governments, October 1975 — Continued in thousands) 311 Institutions — Continued Probation and parole Miscellaneous Other and combined institutions Number of employ ees October Nu mber of emplo yees October ; ' Number of employees , Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent pay ro 1 1 j 35 35 35 22 13 13 13 10 1 28 25 26 19 19 19 19 14 - - - - 2 4 4 4 5 55 54 55 41 - - - _ '< 45 44 44 33 20 20 20 17 " " - - 4 39 37 38 25 2 1 1 1 5 54 51 53 34 - - - - - - - - 6 38 37 37 25 - - - - - - - - 7 31 29 30 15 - - - - _ - _ _ 8 4 3 40 42 27 - - - - - - _ _ 9 18 18 18 12 8 7 7 6 " - - - 10 69 68 68 44 27 27 27 21 2 2 2 2 11 60 50 54 28 1 1 1 1 - - - _ 12 373 37 3 373 310 45 45 45 42 - - - - 13 8 8 8 5 2 2 2 1 - - - - 14 9 9 9 5 30 28 29 17 15 229 202 216 131 103 99 101 76 - - _ - 16 6 6 6 4 15 15 15 9 - - - - 17 30 30 30 14 35 31 34 17 - - _ _ 18 170 170 170 156 179 179 179 185 - - _ _ 19 44 44 44 26 42 42 42 29 - - - - 2 28 28 28 18 14 14 14 10 - - _ _ 21 256 256 256 222 302 301 301 278 6 6 6 6 ?.' 25 25 25 14 25 25 25 16 - - - - 23 32 32 32 26 17 17 17 13 _ _ _ _ 24 10 10 10 6 25 25 25 17 - - _ - 25 23 22 23 14 50 44 45 31 - _ _ - lb 23 23 23 16 34 34 34 29 - - - _ 27 7 7 7 4 10 9 9 7 - - _ _ 28 81 70 77 55 75 75 75 75 - _ _ _ 29 12 12 12 7 10 10 10 6 - _ - _ 30 53 51 52 44 139 126 132 115 - _ _ _ 31 7 7 7 4 23 23 23 20 - - - - 3-1 6 6 6 5 33 73 68 70 63 - - - - - - _ _ 34 6 5 5 4 - - - - - - - _ 35 19 19 19 14 - - - - - - - - 36 - " - - - - - " - - - - 37 47 40 43 40 48 34 38 40 38 10 9 9 3 57 55 55 57 - - - - 39 25 25 25 18 30 30 30 26 - - _ - 40 16 16 16 15 15 15 15 11 - - - - 41 28 27 27 20 38 25 29 28 42 202 178 184 209 175 169 170 179 - - _ _ 43 13 13 13 9 13 13 13 12 - - - - 44 12 12 12 16 2 1 20 20 19 _ _ _ - 45 50 50 50 40 60 58 59 48 - - _ - 46 50 48 49 45 18 16 16 17 - - - - 47 32 32 32 25 35 35 35 29 - - - - 48 12 12 12 9 49 50 47 48 32 1 1 1 (Z ) - - - - 50 13 13 13 12 51 49 44 45 45 20 20 20 24 _ - - - 52 17 17 17 20 - - - - - - - - 53 6 6 6 5 40 9 15 12 - - - - 54 241 241 241 254 24 24 24 32 65 65 65 71 55 12 9 10 9 _ - _ - - - - - 56 8 3 6 3 14 14 14 14 - - - - 57 37 35 35 37 12 12 12 10 - - - - 58 46 46 46 48 _ - - - _ - - - 59 12 10 11 7 - - - - - - - - 60 312 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 48. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of 394 large city governments, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) City 1 TOTAL ALABAMA : BIRMINGHAM GADSDEN HUNTSVILLE MOBILE MONTGOMERY TUSCALOOSA ARIZONA: GLENDAl.E . MESA PHOENIX SCOTTSDALE TEMPE TUSCON arkansas : fort smith little rock north little rock . . . . pine bluff California: ALAMEDA ALHAMBRA ANAHEIM BAKERSFIELD BELLFLOWER 8ERKELEY BUENA PARK BURBANK CARSON CHULA VISTA COMPTON CONCORD COSTA MESA DALY CITY DOWNEY EL CAJON EL MONTE FREMONT FRESNO FULLERTON GARDEN GROVE. GLENDALE HAWTHORNE HAYWARD HUNTINGTON BEACH INGLEWOOD LAKEWOOD LONG BEACH LOS ANGELES MODESTO MOUNTAIN VIEW NEWPORT BEACH NORWALK OAKLAND ONTARIO ORANGE OXNARD PALO ALTO PASADENA PICO RIVERA POMONA REDONDO BEACH RE DW OP CITY :D RIVERSIDE See footnotes fjt end of tnble Total correctic Number of employees 13 Full-time only Full-time equivalent 2 13 October payroll 20 216 12 Institutions Number of employees 13 Full-time only 13 Full-time equivalent October payroll CORRECTIONS 313 Table 48. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of 394 large city governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Probation and parole Miscellaneous City 1 Num ber of employees Number of employees October payroll October payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent 3 931 3 802 3 851 n 102 354 316 325 424 Alabama: BIRMINGHAM 8 8 8 8 - - - - GADSDEN - - - - - - - - HUNTSVILLE - - - - - - - - MOBILE - - - - - - - - MONTGOMERY - - - - - - - - TUSCALOOSA - - - - - - - - ARIZONA: GLENDALE 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 MESA PHOENIX _ TEMPE - - - - - - - TUSCON ARKANSAS: - - - - - - - - 4 a 4 3 - - - - NORTH LITTLE ROCK .... 2 2 2 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - CALIFORNIA: - - - - - - - ALHAMBRA ANAHEIM _ - - - - - - - - BERKELEY - : : _ : : : - BURBANK - - - - - - - _ COMPTON - - - - - - - CONCORD _ - _ ~ - - - ~ - DOWNEY - - - - - - - EL MONTE FRESNO _ - ~ - - ~ ~ ~ - - ~ - - ~ _ ~ - GLENDALE HAYWARD - - - - - - - HUNTINGTON BEACH _ - ~ _ - _ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - _ - ~ - - - - - - MODESTO : : - - - : : - - _ - - ~ _ - - NORWALK - - - - - - - ONTARIO _ PASADFNA - - - - - - - _ 4 3 a 4 - - - _ REDWOOD CITY _ - _ _ _ _ _ - RICHMOND ~ - - - ~ - - - See footnotes at end of table. 314 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 48. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of 394 large city governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) City 1 CALIFORNIA — CONTINUED SACRAMENTO SALINAS SAN BERNARDINO SAN BUENAVENTURA SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SAN JOSE SAN LEANDRO SAN MATEO SANTA ANA SANTA BARBARA . SANTA CLARA SANTA MONICA SANTA ROSA SIM I VALLEY SOUTH GATE STOCKTON SUNNYVALE TORRANCE VALLEJO WEST COVINA WESTMINSTER WHITTIER COLORADO : ARVADA AURORA BOULDER COLORADO SPRINGS DENVER FORT COLLINS LAKEWOOD PUEBLO CONNECTICUT: BRIDGEPORT BRISTOL DANBURY HARTFORD MERIDEN MILFORD NEW BRITAIN NEW HAVEN NORWALK stamford waterbury west haven delaware • wilmington district of columbia: washington Florida: clearwater fort lauderdale gainesville HIALEAH HOLLYWOOD JACKSONVILLE MIAMI MIAMI BEACH ORLANDO PENSACOLA ST. PETERSBURG TALLAHASSEE TAMPA WEST PALM BEACH See footnotes at end oi table. Total corrections Number of employees 10 2 7 59 13 53] 10 60 7 m Full-time only ii' 13 5 >6 Full-time equivalent 2 625 10 13 32B 60 7 •'I October payroll 2 10 259 Institutions Number of employees 210 13 298 LO 60 L0 Full-time only 210 13 297 10 Full-time equivalent 210 L3 . 98 10 October payroll 2 955 10 235 5 'HI CORRECTIONS 315 Table 48. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of 394 large city governments, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Probation and parole Miscellaneous City 1 Number of employees October Number of employees October Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent payroll Total Full-time only Full-time equivalent payroll CALIFORNIA — CONTINUED - - - - - - - - SALINAS - : - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - _ - - 362 321 336 380 - - - - SAN JOSE _ _ _ - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - _ TORRANCE - - - - - - - VALLEJO _ - - - - - - _ _ WHITTIER COLORADO : - - - - - - - AURORA _ - - - - 25 25 25 2 1 LAKEWOOD. - - - - 2 2 2 2 CONNECTICUT! - - - - - - _ _ j - - - - - - DANBURY HARTFORD MILFORD _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - - \ - _ WEST HAVEN. ....... - - - - - - - - DELAWARE : - - - - - - - - district of Columbia: 302 301 302 am 261 257 261 370 Florida: - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - _ 33 29 31 24 _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ — ■" ~ "" — - - - See footnotes at end of table. 316 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 48. Detail of corrections employment and payrolls of 394 large city governments, October 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Cityi Total corrections Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent'' October payroll 2 Institutions Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Georgia: ALBANY. . ATLANTA . AUGUSTA . COLUMBUS. MACON . . SAVANNAH. HAWAI I : HONOLULU. I DAHO : BOISE CITY. ILLINOIS: ARLINGTON HEIGHTS AURORA BERWYN CHAMPAIGN .... CHICAGO CICERO DECATUR DES PLAINES . . . EAST ST. LOUIS. . ELGIN EVANSTON JOLIET OAK LAWN OAK PARK PEORIA ROCKFORD ROCK ISLAND . . . SKOKIE SPRINGFIELD . . . WAUKEG N Indiana: anderson evansville. . . . fort wayne. . . . GARY HAMMOND INDIANAPOLIS. . . MUNCIE SOUTH BEND. . . . TERRE HAUTE . . . IOWA : CEDAR RAPIDS. COUNCIL BLUFFS. DAVENPORT . . DES MOINES. . DUBUQUE . . . SIOUX CITY. . WATERLOO. . . KANSAS: KANSAS CITY . OVERLAND PARK TOPEKA. . . . WICHITA . . . KENTUCKY: COVINGTON . . LEXINGTON . . LOUISVILLE. . OWENSBORO . . 153 10 60 17 11 1 1 7 3 447 1 23 6 148 9 59 17 11 7 3 374 150 9 17 11 3 389 1 122 5 40 12 10 (X) (X) 470 362 469 970 392 236 156 8 107 STATE 8 107 COUNTIES ALASKA 452 STATE. 452 BOROUGHS 4 566 STATE 4 568 COUNTIES . ARKANSAS 4 588 STATE 4 588 LOCAL, TOTAL ..,....„ 41 874 STATE . 41 873 1 1 COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES . COLORADO 11 265 STATE 11 263 LOCAL, TOTAL ... COUNTIES 2 CONNECTICUT 2 3 784 STATE 3 784 LOCAL, TOTAL DELAWARE 1 086 1 086 STATE COUNTIES DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE - MUNICIPALITIES 10 900 STATE 10 900 LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES GEORGIA. 14 783 14 783 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES - See footnotes at end of table. 328 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 49. Other criminal justice expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments HAWAII STATE 538 2 040 32 32 1 039 1 823 432 426 9 7 023 25 344 3 752 3 215 666 4 633 14 327 2 715 1 306 1 409 1 512 5 502 1 030 483 553 2 672 7 669 1 805 819 986 7 468 8 394 6 883 6 856 28 1 414 15 210 597 154 443 933 2 740 64 66 30 6 333 14 704 2 887 1 716 1 171 9 446 18 284 3 105 78 3 027 8 932 29 832 2 303 1 193 1 121 538 506 32 32 1 039 608 432 423 9 7 023 3 276 3 747 3 102 645 4 633 1 919 2 715 1 306 1 409 1 512 495 1 017 470 547 2 672 867 1 805 819 986 7 468 585 6 883 6 856 27 1 414 818 596 154 442 933 869 64 63 1 6 333 3 446 2 887 1 716 1 171 9 446 6 344 3 102 75 3 027 8 932 6 629 2 303 1 182 1 121 538 506 32 32 629 589 40 31 9 4 645 3 254 1 391 748 642 4 604 1 894 2 711 1 302 1 409 1 173 490 683 137 545 2 371 865 1 506 525 982 630 585 46 19 27 1 327 802 525 154 371 871 869 2 1 1 6 313 3 426 2 887 1 716 1 171 9 435 6 333 3 102 75 3 027 8 283 6 629 1 654 632 1 021 410 19 391 391 2 378 22 2 356 2 354 2 29 25 4 4 340 5 335 333 2 300 2 298 294 4 6 838 6 838 6 838 87 16 71 71 62 62 62 20 20 11 11 649 649 550 99 1 534 1 534 1 219 1 215 4 4 22 201 22 068 133 113 21 12 408 12 408 5 026 5 007 19 13 6 6 802 6 802 7 810 7 809 1 1 14 393 14 392 1 1 1 903 1 871 32 3 29 11 258 11 258 11 943 11 940 3 3 23 214 23 203 11 11 (X) (X) 5 (X) 5 5 (X) 13 (X) 13 13 (X) (X) 1 (X) 1 1 (X) (X) 3 (X) 3 3 (X) 1 534 1 534 IDAHO 1 219 STATE 1 215 4 4 MUNICIPALITIES . . . . . . ILLINOIS 22 196 STATE 22 068 COUNTIES 128 107 INDIANA 21 12 408 STATE. . . 12 408 COUNTIES MUNICIPALITIES IOWA 5 013 STATE 5 007 COUNTIES 6 KANSAS . 6 6 802 STATE 6 802 COUNTIES KENTUCKY 7 810 STATE 7 809 COUNTIES 1 LOUISIANA 1 14 392 STATE 14 392 MAINE 1 903 STATE 1 871 32 3 MARYLAND 29 11 258 STATE 11 258 COUNTIES MASSACHUSETTS 11 940 STATE 11 940 LOCAL, TOTAL COUNTIES 23 214 STATE 23 203 COUNTIES 11 11 See footnotes at end of tabic. OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE 329 Table 49. Other criminal justice expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Dire ct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments MINNESOTA 3 618 7 095 1 931 390 1 541 1 617 4 186 284 256 28 3 605 12 020 2 585 1 677 908 1 000 2 167 138 132 6 1 735 4 808 915 346 618 1 354 3 413 29 29 465 292 173 5 168 8 040 20 612 5 105 1 259 3 850 1 113 3 183 319 301 21 42 405 47 329 26 978 4 383 22 595 8 406 14 203 3 709 3 488 222 311 2 223 30 21 9 3 618 1 688 1 930 389 1 541 1 617 1 334 284 256 28 3 605 1 020 2 585 1 677 908 1 000 862 138 132 6 1 735 820 915 346 568 1 354 1 325 29 29 465 292 173 5 168 8 040 2 935 5 105 1 259 3 846 1 113 794 319 298 21 42 405 15 427 26 978 4 383 22 595 8 406 4 715 3 691 3 471 220 311 281 30 21 9 3 493 1 688 1 805 272 1 533 1 339 1 303 37 9 28 3 589 1 004 2 585 1 677 908 889 842 47 42 6 1 714 808 906 345 560 1 319 1 290 29 29 354 292 62 62 7 985 2 930 5 055 1 254 3 801 1 099 780 319 298 21 39 527 15 405 24 122 1 539 22 583 5 902 4 704 1 198 989 209 310 280 30 21 9 125 125 117 8 278 31 247 247 16 16 110 20 90 90 21 12 9 1 8 35 35 111 111 5 106 55 5 50 5 45 14 14 2 878 22 2 856 2 844 12 2 504 11 2 493 2 482 12 1 1 5 408 5 407 1 1 2 852 2 852 11 000 11 000 1 305 1 305 4 038 3 988 50 50 2 088 2 088 17 681 17 677 4 4 2 392 2 389 3 3 31 902 31 902 9 508 9 488 20 17 2 1 942 1 942 1 (X) 1 1 «X) (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) 17 (X) 17 15 2 (X) 5 407 STATE 5 407 COUNTIES 2 852 2 852 11 000 state 11 000 COUNTIES MONTANA 1 305 STATE 1 305 COUNTIES .... MUNICIPALITIES NEBRASKA 4 038 STATE 3 988 COUNTIES 50 NEVADA 50 2 088 STATE 2 088 ~ STATE _ COUNTIES - NEW JERSEY 17 681 STATE 17 677 COUNTIES 4 4 2 392 STATE ? 389 COUNTIES 3 3 NEW YORK 31 902 STATE 31 902 MUNICIPALITIES STATE 9 490 9 488 COUNTIES 2 2 NORTH DAKOTA 1 942 STATE 1 942 COUNTIES - See footnotes at end of table. 330 CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT Table 49. Other criminal justice expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 2 Direct expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments STATE 5 789 43 178 3 884 2 235 1 655 2 940 5 888 2 203 2 203 6 309 8 978 3 700 1 873 1 827 10 828 38 666 7 023 321 6 702 519 2 040 39 39 8 591 7 360 6 506 6 442 142 916 2 136 2 2 8 3 038 10 739 1 911 1 051 865 21 331 46 013 6 889 5 381 1 554 809 4 202 440 550 12 11 1 4 224 11 241 2 134 367 1 769 5 789 1 910 3 879 2 224 1 655 2 940 737 2 203 2 203 6 309 2 609 3 700 1 873 1 827 10 828 3 826 7 002 300 6 702 519 480 39 39 8 591 2 104 6 486 6 349 137 916 914 2 2 3 038 1 127 1 911 1 051 860 21 337 20 951 6 387 4 888 1 499 809 809 440 429 11 11 *+ 224 2 090 2 134 365 1 769 4 178 1 910 2 268 621 1 647 2 787 736 2 051 2 051 4 663 2 590 2 073 246 1 827 10 827 3 826 7 001 299 6 702 519 480 39 39 1 903 1 743 160 22 137 911 909 2 2 2 014 1 112 902 755 147 25 681 20 938 4 743 3 246 1 497 806 806 440 429 11 U 2 932 2 069 863 360 503 1 611 1 611 1 603 8 153 1 152 152 1 646 19 1 627 1 627 1 1 1 6 688 361 6 327 6 327 5 5 1 024 15 1 009 296 713 1 657 13 1 644 1 642 2 3 3 1 291 21 1 270 5 1 266 41 279 41 268 11 11 5 151 5 151 6 369 6 369 34 861 34 840 21 21 1 560 1 560 5 354 5 256 98 94 4 1 230 1 222 8 8 9 617 9 612 5 5 25 611 25 062 549 493 55 3 393 3 393 122 121 1 1 9 153 9 151 2 2 - 5 (X) 5 5 (X) (X) 21 (X) 21 21 (X) 19 (X) 19 15 4 (X) (X) 502 (X) 502 476 26 (X) 1 (X) 1 1 (X) 41 274 41 268 COUNTIES 6 6 MUNICIPALITIES OKLAHOMA 5 151 STATE 5 151 COUNTIES OREGON 6 369 STATE 6 369 PENNSYLVANIA . 34 840 STATE, 34 840 COUNTIES RHODE ISLAND 1 560 STATE 1 560 MUNICIPALITIES . STATE 5 335 5 256 COUNTIES 79 79 MUNICIPALITIES SOUTH DAKOTA 1 230 STATE 1 222 8 MUNICIPALITIES TENNESSEE 8 9 617 STATE 9 612 COUNTIES 5 TEXAS 5 25 108 STATE 25 062 COUNTIES 46 17 UTAH 29 3 393 STATE 3 393 VERMONT 121 STATE 121 VIRGINIA 9 153 STATE 9 151 COUNTIES 2 2 MUNICIPALITIES See footnotes at end of tabic. OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE 331 Table 49. Other criminal justice expenditure, by character and object, by State and type of government, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Total 8 Dii ect expenditure Intergovernmental expenditure State and type of government Total Direct current Capital outlay Total To State governments To local governments WASHINGTON 2 636 7 639 1 421 611 810 1 006 3 244 292 218 74 5 083 10 291 265 180 84 231 1 790 32 9 23 2 636 1 215 1 421 611 810 1 006 715 292 218 74 5 083 4 819 265 180 84 231 199 32 9 23 2 633 1 215 1 418 609 809 926 700 227 218 9 4 962 4 804 159 74 84 231 199 32 9 23 3 3 2 1 80 15 65 65 121 15 106 106 6 424 6 424 2 529 2 529 5 472 5 472 1 591 1 591 (X) (X) (X) (X) 6 424 6 424 STATE COUNTIES 2 529 2 529 STATE MUNICIPALITIES 5 472 5 472 STATE LOCAL, TOTAL MUNICIPALITIES WYOMING 1 591 1 591 STATE COUNTIES - Represents zero or rounds to zero. X Not applicable. 'Data for municipalities, and the local governments totals which include municipal data, are estimates subject to sampling variation; data for counties (boroughs, parishes) are based on a canvass of all county governments and therefore are not subject to sampling variation; see text for data limitations. For each State, and the United States summary, the expenditure figures shown on the "Local, total" line and the combined State-local total line (the data shown opposite the names of the individual States) exclude duplicative intergovernmental expend- iture amounts. This was done to avoid the artificial inflation which would result if an intergovernmental expenditure amount for one government is tabulated and then counted again when the recipient governments ) ultimately expend(s) that amount. APPENDIX 1 : EXHIBIT TABLES A, B, C, AND D Table A. Special police force expenditure of selected special districts and school districts by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Inter- governmental expenditure Total CALIFORNIA Special districts: Los Angeles City Housing Authority East Bay Regional Park District (Oakland) Oakland Housing Authority San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (Oakland) San Diego Unified Port Authority San Francisco City-County Housing Authority Stockton Port District Sacramento Yolo Port District (West Sacramento) Independent school districts: Kern Joint Union High School District (Bakersf ield) . . Compton Junior Col lege Compton Unified School District State Center Community College District (Fresno) Long Beach Unified School District Grant Union High School District (Sacramento) Foothill Community College District (Los Altos Hills) Los Angeles Community Colleges Los Angeles Unified School District Norwalk-La Mirada Unified School District Oakland Unified School District Peralta Community College District (Oakland) Pasadena Area Community College District Pomona Unified School District Richmond Unified School District Los Rios Junior College (Sacramento) Sacramento City Unified School District San Bernardino Community College District San Diego City Schools San Francisco Community College District San Mateo Junior College District Santa Ana College Santa Ana Unified School District El Camino College (Torrance) Ventura County Community College District COLORADO Independent school districts: Denver Public School District No. 1 Jefferson County School District (Lakewood) CONNECTICUT Special districts: Housing Authority--City of Bridgeport Hartford Metro District Housing Authority--City of New Haven DELAWARE Special districts: Delaware River Bay Authority (New Castle) Housing Authority of Wilmington DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Special districts: Washington Metro Area Transit Authority FLORIDA Independent school districts: Pinellas County School District (Clearwater) Broward County School District (Fort Lauderdale).... Duval County School Board (Jacksonville) 564 630 108 ,900 ,000 258 198 108 246 53 500 125 73 146 150 1,324 4,271 108 280 404 289 70 269 146 18-1 69 483 103 123 10G 129 128 105 1 11 268 507 178 393 258 158 304 564 6 30 108 1,900 1,000 258 198 108 246 53 500 125 73 146 150 1,324 4,271 108 280 404 289 70 269 146 184 69 483 103 102 106 129 128 105 141 268 5()7 178 393 258 158 222 534 600 86 1,900 976 258 198 108 246 53 500 123 69 144 1 50 ,324 ,271 108 280 404 183 70 234 146 143 68 482 100 102 105 125 124 99 141 260 507 172 393 253 158 221 See footnotes at end of table. 333 334 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table A. Special police force expenditure of selected special districts and school districts by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Inter- governmental expenditure FLORIDA — Continued Independent school districts — Continued Florida Junior College (Jacksonville) Dade County School (Miami ) Miami Dade Junior College Pensacola Junior College Hillsborough County School District (Tampa ) GEORGIA Special districts: Fulton-De Kalb Hospital Authority (Atlanta) Richmond County Hospital Authority (Augusta) Hall County Hospital Authority (Gainesville) Macon-Bibb County Hospital Authority Independent school districts: Atlanta Independent School District Muscogee County School District (Columbus ) Bibb County School District (Macon) Cobb County School District (Marietta ) Savannah-Chatham County School District (Savannah) ILLINOIS Special districts: Chicago City Board of Education Chicago Housing Authority Chicago Transit Authority Metro Fair Exposition Authority (Chicago) Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago East St . Louis Park District Springfield Airport Authority Independent school districts: Chicago City College Peoria Public School District 150 INDIANA Special districts: Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority (Indianapolis) Independent school districts: Gary Commission School Corporation Indianapolis Public Schools IOWA Independent school districts: Waterloo Community School District KANSAS Independent school districts: Kansas City School District Unified School District 501 (Topeka ) Wichita Unified School District 259 KENTUCKY Independent school districts: Fayette County School District (Lexington) Jefferson County School District (Louisville) 2 Louisville Public Schools 2 LOUISIANA Special districts: Lake Charles Harbor and Terminal District Orleans Levee District ( New Orleans ) See footnotes at end of table. 252 1,480 220 197 372 3,200 770 1,888 484 945 52 7K 579 221 NA 7 :■; 7 962 132 86 447 269 325 167 188 598 ■2.W1 1,480 177 197 372 484 946 52 78 579 2 21 (NA) 737 962 1 32 86 447 269 325 167 188 598 233 1,480 177 197 372 380 380 380 157 157 157 70 70 69 87 87 83 492 316 291 66 66 63 104 104 95 171 105 100 84 25 25 181) 946 52 72 579 2 1 5 (NA) 737 962 132 86 12 1 262 325 167 175 574 59 (NA) NA APPENDIX 1— Continued 335 Table A. Special police force expenditure of selected special districts and school districts by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Inter- governmental expenditure LO'JISIANA--Continued Independent school districts: East Baton Rouge Parish School (Baton Rouge) Orleans Parish School District (New Orleans) MARYLAND Special districts: Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission (Riverdale) MASSACHUSETTS Special districts: Boston Housing Authority Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority (Jamaica Plain) MICHIGAN Special districts: Huron-Clinton Metro Authority ( Detroit ) Tri-City Airport Commission (Freeland) Peoples Community Hospital Authority (Wayne) Independent school districts: Oakland Community College (Bloomfield Hills) Detroit City School District Flint City School District Grand Rapids Public Schools Lansing City School District Pontiac City School District Macomb County Community College (Warren) MINNESOTA Special districts: Hennepin County Park Reserve (Maple Plain) Minneapolis-St . Paul Metro Airports Commission (St. Paul MISSOURI Special districts: Housing Authority of Kansas City St . Louis Housing Authority Independent school districts: Kansas City School District Junior College District of St. Louis St. Louis City School District... Springfield School District NEBRASKA Independent school districts: Omaha City School District No. 1 NEVADA Independent school districts: Clark County School District ( Las Vegas ) NEW JERSEY Special districts: Delaware River Port Authority (Camden) Burlington County Bridge Commission (Palmyra) Housing Authority of the City of Trenton NEW MEXICO Independent school districts: Albuquerque School District See footnotes at end of table. 106 592 774 ,213 1,047 222 (NA) 165 711 150 288 271 59 246 80 666 372 770 352 564 718 84 1,739 375 153 106 592 571 1,213 1,000 106 (NA) 165 711 288 271 80 666 372 762 352 564 718 84 1,739 375 153 106 592 571 1,213 1,000 106 (NA) 165 711 L>80 270 75 6Go 372 751 352 564 718 70 ,739 375 153 47 116 (NA) 336 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table A. Special police force expenditure of selected special districts and school districts by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Inter- governmental expenditure NEW YORK Special districts: Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (New York) Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor Independent school districts: Farmingdale Public Schools OHIO Special districts: Akron Metropolitan Park District Hamilton County Park District (Cincinnati) Cleveland Metro Housing Authority Cleveland Metropolitan Park District Lorain County Metro Park District (Elyria) Metro Park District of the Toledo Area (Toledo) Youngstown Township Park District Independent school districts: Cincinnati City School District Cuyahoga Community College (Cleveland) Dayton City School District OKLAHOMA Independent school districts: Oklahoma City School District OREGON Special districts: The Port of Portland District Independent school districts: Portland School District PENNSYLVANIA Special districts: Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission (Morrisville ) Philadelphia Housing Authority Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Philadelphia) Pittsburgh Housing Authority Port Authority of Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) Independent school districts: Penn Hills Township School District (Pittsburgh) Pittsburgh City School District SOUTH CAROLINA Special districts: Columbia Metro Airport TENNESSEE Special districts: Memphis-Shelby County Airport Authority Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority TEXAS Special districts: Dallas-Fort Worth Airport Authority (Dallas ) Brownsville Navigation District Nueces County Navigation District (Corpus Christ! ) Dallas County Hospital District Housing Authority-Ci ty of Houston Port of Houston Authority Bexar County Hospital District (San Antonio) 25,392 1,310 177 239 50] 1,320 364 356 151 309 353 3,753 3,145 438 (596 389 80 679 79 345 1,421 237 25,392 1,310 177 239 501 1,320 364 356 151 309 353 169 1,216 267 3,753 3,145 438 396 307 545 5,031 67 ,421 237 25,392 1,289 177 225 486 1,197 316 325 151 309 :ii« 169 1,192 245 3,753 3,145 >;ki 541 5,031 67 79 345 91 1,421 237 14 15 123 48 31 See footnotes at end of table. APPENDIX 1— Continued 337 Table A. Special police force expenditure of selected special districts and school districts by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Inter- governmental expenditure TEXAS — Continued Independent school districts: Dallas County Community College District (Dallas) El Paso Independent School District Ysleta Independent School District (El Paso) Tarrant County Junior College (Forth Worth) Houston Independent School District Irving Independent School District San Jacinto Col lege ( Pasadena ) San Antonio Independent School District San Antonlo-St. Phillips College District (San Antonio) UTAH Independent school districts: Granite School District (Salt Lake City) VIRGINIA Special districts: Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel District (Cape Charles) Elizabeth River Tunnel Commission (Norfolk) WASHINGTON Special districts: Port of Seattle District Port of Tacoma District Independent school districts: Seattle School District 277 277 274 192 192 192 315 315 315 218 218 216 790 790 790 62 62 62 80 80 80 990 990 990 167 167 157 566 630 566 630 5116 :,oi, 566 630 1,090 63 497 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. NA Data not available. Where the name of the unit of government does not reflect the city where the unit's administrative headquarters are located, this information appears in parenthesis after the unit name. 2 Jefferson County School District and Louisville Public Schools merged. 338 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table B. Special police force employment and payroll of selected special districts and school districts, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Total CALIFORNIA Special districts: Los Angeles City Housing Authority East Bay Regional Park District (Oakland) Oakland Housing Authority San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (Oakland) San Diego Unified Port Authority San Francisco City-County Housing Authority Stockton Port District Sacramento-Yolo Port District (West Sacramento) Independent school districts: Kern Joint Union High School District (Bakersf ield ) . Compton Junior College Compton Unified School District State Center Community College District (Fresno).... Long Beach Unified School District Grant Union High School District (Sacramento) Foothill Community College District (Los Altos Hills Los Angeles Community Colleges Los Angeles Unified School District Norwalk-La Mirada Unified School District Oakland Unified School District Peralta Community College District (Oakland) Pasadena Area Community College District Pomona Unified School District Richmond Unified School District Los Rios Junior College (Sacramento ) Sacramento City Unified School District San Bernardino Community College District San Diego Unified School District San Francisco Community College District San Mateo Junior College District Santa Ana College Santa Ana Unified School District El Camino College (Torrance) Ventura County Community College District COLORADO Independent school districts: Denver Public School District No . 1 Jefferson County School District (Lakewood) CONNECTICUT Special districts : Housing Authority City of Bridgeport Hartford Metro District Housing Authority City of New Haven DELAWARE Special districts: Delaware River Bay Authority (New Castle) Housing Authority of Wilmington DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Special districts: Washington Metro Area Transit Authority FLORIDA Independent school districts: Pinellas County School District (Clearwater) Broward County School District (Fort Lauderdale ) . . . . Duval County School Board (Jacksonville) See lootnotes at end of table. ( 2 ) 312 6 18 18 ( 2 ) 18 j 9 19 ( 2 ) 57 43 18 128 101 24 17 12 22 5 40 10 8 15 12 107 370 9 20 21 19 4 20 12 12 6 43 3 13 35 2] ( 2 ) APPENDIX 1— Continued 339 Table B. Special police force employment and payroll of selected special districts and school districts, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll FLORIDA — Continued Independent school districts — Continued Florida Junior College (Jacksonville) Dade County School (Miami ) Miami Dade Junior College Pensacola Junior College Hillsborough County School District (Tampa) GEORGIA Special districts : Fulton-De Kalb Hospital Authority (Atlanta ) Richmond County Hospital Authority (Augusta ) Hall County Hospital Authority (Gainesville ) Macon-Bibb County Hospital Authority (Macon) Independent school districts: Atlanta Independent School District Muscogee County School District (Columbus) Bibb County School District (Macon) Cobb County School District (Marietta ) Savannah-Chatham County School District ILLINOIS Special districts: Chicago City Board of Education Chicago Housing Authority Chicago Transit Authority Metro Fair Exposition Authority (Chicago) Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago East St. Louis Park District Springfield Airport Authority Independent school districts: Chicago City College Peoria Public School District 150 INDIANA Special districts: Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority (Indianapolis). Independent school districts: Gary Commission School Corporation Indianapolis Public Schools IOWA Independent school districts: Waterloo Community School District KANSAS Independent school districts: Kansas City School District Unified School District 501 (Topeka) Wichita Unified School District 259 KENTUCKY Independent school districts: Fayette County School District (Lexington) Jefferson County School District (Louisville ) 3 Louisville Public Schools LOUISIANA Special districts: Lake Charles Harbor and Terminal District Orleans Levee District (New Orleans ) Independent school districts: East Baton Rouge Parish School District (Baton Rouge) Orleans Parish School District (New Orleans) See footnotes at end of table. 35 1 1 1 70(1 ( 2 ) 78 45 67 (NA) ] 39 100 ( 2 ) ( 3 ) 32 111 23 ( 2 ) 78 37 67 6 6 (NA) ( 2 ) 25 13 ( 3 ) 111 23 2 59 ( 2 ) (NA) ( 2 ) 25 26 ( 3 ) 1!) 114 12 7 16 3 287 ( 2 ) 117 39 82 5 5 (NA) ( 2 ) 10 Hi 37 '.:•■ 18 ( 3 ) 15 60 340 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table B. Special police force employment and payroll of selected special districts and school districts, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll MARYLAND Special districts: Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission (Riverdale) MASSACHUSETTS Special districts: Boston Housing Authority Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority (Jamaica Plain) MICHIGAN Special districts: Huron-Clinton Metro Authority (Detroit) Tri City Airport Commission (Freeland ) Peoples Community Hospital Authority (Wayne) Independent school districts: Oakland Community College (Bloomfield Hills) Detroit City School District Flint City School District Grand Rapids Public Schools Lansing City School District Pontiac City School District Macomb County Community College (Warren) MINNESOTA Special districts: Hennepin County Park Reserve (Maple Plain) Minneapolis-St . Paul Metro Airports Commission (St. Paul) MISSOURI Special districts: Housing Authority of Kansas City St . Louis Housing Authority Independent school districts: Kansas City School District Junior College District of St. Louis St . Louis City School District Springfield School District NEBRASKA Independent school districts: OmnhH City School District No . 1 NEVADA Independent school districts: Clark County School District (Las Vegas) NEW JERSEY Special districts: Daluware River Port Authority (Camden) Llurlington County Bridge Commission (Palmyra) Housing Authority of the City of Trenton NEW MEXICO Independent school districts: Albuquerque School District NEW YORK Special districts: Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (New York) Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor Independent school districts: Farmingdale Public Schools Sue footnotes at end of tab^r (*) 67 53 116 119 30 19 1,325 74 ( 2 ) 67 53 104 40 40 77 l L9 25 19 1,325 72 ( 2 ) 53 24 36 (*) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) (NA) (NA) (NA) 13 13 13 54 27 37 ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 34 6 25 24 24 24 < 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 32 11 19 53 114 40 43 77 7 119 26 1,325 73 APPENDIX 1— Continued 341 Table B. Special police force employment and payroll of selected special districts and school districts, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Special districts: Akron Metropolitan Park District (Akron ) Hamilton County Park District (Cincinnati) Cleveland Metro Housing Authority Cleveland Metropolitan Park District Lorain County Metro Park District (Elyria) Metro Park District of the Toledo Area (Toledo) Youngstown Township Park District Independent school districts: Cincinnati City School District Cuyahoga Community College (Cleveland ) Dayton City School District OKLAHOMA Independent school districts: Oklahoma City School District OREGON Special districts: The Port of Portland District Independent school districts : Portland School District PENNSYLVAN IA Special districts: Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission (Morrisvllle Philadelphia Housing Authority Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Philadelphia) Pittsburgh Housing Authority Port Authority of Allegheny County (Pittsburgh)... Independent school districts: Penn Hills Township School District (Pittsburgh) Pittsburgh City School District SOUTH CAROLINA Special districts: Columbia Metro Airport TENNESSEE Special districts: Memphis-Shelby County Airport Authority (Memphis) Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority TEXAS Special districts: Dallas/Fort Worth Airport Authority (Dallas ) Brownsville Navigation District Nueces County Navigation District (Corpus Christi) Dallas County Hospital District (Dallas) Housing Authority — City of Houston Port of Houston Authority Bexar County Hospital District (San Antonio) Independent school districts: Dallas County Community College District (Dallas) El Paso Independent School District Ysleta Independent School District (El Paso).. Tarrant County Junior College District (Fort Worth) Houston Independent School District See footnotes at end of table. 134 45 22 109 222 ( 2 ) 8. r i 20-1 12 3 ( 4 ) 46 101 25 109 222 ( 2 ) 20-1 12 3 ( 4 ) 98 25 109 222 f 2 ) 65 201 12 3 ( 4 ) 21 100 25 19 26 12 5] 28 18 119 243 34 28 20 ( 2 ) 63 38 42 ( 4 ) 13 8 1 22 26 1 26 25 ,io 342 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table B. Special police force employment and payroll of selected special districts and school districts, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll TEXAS — Continued Independent school districts — Continued Irving Independent School District San Jacinto College (Pasadena ) San Antonio Independent School District San Antonio-St. Phillips College District (San Antonio). UTAH Independent school districts: Granite School District (Salt Lake City] VIRGINIA Special districts: Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel District (Cape Charles). Elizabeth River Tunnel Commission (Norfolk) WASHINGTON Special districts: Port of Seattle District. Port of Tacoma District.. Independent school districts: Seattle School District.... 3 7 101 4 37 101 5 3 7 5 8 i3 is 47 -17 33 - Represents zero or rounds to zero. NA Not available. 1 Where the name of the unit of government does not reflect the city where the unit's administrative headquarters are located, this information appears in parenthesis after the unit name. 2 No units known meeting the criteria of 10 or more full-time equivalent employees or $50,000 or more in annual expenditures for contract services. 3 Jefferson County School District and Louisville Public Schools merged. 4 No longer has power of arrest. APPENDIX 1— Continued 343 Table C. Campus police force expenditure by character and object, fiscal year 1975 (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Intergovern- mental expenditure Total Alabama: Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University, Normal.. Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind, Talladega Alabama State University, Montgomery Alexander City State Junior College, Alexander Auburn University, Auburn Bessemer State Technical College, Bessemer Enterprise State Junior College, Enterprise Faulkner State Junior College, Bay Minette Gadsden State Junior College, Gadsden George C. Wallace State Community College, Dothan Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville Jefferson State Junior College, Birmingham John C. Calhoun State Community College, Decatur Livingston University, Livingston Northeast Alabama State Junior College, Rainsville Northwest Alabama State Junior College, Phil Campbell... Troy State University, Troy The University of Alabama, University University of Alabama in Birmingham, Birmingham University of Montevallo, Montevallo University of North Alabama, Florence University of South Alabama, Mobile Arizona: Arizona State University, Tempe Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff University of Arizona, Tucson Arkansas : Arkansas Polytechnic College, Russellville Arkansas State University, State University Arkansas State University, Beebe Henderson State University, Arkadelphia Southern State College, Magnolia University of Arkansas, Fayetteville University of Arkansas, Little Rock University of Arkansas, Monticello University of Arkansas, Pine Bluff University of Central Arkansas, Conway California: California State College, Bakersf ield California State College, Dominguez Hills California State College, San Bernardino California State College, Sonoma California State College, Stanislaus California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo California State Polytechnic University, Pomona California State University, Chico California State University, Fresno California State University, Fullerton California State University, Hayward California State University, Long Beach California State University, Los Angeles California State University, Northridge California State University, Sacramento Humboldt State University, Areata San Diego State University, San Diego San Francisco State University, San Francisco San Jose State University, San Jose University of California, Berkeley (9 campuses) Colorado: Adams State College, Alamosa Colorado School of Mines, Golden Colorado State University, Fort Collins El Paso Community College, Colorado Springs Otero Junior College, La Junta University of Colorado, Boulder University of Southern Colorado, Pueblo See footnotes at end of table. 7 130 9 389 8 24 47 151 579 249 998 49 18 304 (X) 56 61 89 126 196 145 135 168 236 202 187 293 187 252 438 489 343 415 179 356 313 279 5,373 319 9 926 133 409 496 54 47 151 579 249 998 24 117 49 18 304 (X) 56 61 89 126 196 145 135 168 236 202 187 293 187 252 438 489 343 415 179 356 313 279 5,373 80 70 319 926 133 139 5 324 24 409 496 54 579 245 929 23 105 7 48 18 235 (X) 51 61 126 196 144 135 168 235 200 187 293 187 252 438 489 326 355 172 356 313 275 5,373 74 59 319 133 (X) 344 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table C. Campus police force expenditure by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of Government Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Intergovern- mental expenditure Connecticut: Central Connecticut State College, New Britain Eastern Connecticut State College, Willimantlc Manchester Community College, Manchester Mattatuck Community College, Waterbury Southern Connecticut State College, New Haven University of Connecticut, Storrs Western Connecticut State College, Danbury Delaware: University of Delaware, Newark Florida: Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, Tallahassee Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton Florida International University, Miami Florida State University, Tallahassee Florida Technological University, Orlando University of Florida, Gainsville University of North Florida, Jacksonville University of South Florida, Tampa University of West Florida, Pensacola Georgia: Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College, Tif ton Albany Junior College, Albany Albany State College, Albany Augusta College, Augusta Columbus College, Columbus Fort Valley State College, Fort Valley Georgia College, Milledgeville Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia Southern College, Statesboro Georgia Southwestern College, Americus Georgia State University, Atlanta Medical College of Georgia, Augusta Middle Georgia College, Cochran North Georgia College, Dahlonega Savannah State College, Savannah South Georgia College, Douglas University of Georgia, Athens Valdosta State College, Valdosta West Georgia College, Carrollton Idaho: Boise State University, Boise Idaho State University, Pocatello Lewis-Clark State College, Lewiston University of Idaho, Moscow Illinois: Chicago State University, Chicago Eastern Illinois University, Charleston Governors State University, Park Forest South Illinois State University, Normal Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago Northern Illinois University, De Kalb Sangamon State University, Springfield Southern Illinois University, Carbondale Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville University of Illinois, Chicago Circle Campus University of Illinois Medical Center, Chicago University of Illinois, Urbana Western Illinois University, Macomb Indiana : Ball State University, Muncie Indiana State University, Terre Haute Indiana University, Bloomington Indiana University Regional Campuses Cndj University-Purdue University, Indianapolis Purdue University, Lafayette 2 58 610 87 217 253 226 544 243 812 172 508 184 43 27 88 69 88 111 56 548 118 93 S17 331 62 46 1117 40 456 1 in 132 23 71 11 140 352 178 283 341 128 528 155 898 623 820 698 963 226 500 285 938 191 711 591 2 58 610 87 217 253 226 544 243 812 172 508 184 6 9 88 111 56 54 8 118 93 617 331 62 46 107 40 456 110 132 3 52 1 78 283 341 128 528 155 898 623 820 098 963 226 5(1(1 285 938 191 711 591 197 77 42 258 610 87 217 250 225 537 24 3 799 172 493 184 41 27 86 65 84 111 56 512 114 93 605 313 62 46 107 40 4 54 110 126 3 52 178 282 34 1 128 528 155 898 536 820 098 963 226 30(1 285 913 177 695 581 footnotes at cud oi table. APPENDIX 1— Continued Table C. Campus police force expenditure by character and object, fiscal year 1975 — Continued (Thousands of dollars) 345 Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Intergovern- mental expenditure Iowa : Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames University of Iowa, Iowa City University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls Kansas : Emporia Kansas State College, Emporia Fort Hays Kansas State College, Hays Kansas State College, Pittsburg Kansas State University of Agriculture and Applied Science Manhattan University of Kansas, Lawrence University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City Wichita State University, Wichita Kentucky : Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond Kentucky State University, Frankfort Morehead State University, Morehead Murray State University, Murray University of Kentucky, Lexington University of Louisville, Louisville Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green Louisiana: Delgado Junior College, New Orleans Grambling State University Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge Louisiana State University Medical Center, New Orleans.... Louisiana Tech University, Ruston McNeese State University, Lake Charles Nlcholls State University, Thibodaux Northeast Louisiana University, Monroe Northwestern State University of Louisiana, Natchitoches.. Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond Southern University Agriculture and Mechanical College, Baton Rouge Southern University, New Orleans Southern University, Shreveport University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette Maine: Northern Maine Vocational and Technical Institute, Presque Isle Southern Maine Vocational and Technical Institute, South Portland University of Maine, Bangor University of Maine, Farmington University of Maine, Orono University of Maine, Portland-Gorham Maryland: Bowie State College, Bowie Coppin State College, Baltimore Frostburg State College, Frostburg Morgan State University, Bal timore Saint Mary's College of Maryland Salisbury State College, Salisbury Towson State College, Baltimore University of Maryland Massachusetts : Bristol Community College, Fall River Holyoke Community College, Holyoke Massasoit Community College, Brockton..... Mount Wachuset Community College, Gardner Quinsigamond Community College, Worcester Springfield Technical Community College, Springfield Boston State College, Boston Bridgewater State College, Bridgewater Fitchburg State College, Fitchburg Framingham State College, Framingham 305 469 200 133 93 155 326 607 142 244 377 71 114 137 410 322 353 HI 126 340 164 134 90 118 123 143 161 314 219 54 179 305 469 200 133 93 155 326 607 142 244 37 7 71 106 137 440 322 353 81 126 340 164 134 90 118 123 143 161 314 219 54 179 305 452 198 132 93 155 322 495 142 235 37 7 71 100 137 125 310 353 72 126 340 164 130 90 118 123 142 160 306 211 54 179 29 29 29 454 454 442 53 53 53 274 274 274 96 96 96 178 178 178 128 128 119 166 166 166 303 303 299 89 89 89 112 112 112 299 299 299 1,009 1,009 997 56 56 55 128 128 95 50 50 50 59 59 59 281 281 281 137 137 136 211 211 209 90 90 89 112 9 See footnotes at end of table. 346 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table C. Campus police force expenditure by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Intergovern- mental expenditure Massachusetts- -Continued Massachusetts Maritime Academy, Buzzards Bay North Adams State College, North Adams Salem State College, Salem Westfield State College, Westfield Worcester State College, Worcester University of Lowell, Lowell University of Massachusetts, Amherst Michigan: Central Michigan University, Mt . Pleasant Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti Ferris State College, Big Rapids Grand Valley State College, Allendale Michigan State University, East Lansing Michigan Technological University, Houghton Northern Michigan University, Marquette Oakland University, Rochester Saginaw Valley State College University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Wayne State University, Detroit Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo Minnesota : Mankato State College, Mankato University of Minnesota, Minneapolis Willmar Community College, Willmar Mississippi: Alcorn State University, Lorman Delta State University, Cleveland Jackson State University, Jackson Mississippi State University, Mississippi State.... Mississippi University for Women, Columbus Mississippi Valley State University, Itta Bena University of Mississippi, University University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson.. University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg. . . . Missouri : Central Missouri State University, Warrensburg Missouri Southern State College, Joplin Missouri Western State College, St. Joseph Northeast Missouri State University, Kirksville . . . . Northwest Missouri State University, Maryville Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield... University of Missouri, Columbia University of Missouri, Kansas City University of Missouri, Rolla University of Missouri, St. Louis Montana : Eastern Montana University, Billings Montana State University, Bozeman University of Montana, Missoula Nebraska : Kearney State College, Kearney Peru State College, Peru Wayne State College, Wayne University of Nebraska, Lincoln Nevada : University of Nevada, Las Vegas University of Nevada, Reno New Hampshire: New Hampshire Technical Institute, Concord University of New Hampshire, Durham 20 82 148 103 61 120 795 360 633 250 123 918 116 125 265 23 ,176 ,181 695 167 ,046 4 57 79 158 171 34 99 203 327 279 178 35 60 142 71 71 172 57 2 .(8 1 2 2 8 228 101 119 111 66 18 27 19 1 Kin 193 20 82 1 16 103 61 120 795 633 2 5(i 123 918 116 12 5 265 23 944 1,181 670 118 1,046 57 79 158 171 34 99 203 .'(27 279 178 35 60 142 71 71 172 572 384 228 228 Mil 1 19 111 100 193 20 82 1 IS 103 56 120 779 352 346 2 50 125 918 116 125 265 23 944 1,078 650 118 1,046 57 79 157 166 34 98 203 52 1 267 171 35 60 142 71 67 1 72 531 358 228 215 101 119 109 100 186 10 2 20 See footnotes at end of table. APPENDIX 1— Continued Table C. Campus police force expenditure by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) 347 Unit of Government Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Intergovern- mental expenditure New Jersey: College of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark Glassboro State College, Glassboro Kean College of New Jersey, Union Montclair State College, Upper Montclair Ramapo College of New Jersey, Mahwah Richard Stockton State College, Pomona Rutgers, The State University, New Brunswick Trenton State College, Trenton New Mexico: Eastern New Mexico University, Portales New Mexico Highlands University, Las Vegas New Mexico Military Institute, Roswell New Mexico State University, Las Cruces University of New Mexico, Albuquerque Western New Mexico University, Silver City New York: State University of New York Albany State University of New York, Binghamton State University of New York, Buffalo State University of New York, Stony Brook State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse State University of New York College, Brockport State University of New York College, Buffalo State University of New York College, Cortland State University of New York College, Fredonia State University of New York College, Geneseo State University of New York College, New Paltz State University of New York College, Old Westbury State University of New York College, Oneonta State University of New York College, Oswego State University of New York College, Plattsburgh State University of New York College, Potsdam State University of New York College, Purchase State University of New York College, Utica-Rome State University of New York Maritime College, Bronx State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Alfred State University of New York Agricultural and Technical Col lege, Canton State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Cobleskill State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Delhi State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Farmingdale State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Morrisville North Carolina: Appalachian State University, Boone East Carolina University, Greenville Elizabeth City State University, Elizabeth City Fayetteville State University, Fayetteville North Carolina Agriculture and Technical State University, Greensboro North Carolina Central University, Durham North Carolina State University, Raleigh Pembroke State University, Pembroke University of North Carolina, Asheville University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill University of North Carolina, Charlotte University of North Carolina, Greensboro University of North Carolina, Wilmington Western Carolina University, Cullowhee Winston-Salem State University, Winston-Salem 753 321 346 365 182 190 1,640 329 57 68 25 352 587 35 692 404 1,042 822 753 321 346 365 182 190 ,630 329 5 7 68 25 352 587 35 404 ,042 822 125 125 125 298 298 297 337 337 336 229 229 229 213 213 213 210 210 210 320 320 320 383 383 383 283 283 283 251 251 251 249 249 249 168 168 168 253 253 253 4 4 4 114 114 114 213 216 200 135 135 135 158 158 158 114 114 114 322 322 322 82 82 82 139 139 136 272 272 232 61 61 61 9] 91 91 175 175 175 170 170 170 246 246 246 59 59 59 58 58 58 385 385 385 192 192 192 193 193 193 78 78 72 157 157 157 145 145 145 753 290 346 365 182 183 ,630 320 57 68 25 352 587 35 692 404 1,022 822 589 See footnotes at end of table. 348 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table C. Campus police force expenditure by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Intergovern- mental expenditure North Dakota: North Dakota State School of Science, Wahpeton North Dakota State University, Fargo University of North Dakota, Grand Forks , Ohio: Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green Central State University, Wilberforce Cleveland State University, Cleveland Kent State Uni versi ty , Kent Medical College of Ohio, Toledo Miami University , Oxford Ohio State University, Columbus Ohio University, Athens University of Akron, Akron University of Toledo Wright State University, Dayton Youngstcwn State University, Youngstown Oklahoma : Cameron University, Lawton Central State University, Edmond Connors State Agriculture College, Warner Langston University, Langston Murray State College, Tishomingo Northeastern Oklahoma State University, Tahlequah Northwestern Oklahoma State University, Alva Oklahoma Panhandle State University, Goodwell Oklahoma State University, Stillwater Southeastern Oklahoma State University, Durant Tulsa Junior College, Tulsa University of Oklahoma, Norman University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, Oklahoma City University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma, Chiritasha Oregon: Oregon State University, Corvallis University of Oregon, Eugene Pennsylvania : Bloomburg State College, Eloomburg , California State College, California Cheyney State College, Cheyney Clarion State College, Clarion East Stroudsburg State College, East Stroudsburg Edinboro State College, Edinboro Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana Kutztown State College, Kutztown Lock Haven State College, Lock Haven Mansfield State College, Mansfield Millersville State College, Millersville Shippensburg State College, Shippensburg Slippery Rock State College, Slippery Rock West Chester State College, West Chester Pennsylvania State University, University Park South Carolina: Citadel Military College of South Carolina, Charleston Clemson University, Clemson Frances Marion College, Florence Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston South Carolina State College, Orangeburg University of South Carolina, Columbia Winthrop College, Rock Hill South Dakota: South Dakota State University, Brookings University of South Dakota, Springfield 31 106 ml 31] 123 417 516 88 439 ,134 425 328 373 224 285 282 21 81 348 258 15 185 565 IT 1 178 169 192 L59 250 206 ••(id 103 145 1" . i rv> i.;i, 314 ,356 1 L6 310 49 380 132 789 L6 I 106 10 1 311 123 117 516 88 139 ,134 425 328 376 224 28 5 36 68 11 30 9 110 20 5 282 21 81 348 2 58 15 185 1.2 7 174 1 78 L69 192 159 2 51 1 206 20(1 103 145 193 179 136 314 ,2.'" 116 310 49 380 132 789 164 21 97 101 263 123 414 514 8H 439 ,121 425 323 376 223 2X1 3 1 67 11 3(1 9 Kin 20 5 272 21 70 3 18 258 15 185 13(1 174 178 162 192 159 250 192 200 102 145 196 1 79 165 314 1,287 1 16 310 48 380 131 783 155 See footnotes at end of table. APPENDIX 1— Continued 349 Table C. Campus police force expenditure by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Intergovern- mental expenditure Tennessee: Austin Peay State University, Clarksville Cleveland State Community College, Cleveland East Tennessee State University, Johnson City Memphis State University, Memphis Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro Motlow State Community College, Tullahoma ■ Tennessee State University, Nashville Tennessee Technical University, Cookeville University of Tennessee, Knoxville Walter State Community College, Morristown Texas : Angelo State University, San Angelo East Texas State University, Commerce Lamar University, Beaumont Midwestern State University, Wichita Falls North Texas State University, Denton Pan American University, Edenburgh Sam Houston State University, Huntsville Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches Sul Ross State University, Alpine Texas Agricultural and Industrial University, Kingsville Texas Agricultural and Mechanical University, College Station Prairie View Agricultural and Mechanical University, Prairie View Tarleton State University, Stephenville Texas Southern University, Houston Texas State Technical Institute-James Connolly Campus, Waco.. Texas Technical University, Lubbock Texas Womens University, Denton University of Houston, Houston University of Texas, Austin University of Texas, Arlington University of Texas, Dallas University of Texas, El Paso University of Texas Health Science Center, Dallas University of Texas Cancer Center, Houston University of Texas Dental School, San Antonio University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio West Texas State University, Canyon Utah: University of Utah, Salt Lake Utah State University, Logan Southern Utah State College, Cedar City Weber State College, Ogden Dixie College, Saint George Snow College, Ephraim , Vermont: Castleton State College, Castleton Lyndon State College, Lyndonville University of Vermont, Burlington Virginia: Clinch Valley College, Wise College of William and Mary, Williamsburg George Mason University, Fairfax , Madison College, Harrisonburg Mary Washington Col lege, Fredericksburg Norfolk State College, Norfolk Old Dominion University, Norfolk Radford College, Radford University of Virginia, Charlottesville Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond Virginia Military Institute, Lexington Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg Virginia State College, Petersburg Central Virginia Community College 122 122 122 431 431 426 232 232 228 23 23 23 143 143 143 115 115 110 800 800 800 32 32 32 223 220 215 145 145 142 100 100 94 301 301 291 93 93 92 109 109 104 177 177 176 140 140 133 49 49 44 170 168 168 362 362 338 65 65 65 169 169 167 93 93 83 338 338 333 146 146 142 747 747 747 1,509 1,509 1,486 411 411 399 63 63 63 286 286 236 373 373 363 490 490 485 192 192 185 190 190 186 87 87 87 656 656 540 35 6 6 15 15 15 HI 81 77 15 15 14 13 13 13 25 25 25 234 234 234 158 158 158 159 159 159 140 140 140 180 180 180 213 213 213 110 110 110 630 630 630 711 711 711 56 56 56 310 310 310 82 82 82 See footnotes at end of table. 350 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table C. Campus police force expenditure by character and object, fiscal year 1975— Continued (Thousands of dollars) Unit of government 1 Direct expenditure Direct current Capital outlay Intergovern- mental expenditure Virginia- -Continued Dabney S. Lancaster Community College, Clifton Forge. Danville Community College, Danville J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College, Richmond Northern Virginia Community College, Annandale Paul D. Camp Community College, Franklin Southside Virginia Community College, Alberta Southwest Virginia Community College, Richlands Thomas Nelson Community College, Richmond Virginia Highlands Community College, Richmond Virginia Western Community College, Roanoke Wytheville Community College, Wytheville Washington: Big Bend Community College, Moses Lake Central Washington State College, Ellensburg. Eastern Washington State College, Cheney The Evergreen State College, Olympia Fort Steilacoom Community College, Tacoma . . . . Green River Community College, Auburn Seattle Community College, Seattle Tacoma Community College, Tacoma University of Washington, Seattle Washington State University, Pullman Western Washington State College, Bellingham. West Virginia: Bluef ield State College, Bluef ield Concord College, Athens Fairmont State College, Fairmont Glenville State College, Glenville Marshall University, Huntington Potomac State College, Keyser Shepherd College, Shepherdstown West Liberty State College, West Liberty West Virginia Institute of Technology West Virginia State College, Institute West Virginia University, Morgantown Wisconsin: University of University of University of University of University of University of University of University of University of University of University of University of Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Eau Claire Green Bay La Crosse Madison Milwaukee Oshkosh Parkside, Kenoshs Platteville River Falls Stout Superior Whitewater Wyoming: University of Wyoming, Laramie. 72 2 12 23 15 9 36 9 r,:, 12 134 155 86 30 44 53 64 ,306 241 209 22 72 212 23 45 12 134 103 86 30 44 53 64 1,306 241 209 2 2 72 22ti 23 15 9 36 9 B5 12 13 1 96 86 30 44 53 64 1,299 240 196 20 20 20 50 50 50 49 49 49 190 190 155 25 25 25 20 20 20 33 33 33 56 56 56 39 39 39 218 218 218 138 138 137 132 132 130 102 102 102 1,075 1,075 1,032 406 406 402 142 142 142 155 155 150 69 69 69 76 75 68 104 74 73 78 78 77 130 130 122 Represents zero or rounds to zero. X Not applicable. 1 Where the name of the unit of government does not reflect the city where th this information appears after the unit name. unit's administrative headquarters are located, APPENDIX 1— Continued Table D. Campus police force employment and payroll, October 1975 (Dollar amounts in thousands) 351 Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Total Alabama : Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University, Normal.. Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind, Talladega Alabama State University, Montgomery Alexander City State Junior College, Alexander Auburn University, Auburn Bessemer State Technical College, Bessemer Enterprise State Junior College, Enterprise Faulkner State Junior College, Bay Minette Gadsden State Junior College, Gadsden George C. Wallace State Community College, Dothan Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville Jefferson State Junior College, Birmingham John C. Calhoun State Community College, Decatur Livingston University, Livingston Northeast Alabama State Junior College, Ralnsville Northwest Alabama State Junior College, Phil Campbell... Troy State University, Troy The University of Alabama, University University of Alabama in Birmingham, Birmingham University of Montevallo, Montevallo University of North Alabama, Florence University of South Alabama, Mobile Arizona : Arizona State University, Tempe Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff University of Arizona, Tucson Arkansas : Arkansas Polytechnic College, Russellville Arkansas State University, State University Arkansas State University, Beebe Henderson State University, Arkadelphla „ Southern State College, Magnolia University of Arkansas, Fayetteville University of Arkansas, Little Rock University of Arkansas, Monticello University of Arkansas, Pine Bluff University of Central Arkansas, Conway California : California State College, Bakersf ield California State College, Dominguez Hills California State College, San Bernardino California State College, Sonoma California State College, Stanislaus California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo California State Polytechnic University, Pomona California State University, Chico California State University, Fresno California State University, Fullerton California State University, Hayward California State University, Long Beach California State University, Los Angeles California State University, Northridge California State University, Sacramento Humboldt State University, Areata San Diego State University, San Diego San Francisco State University, San Francisco San Jose State University, San Jose University of California, Berkeley (9 campuses) Colorado : Adams State College, Alamosa Colorado School of Mines, Golden Colorado State University, Fort Collins El Paso Community College, Colorado Springs Otero Junior College, La Junta University of Colorado, Boulder University of Southern Colorado, Pueblo See footnotes at end of table. (X) 7 10 ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 57 10 1 15 1 6 '"> 30 (X) 25 3 ( 2 ) 352 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table D. Campus police force employment and payroll, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Connecticut : Central Connecticut State College, New Britain. Eastern Connecticut State College, Willlmantic. Manchester Community College, Manchester Mattatuck Community College, Waterbury Southern Connecticut State College, New Haven.. University of Connecticut, Storrs Western Connecticut State College, Danbury Delaware : University of Delaware, Newark. Florida : Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, Tallahassee. Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton Florida International University, Miami Florida State University, Tallahassee Florida Technological University, Orlando University of Florida, Gainsville University of North Florida, Jacksonville University of South Florida, Tampa University of West Florida, Pensacola Georgia : Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College, Tyton. Albany Junior College, Albany Albany State College, Albany Augusta College, Augusta Columbus College, Columbus Fort Valley State College, Fort Valley Georgia College, Milledgeville Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.... Georgia Southern College, Statesboro Georgia Southwestern College, Americus Georgia State University, Atlanta Medical College of Georgia, Augusta Middle Georgia College, Cochran North Georgia College, Dahlonega Savannah State College, Savannah, South Georgia College, Douglas University of Georgia, Athens Valdosta State College, Valdosta West Georgia College, Carrollton Idaho : Boise State University, Boise Idaho State University, Pocatello.., Lewis-Clark State College, Lewiston. University of Idaho, Moscow Illinois : Chicago State University, Chicago Eastern Illinois University, Charleston Governors State University, Park Forest South.. Illinois State University, Normal Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago Northern Illinois University, De Kalb Sangamon State University, Springfield Southern Illinois University, Carbondale Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville University of Illinois Chicago Circle Campus... University of Illinois Medical Center, Chicago. University of Illinois, Urbana Western Illinois University, Macomb Indiana : Ball State University, Muncie Indiana State University, Terre Haute Indiana University, Bloomington Indiana University Regional Campuses Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis. Purdue University, Lafayette Number of employees 23 7 4 ( 2 ) 42 6 ( 2 ) 16 12 13 17 8 43 14 14 r,.s 33 6 6 14 7 53 L5 22 ( 2 ) 6 8 13 36 37 1.25 22 S3 50 Full-time only 6 ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 6 . -time Oct pay Dber roll ivalent 23 17 7 5 4 3 ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 25 20 6 ( 2 ) L6 ( 2 ) See footnotes at end of tabic APPENDIX 1— Continued 353 Table D. Campus police force employment and payroll, October 1975 — Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Iowa: Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames University of Iowa, Iowa City University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls Kansas : Emporia Kansas State College, Emporia Fort Hays Kansas State College, Hays Kansas State College, Pittsburg Kansas State University of Agriculture and Applied Science, Manhattan University of Kansas, Lawrence University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City Wichita State University, Wichita Kentucky : Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond Kentucky State University, Frankfort Morehead State University, Morehead Murray State University, Murray , University of Kentucky, Lexington University of Louisville, Louisville Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green Louisiana : Delgado Junior College, New Orleans Grambling State University Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge Louisiana State University Medical Center, New Orleans Louisiana Tech University, Ruston McNeese State University, Lake Charles Nicholls State University, Thibodaux Northeast Louisiana University, Monroe Northwestern State University of Louisiana, Natchitoches Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond Southern University Agriculture and Mechanical College, Baton Rouge.. Southern University, New Orleans Southern University, Shreveport University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette Maine : Northern Maine Vocational and Technical Institute, Presque Isle Southern Maine Vocational and Technical Institute, South Portland.... University of Maine, Bangor University of Maine, Farmington University of Maine, Orono University of Maine, Portland-Gorham Maryland: . Bowie State College, Bowie Coppin State College, Baltimore Frostburg State College, Frostburg Morgan State University, Baltimore Saint Mary's College of Maryland Salisbury State College, Salisbury Towson State College, Baltimore University of Maryland Massachusetts : Bristol Community College, Fall River Holyoke Community College, Holyoke Massasoit Community College, Brockton Mount Wachuset Community College, Gardner Quinsigamond Community College, Worcester Springfield Technical Community College, Springfield Boston State College, Boston Bridgewater State College, Bridgewater Fitchburg State College, Fitchburg Framingham State College, Framingham See footnotes at end of table. ( 2 ) 66 ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 64 5 26 10 ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 354 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table D. Campus police force employment and payroll, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Massachusetts — Continued Massachusetts Maritime Academy, Buzzards Bay North Adams State College, North Adams Salem State College, Salem Westfield State College, Westf ield Worcester State College, Worcester University of Lowell, Lowell University of Massachusetts, Amherst Michigan : Central Michigan University, Mt . Pleasant Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti Ferris State College, Big Rapids Grand Valley State College, Allendale Michigan State University, East Lansing Michigan Technological University, Houghton Northern Michigan University, Marquette Oakland University, Rochester Saginaw Valley State College University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Wayne State University, Detroit Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo Minnesota : Mankato State College, Mankato . . . „ University of Minnesota, Minneapolis Willmar Community College, Willmar Mississippi : Alcorn State University, Lorman Delta State Universi ty , Cleveland Jackson State University, Jackson Mississippi State University, Mississippi State.... Mississippi University for Women, Columbus Mississippi Valley State University, Itta Bena University of Mississippi, University University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson.. University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg . . . . Missouri : Central Missouri State University, Warrensburg Missouri Southern State College, Joplin Missouri Western State College, St. Joseph Northeast Missouri State University, Kirksville. . . . Northwest Missouri State University, Maryville Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield... University of Missouri, Columbia University of Missouri, Kansas City University of Missouri, Rolla University of Missouri, St. Louis Montana: Eastern Montana University, Billings Montana State University, Bozeman University of Montana, Missoula Nebraska : Kearney State College, Kearney Peru State College, Peru Wayne State College, Wayne University of Nebraska, Lincoln Nevada : University of Nevada, Las Vegas University of Nevada Reno New Hampshire: New Hampshire Technical Institute, Concord University of New Hampshire, Durham See footnotes at end of table. 42 51 26 13 204 19 36 35 ( 3 ) 20 70 i;,s 69 ( 2 ) 20 3 ) 15 ( 3 ) 61 43 2 1 23 69 ( 2 ) 'i L2 3 ) 6 ( 3 ) 20 18 ( 3 ) 20 60 52 69 ( 2 ) 9 11 (3) 7 ( 3 ) ..1 :t;i 2 1 21 APPENDIX 1— Continued 355 Table D. Campus police force employment and payroll, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll New Jersey : College of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark Glassboro State College, Glassboro Kean College of New Jersey, Union Montclair State College, Upper Montclair Ramapo College of New Jersey, Mahwah Richard Stockton State College, Pomona Rutgers the State University, New Brunswick Trenton State College, Trenton New Mexico: Eastern New Mexico University, Portales New Mexico Highlands University, Las Vegas New Mexico Military Institute, Roswell New Mexico State University, Las Cruces University of New Mexico, Albuquerque Western New Mexico University, Silver City New York : State University of New York, Albany State University of New York, Binghamton State University of New York, Buffalo State University of New York, Stony Brook State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse State University of New York College, Brockport State University of New York College, Buffalo State University of New York College, Cortland State University of New York College, Fredonia State University of New York College, Geneseo State University of New York College, New Paltz State University of New York College, Old Westbury State University of New York College, Oneonta State University of New York College, Oswego State University of New York College, Plattsburgh State University of New York College, Potsdam State University of New York College, Purchase State University of New York College, Utica-Rome State University of New York Maritime College, Bronx State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Alfred State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Canton State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Cobleskill State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Delhi. State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Farmingdale State University of New York Agricultural and Technical College, Morrisville North Carolina: Appalachian State University, Boone East Carolina University, Greenville Elizabeth City State University, Elizabeth City Fayetteville State University, Fayetteville North Carolina Agriculture and Technical State University, Greensboro,. North Carolina Central University, Durham North Carolina State University, Raleigh Pembroke State University, Pembroke University of North Carolina, Asheville University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill University of North Carolina, Charlotte University of North Carolina, Greensboro University of North Carolina, Wilmington Western Carolina University, Cullowhee Winston-Salem State University, Winston-Salem See footnotes at end of table. 9-1 45 58 42 21 23 1 59 30 17 17 19 106 29 24 15 16 144 28 356 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table D. Campus police force employment and payroll, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll North Dakota : North Dakota State School of Science, Wahpeton North Dakota State University, Fargo University of North Dakota, Grand Forks Ohio: Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green Central State University, Wilberforce Cleveland State University, Cleveland Kent State University, Kent Medical College of Ohio, Toledo Miami University, Oxford Ohio State University, Columbus Ohio University, Athens University of Akron, Akron University of Toledo Wright State University, Dayton Youngstown State University, Youngstown Oklahoma : Cameron University, Lawton Central State University, Edmond Connors State Agriculture College, Warner Langston University, Langston Murray State College, Tishomingo Northeastern Oklahoma State University, Tahlequah Northwestern Oklahoma State University, Alva Oklahoma Panhandle State University, Goodwell Oklahoma State University, Stillwater Southeastern Oklahoma State University, Durant Tulsa Junior College, Tulsa University of Oklahoma, Norman University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, Oklahoma City University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma, Chickasha Oregon : Oregon State University, Gorvallis University of Oregon, Eugene Pennsylvania : Bloomburg State College, Bloomburg California State College, California Cheyney State College, Cheyney Clarion State College, Clarion East Stroudsburg State College, East Stroudsburg Edinboro State College, Edinboro Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana Kutztown State College, Kutztown Lock Haven State College, Lock Haven Mansfield State College, Mansfield Mlllersvllle State College, Millersville Shippensburg State College, Shippensburg Slippery Rock State College, Slippery Rock West Chester State College, West Chester Pennsylvania State University, University Park South Carolina: Citadel Military College of South Carolina, Charleston Clemson University, Clemson Frances Marion College, Florence Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston South Carolina State College, Orangeburg University of South Carolina, Columbia Winthrop College, Rock Hill South Dakota: South Dakota State University, Brookings University of South Dakota, Springfield See footnotes at end of table. 46 46 46 48 35 38 10 10 10 50 43 44 105 78 82 39 35 35 27 27 27 46 30 32 24 21 22 40 20 25 7 7 7 9 9 9 ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 4 4 4 3 2 3 18 8 9 4 3 3 2 - (z) 38 34 34 7 5 5 9 1 7 50 34 39 32 32 32 19 ( 2 ) 17 ( 3 ) 18 33 1 1 13 90 16 17 39 243 ( 2 ) ( 3 ) 8 6 44 44 16 15 85 70 16 16 26 9 ( 2 ) ( 2 ) 19 ( 2 ) ( 3 ) 18 16 9 13 22 L6 17 27 147 APPENDIX 1— Continued 357 Table D. Campus police force employment and payroll, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Tennessee : Austin Peay State University, Clarksvllle Cleveland State Community College, Cleveland East Tennessee State University, Johnson City Memphis State University, Memphis Middle Tennessee State University, Murf reesboro Motlow State Community College, Tullahoma Tennessee State University, Nashville Tennessee Technical University, Cookeville University of Tennessee, Knoxvllle Walter State Community College, Morristown Texas : Angelo State University, San Angelo East Texas State University, Commerce Lamar University, Beaumont Midwestern State University, Wichita North Texas State University, Denton Pan American University, Edinburg Sam Houston State University, Huntsville Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches Sul Ross State University, Alpine Texas Agricultural and Industrial University, Kingsville Texas Agricultural and Mechanical University, College Station.... Prairie View Agricultural and Mechanical University, Prairie View Tarleton State University, Stephenville Texas Southern University, Houston Texas State Technical Institute — James Connolly Campus, Waco Texas Technical University, Lubbock Texas Womens University, Denton University of Houston, Houston University of Texas, Austin University of Texas, Arlington University of Texas, Dallas University of Texas, El Paso University of Texas Health Science Center, Dallas University of Texas Cancer Center, Houston University of Texas Dental School, San Antonio University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio West Texas State University, Canyon Utah: University of Utah, Salt Lake Utah State University, Logan Southern Utah State College, Cedar City Weber State College, Ogden Dixie College, Saint George Snow College, Ephraim Vermont : Castleton State College, Castle ton Lyndon State College, Lyndonville University of Vermont, Burlington Virginia : Clinch Valley College, Wise College of William and Mary, Williamsburg George Mason University, Fairfax Madison College, Harrisonburg Mary Washington College, Fredericksburg Norfolk State College, Norfolk Old Dominion University, Norfolk Radford College, Radford University of Virginia, Charlottesville Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond Virginia Military Institute, Lexington Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg Virginia State College, Petersburg Central Virginia Community College See footnotes at end of table. ( 3 ) 20 55 51 5 18 20 198 5 22 12 45 23 60 153 51 14 43 43 33 17 29 14 19 35 17 53 114 9 ( 3 ) 14 55 20 12 39 17 60 137 40 10 ( 3 ) 105 5 12 40 20 60 141 44 14 32 43 33 23 38 (Z) 3 9 2 2 ( 3 ) 10 46 20 4 12 10 86 7 15 13 8 30 6 13 13 13 3 15 35 11 5 14 10 30 15 47 111 34 11 23 35 30 19 18 6 2 19 12 13 9 14 22 12 50 60 4 33 7 1 358 APPENDIX 1— Continued Table D. Campus police force employment and payroll, October 1975— Continued (Dollar amounts in thousands) Unit of government 1 Number of employees Full-time only Full-time equivalent October payroll Virginia — Continued Dabney S. Lancaster Community College, Clifton Forge, Danville Community College, Danville J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College, Richmond Northern Virginia Community College, Annandale Paul D. Camp Community College, Franklin Souths jde Virginia Community College, Alberta Southwest Virginia Community College, Richlands . . . . . . Thomas Nelson Community College, Richmond. Virginia Highlands Community College, Richmond .. Virginia Western Community College, Roanoke.. Wytheville Community College, Wythevllle.. Washington: Big Bend Community College, Moses Lake Central Washington State College, Ellensburg. Eastern Washington State College, Cheney The Evergreen State College, Olympia.. Fort Steilacoon Community College, Tacoma . . . . Green River Community College, Auburn Seattle Community College, Seattle Tacoma Community College, Tacoma University of Washington, Seattle Washington State University, Pullman Western Washington State College, Bellingham. West Virginia: Bluef ield State College, Bluef ield Concord College, Athens Fairmont State College, Fairmont G.lenville State College, Glenville Marshall University, Huntington Potomac State College, Key ser Shepherd College, Shepherdstown West Liberty State College, West Liberty West Virginia Institute of Technology West Virginia State College, Institute West Virginia University, Morgantown Wisconsin Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Unlvo Univers of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin of Wisconsin Eau Claire Green Bay La Crosse Madison. ......... Mi lwaukee Oshkosh Parkside, Kenosha. Platteville River Falls Stout Superior Whitewater Wyoming : University of Wyoming, Laramie. 1 8 16 -11 ( 2 ) 10 1 5 1 9 2 ( 3 ) 14 7 ( 2 ) 4 4 92 2 3 4 1 ( 3 ) 4 5 20 33 29 ( 2 ) ( 3 ) 10 3 ( 2 ) 3 ( 3 ) ( 3 ) ( 2 ) ( 3 ) 10 1 1 ( 2 ) 3 3 ; 7 19 ( 3 ) 2 l - Represents zero or rounds to zero. X Not applicable. Z Less than half the unit of measurement shown . 'Where the name of the unit of government does not reflect the city where the unit's administrative headquarters are located, this information appears after the unit name. 2 Unit of government does not directly employ police personnel. Police services are provided by contract with another government or with a private security firm. 3 No longer has power of arrest. APPENDIX 2: DEFINITIONS OF TERMS Following is a glossary of terms, concepts, and categories used in this report and comments concerning their limitations. The definitions are those applied in the field compilation of data for the 50 States, 334 largest counties, and 394 largest cities. These definitions were necessarily summarized for in- clusion in the survey questionnaires (see appendix 3) sent to governments in the mail portion of the survey. Government expenditure Expenditure is all amounts of money paid out (net of any correcting transactions) other than for retirement of debt (including interest), investment in securities, extensions of loans, or agency transactions. It includes only external cash payments and excludes any intragovernmental transfers and noncash transactions, such as the provision of meals or housing of em- ployees. It also includes any payments financed from borrowing, fund balances, intergovernmental revenue, and other current revenue. In several instances, two or more governments share the expense of maintaining a court or other criminal justice agency. In these cases, the allocable direct expenditure amount is reported for each government in the appropriate category. When a government pays pensions directly to retired employees from appropriated funds, such payments are included as expenditure of the government concerned. However, State and local govern- ment contributions to retirement systems and various other employee benefits are not included in expenditure data, since the majority of governments make lump-sum contributions to plans covering all government employees and cannot report for criminal justice employees separately. Neither in government's basic accounting records (from which criminal justice expendi- ture figures are drawn) nor in the records of their general- coverage employee benefit systems is there usually any breakdown of amounts contributed in terms of the various agencies or functions involved. Nor has an adequate procedure for calculating the proportion of such contributions allocable to criminal justice employees been developed because of the wide variation in the coverage of various plans, employee status requirements, benefit rates, etc. For those governments whose records reflect contributions of criminal justice employees separately, separate data were ob- tained. However, these data are subject to the same variation referred to above, and neither the amount nor the quality of the data reported would permit any attempt to estimate total contributions for all similar governments in a given State. Given the problems involved, no estimation procedure seems feasible. Such data as were reported separately were therefore excluded from total criminal justice expenditures to provide a consistent data base for administering the "variable pass-through" require- ment. Expenditure is divided into two major categories by character: 1. Direct expenditure is all expenditure except that classed as intergovernmental and is further divided into two principal object categories: a. Direct current , which includes salaries, wages, fees, and commissions, purchase of supplies, materials, and contractual services. b. Capital outlay , which includes expenditure for the three subcategories below: Construction: Production of fixed works and structures, and additions, replacements and major alterations thereto undertaken either on a contract basis by private contrac- tors or through force account construction by the em- ployees of the government. Included are the planning and designing of specific projects, the grading, landscaping, and other site improvement, and the provision of equip- ment and facilities that are integral parts of the structure. Equipment: Purchase and installation of apparatus, fur- nishings, office equipment, motor vehicles and the like having an expected life of more than 5 years. This in- cludes both additional equipment and replacements. Rentals for equipment, including rental payments that may be credited on the purchase price if purchase options are exercised, are classified as direct current expenditure. Equipment and facilities that are integral parts of con- structed or purchased structures are classified respectively under construction or purchase of land and existing structures. Purchase of land and existing structures : Purchase of these assets as such, purchase of rights-of-way, and title search and similar activities associated with purchase transactions. The other object categories— interest on general debt, assist- ance and subsidies, and insurance benefits— are not applied to specific functions because they are not ordinarily available on a functional basis from government financial reports. In the few instances where bonded or mortgaged general indebtedness is identified for specific purposes, the interest payments are aggregated with other interest expenditures which make it virtually impossible to arrive at reliable and consistent breakouts of such data over a long period of time. 2. Intergovernmental expenditure is payments from one government to another, including grants-in-aid, shared revenues, payments in lieu of taxes, and amounts for services performed by one government for another on a reimbursable or cost-sharing basis (for example, payments by one government to another for boarding prisoners). Total expenditure is direct and intergovernmental expenditure of a government or level of government for criminal justice activities. Total general expenditure is all expenditure of a government or level of government for all government functions , including criminal justice activities, but excluding utility system expendi- ture, liquor store expenditure, and insurance trust expenditure. Total general expenditure shown for the local level of govern- ment includes expenditure only of general purpose governments, and excludes expenditure of special districts and school districts. 359 360 APPENDIX 2-Continued Government employment Employees includes all persons paid for personal services performed, including all paid officials and persons in paid leave status, and excludes unpaid officials, persons on unpaid leave, pensioners and contractors. Under this definition are two classes: 1. Full-time employees , who are all persons employed during the pay period including October 15, 1975, on a full-time basis, including all full-time temporary or seasonal workers employed during this pay period, as well as persons having permanent status. 2. Part-time employees , who are persons employed during the pay period including October 15, 1975, on a basis other than full-time, and persons paid by more than one govern- ment. Derived from these two classes is: Full-time equivalent employees , which means the total number of employees, discounted by applying average full-time earning rates. This is calculated by dividing the total payroll (full-time plus part-time) by the full-time payroll and multiplying this by the number of full-time employees. Payroll is the gross payroll before deductions and includes salaries, wages, fees and commissions paid to employees as defined above for the month of October 1975. Governmental functions Police protection is the function of enforcing the law, preserving order, and apprehending those who violate the law, whether these activities are performed by a police department, a sheriffs department, or a special police force maintained by an agency whose prime responsibility is outside the criminal justice system, but which has a police force to perform these activities in its specialized area (geographic or functional). Included in this activity are regular police services, the maintenance of buildings used for police purposes, and such specialized police forces (including public and private contract forces) as airport police, free and toll highway police, free and toll bridge and tunnel police, housing police, maritime police, park police, transit and other utility system police, college and university campus police, and alcoholic beverage control agents. Coroners and medical examiners are also included. Excluded are vehicular inspection and licensing, traffic safety and engineering, fish and game wardens, fire marshals, and the like. The special police forces included in the data are only those which are part of general purpose governments. Security forces, building guards, school crossing guards, and meter maids without general arrest power were excluded. Those special police forces that are part of independent school districts or special districts are not included in the data, inasmuch as these districts are not general purpose governments. However, data for selected larger special police forces of these districts are displayed in appendix 1 , tables A and B. In addition, data for State and local government dependent colleges and universities are displayed in tables C and D. In most States, sheriffs' departments are multifunctional agencies providing police protection, judicial, and/or correctional services. In order to allocate expenditure and employment data to the proper activity, the data for sheriffs' departments are prorated using factors developed from a special survey of sheriffs' departments conducted in 1973, or more current estimates of manpower distribution if available. Short-term custody and detention have traditionally been considered part of the police protection function; and in editions prior to the 1969-70 report, were treated as such. However, beginning with the 1969-70 report, the concept was modified on the basis of information obtained from the 1970 National Jail Census. Data for institutions with authority to hold prisoners 48 hours or more are included in the "corrections" sector. Data for lockups or "tanks" holding prisoners less than 48 hours are included in the "police protection" sector. Judicial activities encompass all civil and criminal courts and activities associated with courts such as law libraries, grand juries, petit juries, and the like. Since the names of courts with similar functions and legal jurisdiction vary from State to State and even within States, data have been categorized by types of court rather than by court name. 1. Appellate courts include courts of last resort and intermediate appellate courts. These are courts having jurisdic- tion of appeal and review, with original jurisdiction conferred only in special cases. a. Court of last resort is the court of final appeal within the judicial structure of each State. It is called the "Court of Appeals" in the District of Columbia, Mary- land, and New York; the "Supreme Court of Appeals" in West Virginia; the "Supreme Judicial Court" in Maine and Massachusetts. In Texas and Oklahoma two courts of last resort are authorized— the "Court of Criminal Appeals" for criminal cases and a "Supreme Court" for civil cases. In every other State the court of last resort is titled the "Supreme Court." b. Intermediate appellate courts are those that are limited in their appellate jurisdiction by State law or at the discretion of the court of last resort. In 1 6 of the 25 States with a court of this type operating in fiscal year 1974-75 the name "court of appeals" is used. These States are: Arizona Michigan California Missouri Colorado New Mexico Florida North Carolina Georgia Ohio Kentucky Oklahoma Indiana Oregon Louisiana Washington In Illinois the title is "Appellate Court"; in Maryland, "Court of Special Appeals"; in Massachusetts, "Appeals Court"; in New Jersey, "Appellate Division of the Superior Court"; in New York 1 , "Appellate Division of the Supreme Court"; and in Texas, "Court of Civil Appeals." In Alabama the civil and criminal cases are heard on appeal by separate courts— a "Court of Civil Appeals" and a "Court of Criminal Appeals." In Ten- nessee the "Court of Appeals" hears only civil appeals; i separate "Court of Criminal Appeals" reviews criminal cases before review by the court of last resort. In Pennsylvania the "Commonwealth Court" reviews all 'There are also three appellate terms of the Supreme Court that have jurisdiction in specific cases that would otherwise be heard by the appellate division. APPENDIX 2-Continued 361 cases brought by or against the State government or its agencies; the "Superior Court" reviews all other appeals except those within the exclusive jurisdiction of the court of last resort. 2. Courts of general jurisdiction are trial courts having unlimited original jurisdiction in civil and/or criminal cases, the names of which vary considerably. The list below shows the title of the courts of general jurisdiction in each State. Several States are listed more than once because local situations led to the development of separate courts, either to hear cases involving different types of pleadings or to hear cases in particular local jurisdictions. In many States, statutes either require or permit local governments to supplement the salary of State-paid judges of general jurisdiction courts. These judges were counted as part-time employees at both the State and local levels when actually receiving a check from both governments. Circuit courts Alabama Mississippi Arkansas Missouri Florida Oregon Hawaii South Carolina Illinois South Dakota Indiana Tennessee 2 Kentucky Virginia Maryland West Virginia 2 Michigan 2 Wisconsin District courts Colorado Nevada Idaho New Mexico Iowa North Dakota Kansas Oklahoma Louisiana Texas Minnesota Utah Montana Wyoming Nebraska Superior courts Alaska Indiana 2 Arizona Maine California Massachusetts Connecticut New Hampshire Delaware New Jersey District of North Carolina Columbia Rhode Island Georgia Washington Chancery courts Arkansas Mississippi Delaware Tennessee County courts New Jersey Vermont New York Wisconsin In these States, the above-named courts are supplemented in somt counties and cities by general jurisdiction courts with varying names. Common pleas courts Missouri Ohio Pennsylvania Supreme court New York 3. Courts of limited jurisdiction are courts whose legal jurisdiction covers on.y a particular class of cases or cases where the amount in controversy is below a prescribed sum or is subject to specific exceptions. Included under this category are probate courts, juvenile courts and other courts of limited jurisdiction. Probate courts are also called orphans courts, surrogate's courts, or courts of ordinary. The subject jurisdiction varies from place to place, but generally includes estate settlement; probate and contest of wills; adoption; commitment of the insane; administration of the affairs of orphans, mental defectives and incompetents; guardianship of minors; appren- ticeship; receivership; change of name proceedings; and the administration of trusts. Juvenile courts are those that deal primarily with delinquent and neglected children regardless of the name of the court. In various places such courts ar? called juvenile courts, family courts, juvenile and domestic relations courts, domestic relations courts, or other similar names. The jurisdiction of these courts can include crimes committed by persons under legal age; juvenile status offenses; offenses against children; probation of minor delinquents; adoption, custody, or dis- position of minor and mentally incompetent children; child neglect or abandonment; child and wife support; and pater- nity. Other courts includes various other State and local courts with limited jurisdiction such as justices of the peace, district magistrates, justice courts, county courts of limited jurisdic- tion, municipal courts, city courts, etc. Also included are specialized courts such as tax courts, courts of claims, and courts having jurisdiction over more than one type of case (e.g., a court that handles both juvenile and probate cases). 4. Miscellaneous judicial i ncludes data on judicial activities that could not be reported under any of the above court categories, such as judicial councils and conferences, court administration offices (where identifiable), law libraries, jury commissions, and grand juries. Le gal services and prosecution includes the civil and criminal justice activities of the attorneys general, district attorneys, State's attorneys, and their variously named equivalents; corpora- tion counsels, solicitors, and legal departments with various names. It includes providing legal advice to the chief executives and subordinate departmental officers, representation of the government in lawsuits, and the prosecution of accused violators of criminal law. These activities are included whether performed by one office or several, because in some jurisdictions a single officer provides all legal services, whereas in others a prosecutor's office handles only criminal matters, and a separate attorney's office performs all civil legal services. The operations of various investigative agencies having full arrest powers and attached to offices of attorneys general, district attorneys, or their variously named equivalents are also included. 362 APPENDIX 2-Continued Public defense includes legal counsel and representation in either criminal or civil proceedings as provided by public defenders, and other government programs that pay the fees of court-appointed counsel. These include court-paid fees to individually retained counsel, fees paid by the court to court- appointed counsel, government contributions to private legal aid societies and bar association-sponsored programs, and the activi- ties of an established public defender office or program. Employment data are included only for public defenders' offices, because fee-paid counselors are not considered government employees, nor are counselors working for bar associations or legal aid societies. Corrections is that function of government involving the confinement and rehabilitation of adults and juveniles convicted of offenses against the law and the confinement of persons suspected of a crime and awaiting adjudication. Data for institutions with authority to hold prisoners 48 hours or more are included in this sector. Data for lockups or "tanks" holding prisoners less than 48 hours are included in "Police Protection." Correction includes the operation of prisons, reformatories, jails, houses of correction, and other institutions. It also includes institutions, facilities and programs exclusively for the confine- ment of the criminally insane or for the examination, evaluation, classification, and assignment of inmates and institutions and programs for the confinement, treatment, and rehabilitation of drug addicts and alcoholics if the institution or program is administered by a correction agency of the criminal justice system. Pardon boards and parole and probation agencies, including resettlement or halfway houses for those not in need of institutionalization, are included in the correction sector as a separate subcategory. 1. Correctional institutions are prisons, reformatories, jails, houses of correction, penitentiaries, correctional farms, work- houses, reception centers, diagnostic centers, industrial schools, training schools, detention centers, and a variety of other types of institutions for the confinement and correction of convicted adults or juveniles adjudicated delinquent or in need of supervision, and for the detention of those adults and juveniles accused of a crime and awaiting trial or hearing. When an institution maintains a prison industry or agricultural program, data on the cost of production or the value of prison labor used by agencies of the same government, if identifiable, are excluded (and classed as expenditure for the function using the products or services). Expenditure for the manufacture, production, sale, and distribution of goods produced for sale or use outside the government are included under this heading. a. Institutions for men includes identifiable expenditure and employment data for institutions exclusively for adult male offenders. b. Institutions for women includes identifiable expendi- ture and employment data for institutions exclusively for adult female offenders. Where there is no separate wo- men's prison, women offenders are either maintained in a prison complex that also houses other offenders or are boarded in private facilities or institutions in another State. No attempt was made to prorate data on institu- tions housing more than one type of inmate, but where females are boarded in private institutions or in another State, available expenditure data was tabulated. Employ- ment data were not tabulated because the personnel were employees of another government. New Hampshire boards its female offenders in the Massa- chusetts Correctional Institution (for Women). Montana operates a split system, housing some females at the Warm Springs State Hospital and contracting with Ne- braska for the rest. Vermont also operates a split system, housing some females and contracting with Massachusetts for the rest. North Dakota and Wyoming house all of their female offenders in the Nebraska Reformatory for Women and Idaho contracts with the State of Oregon for boarding its female offenders in the Oregon Women's Correctional Center. c. Institutions for juveniles are those institutions identi- fied by the 1974 Juvenile Detention and Correction Facility Census as housing primarily juveniles and in some States, "youthful offenders." These institutions include those under the control of a juvenile court, a probation department, or a youth authority or other similarly designated administrative body, as well as independently administered institutions. Also included are government payments to private agencies for the detention or treatment of delinquent juveniles. There is considerable variation from State to State in the legal definition of a juvenile, particularly in regard to the age at which a person is no longer considered a juvenile. Institutions for juveniles have been classified individually in accordance with the laws and age designations of their respective States. Institutions housing youths treated as adults by the courts or other authority were included in the institutions for men category. d. Other and combined institutions are those institutions holding a combination of inmates. Where expenditure or employment data for physically separate institutions for juveniles, adult females, and adult males were not separa- ble by institution or type of institution, the entire amounts were included under this category. 2. Correctional administration consists of data for the administration of the correctional system, including data on the centra] administrative office (for example, the department of corrections or a youth authority) and available data on the administration of individual correctional institutions. For some individual institutions, administration data were not segregable from data on the operation of the institution. 3. Probation, parole, and pardon includes data on pro- bation agencies, boards of parole, boards of pardon, and their variously named equivalents. Although probation agencies frequently function under the administration of the general jurisdiction court, the data are presented here after having been deducted from the judicial data, because of the correc- tional nature of the probation function. If the probation, parole, and pardon activities, or any of them individually, were part of the correctional administrative office, data were deducted and shown separately here, and the balance was shown under the correctional administration category. The overlapping character of the probation, parole, and pardon activities prevented the separate presentation of these data. 4. Miscellaneous correction includes expenditure and employment data that could not be classified under one of the other subcategories. Other criminal justice activities , shown in some tables, includes expenditure or employment data that are not elsewhere classi- fied, that cut across more than one category, or that are not allocable to separate categories; e.g., expenditure on a general curriculum in educational institutions, the operation of State criminal justice agencies, crime commissions, etc. Such data are included in the totals, where they are not shown separately. APPENDIX 3: SURVEY FORMS Form CJ-6 Survey of Expenditure and Employment for Civil and Criminal Justice Activities of Local Governments This form was mailed to the chief financial officer of the counties and municipalities surveyed. Form CJ-6D Survey of Expenditure and Employment for Civil and Criminal Justice Activities of Local Governments (Fee- Supported Offices) This form was mailed to the fee-supported offices of Sheriff and/or Clerk of Court in the States of Florida, Kentucky and Louisiana. Data for these fee-supported offices were incorporated in the appropriate criminal justice function data for the county where located. Form CJ-23 Survey of Expenditure and Employment for Selected Special Police Forces This form was mailed to special police forces serving colleges and universities, special districts, and independent school districts. Data for college and university forces were incorporated in the police protection data for the parent government and are displayed separately in appendix 1 , tables C and D. Data for special police forces serving independent school districts or special districts were not included in the regular police protection data, inasmuch as these districts are not general purpose governments. However, data for selected large police forces serving such districts are displayed in appendix 1 , tables A and B. Form CJ-25 Survey of Expenditure and Employment for Civil and Criminal Justice Activities of the Federal Government This form was mailed to the chief financial or administrative officer of individual Federal agencies, bureaus, and offices identified as part of the criminal justice system. A list of the units canvassed in the survey for this year is presented in tables 4 and 5. JJ.U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 19 7 7-240-869/3039 363 J 3 1,4 APPENDIX 3-Continued IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS FOR Part II - EXPENDITURE, PAGE 2 • If your government's fiscal year ends on December 31, enter annual expenditure for calendar year 1974 (even though calendar year 1975 data may be available). • If your government's fiscal year ends on June 30, enter annual expenditure for the period July 1, 1974-June 30, 1975. • If your government's fiscal year ends on a date other than December 31 or June 30, enter annual expenditure for your govern- ment's fiscal year which ended between July 1, 1974 and June 30, 1975. RETURN TO ^^ Bureau of the I ■0 > 1201 East Ten ^r Jeffersonville, Census Tenth Street Indiana 47130 FORM CJ-6 (10-6-76) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS SURVEY OF EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT FOR CIVIL AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACTIVITIES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS In correspondence pertaining to this report, please refer to the identification number above your address (Please correct any error in name and address including ZIP code) Data supplied by Name Official address (Number and street, city, State, ZIP code) Title Telephone Area code Number Extension Dear Friend: On behalf of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, the Bureau of the Census annually collects public expenditure and employment data for six criminal justice functions: police protection, judicial, legal services and prosecution, indigent defense, corrections, and other criminal justice. Your cooperation in completing this year's questionnaire will be appreciated. The data collected in this voluntary survey are utilized by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration in implementing and administering the planning and action grant programs of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 as amended. The data are published annually in a report entitled Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System. It would be most helpful if we could receive your reply within 3 weeks. A preaddressed envelope is enclosed for your convenience. If you have any problems in filling out this questionnaire, you may call collect for assistance on area code (301) 763-7825 or (301) 763-2843. Sincerely, \MutfPdaAs^ VINCENT P. BARABBA Director Bureau of the Census Enclosures Please mark (X) the box if you would like to receive a free copy of the current report Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System ♦ □ APPENDIX 3-Continued 365 — i zZ. ^> *» 2 ' l ddd CD O w CT1 is r~ ro ■— ' .3 3 cd n o> *J *•— c ■ X — CO y S£ cu 3 — -£ s2 1 c= CD E J30 > CD CD CD < C O 4> £ O 2 co"5 c El c 2 x LUCE S3 ZH 0<5 UJ|_ 0:0- o ~ hii CO CO 1.2 > o a. m o _ ** to to c CO o co •po b 4> ._ E co 0) >,-£= > zz to c EiS 3 c c: o CO O s*p O *~ ^H ♦- p 41 3 C _ >> = rf — S — i_ o a. £ a, n C.JS Q_ O s- o *— ' >■ A S O _J QO' - ' o cc >- *= CD if . c_> to "to -a to CD CD 0. oO zz cz t= o -o CD o -a >. CD F CO «* >.-3 O- -I_ fe CO o _! CD o z UJ y-g ^ >. Q- >- i - _C3 t= o fn * >.£ — TO >_ O CcC CO >* CO — o to c .ct. rt o — o s « CO i_ CO CO >, .O O ' — 5 x o = co ■ -o o _ O C CO ° .C TO — CO CO O : — UJ £ J=ScO op S; co co; — s;_ > ,_ co > to = 41 <£ 01 CO Ei2r o — o Q CO 3 Q.-C CO C T3 m o . 00 TO TO C. CO ££"=£.-£ co ™ o>" -o: = « 2--S ™ § ° CO ~ O C co ■£ _■<- J2UJ „ O = ■S|T&: g.3S! ,i-.«sss >- . "a c o 0- M 3 T>j; = 3 X (J 0) to TO ,„ lil CO — "O u>a>: °UJ > — *-" 'Z »_ 0) <" ro co -a; co ra !=T3 CO ._ I «S = ■£ <" TO 1 CO — 3 — 8 M ^ t; t; _ tt ♦; co 3 o o c o co c —1 O O TO O 00 33 5 *_ — M.t: o. r- ^OE U TO - y S2 co o a. - W aj — q; Jj >,co — B* - 41 41 ♦- ■t E£ to a ° o^ S. < >. o W «C C «I 2 £ «> to E O ° >■ co ~ 0£ oo a> - to w c'2~ ■j o ■*" — a> < CO CO TO C <5 c?o W " co cS -1 CL E TO TO OO »;-o s CO CO CO 2'5 ra — a. 3 TO Q£ I §»>, Ul <-> TO c CO o > o Ul -o Q-oj ••-'to o" ui S.*- = Q ,„ co E .c3§^ C 41.- O Ul 0)5 - O "O ■— — 5-^ et Z c ° S to . — *- ■=°I5'>. . *- an— ,„' ro -= c £ E< cGab-Sg. _T3 CO O TO a, O ■= 3 -C C C o i2 co ~ ■_ J£ Q.— oo g O C0-3T rr jz — a> tu i co -cr 5 o-S Z ^ -= to"3 = >, - *- to -= ™ 53 w I ™ So o£ 2 «X?3">3- '"O CO CO O c: co— to Si m O 0) °_ t? 0). r; -^ ._ ra o - ^2 °E C d Q.J3 2^ 0£ CO CO O c: u • 41 5 c-o x CJ "O — , TO TO TO UJ TO — CO f.§g co To II 'o OgS" (5 I "^ & . . CO o to 3«.g -^ 0) 41 O _l -ri oo to < co ro CO •m CO OO to S s c oi 1>1 £ JGG APPENDIX 3-Continued CD c_> o ^ CD £ 5. S 'P « o > O O0 C/3 a> > I/) CO O. O "c5 — i "S3 <; O S3 > - CU cr a. 6J to 3 s I QJ 75 > CD a> ' DO no e CT3 CD E S3 o CD £ s ■— m <^ £ <-> ^ -* 53 c ■= ^ n> y o 5 > o t S r— U-i =S O DDDDD o 0.1 a E S S H- UJ =£ DDDDD •■ N CI 4 10 c a. S 5- o a; o S flj TO 3 - SeT I £ *"T3 O C C 3 E TO - O c Si- < 5 5 O o E = co - o *" E o"2 M >, co ro co >- c > a. o cu co 00 o o co" 5 ° = S 2 x: j- co ,u .if °.<2 2~ 5 g S o ™"E ^ c -o 2 ° co >, 2 toco ™ ri a. o >. — j- o co to -t- .- >> ^ £ 5 o ° _ "co <|gf |° 1 a>= J] 2 co T3 o a. c UJ = Q- o a: £ _; „,-'~ = tO°=2i§ t <" cu ™- ™ Q ~ « S;u 3 t >* un M Z co ■" cu -C J£ S ■- C O 3 12 Z o Ec O-co K - tr co q. > CO o — *- c O — CO 0) cj ni > ■n cu "> CO CT c c 10 f~ 1/1 &- ' > a. CIJ Q. CL - o on a) 4_, o TO c 0.. n o b D c_ >^ Q.JD o ^ 3 CO < > o j ■; o >,-a o 0) X n, •a CO a ~ ^i o CJ - t O u u -i O n ' n> O TJ TO ?' S ^ co P - CO "O >. ... TO .0 0- i_ 1^ o CO or « £? s^ C.I ,1) ■:- EM CO 3 . CO c ai E o-o = 0. > •1- = 3 . Q. ""if 3 >. o. c o to£2. TO C °co-S °£ CO employed October 1 ed during T3 O •-< is o E >, -O a 2-d ° c- O o co -o cu 2? 3 £= 5— CO H o 0. g co JZ 5 1 j=-5 1 e r: CU C 5 TO <_> '" 1= c: jz n/i - Sw in E 5 S° o co cu a to ? TO in °- o P O^ TO 5*°- *- Q) an a. CLI= O Q. QJ E o a- fl> fc £ I 1 §° i to a- c Si: E~ :-" s _1 c V «!# c £ CM £^^ 0. -a a* |c?> « E TO >> = o — 8, a OTO^^-g c£"£ > I « c - « 3 o EFITJ deral nutua your Ex loyee "' to t/1 d> S^O^EE c o f. ... co cu _ s 2 • £ co co oa >, cu Q.< = i3„-c3 o !r o. o §iiisi _| ~ o E = fc 0l .5 <-> CU 2 (O z 5 KlL > ..« o w O ■£ tS i2 to _l X — "^ *■ c — m cu < !s to 2iT s ESs? -Q. 3 S _o to o E=-a=4= >. CU C 3 V> Z C 3 ° z «J CU »- "O _ gs|.i g I — 00 CO TO >. — m c •- ss ■ - to — O _ = — 3 H 3 " pTO > 5S ■— — O — T3 Oi _ o-o c °1 = « -'" O co - — o • . O C CO *-- to C ^. £ ffi : ~ ^. E ?-^3Js-=2 o co g o u f» 3 S Z Q. . o: E E -T3 "• o co to o|°-StoE O < Q. Q..E E CO >. CO »- Q. o E a. cu cu . — . a: cu 1 1 < - s g. u a; = £' ^: g'S "a -o ^ ,. w-S o Q ^ SJtjS- . = « ra -5? ^ o UJ cu to 5rr > 9. £ = to" UJ *- !r; a t TO *■ curj cu ™ co 1 c «- £ ° g I C "c^ S .2 2 o ^ uj ^-t; s •— o — o q. cu < i: .:'- Ofl-C to CO C O CO "O SS 2.- = 5 o " g-o"5.~ ■= o E a, Z CU CO O TO C 3 q— t-t ° ai S. CU TOQ. S3 M„ r i: c (n 2-o = .£ °-g co-o 10 to" a — to" "■ M.2 2 ™ g£ TO — J » ° 0) > Q. >_ -D to C > aa3 C » ■O 3 — CO J2 CO -C .*< x > .2 CO 2 • TO — »~ to — O Q. .2 TO to g~ E CO -c p g »-• cu to Cf E g c _ ^. 3^: o g o o Q. <-> E "- CO cu cu c: *, ^ '- ^3.P oicio o .- (.' Q £ £ to g°" E h >N-^ 0 o o -J „." "D T3 S <"^ TO-? ^'i = °" = Jj* TO c >_ E Q. to ._ (O CO US'" 0«m O CU .= "O ^•.2 tojS _- z=S525 K J o 5 <1) ' O 2 g :to £ o , 5 M ^ CO CJ ^ M co"oigg S I 3 « ^_._ ™Z •- > ^- TO -c= is ■*-* O" a> a, o ■■ E ° o ■+- CD »- 00 03 _£ O Q- « i CO CD -o <" B. ™ ca_£? 1.2 TO ,_ a d ro -a o 5 , . a. CD €/) C^- 2» • (^ B cu r-~ O CJ co . (J SZ o^ o e 3 3 3 — 1 O o „. >> = «o ro o c co 5 c= e V) 1 c * >- 2: s: DDD o ra co co to cu c/> en r — cu 2 n * id « >»2 co m - ' ' o >- CO I . CD 5 I DDD LlJ to o _o ■ O- Sj Q oO Z •a: CD i_> o t— 5^2 9E CO c_> UJ Q. C= s l_> >- eg " o ^j _c &.2 — - TO -- CD °- LU o (/) UJ (CO >-«/» £*52 oP co* 5 » o £ LU . Q. f£ — 0_ CU E CU 3 ~ . O O J3 < S ° -S - — 3 » . . O << <2 to 0S< °l ,„ co « c O cu i - E E 0) £ 0_ o > O DO *- CD ^ •- TO O <= 5 ~ _• CO t- X O CU o = nj <2 — o cu cu g-a g&~ g"c >, = ■-• u ^ TO — ^ «r o CL£; cu E >-«;.y"o o (O C .c -^ -— - > r-i 0- ° ' amount y period ncluded 15, 1975 2 c 0) o — co — ,_ o °-sz cu 6 o ja o la -5 E JLS1: _ > X c — cu o o_ to co CO E: cu .- a> - I— cu cu Lu= 2 I— >>-^ a. T3 T3 ro O o ■a c 03 ■ — O a _ 3 — ^ 01 * OJ T3 13 o — ro 8§ s .g •*- c (rt u >..2 g-o 1 -o SH E 1 rsSo MaS a i • O Q. : ^0)O

^ go d a^tt:t!.2 2 cu -^ 8-^ 3 TB-S8-J a) - 5 — i- W 0) 0)^ = S=£ ™ o c 0> 1§.I:1 >»:s ^ e ■p = 0-5 OS «™ \_ to" CO 2 gS M 3 2? g °^ O o „ £ 5 ♦; c c L ,™o« c|l2 *-■ -S o ra <2 ° jc»-.E-d o — cu CO c 3 _cu ; y c=o c I »- o ^_ cu :^2°-| i 0-0 ^o 370 APPENDIX 3-Continued CD o cr (/-I OZ(J3 > > C/l •^-^ 1 1 O ZTt cn ra CO O) o °" E u u i CJJ 'ZZ c "cr: s <1) <1) (V) llJ .zi. E= E -Q C 3 r- QJ cr CD cn c > c > t j a.] c > O o o CO CD i j < J -O "O cn co CO o ~o -^ o_ o cn >-, cn CD CD cn CL ^ CD o E a; O n. CD E CD j= CJ F ^ — V CZL o> -a br =3 - Z3 o cr C_) oo u L_i- o_ CD CD ™ "_T "^ "O • CO CO TO — o c o rs ^— » ;00 £ ^ Q> D : E o -o ! <^J O ^ m *- cd — to co o co ^-> _^ -^ cd E "i-o 5*- S £> 2 ° "-"■* =3 . CD SE E ° c= cr LU a, ca ^ O- CD O O 1 E Z3 o ca X LU _1 _cc — CZ cn cn bJ _ «* £T. a: ,- CZ (- CO -^ ZD >- O CD z co S V- o o CC C_J CD ,_ E o 1 r— CO vr «•> — n O -cr LU »— CO CO •>— jL w «=c cd U I— > o o 0_ <-> • ca Q- • oo^; 1- ▲ C CO ^ E =, ro > > -^ -^ co 'Z ^ c > c E tj =*< ° ~ — ro », t= CO cn 2 f= CD — — =" CD Q.T3 o CO — E CD > Oo f= CU3- co «J a a. U- 2 ra w CD C10 ' cS -Q CO ^ >_ E ^ : ro £5 o — ., ) S 2 "2-p-g >5u c «^J= oo CO - £ CD > o c: -»- ~ jr o — ca "*r ** = _ d. ^ ° LU a> Q- C3 co-.E o co „, =J =^ = co 5 cd •*- >, iz ra oo : — _o oo E ]«a:oo: CD ^ O 2. ■" > *" PL _ I Cd "cc ° > q, C O i s E ~ w I i— CO "*^ *— CD C_> ZZ > c= *; CD -w = ! CD qj ^ CD 00 ' r— ■— °0 ^ * • § = - 5 « > ^3 E c: j ^ co _ cj : o j," (5 oo ' =^^ o S3 ro : — — ' ° -o — > ro *- — io <=> : ■ • co J2 c° co '-JiijfE - <=-2 •= -r > e 2 ° — '« t a — o „, a co • ao E^c -^ CT-> ^ ' ' "O Z3 '^^ «_ LO T3 ■— O CO oo CO i— co oo — 1X3 CO cr -- o. ' o co cr co sz: -3 i ' O cn ^ LO i- ^ o co ?0 -«— O CO 03 Z3 CD "O — Li ^3 1. UJ o a a. ? o^r) c.E to E 2 ° -~ TO CD .^ -O E "C oo oo ^— = o ™ crl cn CO "?° cn cd _ r> cn 3 CO o cr o iC CD TZ CD -•rc: o °-cz _EZ ' - Q0 cd cr ■ ~ "C3 LU °-o o ^^ Q_ CO E TZ> <— > CO E"° CD CO s as de the pre d basis 3 O CO sons id p your 5 CO ,E ° O 2 3 3 CD to" g = cn CD CO c; O CD CD l_> _C3 Z u ._ CO o. _.£ 00 _^ CI o O to _CT ^ CD ° E ■=** CD — CD o cr CD CD co E <— >, o cn o - S - CO -j-, CO CO co — CO ^ OO Q_ -cr 3 CO CO iplo it fr ad j l E Z= 2 o 2 g 'rr^- >- •a: ^ co - jr j- — u ° o co „T3 ^ cn ■=l-_CO CO 53 2 to co cz>--cr — cr — cr ■*— ^ O « Z3 I ,_ CZ q. CO P c-, E JE — "q. > E 3 CO X Q. — — ro = LO <-> CO ^ 75 « " X o ooLU *t o - ^ °- E > E E co i.i O CD 2 cru co cz> to cr co «-< Of— , O CO CJ- Z3 "CZ1 ^. E E DO 1 ^ .2 E cz a> cr — ■— a> E — CD a> «, E ro era. ■"° «co- V to"? O. co "t^ co — c i*s ™ co 2 2 ._ -TZJ ^ CO — cz. o • — ' CO *— ,«- CD = i2 5 on ^ c^- ro S Si CD °f ^ ■ — ra -o ra rr cr ~ ._ Z3 ■•— -a -^ Q> cz — CD i-i CD *— E !- ™ ■a 0J ^z; — >^ rr ~n> a; ro 03 O. ZD i— CJ - 03 fcr ^— T3 GO TO U_j < » CI 2T Q_ CD B/J O on cu r-> E > or O CD ^£ 2 ca. ■ — = CZ CD 00 — ._ (/I c: o APPENDIX 3-Continued 371 COMMENTS FORM CJ-6D (10-8-75) Page 3 372 APPENDIX 3-Continued Data supplied by Name FORM CJ-23 (10.24-75) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS SURVEY OF EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT FOR SELECTED SPECIAL POLICE FORCES In correspondence pertaining to this report, please refer to the identification number above your address Title Official address (Number and street, city, State, ZIP code) Telephone (Please correct any error in name and address including ZIP code) Area code Number Extension RETURN TO 2 Bureau of the Census ATTN: Governments Division Washington, D.C. 20233 Dear Friend: On behalf of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, the Bureau of the Census annually collects expenditure and employment data for Special Police Forces serving colleges, universities, independent school districts, and special districts. Your cooperation in completing this year's questionnaire will be appreciated. The data collected in this voluntary survey are used by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration in implementing and administering the planing and action grant programs of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 as amended. They are published annually in a report entitled Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System. It would be most helpful if we could receive your reply within 3 weeks. A preaddressed envelope is enclosed for your convenience. If you have any problems in filling out this questionnaire, you may call collect for assistance on area code (301 ) 763—7825 or (301 ) 763-2843. Sincerely, fAMuM VINCENT P. BARABBA Director Bureau of the Census Enclosures NOTE: Please mark (X) the box if you would like to receive a free copy of tha current report Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System — — -□ APPENDIX 3-Continued 373 1 Part I - SWORN POLICE OFFICERS Does your unit (as described in the address box on the front of the questionnaire) employ either directly or by contract a special police force, i.e., a group of sworn law enforcement officers with general power to arrest? | | Yes — Please complete the questions below | | No — Please disregard the remainder of this questionnaire and return in preaddressed envelope Enter here the number of full-time and part-time sworn police officers (i.e., having general power to arrest) in your special police force unit 1. Officers employed directly by your unit ^— — — — — — — 2. Contract officers If applicable, enter here the name of the firm or police agency with whom you contract for police services . . . FULL-TIME (a) PART-TIME (b) If you contract exclusively for police services and have no officers of your own, fill out only parts III and IV below. If you employ sworn police officers directly, fill out parts II, III, and IV below. Part II - EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLL A. For your special police force unit, enter employment and payroll for the one pay period which included October 15, 1975. Include sworn police officers, security patrols, guards, clerical and communi- cations, personnel, and other support personnel who are employees of the special police force. Do NOT report ANNUAL payroll data. FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES Number of employees (a) Payroll amount (one pay period which included October 15, 1975) (Omit cents) (b) PART-TIME EMPLOYEES Number of employees (O Payroll amount (one pay period which included October 15, 1975) (Omit cents) (d) B. Mark the pay period interval which applies to the payrolls reported above. (Mark (X) one box in each column) 1 □ Monthly 2 □ Twice a month (24 pay periods per year) 3 □ Every 2 weeks (26 pay periods per year) • □ Weekly 5 □ Other - Specifyi 1 □ Monthly 2 □ Twice a month (24 pay periods per year) 3 \~\ Every 2 weeks (26 pay periods per year] 4 □ Weekly 5 □ Other - Specify/ CENSUS USE ONLY Part III - EXPENDITURE Enter the annual expenditure for your special police force unit for your fiscal year ending between July I, I 974 and June 30, I 975. Your fiscal year was □ July I, 1974-June 30, 1975 □ January I —December 31 , 1974 □ Other Specify CURRENT OPERATION CAPITAL OUTLAY INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE GOVERNMENT CONTRIBUTIONS FOR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS Annual salaries and all operating expenses (Exclude employer contri- butions for employee benefits (enter in col. (e).) (a) Construction, equipment, and land (b) Payments to local governments (c) Payments to the State government (d) FICA, PERS, insurance, workmen's comp., etc. (Exclude employee contributions.) (e) Part IV - REVENUE DIRECT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ' Enter all revenue your unit received for police activities direct from the Federal Government (not passed through any State agency) in your fiscal year ending between July I, 1974 and June 30, 1975 FORM CJ-23 (10-24-751 Page 2 374 APPENDIX 3-Continued DEFINITIONS ► Part I - SWORN POLICE OFFICERS SPECIAL POLICE FORCE - A group of law enforcement officers other than the regular police which services a special area or jurisdiction, e.g., campus police, park police, transit police, harbor police, airport police. Though a special police force usually cooperates fully with the regular local police force, it is administratively independent. ^ Part II - EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLL A. EMPLOYEES - All persons in your special police force unit (officers and employees) paid for personal services performed, including all officials, salary workers, and other persons in paid leave status in your unit. Exclude unpaid officials, persons on unpaid leave, pensioners, contractors and their employees; and persons paid entirely by another government for services performed for your unit. FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES (Part II, column a) - Persons employed during the one pay period which included October 15, 1975, on a full-time basis. Include all full-time temporary or seasonal workers employed during this pay period. PART-TIME EMPLOYEES (Part II, column c) - Persons employed during the one pay period which included October 15, 1975, on a part-time basis. PAYROLL (Part II, columns b and d) — Gross payroll before deductions including salaries, wages, fees, or commissions earned during the one pay period which included October 15, 1975, by employees as defined above. If some employees are paid on a basis different from the predominant pay period, please include amounts for them on an adjusted basis. B. Report the pay period interval for which all or most of the full-time (or part-time) employees are paid. $ Part III -EXPENDITURE CURRENT OPERATION (Part III, column a) - Annual salaries and payroll of your unit's officers and employees and the purchase of supplies, materials, and contractual services with individuals and firms in the private sector. Exclude all capital outlay (see below), debt retirement, securities investment, loan extension, within-government transactions and employer contributions to employee benefits (see below). CAPITAL OUTLAY (Part III, column b) - Direct expenditure for contract or force account construction of buildings and other improvements, and for the purchase of equipment, land, and existing structures. INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURE - All money paid to other governments as fiscal aid, or payment for services rendered, or for contracts or compacts with another government (e.g., purchase of police services). Exclude money paid to another government for the purchase of commodities, property, utility services, any taxes imposed and paid as such, and contributions for social insurance. PAYMENTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS (Part III, column c) - Payments to a county, city, town, special district, school district, or any of their departments or agencies. PAYMENTS TO THE STATE GOVERNMENT (Part III. column d) - Payments to the State government or any of its department or agencies. GOVERNMENT CONTRIBUTIONS FOR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (Part III. column e) - Any employer contributions, separable for your unit, to the Federal Social Security program, State and local retirement systems, commercial or mutual life insurance plans, workmen's compen- sation funds; and premiums paid by your parent government for health, hospital, disability, and other insurance programs. Exclude payments made directly to individuals and contributions made by employees to any of the above programs. ^ Part IV - REVENUE DIRECT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT Enter only the revenue received directly from the Federal Government. Do not enter amounts passed from the Federal Government through the State or its departments or agencies to your unit. Page 3 APPENDIX 3-Continued 375 This report has been cleared in accordance with FPMR 101-11.11 and assigned interagency report control number 1078-DOC-AN. FORM CJ-25 (9-17-75) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS Data supplied by SURVEY OF EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT FOR CIVIL AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACTIVITIES OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT Name Title Official address (Number and street, city, State, ZIP code) Telephone (Please correct any error in name and address including ZIP code) Area code Number Extension RETURN TO Bureau of the Census ATTN: Governments Division Washington, D.C. 20233 Dear Sir: On behalf of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, the Bureau of the Census annually collects public expenditure and employment data for civil and criminal justice activities from agencies of the Federal Government and from State and local governments. Your cooperation in completing this year's questionnaire will be appreciated. The data collected in this voluntary survey are used by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration in implementing and administering the provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 as amended. Federal data are used particularly for intergovernmental comparisons and to meet the needs of criminal justice planners at all levels of government. The data are published annually in a report entitled Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System. It would be most helpful if we could receive your reply within 3 weeks. A pre- addressed envelope is enclosed for your convenience. The information you enter should be only for the bureau, agency, or office capitalized in the address block above. If you have any problems in filling out this questionnaire, please call for assistance on 763-7825 or 763-2843. Sincerely, VINCENT P. BARABBA Director Bureau of the Census Enclosure 376 APPENDIX 3-Continued ► Part 1 - EXPENDITURE* (FOR FISCAL YEAR 1975; JULY 1, 1974 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1975) • NOTE - If unable to show actual cash disbursement, please show total obligations incurred minus the sum of unpaid accounts payable and undelivered orders. 1. What was your total CASH disbursement for CURRENT OPERATIONS; i.e., annual salaries, wages, and expenses of officers and employees; purchase of supplies and materials; and contractual services with other Federal agencies or private organizations? (Do not include government contributions to employee benefits — see item 5 below for further details.) $ 2. What was your total CASH disbursement for CAPITAL OUTLAY; i.e., direct expenditure FROM YOUR OWN BUDGET for acquisition of land, construction, renovation and repairs of buildings and facilities^ and purchase of equipment? $ 3. What was your total INTERGOVERNMENTAL CASH disbursement to all STATE GOVERNMENTS for fiscal aid (e.g., grants, including amounts which were "passed through" State governments to local governments) or for services rendered? $ 4. What was your total INTERGOVERNMENTAL CASH disbursement to all LOCAL GOVERNMENTS for fiscal aid (e.g., grants) or for services rendered, made DIRECTLY to local governments and NOT "passed through" State governments or their departments or agencies? $ 5. What was your total CONTRIBUTION FOR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS; i.e., payments made to the Federal Social Security program, Federal retirement systems, commercial or mutual life insurance plans, or premiums paid for accident and health, hospital and other insurance programs? (Do not include payments made directly to individuals and contributions made by employees for any of the above programs.) $ ► Part II - EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLL* (FOR THE ONE PAY PERIOD WHICH INCLUDED OCTOBER 15, 1975 - NOT ANNUAL DATA) • NOTE - Please report all employees; executives, managers, operatives, and support personnel. Temporary employees should be reported as full- or part-time on the basis of number of hours worked 1. How many FULL-TIME (40 hours or more a week) employees did you have on your payroll during the ONE PAY PERIOD WHICH INCLUDED OCTOBER 15, 1975? Full-time employees 2. What was the total payroll amount for all FULL-TIME employees noted in item 1 for the ONE PAY PERIOD WHICH INCLUDED OCTOBER 15, 1975? $ 3. What is the pay period interval which applies to the payroll reported in item 2? 1 Q Monthly 2 Q Twice a month 3 Q Every 2 weeks a. [^Weekly s | ] Other - Specify CENSUS USE ONLY 4. How many PART-TIME (less than 40 hours a week) employees did you have on your payroll during the ONE PAY PERIOD WHICH INCLUDED OCTOBER 15, 1975? Part-time employees 5. What was the total payroll amount for all PART-TIME employees noted in item 4 for the ONE PAY PERIOD WHICH INCLUDED OCTOBER 15, 1975? $ 6. What is the pay period interval which applies to the payroll reported in item 5? 1 Q Monthly 2 Q Twice a month 3 Q Every 1 weeks 4 Q Weekly 5 [H Other - Specify CENSUS USE ONLY Comments FORM CJ-25 (9-17-75) Page 2 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION USER EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System, 1975 Dear Reader: We have provided an evaluation form below for whatever opinions you wish to express about this report. Please cut out both pages, staple them together on one corner, and fold so that the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration address appears on the outside. After folding, use tape to seal closed. No postage stamp is necessary. Thank you for your help. 1. For what purpose did you use this report on Expenditure and Employment Data for the Criminal Justice System, 1975? 2. For that purpose, the report - □ Met most of my needs □ Met some of my needs □ Met none of my needs 3. What particular types of data in the report did you use: 4. If the report did not meet your needs, what changes would increase its usefulness to you : . 5. What additional types of data, if any, would you like to see collected regarding public employment and expenditure for criminal justice purposes? 6„ Which parts of the report, if any, were difficult to understand or use 7 How could they be improved? 7. Would a different format have been more useful to you? If yes, please suggest a more useful organization of the material 8. Can you point out specific parts of the text or table notes that are not clear or additional terms that need to be defined? 9„ In what capacity did you use this report? □ Researcher | 1 Educator □ Student □ Criminal justice agency employee [~1 Government employee other than criminal justice - Specify □ Other - Specify Page 2 10. If you used this report as a governmental employee, please indicate the level of government. □ Federal □ City □ State □Other - Specify^ □ County 11. If you used this report as a criminal justice agency employee, please indicate the sector in which you work. | | Law enforcement (police) □ Corrections | | Legal services and prosecution Q Parole | | Public or private defense services □ Criminal justice planning agency | | Courts or court administration □ Other criminal justice agency - Specify type^ □ Probation 12. If you used this report as a criminal justice employee, please indicate the type of position you hold. Mark all that apply I | Agency or institution administrator | | General program planner/evaluator/analyst | | Operations or management planner/evaluator/analyst | | Budget planner/evaluator/anaiyst | | Program or project manager | | Statistician □ Other - Specify-^ 13. Additional comments // your comments require an answer, please enter your name and mailing address. Name Number and street City State ZIP code Page 3 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Law Enforcement Assistance Administration Washington, D.C. 20531 POSTAGE AND FEES PAID U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE JUS-436 Director, Statistics Division National Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service Law Enforcement Assistance Administration U.S. Department of Justice Washington, D. C. 20531 \ ...A A I L n U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION Washington, D.C. 20531 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 PENN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES ADQDDTDTblSbD POST U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE JUS-436 SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE BOOK 001 GSS82 QCRA Fol 001180 PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY DOCUMENTS SECTION UNIVERSITY PARK PA 16802