Join the Resolution

The Maryland ADR Commission’s Practical Action Plan

The Honorable Robert M. Bell Chief Judge, Maryland Court of Appeals Chair, ADR Commission • December 1999 To get involved:

• Call the ADR Commission at 410-321-2398. • Visit our website at www.courts.state.md.us/adr.html and/or e-mail us at [email protected] • Write to us at Maryland ADR Commission 113 Towsontown Blvd., Suite C, Towson, MD 21286-5352 or send comments by fax to 410-321-2399. • Identify other individuals or groups around the state that might be interested and help us reach them. Join the Resolution

The Maryland ADR Commission’s Practical Action Plan

The Honorable Robert M. Bell

Chief Judge, Maryland Court of Appeals

Chair, ADR Commission

December 1999 Dear Fellow Marylanders: On behalf of the Maryland Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Com- mission, I am pleased to present this Practical Action Plan. This docu- ment reflects over a year and a half of work by hundreds of individuals who served as members of the ADR Commission, its six working com- mittees, its four regional advisory boards and its national advisory board. Together, we are committed to turning our “culture of conflict” into a “culture of conflict resolution” as we progress into the new millennium. As Chief Judge of the Maryland Court of Appeals and as chair of the ADR Commnis- sion, I recognize that it is essential for the court to take the lead in promoting the use of ADR where appropriate. As you will read within, the ADR Commission was formed and operates under the court’s leadership, but its scope is not limited to improving the courts and increasing litigant satisfaction. While these are important Commission goals, this Action Plan further outlines a broad and sensible strategy to help improve the way we, as a society, manage conflict. With this in mind, the ADR Commission is working to advance the use of mediation and other ADR processes in schools, neighborhoods, busi- nesses, government agencies and other areas, which will help prevent disputes from reaching a stage at which court intervention is needed. Based on extensive outreach and discussion, we have reached a statewide consensus in favor of moving forward on each action outlined in this Plan. Recognizing the need to continue our momentum, the Commission is pulling together diverse groups to “Join the Resolution” and help implement this Action Pan across the state. If you would like to get involved, I encourage you to call Rachel Wohl, Executive Director of the ADR Com- mission, at (410) 321-2398. Very truly yours,

Robert M. Bell Chief Judge Maryland Court of Appeals Contents

Executive Summary ...... 1 Background—Overview ...... 4 Public Awareness and Targeted Education ...... 10 School Programs and Educational Advancements ...... 18 Definitions and Dispute Screening ...... 23 ADR Practitioners and Trainers ...... 27 Community Mediation ...... 34 District Court ...... 40 Circuit Courts ...... 44 Office of Administrative Hearings ...... 50 State and Local Government ...... 52 Criminal and Juvenile Justice ...... 58 Business Applications ...... 63 Maryland State Dispute Resolution Office ...... 66 Action Plan at a Glance ...... 69 Commission Members ...... 70 Staff and Acknowledgements ...... 72 National Advisory Board ...... 73 Committee Members ...... 74

Executive Summary

CommunicationFamily breakdowns. tensions Divorce. Workplace disputes. School violence. GovernmentNeighborhood disputes. Bankruptcy.red tape hese are just a few sources Responding to the need for more and bet- of conflict in our soci- ter ways to handle conflict situations, a ety—we experience many field of dispute resolution methods has de- more on a daily basis. veloped under the umbrella term “alterna- Some can be ignored, oth- tive dispute resolution” or “ADR.” This ers fester and grow, and a field is made up of a number of different few explode into violence. processes including mediation, arbitration, TFortunately, this is only a part of the pic- settlement conferencing, and consensus ture. There are, and traditionally have been, building, which help people resolve dis- productive and dignified ways of managing putes peacefully and often in a manner conflict, both within and outside of our le- that improves relationships and builds so- gal system. Indeed, today there is reason to cial skills. have a sense of “cautious optimism” when it These dispute resolution techniques are comes to conflict resolution. Innovative growing because they work. When schools ways of resolving disputes that have existed start teaching conflict resolution and cre- for years but have ate peer mediation not been widely Dispute resolution programs, suspen- used, are quietly sions decrease and and steadily on the techniques are growing teachers spend less rise. Victims of mi- because they work. classroom time nor crimes are sit- dealing with dis- ting down with mediators and offenders to ruption. When neighbors bring their dis- work out restitution agreements. Govern- putes to mediation, they develop creative ment agencies are inviting business, con- agreements that last and often lead to sumer and environmental groups to the friendship. When business disputes settle table to help set policies and draft new regu- without prolonged legal battles, working lations. Divorcing parents are brought to- relationships remain intact. When families gether to negotiate child custody and visita- are in crisis, mediators help reestablish tion arrangements that address the needs of communication and rebuild relationships. M A R Y L N D C O I S each parent and each child. These effective ways of resolving conflict 1 can save time, money and relationships, After recruiting about 100 people to prevent violence, help rebuild communi- work with Commission members in six ties, ease the burden on our courts, help working committees, Chief Judge Bell develop the character of our youth, and appointed four large Regional Advisory expand public participation in govern- Boards covering Western Maryland, ment decision making. Southern Maryland, Central Maryland Recognizing ADR’s benefits, the Honor- and the Eastern Shore to bring hundreds able Robert M. Bell, Chief Judge of the of interested Marylanders into the ongo- ing dialogue about how best to advance The Commission hopes Maryland Court of Appeals, appointed the ADR Commission to advance the use ADR statewide. The Commission also to generate significant of innovative conflict resolution methods formed a National Advisory Board made advancements in our statewide. In this effort, and several oth- up of ADR experts in different fields ers, Maryland’s judiciary is actively pro- across the country. fundamental interactions moting justice in society and reaching out The Commission believes that these ac- with one another, creat- to help prevent disputes from getting to tions will increase public access to justice, ing a “culture of conflict court. Chief Judge Bell charged the di- promote more peaceful and civil commu- verse, 40-member, multi-disciplinary nities, empower people to control the resolution” for the new ADR Commission with the challenging outcome of their own disputes, make the millennium. task of advancing the use of ADR courts more efficient and user-friendly, statewide, not only in the courts, but also and substantially improve the way that in communities, schools, businesses, gov- we, as a society, manage conflict. In the ernment agencies, the criminal and juve- future, as we adapt to complex new tech- nile justice systems and other settings. nological advancements, the Commission To carry out this task, the ADR Commis- hopes to generate equally significant ad- sion took the innovative approach of us- vancements in our fundamental interac- ing ADR to advance ADR by conducting tions with one another, creating a “cul- a statewide consensus building process. ture of conflict resolution” for the new millennium. M A R Y L N D C O I S

2 After much research, discussion and a successful statewide consensus building effort, this Practical Action Plan explains the Commission’s plan to work with other groups and individuals to:

• Launch a comprehensive public awareness campaign about ADR and its benefits • Create an ADR Awards program to recognize major contributions to the dispute resolution field • Deliver targeted education and training programs to: teachers, school administrators and students; court, government and law enforcement officials; attorneys and prospective litigants; the business community and others • Incorporate ADR into the core curricula at Maryland colleges, universities, and professional schools • Create a variety of ADR networks and educational conferences for people working in schools, communities, courts, state and local government, the criminal and juvenile justice systems, and the business community • Disseminate clear definitions and descriptions of ADR processes, so people can decide for themselves when it is appropriate to use ADR • Establish an ethical code, set high standards for ADR practitioners and trainers, and protect the confidentiality of mediation • Conduct independent evaluations of currently operating ADR programs in Maryland’s schools, communities, courts, government agencies and the criminal and juvenile justice systems • Launch pilot ADR projects in communities, courts, state and local government agencies, and the criminal and juvenile justice systems • Create a non-profit Community Mediation Association, establish stable funding for community mediation services, and help develop new community mediation programs • Encourage the expanded use of ADR in appropriate family law cases in the circuit courts and “peace order” cases in the District Courts • Expand the use of ADR in government and help Maryland’s Attorney General increase re- sources for ADR training, staff and innovative ADR programs in the Attorney General’s Office • Work with the Governor on an Executive Order encouraging the appropriate use of ADR in the public sector • Promote a “no retaliation” principle to protect victims and alleged offenders who decline to participate in mediation • Create a Maryland Corporate ADR Pledge program to promote businesses that agree to use ADR in all appropriate cases • Promote business-government ADR partnerships • Establish a State Dispute Resolution Office to promote and coordinate continued ADR advancements in Maryland M A R Y L N D C O I S

3 Background—Overview

Why Do We Need to Take Action? critically important in a number of situa- Most people face a wide variety of conflicts tions. Courts punish serious crimes and on a daily basis, whether at home, work, decide precedent-setting cases that estab- school, or in their communities, but few lish legal standards, which govern fu- recognize that conflict—when managed ture behavior. Courts handle disputes in effectively—can be tremendously benefi- which there are significant power imbal- cial. Despite the high physical, emotional, ances, such as domestic violence cases, and financial stakes inherent in many dis- try cases that parties want aired publi- putes, few people have learned to harness cally, and hear a wide variety of cases af- the power of conflict and direct it toward ter settlement efforts have failed to re- positive outcomes. solve all of the issues. Instead, given lim- The burden on our courts, however, has Good ideas are not adopted automatically. ited knowledge of increased dramatically. Over two million They must be driven into practice with dispute resolution cases were filed in Maryland’s combined options, many have trial courts in 1998. These cases crowd courageous patience. a natural tendency court dockets despite the likelihood that —Admiral Hyman Rickover to avoid dealing many could be better resolved though with conflict. While mediation or some other alternative to this may be an appropriate first response in litigation. Many such civil and minor many circumstances, avoidance rarely ad- criminal cases involve interpersonal dis- dresses the underlying issues in a dispute putes that result in charges and cross- and can contribute to mounting tensions. charges being filed repeatedly because the When tensions are allowed to fester, they courts are unable to resolve the underly- can erupt into violence, especially where ing conflicts. All too often, the court is there is a general sense of powerlessness the only known option for people, even and a lack of understanding about how to when their disputes have little or no con- get one’s needs met in a socially acceptable nection to legal issues. way. In this age of rising concerns about A tendency to avoid conflicts until they the safety of our schools and communi- escalate to unmanageable levels, heightened ties, it is clear that better conflict resolu- concerns about violence, and the ever- tion skills and options are needed, espe- increasing burden on our courts all point to cially in potentially violent situations. a need to expand the use of alternatives to A venue for civil and peaceful dispute the traditional means of resolving disputes. resolution has historically been provided Unfortunately, ADR techniques that have by our courts. A public adversarial pro- been proven effective for resolving a wide cess and judicial determination can be variety of conflicts remain unknown to M A R Y L N D C O I S

4 many people and are not readily available in ADR processes generally give most communities. the participants a more active What Is ADR and What Good Is It? ADR recognizes conflict as an opportu- role in resolving their own nity to bring people together, clarify is- sues, identify common ground, discuss conflicts, and they tend to be options that meet the participants’ needs, more private, faster and less rebuild relationships, and reach new un- derstandings and, if possible, agreements expensive than resolving that will prevent future disputes. In ap- propriate situations, ADR can help peo- disputes through litigation. ple find creative ways to resolve their dis- putes and manage conflict effectively. settlement conferences and many other There are a variety of dispute resolution non-adversarial ADR processes are geared methods that fall under the umbrella term toward helping participants reach their “ADR,” although the Commission fo- own voluntary decisions, while court in- cused primarily on medi- ation, arbitration, settle- ment conferences, and consensus building (see the “Definitions and Dis- pute Screening” section of this report). Other ADR processes include conciliation, ombuds programs, neutral case evaluation, and a host of other processes designed to address a variety of conflicts. The different forms of ADR share some basic characteristics that differentiate them from the traditional path of trial by judge or jury. Foremost, they are not limited to legal disputes. ADR processes generally give the participants a more active role in re- solving their own con- flicts, and they tend to be more private, faster and less expensive than re- solving disputes through litigation. It is important to note that mediation, M A R Y L N D C O I S

5 volvement continues as an option if all of ernment agencies and others, such as the issues are not resolved. Although the consensus building, are beneficial for pro- Commission is interested in advancing all ducing creative solutions that shape types of ADR where appropriate, its ef- sound public policies. Over and above forts thus far have focused most signifi- the delight with cost and time savings, in cantly on mediation since it is the major states where ADR is used extensively, it form of ADR growing around the country receives enthusiastic reviews from the ju- and the state. diciary, bar associations, participants, ed- For many years, ADR use has been grow- ucators, government officials, the busi- ing slowly in some states, including Mary- ness community, religious organizations, land, and more rapidly in others. ADR and the community-at-large. processes are being used for a multitude of ADR methods are gaining popularity and purposes. These include resolving disputes becoming more available as part of the between neighbors, improving communi- standard continuum of dispute resolution Robert M. Bell, Chief cation skills within families, settling busi- options, which has caused many to ques- ness disputes out of court, developing tion the use of the term “alternative.” A Judge of the Maryland government regulations, addressing em- growing number of groups around the Court of Appeals, cre- ployment disputes, allowing offenders to country are referring to mediation and ated the Maryland ADR take responsibility for minor crimes, and other ADR processes as “appropriate dis- resolving conflicts that arise among stu- pute resolution” or simply “dispute reso- Commission in February dents in schools. lution.” As Maryland’s efforts evolve, the of 1998 to help expand The growing popularity of ADR, and Commission envisions creating a state “dispute resolution” office, recognizing dispute resolution op- mediation in particular, is due to the ar- ray of benefits associated with ADR. In a that ADR is no longer an “alternative” tions both inside and survey of Fortune 1000 companies con- but rather is part of the mainstream. outside the court sys- ducted by Cornell University, businesses What is the ADR Commission? across the country reported that ADR Recognizing the benefits of effective dis- tem, and ultimately im- creates substantial time and cost savings, pute resolution processes and conflict and helps them preserve good working prove the way in which management practices, the Honorable relationships. In exit surveys following Robert M. Bell, Chief Judge of the Mary- our society manages court-related mediation sessions, the vast land Court of Appeals, created the Mary- conflict. majority of participants in mediation ses- land ADR Commission in February of sions report a high level of satisfaction 1998 to help expand dispute resolution with playing an active role in resolving options both inside and outside the court their own conflicts. Participants can be system, and ultimately improve the way creative in tailoring the results of media- in which our society manages conflict. tion to meet their needs, unlike the lim- Chief Judge Bell charged the Commis- ited outcomes available in court or by sion with reviewing the state of ADR in resorting to violence. Thus, it is not sur- Maryland and around the country, as well prising that studies show participants as developing and implementing a practi- comply with mediated agreements to a cal action plan to advance the appropriate greater extent than solutions that have use of ADR in our courts as well as in our been imposed by courts. Participants also schools, neighborhoods, businesses, state report valuing the interpersonal under- and local government agencies, and in standing that can be achieved, especially our criminal and juvenile justice systems. in mediation, which can rebuild or pre- Providing visionary leadership and show- serve their relationships with one another. ing dedication to improving Maryland’s

M A R Y L N D C O I S Finally, some ADR methods used by gov- 6 overall approach to dispute settlement, and have also participated in the develop- Chief Judge Bell, who chairs the ADR ment of this Plan. Commission together with vice chair The Commission recognized that assessing Donald G. Gifford, former Dean of the the current state of ADR in Maryland was University of Maryland School of Law, an essential first step in determining how shepherded a consensus-based process to to move forward in this area. Thus, the develop this Action Plan. Commission and its working committees The ADR Commission’s membership is looked around the country and the state, multi-disciplinary and brings together held public forums in each region, sur- representatives of the different stakeholder veyed Maryland judges, court personnel, interests to shape the future development educators, business representatives, com- of ADR in Maryland. ADR Commission munity mediation programs and ADR members include judges, legislators, state practitioners, and launched a comprehen- and local government officials, bar associ- sive fact finding process. This effort in- ation representatives, ADR practitioners, formed Commission members about cur- business represen- rent practices and tatives, community Ultimately, the ADR led to a common members, educa- understanding of tors, court person- Commission’s work will dispute resolution nel and other pol- catapult Maryland to issues as they relate icy makers from to each commit- across the state. A the forefront of states tee’s work. A sepa- number of ADR rate appendix that Commission mem- successfully using ADR. documents the bers have expertise Commission’s fact in the field of ADR and have been inti- finding process and contains committee mately involved in efforts to advance reports, survey documents, and other in- ADR, both in Maryland and nationally, formation collected can be obtained by for many years. calling the ADR Commission at (410) 321-2398. Additionally, each committee’s The ADR Commission recruited approxi- “baseline research” is briefly summarized mately 100 additional people to work on six in applicable sections of this Action Plan. committees that examined definitions and screening, courts administration, pro- During this fact-finding process, nationally fessional responsibilities, community issues, acclaimed ADR scholar, Professor Nancy business applications and education, as each Hardin Rogers of Ohio State University’s relates to the use of ADR. Working together, College of Law, selected the Commission our outstanding Commission and commit- as a pilot project for her efforts to develop tee members brought a wealth of experience a national court consultation service on and expertise to the table. This Action Plan ADR. With Hewlett Foundation funding, is the result of their hard work. Professor Rogers wrote a report for the To expand consensus building efforts fur- Commission based on selected national ther, the ADR Commission also formed ADR research in each of our six commit- four multi-disciplinary Regional Advisory tee areas. She also serves as a member of Boards covering Western Maryland, Cen- the ADR Commission’s National Advi- tral Maryland, Southern Maryland and sory Board, which is made up of a diverse the Eastern Shore. These large Boards pro- group of acclaimed ADR experts from across the country (please see acknowledg- vide diverse perspectives on regional needs M A R Y L N D C O I S 7 ments). Copies of Professor Rogers’ “Re- making, rebuild relationships and build port to the Maryland ADR Commission a future capacity by teaching students and Synthesis of Applicable National ADR adults the skills necessary to prevent con- Research and Background” can be ob- flicts from escalating into litigation or vio- tained by calling the ADR Commission at lence. Ultimately, the ADR Commission’s (410) 321-2398. work will catapult Maryland to the fore- front of states successfully using ADR. Based on ADR journal articles and discus- sions with national ADR leaders, we have What is the Commission’s Role? learned that Maryland is unique in its ap- The Commission sees its role as inaugu- proach of using widespread public partici- rating and providing initial support and pation, joint fact-finding, statewide con- assistance to efforts that will be estab- sensus building and other dispute lished to implement this action plan resolution techniques in the Commis- statewide. Many of these projects will be sion’s process. Maryland is the first state to led by other organizations or agencies, purposefully “use ADR to advance ADR” and it is hoped that they will take on in- with a high-level, statewide, multi-disci- dependent lives of their own. The Com- plinary group. We are also unique because mission will play a transitional role dur- the Commission’s scope goes well beyond ing its implementation phase, while the boundaries of the judicial system in an working to create a Maryland Dispute effort to help prevent disputes from reach- Resolution Office to supercede the Com- ing the courts by stimulating the use of mission. Such an office would carry on ADR in the business community, in state the Commission’s coordination function, and local government, in neighborhoods, oversee long-term projects, serve as an in- in families, in the criminal justice arena, formation clearinghouse, advocate for the in schools, and in the realm of educating use of ADR and carry-out other func- the general public. Finally, the Commis- tions as needed. sion is charged not only with playing an advisory role but also with taking action, Consistent with its work so far, the Com- setting it apart from most Commissions. mission will use collaborative consensus building processes to advance ADR ef- Based on its research and its best thinking, forts and will work closely with stake- as well as feedback received from inter- holder groups throughout Maryland to ested individuals and groups throughout ensure that planned initiatives are consis- the state, the Commission and its com- tent with local needs and that all inter- mittees developed this Practical Action ested groups have a role in implementing Plan to advance the appropriate use of this Practical Action Plan. ADR throughout Maryland’s courts, neighborhoods, families, schools, busi- The Commission also recognizes the ex- nesses, government agencies, criminal/ tent to which mediation and other ADR juvenile justice systems, and other organi- processes may be effectively used in the zations and settings. The Commission pro bono legal services arena. As such, the anticipates that by implementing this ADR Commission anticipates coordinat- Plan we will achieve measurable results ing some of its efforts with the Maryland that will enhance the quality of life in our Legal Services Corporation and the communities, improve Maryland’s busi- Maryland Judicial Commission on Pro ness climate, decrease court delays, in- Bono, which was recently established by crease access to justice, enhance satisfac- Chief Judge Bell. The mission of that tion with the legal system, broaden public Commission is to promote and encour-

M A R Y L N D C O I S participation in government decision- age pro bono legal work for those unable 8 to afford legal assistance and to increase take those actions that are supported by a access to the civil justice system for low to broad consensus across the state, are sig- moderate income individuals in Mary- nificant, meaningful and feasible, and can land. The ADR Commission will assist in be adapted to meet local needs. The these efforts by helping the Pro Bono Commission believes that such actions Commission to increase the use of media- are described in this document. It is the tion in pro bono cases. Commission’s intent to be instrumental In short, the Commission aims to provide in advancing the appropriate use of ADR more dispute resolution options for peo- statewide and to improve the way in ple than they now have, and to acquaint which we, as a society, manage conflict. and educate people about the potential The Commission’s operating expenses are benefits that can be achieved through a covered by the judiciary, and both the range of dispute resolution processes. It is legislature and the governor have allo- the Commission’s intention not to im- cated funds totaling $500,000 for the pede any progress related to ADR that is Commission to seed projects outlined in already being made. Rather, the Commis- this Action Plan during state fiscal year sion is interested in otherwise highlight- 2000, which began on July 1, 1999. To ing and assisting such efforts. implement the Plan, the Commission This Action Plan does not attempt to do will draw on the active participation of everything with regard to ADR in any of interested individuals and groups across the fields that the Commission is address- the state, identify additional funding ing. Rather, the Commission will under- sources, and capitalize on existing re- sources. M A R Y L N D C O I S

9 There is a critical need to make the public aware of ADR processes, to build public demand for ADR services, and raise ADR’s profile in the public mind. Public Awareness and Targeted Education

he ADR Commission Public Awareness has found that most In tandem with other recommendations people in Maryland are to encourage growth in the ADR field not aware of ADR and to cultivate high quality ADR ser- processes and their vices statewide, the Commission must benefits. Moreover, make the general public aware of ADR many of those who processes and their benefits. To launch a have some familiarity significant public awareness campaign, with ADR have not learned to harness its the Commission plans to recruit local Tfull potential. During regional forums and national celebrities, and to engage around the state, Marylanders repeatedly satisfied ADR consumers to promote emphasized the critical need to make the ADR and its benefits using radio, televi- public aware of ADR processes, to build sion and print media. public demand for ADR services, and As part of this effort, the Commission plans raise ADR’s profile in the public mind. to produce a documentary video that can Thus, some of the ADR Commission’s be aired on local television stations and used top priorities are raising public awareness in promotional events to educate the pub- of ADR processes, educating groups that lic, in an emotionally gripping manner, deal with potential users of ADR services, about the power and benefits of using ADR recognizing and promoting effective con- in different contexts. Other components of flict management, and increasing the use the Commission’s public awareness agenda of appropriate conflict resolution skills. include working with networks of ADR advocates to promote Thus, the ADR Commission plans to: court, community, fam- • Coordinate a large-scale, multi-media public awareness campaign ily, and government ADR programs, develop • Establish a high-profile awards program for achievements in a variety of brochures, the dispute resolution field produce public service • Launch educational initiatives targeted to the needs of Mary- announcements, get land’s families, neighborhoods, courts, law enforcement agencies, media coverage of ADR criminal and juvenile justice systems, bar associations, govern- issues, create an interac- tive Maryland ADR re- ment agencies, business community and other groups sources and information • Create networks of dispute resolution advocates in various fields website, sponsor ADR and host conferences that bring people together to learn about events such as “Media- the use of ADR and its benefits tion Week,” recruit ADR ambassadors to M A R Y L N D C O I S

11 The Commission’s Education Com- make presentations to in- where, as disputes arise, the general mittee conducted survey research to terested groups, develop public will have sufficient knowledge to examine ADR education and con- partnerships with ADR choose the ADR process that is most ap- flict resolution training within proponents in the busi- propriate for them and have ready access schools, communities, the court ness community, help to outstanding service providers who can system, and mediation training ADR practitioners get meet their needs. programs, to assess their outreach media coverage, and cre- efforts. The Committee found Ozzie Bermant ADR many promising and highly suc- ate opportunities for peo- cessful programs in each of the ple to learn about ADR Excellence Awards areas studied, but also found that and its benefits. As part of its effort to build statewide they were sporadic with significant The Commission will momentum in the ADR field, the Com- inconsistencies statewide. The emphasize the many uses mission plans to establish an annual ADR Committee found that with the ex- of ADR by highlighting awards program that recognizes outstand- ception of some community media- the benefits of mediation ing contributions to the ADR field in tion centers, no significant outreach and other innovative con- Maryland, highlighting effective exam- efforts are being conducted to edu- flict resolution processes ples of ADR as it is applied to various cate the public about ADR in types of disputes. Such an ADR awards Maryland. Thus, the Committee as they are applied in court, family, neighbor- program could be used to recognize prac- identified the need for a compre- titioners who were instrumental in pio- hensive public awareness campaign hood, criminal, juvenile, neering Maryland’s ADR landscape, as to make mediation and other dis- education, government, pute resolution processes part of business and other con- well as to express appreciation for ADR our household vocabulary. texts. There will also be an advocates in the judicial, executive and In addition to its survey research emphasis on using ADR legislative branches of government, in efforts, the Committee also gath- outside of the court con- schools, in community organizations and ered considerable information from text so people will more in the private sector, along with outstand- national sources and educational frequently seek ADR ser- ing ADR programs and success stories. organizations, and advised the vices without first taking Media coverage of the awards ceremony Commission on developments legal action. Informa- will also contribute to the Commission’s within the education and training efforts to educate the public. arenas. tional brochures and mass media messages will sim- Ozzie Bermant was a great leader in Reports developed and collected by the Com- ply and clearly explain Maryland’s ADR community. His dedi- mission and each of its working committees are included in a separate Appendix. To re- ADR processes and in- cation to professionalism and ethics had a ceive a copy, please call the Commission’s of- form the public that in profound effect on the Commission, and fice at (410) 321-2398. many instances, ADR can we all hope to advance many of his ideas produce better results and his values as Maryland moves for- Baseline than more traditional ap- ward to increase the use and quality of proaches to dispute reso- mediation and other consensual dispute Research lution. Educational mes- resolution practices statewide. Ozzie sages will be geared passed away during the course of the toward helping people de- Commission’s work and has been sorely termine whether ADR processes may bene- missed by the many ADR professionals fit them and will let them know how they who had the pleasure of working with can access ADR services. him over the years. To honor his contri- Ultimately, mediation and other dispute butions to the ADR field, the Commis- resolution processes should become com- sion proposes establishing its ADR monly understood by all Marylanders as awards program in his name. part of our household vocabulary. We are Ideally, this program, combined with

M A R Y L N D C O I S working to shape a future in Maryland other initiatives to advance ADR statewide 12 and to promote professionalism in the ity of ADR services and distributing field, will help cultivate the next genera- them at courts to litigants when cases tion of ADR champions in honor of are filed as well as at libraries and other Ozzie’s memory, his integrity, and his pro- public information sources. The Com- fessionalism. mission will also provide information about ADR options via the Judiciary’s Targeted ADR Education website and will encourage litigants to To complement its public awareness contact the ADR Commission for fur- strategy, the Commission plans to coordi- ther information. A notice that ADR is nate targeted educational initiatives in ar- an option and the ADR Commission’s eas that will be critical to advancing the phone number should also be incorpo- use of ADR and transforming the way in rated into court documents that are which we as a society manage conflict. currently provided to litigants. Infor- Educational programs will be designed to mational videos and brochures about meet the needs of specific groups, to help court ADR services should also be improve conflict management in key sec- made available in potential jurors’ wait- Ultimately, mediation tors of society, and to teach people who ing rooms in the courts, where possible. and other dispute deal with conflict situations on a regular Juvenile Justice basis how and when they can use ADR resolution processes Develop ADR awareness training pro- processes most effectively. Groups that grams in cooperation with the Depart- should become com- serve as referral sources for ADR users ment of Juvenile Justice to help juve- need training to maximize appropriate re- monly understood by nile justice intake workers recognize ferrals. The Commission identified the cases that are appropriate for media- all Marylanders as following educational initiatives for some tion and other ADR processes, as well part of our household of its target groups: as to improve their use of conflict vocabulary. Courts management techniques in their daily Use existing resources such as the contact with juvenile justice youths Maryland Judicial Institute, the Judi- and their families, as well as with vic- ciary’s personnel training divisions, tims, police, and other parties involved and the Maryland State, Local and in juvenile cases. The program will also Specialty Bar Associations to develop be designed to help intake workers de- and deliver targeted ADR education to velop ongoing relationships with local judges, masters, court commissioners, community mediation programs and court personnel, attorneys and liti- other ADR service providers. gants, so that each group understands Law Enforcement their particular role within each ADR Create similar mediation awareness in- process. Include ADR courses in service training programs for police of- judges’ and attorneys’ continuing edu- ficers, police academy cadets, and cation courses. Educational programs other appropriate law enforcement should be designed to meet the needs staff by working with the Maryland of each audience, should give partici- Police and Correctional Training Com- pants a general understanding of ADR mission and other law enforcement processes and when they should be training units. Work with the Gover- used, and should help advance efforts nor’s Office of Crime Control and Pre- to increase the court’s use of ADR. vention to coordinate training for Litigants law enforcement teams in identified Educate litigants by developing infor- “HotSpots Communities” and Police

mational brochures about the availabil- Corps cadets. These training programs M A R Y L N D C O I S 13 will be aimed at helping law enforce- could serve as a forum and provide ment officers understand the benefits some technical assistance for new of mediation, make referrals to com- school personnel who join the network munity mediation centers and/or pri- as their schools start-up programs. The The Commission envi- vate practitioners when appropriate, Commission will offer assistance to sions hosting confer- and incorporate effective conflict man- network members, co-host a confer- agement techniques into their daily ence on school ADR programs with ences, developing contact with citizens. the Maryland State Department of Ed- newsletters and using Government ucation (MSDE), and initiate other ef- forts to highlight successful efforts in its website to help the Identify outside funding sources to support an ADR training program for public and private schools throughout networks identify shared the Office of the Attorney General. the state. priorities and build The Attorney General wants to ensure Community Mediation that Assistant Attorneys General un- Establish a statewide association for all partnerships where derstand ADR processes and their ben- community mediation programs. In ad- possible. efits, and can advise government agen- dition to bringing community media- cies about the appropriate use of ADR tion advocates together to learn from in regulatory and transactional activi- each other, to offer technical assistance ties, as well as in legal disputes. In tan- to new programs, and to develop re- dem with this effort, the Commission sources for current and planned com- will also encourage state local agencies munity mediation programs, the Com- to develop training programs for ap- mission envisions this group evolving propriate staff. into a non-profit organization that ad- vocates for community mediation and Networks and Educational helps secure stable funding for new and Conferences existing community mediation centers. To build on these educational efforts and The association will also work to edu- to reach other groups and individuals, the cate families, neighborhoods and others ADR Commission will work to create about the benefits of community media- specialized networks of people involved tion. (More information on this pro- in ADR in different fields so that they posal can be found in the Community can learn from each other and increase Mediation section of this document.) awareness of ADR and its benefits in Courts their fields. Additionally, the Commis- Create networks of local court ADR sion plans to work with these networks coordinators, Differentiated Case Man- and other co-host institutions and orga- agement coordinators, judges and oth- nizations to sponsor a series of ADR con- ers who are currently working on ADR ferences, and to promote communication programs in the circuit courts and in and joint projects among the networks. the District Court. These initiatives The following identifies the networks and would bring together those already conferences planned to increase ADR working on ADR within the courts to awareness and use in each area: share experiences and resources, and to Schools help strengthen and expand existing Build upon a small network of school programs. These groups will encourage personnel who are teaching conflict other courts or circuits to develop ADR resolution and running peer mediation programs and join the networks, which programs. This expanded network will provide them with information M A R Y L N D C O I S

14 and technical assistance. The networks tute ADR programs and to join the will work with the Commission to co- networks, which will provide them ordinate a conference on court ADR with information and technical assis- services, to develop a directory of court tance. They will also work with the ADR programs and service providers, Commission to coordinate a confer- to disseminate information about ence on state and local government ADR, and to promote court programs. uses of ADR. These court ADR networks can also be Business instrumental in educating practicing Bring together ADR leaders in the attorneys about the roles they can play business community and the ADR ser- in ADR processes and their responsi- vice provider community to form a bility for encouraging their clients to network to share experiences, advocate use ADR in appropriate cases. The for advancing the appropriate use of Commission will work with the Mary- ADR in business and government set- land Judicial Commission on Pro tings, and encourage other businesses Bono, the Maryland State Bar Associa- to launch ADR initiatives. As busi- tion, the Maryland Legal Services Cor- nesses begin using ADR, they can join poration, and local bar associations to this network, which will provide them host mini-conferences in each jurisdic- with information and technical assis- tion about the respective roles of tance. The network will also help pro- lawyers, judges and mediators, and mote businesses that embrace ADR about the benefits of mediation for le- and serve as a speakers bureau. gal services recipients. The Commission will also work with Criminal and Juvenile Justice Systems the business network to plan a confer- Organize an educational conference for ence on ADR in business settings, State’s Attorneys, District Court judges, possibly in partnership with the De- juvenile court judges, community me- partment of Business and Economic diators and other stakeholders in the Development, the Greater Baltimore criminal justice system. Co-sponsored Committee, the Maryland Chamber by the University of Maryland School of Commerce, the Better Business Bu- of Law and co-hosted by the Chief reau, the University of Maryland Judge of the Court of Appeals and the School of Law, the University of Balti- Chief Judge of the District Court, the more Negotiations and Conflict Man- conference would highlight effective agement Center and other organiza- ADR applications in the criminal and tions. The conference will highlight juvenile justice systems and would be the benefits of ADR for businesses in geared toward helping local jurisdic- terms of cost/time savings and pre- tions develop effective mediation pro- serving relationships. The conference grams for minor criminal and juvenile will feature testimonials from corpo- justice cases. rate representatives successfully using Government ADR and information on how busi- Bring together those already working nesses can advance their use of ADR on ADR in government to share expe- to resolve internal and external con- riences and resources to help strengthen flicts. The Conference can be used and expand existing programs. The to kick-off the Maryland “Corporate state and local government networks Pledge Program,” which is described will encourage other agencies to insti- further in the Business section of this

document. M A R Y L N D C O I S 15 The Commission will work to maintain Results: The Commission be- ongoing communication and coordina- lieves that its public awareness campaign, tion among these networks. This will ADR awards program, targeted educa- help each network understand how it can tional initiatives, ADR networks and con- work with the others to build new rela- ferences will significantly raise the profile tionships among stakeholder groups. The and level of understanding of ADR within Commission envisions hosting confer- Maryland’s courts, communities, schools, ences, developing newsletters and using businesses, justice systems, government its website to help the networks identify agencies and other organizations. Taken shared priorities and build partnerships together, these efforts will build the de- where possible. mand and momentum for increasing the appropriate use of ADR statewide and will expand the use of conflict resolution skills throughout Maryland. M A R Y L N D C O I S

16

It is critical that we teach our children how to manage conflict effectively without resorting to violence. School Programs and Educational Advancements

he ADR Commission mote the creation of new programs, using believes that more em- effective comprehensive models. phasis needs to be For these models to work successfully, it placed on teaching chil- is critical that school teachers, adminis- dren appropriate ways trators, guidance counselors and parents of responding to con- be taught conflict resolution skills. If stu- flict situations. Espe- dents are taught these skills, but school cially given heightened personnel model a very different form of concerns at the national level about school conflict resolution, students get a weak- Tsafety and youth violence, the Commission ened mixed message, and the school at- believes it is critical that we teach our chil- mosphere cannot truly be transformed. dren how to manage conflict effectively Promoting conflict resolution skills without resorting to violence. Achieving training for school personnel and parents this goal requires a significant ongoing ef- will be an important part of the Com- fort aimed at incorporating effective con- mission’s efforts. flict resolution curricula for all students as well as creating strong peer mediation pro- In the realm of higher education, the grams in every Maryland school. Commission will work to have ADR in- corporated as part of the core curricula Conflict resolution curricula for all stu- for future teachers, lawyers, business peo- dents and peer mediation programs, ple, social workers, psychologists and which train certain students to mediate others. Bowie State University took the student disputes, are being used in some lead in 1985 by establishing the Univer- elementary, middle and high schools in sity of Maryland system’s first alternative every jurisdiction in Maryland. The prob- dispute resolution center. Today, this pro- lem is that these programs, some of which gram offers an eight-course certificate are outstanding, tend to be sporadic. program for ADR studies, trains ADR Some students get no exposure, while oth- practitioners, and takes other steps to ers may have a program in elementary promote comprehensive approaches to school, but not in middle school, result- dispute resolution to serve the needs of a ing in a general lack of continuity among culturally diverse society. Salisbury State schools statewide. To address this prob- University has also developed a conflict lem, the ADR Commission will work resolution center and is establishing an with the State Department of Education, undergraduate conflict resolution major. school boards, superintendents, school The University of Maryland’s Institute administrators, principals and faculty to for Governmental Service has also be- raise the profile of the successful programs come active in recent years by providing operating around the state and to pro- educational programs and assistance with M A R Y L N D C O I S

19 The Commission’s Education Com- public dispute resolution, University of Baltimore also offers signifi- mittee used survey research and in- training local government cant ADR course work at its School of terviews to examine peer mediation representatives in conflict Law and has an interdisciplinary Negotia- and conflict resolution skills train- management, and pro- tion and Conflict Management Center ing in Maryland’s elementary, mid- viding consensus build- which offers a Masters Degree program. dle and high schools. It also gath- ing services for govern- While these ADR courses and programs ered information about conflict ment agencies. Some are laudable, they are all electives in Mary- management and other ADR courses offered in Maryland’s colleges, uni- other higher education land law schools. Although the ADR versities and professional schools. institutions in Maryland Commission believes that all lawyers The Committee found many offer some dispute resolu- should advise their clients of their ADR highly successful school peer medi- tion courses or are devel- options, a law student could graduate in ation programs and conflict resolu- oping programs. None, Maryland with little or no knowledge of tion curricula, as well as a number however, is teaching these ADR. The picture is grimmer with regard of effective higher education vital skills to all students. to teacher training, business schools, and courses. It also found that these The Commission is inter- higher education in general. programs are sporadic and limited. ested in helping them ad- Thus, the Committee identified a vance in this area. Program Evaluations need for a more systemic approach to institutionalize the state’s ADR Both of Maryland’s law The Commission plans to work with a education efforts. schools are well ahead of university research unit to conduct inde- others in their emphasis pendent evaluations of an elementary, Reports developed and collected by the middle and high school feeder system Commission and each of its working com- on ADR and ADR mittees are included in a separate Appendix. course work. The Univer- that teaches conflict resolution skills to all To receive a copy, please call the Commis- sity of Maryland School students and has peer mediation pro- sion’s office at (410) 321-2398. of Law operates an out- grams in each school. The evaluations standing ADR clinical will use appropriate and consistent mea- Baseline program and offers a sures to identify any potential improve- Research wide variety of courses ments, document the program’s benefits, that focus on ADR tech- if any, and, if and when appropriate, be niques and theory. The used to encourage the creation of new

Thus, the Commission plans to work with educational authorities and other interested groups to:

• Evaluate existing conflict resolution and peer mediation programs in an elementary, middle and high school feeder system • Establish conflict resolution and peer mediation pilot programs with built-in evaluation com- ponents in an elementary, middle and high school feeder system that does not offer these programs • Promote the importance of conflict resolution and peer mediation education for teachers, school administrators, guidance counselors, other school-related staff and parents • Highlight current and promote new conflict resolution curricula and peer mediation programs in schools • Work with a network of school personnel involved in conflict resolution and co-host a con- ference with MSDE on school-based conflict resolution and peer mediation programs • Promote the incorporation of ADR into higher education core curricula for future teachers, M A R Y L N D C O I S lawyers and other professionals 20 Peer Mediation programs and justify increased funding Mount Washington Elementary School for current and future programs. The evaluations will be methodologically A fifth grader made a presentation to the ADR Com- sound and have quantitative and qualita- mission in December, 1998, explaining how his Balti- tive components, including case studies. more City public school had been transformed since es- tablishing a peer mediation program the previous year. Pilot Programs The young man—a peer mediator himself—said that Similarly, the Commission will work with the program had changed his life. He also said that stu- at least one elementary, middle, and high dents at his school used to be frightened and bullied in school feeder system that does not teach the lunch room and on the playground, but now, with peer mediators on duty, he said that the entire school conflict resolution or have a peer media- atmosphere had changed. tion program to start pilot programs, Unfortunately, the middle school that young man adapting models that have been success- will soon attend does not have a peer mediation pro- ful elsewhere. The programs will have gram or conflict resolution curriculum. His story illus- built-in evaluation components, use trates the need to institutionalize these concepts within replicable models, and emphasize vio- the educational system, creating a continuum of pro- lence prevention. gressive, age-appropriate programs from kindergarten through high school. Conflict Resolution Education in Higher Education for Future Teachers, Lawyers and Other Professionals incentive for schools to teach these skills. The Commission will work to have MSPAP tests are designed to test schools, course materials on “how to use and and as such, they would also serve to in- teach conflict resolution” incorporated as dicate how well schools are teaching con- part of the core curricula in Maryland flict resolution skills. The Commission colleges’ education departments for col- will work with MSDE to identify other lege students studying to be teachers. incentives and rewards for schools and in- Working with MSDE and the Maryland dividuals who significantly advance the Higher Education Commission, the use of school-based conflict resolution Commission will emphasize that training and peer mediation. Ultimately, the teachers in conflict resolution and peer Commission’s vision is for all members of mediation will produce more effective the school community—parents, stu- teachers, safer schools, and better student dents, teachers and staff—to have the performance. Teachers who understand training and experience needed to man- conflict resolution and peer mediation age conflict effectively. will use these skills to manage their class- The Commission will also work with rooms and to model good conflict resolu- Maryland’s law schools to incorporate tion behavior for students. Research indi- ADR into their existing core curricula cates that this causes a decrease in and will work with the State Board of classroom disruptions, freeing up more Law Examiners to include ADR as an is- instruction time for teachers. sue to spot on the state Bar Exam. The To ensure ongoing emphasis on conflict Commission will coordinate these efforts resolution education, the Commission with the Maryland State Bar Association recommends incorporating problems that (MSBA) and will encourage the MSBA can be solved using conflict resolution to include ADR in its professionalism skills into Maryland School Performance course for new lawyers, emphasizing the Assessment Program (MSPAP) tests as an M A R Y L N D C O I S

21 need for attorneys to advise their clients Ultimately, bringing positive attention to of their ADR options. school conflict resolution and peer medi- Additionally, the Commission will work ation will promote public demand for with business schools, social work pro- replicating successful programs in other grams, psychology departments, and school systems. other professional schools, colleges, uni- Network and Conference versities and the Maryland Higher Edu- The Commission plans to work with a cation Commission to help institute network of school personnel involved in ADR courses as part of their core curric- conflict resolution and to co-host a con- ula. The Commission will also work with ference with MSDE on school-based colleges that are interested in expanding conflict management. The conference their conflict resolution focus further, ei- Training teachers in will provide teachers, administrators and ther by establishing in-house conflict res- students with the tools to expand their conflict resolution and olution programs or creating a conflict use of conflict resolution skills to im- resolution discipline. The Commission peer mediation will prove the quality and safety of Mary- will also encourage professors from all re- land’s schools. produce more effective lated disciplines to participate in planned teachers, safer schools, ADR networks and conferences, where The Commission will work with groups and better student appropriate. such as the Citizen’s Law Related Educa- tion Project and other organizations and performance. Promote New and Existing ADR practitioners who have been setting Programs up conflict resolution and peer mediation As part of its public awareness efforts, the programs in Maryland schools for many Commission plans to highlight current years. The Commission will also encour- and promote new uses of conflict resolu- age community groups, civic organiza- tion curricula and peer mediation pro- tions, ADR providers and community grams in schools. Giving students the op- mediation programs to partner with portunity to tell their own mediation schools and students involved in conflict success stories is an effective way to cap- resolution programs. These community ture the attention of funding sources and members could participate in the ADR policy makers. Exceptional school-based school network and conference, while efforts may also be rewarded through the helping to advance school-based conflict planned “Ozzie Bermant” awards pro- resolution and peer mediation programs. gram explained in the previous section. Results: The Commission be- lieves that implementing these plans will make conflict resolution a central part of the educational system in Maryland, from the elementary school level on through college and professional schools. These efforts will create safer and more manageable schools and will help prepare students to be effective problem solvers and productive citizens. The Commission hopes to help cultivate a new generation of teachers, attorneys and other profes- sionals who understand the importance and the benefits of effective, non-violent,

M A R Y L N D C O I S non-litigious conflict resolution. 22 Definitions and Dispute Screening

he ADR Commission each region of the state, the Commission found that many dif- found differences of opinion about what ferent ADR practices a mediator’s role should be, especially are being used across with regard to the extent to which the Maryland. The Com- practice of mediation should follow a mission was repeatedly transformative model—where creating asked to clarify defini- new understanding is the major focus— tions, especially the or a purely facilitative model—drawing definition of “mediation.” To date, the out all of the ideas about possible solu- Tterm “mediation” is used to describe sev- tions from the participants—or an evalu- eral practices that are significantly differ- ative model where a mediator suggests or ent from one another. The Commission evaluates possible options for the partici- recognizes that educating a wide range of pants and plays an active role in develop- groups and individuals across the state ing solutions for them. about the benefits of ADR necessitates developing a consensus on the defini- tions of various ADR practices, as well as Thus, the Commission plans to: on some general guidelines to help peo- • Promote the use of appropriate definitions and descriptions of ple decide if and when to use different ADR techniques among the general public forms of ADR. • Revise circuit court Rules to clarify definitions of ADR processes ADR Practitioners come from a wide va- riety of backgrounds and include com- • Encourage self-screening by making information about ADR munity leaders, business people, lawyers, processes readily available psychologists, social workers and others. Reaching consensus on definitions Definitions and Descriptions proved to be a difficult process because Based on its review of current practices ADR is a diverse and evolving field, and and opinions, as well as feedback from because ADR practitioners have adapted Marylanders in each region of the state a variety of techniques to a wide range of asking for simple, clear explanations, the disputes in different contexts. For exam- Commission offers the following defini- ple, in reviewing current practices tions and descriptions: statewide and holding public forums in M A R Y L N D C O I S

23 Term Definition Description

“Alternative A process or collection of processes for Generally refers to a broad category of Dispute resolving disputes without going through “ADR processes” that include settlement Resolution” a trial or committing violence conferences, arbitration, mediation, consen- (ADR) sus building, which are defined below, as well as other “alternative” ways of resolv- ing disputes without using violence or having a court decide.

“Mediation” A process in which a trained neutral per- A mediator does not provide legal advice son, a “mediator,” helps people in a dis- or recommend the terms of any agree- pute to communicate with one another, ments. Instead, the mediator helps people understand each other, and if possible, reach their own agreements, rebuild their reach agreements that satisfy the partici- relationships, and if possible, find lasting pants’ needs. solutions to their disputes. Mediation is a process that lets people speak for them- selves and make their own decisions.

“Arbitration” A process in which people in a dispute Arbitrators review evidence and argu- present their views to a knowledgeable ments from people in the dispute and neutral person, an “arbitrator,” who de- make a decision or “arbitration award.” cides how the dispute will be resolved. Arbitration is generally “binding” which means that the participants must abide by the arbitrator’s decision.

“Neutral Case A process in which people in a dispute The neutral person usually has substantial Evaluation” present their views, often in written form, knowledge or experience with issues in- to a knowledgeable neutral person who volved in the dispute. This person’s opin- evaluates their dispute and expresses an ion about how the court would probably opinion about the most likely outcome in decide the dispute helps people come up court. with appropriate out-of-court settlements.

“Settlement A process in which people in a dispute in The settlement conference facilitator is Conference” court present their views to a knowledge- usually a judge or experienced lawyer able neutral person who evaluates the who can give informed opinions about case and suggests ways to settle the dis- how the court might decide the case, dis- pute without a trial. cuss how similar cases have been settled, provide advice and suggest agreements.

“Consensus A process in which a neutral person Consensus building resembles mediation Building” brings “stakeholder” groups and individu- because the process is about people mak- als together and facilitates their efforts ing their own decisions, opening lines of to solve a common problem or address a communication, and developing agree- complex issue in a way that best meets ments that everyone can support. Consen- the participants’ needs. sus building is different because it usually involves a larger group of people and is generally used to prevent or resolve dis- putes about public policy or other com- M A R Y L N D C O I S plex issues involving several parties. 24 Circuit Court ADR Rules cases, arbitration awards The Commission’s Definitions and To make these definitions operational are binding.] Dispute Screening Committee used within a court context, the Commission sampling techniques to gather in- “Neutral Case Evalua- formation and hear presentations proposes revising the definitions in the tion” means a process in circuit court ADR Rules so they will read from a wide variety of ADR practi- which (1) the parties, tioners who conduct mediation ses- as follows: their attorneys, or both sions, arbitration hearings, settle- “Alternative Dispute Resolution” means appear before an impar- ment conferences, consensus the process of resolving matters in pend- tial person (who may building processes and other ADR ing litigation through a settlement con- have specialized knowl- proceedings. The Committee also ference, neutral case evaluation, neutral edge and/or experience surveyed mediators across the state fact finding, arbitration, mediation, con- with similar disputes or to get information on their profes- sensus building, other non-judicial reso- issues in the dispute), sional background, their mediation lution process, or combination of those and present in summary experience, training and tech- niques. Additionally, the Commit- processes. fashion the evidence and tee reviewed a variety of articles arguments supporting “Mediation” means a process in which and outside research on ADR defin- the parties work with one or more impar- their respective posi- itions and dispute screening. tial mediators who, without providing le- tions, and (2) the impar- Based on its research, the com- gal advice, assist the parties in reaching tial person renders an mittee developed the definitions in their own voluntary agreement for the evaluation of their posi- this section and determined that resolution of all or part of their disputes. tions and an opinion as the Commission’s first “screening A mediator may identify issues and op- to the likely outcome of priority” should be to educate the public about ADR processes so that tions, assist the parties or their attorneys the dispute or issues in individuals can make informed de- in exploring the needs underlying their the dispute if the action were to be tried. cisions about what ADR process respective positions, and assist the parties might best meet their needs. The in embodying the terms of their agree- “Settlement Conference” Committee developed a detailed re- ment in a written document. The media- means a conference at port on various ADR processes, and tor does not engage in other alternative which the parties, their a statistical report summarizing its dispute resolution processes, such as arbi- attorneys, or both appear survey results. tration, neutral case evaluation, or neutral before an impartial per- Reports developed and collected by the fact-finding and does not recommend the son to discuss the issues Commission and each of its working com- terms of an agreement, unless the parties and positions of the par- mittees are included in a separate Appendix. agree otherwise. ties in the action in an at- To receive a copy, please call the Commis- sion’s office at (410) 321-2398. “Arbitration” means a process in which tempt to settle the dis- pute or issues in the (1) the parties appear before one or more Baseline impartial arbitrators and present evidence dispute by agreement or and argument supporting their respective by means other than trial. Research positions, and (2) the arbitrators render a A settlement conference decision in the form of an award that, in may include neutral case court-referred arbitration is not binding, evaluation and neutral fact-finding, and unless the parties agree otherwise in writ- the impartial person may recommend the ing. [In addition, the Commission pro- terms of an agreement. poses amending this circuit court Rule by “Consensus Building” means a process adding a printed committee note stating generally used to prevent or resolve dis- that, “Under the Federal Arbitration Act, putes and/or to facilitate decision mak- the Maryland Uniform Arbitration Act, ing, often within a multi-party dispute, at common law and in common usage group process or public policy making outside the context of court-referred process. In consensus building processes, M A R Y L N D C O I S

25 one or more neutral facilitators may iden- of people who might consider using ADR tify and convene all stakeholders or their before bringing their disputes to court. representatives, and use techniques to Similar versions and other informative build trust, open communication, and brochures will be developed for other au- enable all parties to develop options and diences including pro se litigants, com- determine mutually acceptable solutions. munity mediation clients, business groups, labor unions, etc. Self-Screening Having reviewed several dispute screen- Results: The Commission be- ing instruments and research indicating lieves that these definitions describe ADR that a wide variety of disputes can be ef- practices accurately, can help resolve con- fectively resolved using ADR processes, fusion over terminology, and will assist the Commission believes it is important ADR educational efforts. Additionally, to emphasize “self-screening” among peo- these definitions provide a framework for ple in disputes. This means giving people screening disputes for ADR on a case-by- enough information about ADR pro- case basis and will serve as a foundation cesses to be able to determine for them- on which to build best practice standards. selves whether ADR is appropriate for The Commission hopes that the Stand- them. As an example of this, the ADR ing Committee on Rules of Practice and Commission developed a brochure enti- Procedure and the Maryland Court of tled “Is Going to Trial Really Your Best Appeals will consider amending MD Option?” which presents versions of the Rule 17-102 for the circuit courts where above definitions along with questions to necessary to reflect these definitions (red- consider when deciding whether to use lined copies of the Rule are available ADR and, if so, which ADR process to upon request). The Commission will de- use. Written for prospective litigants, the velop informational brochures, and edu- Commission envisions that this simple cational materials that include these defi- brochure could be widely distributed by nitions or appropriate versions thereof. the courts and would reach a wide variety M A R Y L N D C O I S

26 ADR Practitioners and Trainers

he Commission recog- To maintain and safeguard the high qual- nizes that the success ity of ADR services in Maryland as the of any attempt to in- Commission works to advance the field, crease the use of ADR and as new practitioners enter the Mary- processes will be en- land ADR market, the Commis- tirely dependent on sion will: access to high quality • Propose an ethical code and practice standards for ADR dispute resolution prac- titioners and trainers. Thus, the ADR practitioners TCommission conducted an extensive re- • Propose a mediation confidentiality Rule view of current practitioner standards, sur- • Propose amending the current circuit court ADR Rules to veyed ADR professionals across the state, evaluated an array of practice standards address training requirements, qualifications issues and other that could be implemented in Maryland, court ADR practices surveyed ADR trainers and reviewed train- • Work on guidelines for ADR trainers and training ing program curricula. As a result of these efforts, the Commission believes that • Encourage developing mentoring, co-mediation and apprentice- Maryland has a small cadre of ADR practi- ship opportunities for new practitioners tioners and trainers that are well trained, highly skilled, experienced, ethically re- Ethical Code and Practice sponsible, and concerned about quality Standards for ADR Practitioners control. Many of them report adhering The ADR Commission is drafting an ethi- voluntarily to one or more sets of stan- cal code and practice standards for all dards and guidelines that have been estab- ADR practitioners. The ethical code and lished by national ADR associations. practice standards will address issues such National organizations including the as confidentiality and neutrality. Applica- American Bar Association, the Society for ble to ADR in every context, the Commis- Professionals in Dispute Resolution, the sion believes that the ethical code and American Arbitration Association, the practice standards should be adhered to by Academy of Family Mediators and others practitioners of diverse backgrounds in are also involved in developing model both court and non-court settings, and ethical standards, mediation statutes, the Commission will propose that the confidentiality rules, and certification Maryland Court of Appeals adopt the programs. The Commission has been, code and standards. The Commission will and will continue, monitoring and, when work with networks of ADR providers to appropriate, participating in these na- build support for the code and standards. tional efforts. The Commission plans to initially use a M A R Y L N D C O I S

27 The Commission’s Professional “voluntary compliance The issue of certification for practitioners Responsibilities Committee took model” for the code and has been a topic of particular concern for the lead in examining practitioner standards and to establish the Commission. Having reviewed practi- qualifications, ethics, confidential- a “seal of approval” system tioner certification programs in other ity, court rules and other issues af- that highlights practition- states, and having listened to concerns fecting the ADR profession. The ers who abide by them. about creating bureaucratic approval Committee gathered considerable The Commission plans to processes, cumbersome regulatory sys- information from national ADR organizations, and surveyed ADR work with practitioners to tems, and exclusionary or subjective prac- practitioners, court personnel, develop a roster system of tices, the ADR Commission is not creat- community mediators and others. practitioners who certify ing a practitioner certification program at Before his death, Ozzie Bermant that they follow the ethi- this time. Certification is, however, still spearheaded an assessment of ethi- cal code and practice among the quality assurance mechanisms cal standards for ADR professionals standards, and to develop being considered. The Commission has and drafted a detailed report on his consistent standards for discussed “skills-based” certification as a efforts, contributing considerably ADR in court and non- means to move away from degree-based to the Committee’s work. The court settings. The Com- and training-certificate-based qualifica- Committee also prepared reports mission also plans to tions. There is, however, at present, no na- on professional standards among develop a system for re- tional agreement about the best method Maryland’s community mediation ceiving complaints about to conduct skills-based certification. Cer- programs and compiled a report on ADR practitioners and to tification models are currently the subject its survey of ADR practitioners. Based on its research and fact devise methods to re- of significant national research efforts. finding efforts, the Committee pre- spond to them, including Data that may clarify some difficult prac- pared the proposed Rule amend- the development of reme- titioner evaluation issues are expected to ments, confidentiality Rule, ethical dial programs. be available next year. Thus, the Commis- code and practice standards ex- sion believes that, at present, setting vol- plained in this section. The Com- Quality Assurance untary standards and guidelines is the mittee has also monitored national The Commission recog- most logical first step. ADR developments and other prac- nizes that as the use of In light of the feedback we received at our titioner issues during the course of ADR grows in Maryland, public forums and compelling reasons for the Commission’s work. it is imperative to have an establishing a skills based certification active cadre of well- Reports developed and collected by the methodology and certification program, Commission and each of its working com- trained, highly skilled as well as significant concerns about over- mittees are included in a separate Appendix. ADR practitioners. If regulating or limiting the ADR profes- To receive a copy, please call the Commis- people attend mediation sion’s office at (410) 321-2398. sion, the Commission plans to expand its sessions, for example, efforts to build a broad-based consensus conducted by a poor or on this issue. A high priority of the Com- Baseline mediocre mediator, it mission will be to work with practitioners will be their last ADR at- Research around the state to develop a strong qual- tempt and they will ity assurance system that will protect the spread the word that public and will help cultivate a skilled mediation is useless or worse. As such, practitioner base to support other ADR quality assurance is a major priority for expansion plans. the ADR Commission. The Commission is considering ways to promote mentor- Confidentiality ing, co-mediation, apprenticeships, super- Across the state, the Commission has vised practice and other quality assurance been repeatedly told by people involved mechanisms. in community, court and private media- tion that there is a high priority, immedi- M A R Y L N D C O I S

28 ate need to clarify and protect the confi- whether any party halted the process, ex- dentiality of mediation, both within and cept in the event that a party fails to ap- outside of the courts. Thus, the Commis- pear and listen to an explanation of the sion is drafting a proposed confidentiality process in response to a court order. The Rule for mediation. In its public forums, revised draft Rule will also require adding the Commission was asked to broaden the terms “mediator” and “mediation the draft proposed Rule to extend confi- communication” to the definitions con- dentiality to other forms of ADR. The tained in Rule 17-102 as detailed below. drafting committee attempted to do so, but complications over differences in the DRAFT MEDIATION processes caused the committee to limit CONFIDENTIALITY RULE the proposed Rule to mediation. The Add the following to the definitions con- Commission will consider the confiden- tained in Rule 17-102: tiality needs of other ADR processes in (-) Mediation Communication the future. “Mediation communication” The draft below is a work in progress, but means speech, writing or conduct the Commission plans to submit the final made as part of a mediation, includ- confidentiality Rule to the Standing ing those communications made for Committee on Rules of Practice and Pro- the purposes of considering, initiat- cedure and the Maryland Court of Ap- ing, continuing, or reconvening a peals with hopes that they can consider mediation or retaining a mediator. adding it to Title 17, which contains the “Mediation communication” does ADR Rules for the circuit courts. The not include a written agreement Commission will then propose legislation drawn-up as a result of a mediation, that will codify this privilege as a statute the fact that a mediation occurred, to be applied outside the context of who attended a mediation or docu- court-based ADR. ments otherwise publically available This draft Rule protects the confidential- and not generated specifically for the ity of the process, but not the confiden- mediation. tiality of the outcome. If agreements are (-) Mediator reached in cases where litigation is pend- “Mediator” means a neutral per- ing, those settlement agreements are gen- son engaged by the parties or ap- erally filed with the court. In pending pointed by the court to conduct me- criminal cases in particular, while the diation as defined above. process is confidential, if an agreement is reached, a prosecutor may review the MEDIATION CONFIDENTIALITY agreement and place the case on the “stet” DRAFT RULE 17-109 docket so that it can be reopened if the alleged offender fails to honor the agree- (a) A mediator and/or the mediator’s staff ment. In other instances, potential op- shall maintain the confidentiality of tions for closing or delaying the pending all mediation communications, which case may be subject for discussion during include speech, writing, or conduct, the mediation. If no agreement is reached beginning with the initial contact be- in a pending civil or criminal case, how- tween the mediator and/or the media- ever, all that should be reported to the tor’s staff, and the parties and/or par- court is that the mediation was “unsuc- ties’ counsel, except as specifically cessful.” Courts should not be informed stated below in subsection (c). Nei- ther the mediator nor the mediator’s why an agreement was not reached nor M A R Y L N D C O I S 29 staff may disclose or be compelled to (d) Information otherwise admissible or disclose mediation communications subject to discovery does not become in any judicial, administrative or inadmissible or protected from dis- other adversarial proceeding, except as closure solely by reason of its use in stated below in subsection (c). mediation. (b) The parties and/or the parties’ counsel shall maintain the confidentiality of all RATIONALE FOR MEDIATION mediation communications, which in- CONFIDENTIALITY RULE clude speech, writing, or conduct, ex- (a) This subsection binds the mediator cept by written agreement of all of the to keep all mediation communica- parties or as stated below in subsection tions confidential and prevents the (c). Neither the parties, the parties’ mediator from testifying in court counsel nor others present at the me- about mediation communications, diation session on the parties’ behalf except as provided in subsection (c). may disclose or be compelled to dis- It will protect mediation as a safe fo- close mediation communications in rum for party candor and protect any judicial, administrative or other public confidence in mediation as a adversarial proceeding, except by writ- confidential process. ten agreement of all of the parties or as (b) This subsection binds the parties to stated below in subsection (c). keep all mediation communications (c) In addition to the legal requirement confidential and prevents them from to report suspected acts of child abuse, testifying in court about mediation contained in MD Code Ann., Fam. communications, except by written Law §5-705, a mediator and/or medi- agreement of all of the parties or as ator’s staff, and a party and/or party’s provided in subsection (c). This sub- counsel may disclose and/or report section also serves the dual purposes mediation communications to a po- of protecting mediation as a safe fo- tential victim and/or to the appropri- rum for party candor and protecting ate authorities, when and to the ex- public confidence in mediation as a tent that they, in their own judgment, confidential process. Furthermore, it believe it necessary to help: gives the parties the power to agree to (1) prevent physical and/or sexual lift confidentiality for themselves as child abuse or elder abuse; to all or part of the mediation. (2) prevent serious bodily harm or (c) This subsection balances the needs death; for disclosure against the needs for (3) prevent environmental or safety confidentiality to serve the public in- hazards that may threaten the terest in protecting others. It also al- health, safety, or economic well lows parties to report mediator mis- being of an individual or the conduct and serves the need for public; fundamental fairness by allowing ac- (4) prevent criminal actions that cused mediators to respond. would result in serious financial (d) This subsection recognizes the gen- harm; or eral societal support for disclosure of (5) allege mediator misconduct or evidence by preventing mediation defend the mediator in the face of from being used in an attempt to pro- allegations of misconduct. tect otherwise admissible discoverable evidence from disclosure in court. M A R Y L N D C O I S

30 adopted the ADR Rules, it acknowledged Results: The ethical code, prac- an expectation that the ADR Commis- tice standards, seal-of-approval system sion would propose Rule amendments in and complaint system will be designed to its Practical Action Plan. ensure that Maryland ADR practitioners have clear, wise guidance about appropri- Based on its review of circuit court ADR ate behavior. At the same time, these practices and the effects of the new ADR plans respect the need to develop a di- verse pool of mediators to serve the needs of our communities. The confidentiality standard is designed to ensure the in- tegrity of ADR processes for both court- related and non-court-related disputes, allowing participants to have open and honest communication, without fear of subsequent legal consequences and pro- tecting the public perception of media- tion as a confidential process. The issue of quality assurance will be a major subject of the Commission’s ongoing efforts. A quality assurance project team will begin working in the early fall and will regularly report on its progress to the Commission Rules to date, the Commission hopes and its Advisory Boards. that the Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure and the Maryland Circuit Court ADR Rules Court of Appeals will consider amending For several years, MD Rule 9-205 has pro- the ADR Rules to address training re- vided for mandatory mediation in most quirements, qualifications issues, and child custody and visitation disputes. As a other ADR practices in the Maryland cir- result, some very well-established, court- cuit courts. The proposed Rule amend- based child custody and visitation media- ments would: tion programs have been developed in Maryland. • Ensure high quality mediators in di- vorce cases by requiring mediators More recently, in October of 1998, the seeking referrals of divorce cases with Maryland Court of Appeals adopted new financial issues to take an additional ADR Rules for the circuit courts, codified 20 hours of skills-based training in a new Title 17, which became effective about how to mediate these issues on January 1, 1999. MD Rules 17-101 (above the required 40-hour basic et. seq. define ADR practices, establish training and 20-hour child custody statewide circuit court ADR procedures, and visitation mediation training) and set forth training and qualification and specify the general content of requirements for mediators and other that training, and require mediators ADR practitioners taking circuit court to observe or co-mediate eight hours referrals. When the ADR Rules were of divorce mediation sessions involv- adopted, the ADR Commission was still ing financial issues, conducted by in the fact-finding phase of its work and court-approved divorce mediators or was not prepared to make any substantive to review approved video taped me- recommendations about the draft Rules. diation sessions as a substitute if nec-

Therefore, when the Court of Appeals M A R Y L N D C O I S 31 essary. The observation requirement and their attorneys to attend non- can also be waived by the court for fee-for-service settlement confer- those who have substantial experi- ences over their objections, so that ence mediating divorce cases involv- the Rules would also give courts the ing financial issues. discretion to order objecting parties • Set a training standard for practi- and/or their attorneys to attend tioners outside the mediation field non-fee-for-service mediation. Par- (arbitrators, early neutral evaluators, ties would be required to listen to fact-finders and settlement confer- an explanation of the mediation ence facilitators) by requiring 12 process and then decide whether hours of training and specify the to participate in mediation. This general content of that training, would permit expanding under- if the practitioner has not been an standing of the mediation process ADR practitioner in at least five cir- and could contribute to the growth cuit court, or other state, or federal of mediation programs using court court cases. Both this training re- personnel, volunteer mediators and/ quirement and the above-mentioned or community mediation programs, 20-hour divorce mediation training in selected cases. program should be weighted heavily • Promote judicial discretion in cases toward developing needed conflict where parties are unrepresented by resolution skills in each field. attorneys, known as pro se parties, by • Make it easier for judges to waive clarifying language to specify that the existing bachelor’s degree re- the court has the discretion to order quirement. Specifically, the Com- them to attend child custody and mission proposes removing the good visitation mediation. cause standard for exemptions from • Simplify practitioner application the bachelor’s degree requirement, forms by providing that they be so courts could waive this require- affirmed under the penalty of per- ment “in connection with a particu- jury to be true. This would substi- lar action” without stating a reason. tute for the current documentation • Require that mediators take eight requirements. hours of continuing education every two years to strengthen their media- Results: These proposed Rule tion skills and to keep abreast of de- changes (red-lined copies of the Rules velopments in the ADR field. available upon request) will improve the • Acknowledge the possibility that quality of ADR services provided in cir- young people can be effective medi- cuit court cases and will reduce “red tape” ators, especially in peer settings, and so qualified ADR practitioners can be encourage the use of co-mediation listed by the circuit courts more easily. by adult and juvenile mediators in The Commission also believes that Mary- some juvenile justice and parent- land’s ADR Rules and any ADR legisla- teen conflicts, by allowing judges “in tion should be subject to ongoing review connection with a particular action” and periodic revision to reflect the evolv- to waive the requirement that a me- ing nature of the ADR field, and to en- diator be at least 21 years old. sure the appropriate use of ADR. • Amend the Rules which currently permit the courts to order parties M A R Y L N D C O I S

32 Practitioner Training Guidelines Once the guidelines are in place, the The Commission will also work with Commission will begin working with ADR trainers around the state to develop ADR trainers around the state to develop and promote training guidelines. As with and promote model training curricula, the ethical code and practice standards beginning with basic mediation and pro- for practitioners, the Commission plans gressing to more specialized courses. to initially use a “voluntary compliance Consistent with plans for safeguarding model” for these guidelines and to estab- quality control within the practitioner lish a “seal of approval” system that high- community, the option of creating a cer- lights the trainers and training programs tification system for ADR trainers and following the ADR Commission’s guide- training programs will also be examined lines. The training guidelines will also em- once a consensus on training guidelines phasize the importance of gaining experi- has been developed. ence, and the “seal of approval” concept will also be structured as a business devel- Results: As the Commission opment incentive for trainers. The guide- works to increase the demand for ADR lines will also encourage “apprenticeships” services, it will be essential to have an within the ADR community, and the ever-growing diverse pool of well-trained, Commission will promote experienced highly skilled practitioners. These recom- trainers and practitioners who are willing mended actions will help ensure that to mentor, co-mediate with or offer ap- Maryland ADR practitioners are well prenticeships or supervised practice to trained, will promote mentoring, co- new practitioners. mediation and apprenticeship opportuni- ties so that new practitioners can hone their skills, and will improve the quality of ADR training programs statewide. M A R Y L N D C O I S

33 Community mediation services should be encouraged, expanded and financially supported. Community Mediation

o increase the use of Commission plans to work ADR at the community with community mediation advocates, level and to encourage ADR practitioners, and other interested the resolution of dis- groups to: putes before they esca- late into violence or le- • Create a Community Mediation Association gal battles, the ADR Commission paid par- • Establish a stable funding mechanism for community mediation ticular attention to community mediation services Tand its potential to improve the way in • Evaluate an established community mediation center which people respond to conflict in their neighborhoods. The Commission reviewed • Develop programs in counties not yet served by community practices at Maryland’s nine community mediation mediation centers via surveys and direct contact with each community mediation program. Although each of Maryland’s community mediation centers is unique, Tangier Island—Watermen’s Dispute they all provide mediation services at the community level, regardless of participants’ During a public forum on the Eastern Shore, staff ability to pay, making mediation accessible from the Salisbury Conflict Resolution Center relayed to all members of the community. Some a story about a remarkable mediation process on Tan- have developed strong referral relationships gier, a remote island at the mouth of the Chesapeake with courts, police, juvenile justice agencies, Bay where the islanders and watermen have made only private sector ADR service providers, and minimal lifestyle changes since Colonial times. other groups. The Commission strongly A community mediator worked through the local supports community mediation and is very church in hopes of helping the islanders resolve a water interested in encouraging its growth quality dispute with a major environmental group. throughout Maryland by providing fund- Not only did the two groups reach agreement, resolv- ing for community mediation services. ing their dispute, but the watermen were so moved by Unfortunately, most community media- the process that they drafted a “Covenant with God” tion centers in Maryland operate under pledging to live as stewards of the water and to take severe resource constraints. The Com- new steps to protect the Bay. Much to the amazement mission believes that community media- of local folk, the watermen—who rarely leave the is- tion is a valuable service to Maryland cit- land and have barely changed their commercial prac- izens and that community mediation tices in the last 300 years—now make trips to the services should be encouraged, expanded mainland to discuss this experience and its importance and financially supported. As such, the to them. M A R Y L N D C O I S

35 Community Mediation What is it?

Mediation helps people reach agreements, rebuild relationships, and find permanent solutions to their disputes. Mediation is a process that lets people speak for themselves and make their own decisions. Community mediation provides a non-profit framework for assuring access to mediation services at the community level with control and responsibility for dispute resolution maintained in the community. Community mediation strives to: (1) train community members—who reflect the community’s diversity with regard to age, race, gender, ethnicity, income and education—to serve as volunteer mediators (2) provide mediation services at no cost or on a sliding scale (3) hold mediation sessions in the communities where the disputes occur (4) schedule mediation sessions at a time and place convenient to the participants (5) encourage early use of mediation to prevent violence or to reduce the need for court intervention, as well as provide mediation at any stage in a dispute (6) mediate community-based disputes that come from referral sources including self-referrals, police, courts, community organizations, civic groups, religious institutions, government agencies and others (7) educate community members about conflict resolution and mediation (8) maintain high quality mediators by providing intensive skills-based training, apprenticeships, continuing education and ongoing evaluation of volunteer mediators (9) work with the community in governing community mediation programs in a manner that is based on collaborative problem solving among staff, volunteers and community members Community mediation is effective at resolving a wide variety of community- based disputes. M A R Y L N D C O I S

36 The Commission’s Community mediation services were available. Specifi- Issues Committee worked in three cally, forum participants indicated that distinct subcommittees to conduct community mediation services could in-depth reviews of ADR as it is help advance restorative justice initiatives, used in government and public pol- assist in community based “HotSpots” The Commission believes icy, criminal and juvenile justice, projects, and address race, religion and and community mediation. The that the court should ethnic conflicts, all as part of an overall Committee conducted survey take a leading role in research and reviewed literature effort to mediate community-based dis- on state and national efforts, and putes. Forum participants also said that supporting community produced detailed reports on ADR community mediation would make ADR in each of these three areas. accessible to a diverse group of people mediation services, After identifying nine commu- and that community mediation programs largely because of their nity mediation centers in Mary- could partner with school-based conflict land, the Community Mediation resolution programs. potential to prevent Subcommittee surveyed each conflicts from reaching one–as well as several others out- Community Mediation a level at which court side the state–to develop a descrip- Association tion of community mediation and A statewide association for all community intervention is necessary. to assess the needs of community mediation programs should be estab- mediation centers. The Committee lished to develop criteria for new and ex- reported that most community me- diation centers in Maryland are still isting centers that receive state funding, relatively new, they appear to be in as well as to assist the state in its efforts varying stages of development, and to advance community mediation ser- they are still exploring avenues to vices in each jurisdiction. The association establish and maintain adequate should be created by community media- funding for their work. The Com- tors using state start-up funds and should mittee also found that most centers be established as a non-profit organiza- hold their mediators to high stan- tion. The Commission believes that such dards by providing in-depth skills an association would play a pivotal role in training, co-mediation experience coordinating state resource/funding pri- and in-service training. orities, developing criteria for state fund- Reports developed and collected by the ing, identifying outside funding sources, Commission and each of its working com- preparing grant applications for commu- mittees are included in a separate Appendix. To receive a copy, please call the Commis- nity mediation programs, increasing re- sion’s office at (410) 321-2398. sources for new and existing community Baseline Research

During the Commission’s regional public forums, participants expressed strong support for community mediation ser- vices, sharing personal perspectives on the benefits of active programs and dis- cussing the types of disputes that could

be resolved in each region if community M A R Y L N D C O I S 37 mediation centers, advocating for com- through, and monitored by an entity that munity mediation, providing technical could be held accountable by the Mary- assistance to new programs, and advising land General Assembly, such as the ADR the Commission and the superceding Commission, the planned State Dispute State Dispute Resolution Office on other Resolution Office and/or some other issues of concern to community media- agency that could work closely with the tion. The association should also work above-mentioned Community Mediation collaboratively with the Commission and Association and other interested groups. the Maryland Council on Dispute Reso- State funds would be used to augment ex- lution to help build mutually beneficial isting funding and would not be the pro- relationships among community media- grams’ sole source of funds. tors and private sector ADR service The Commission believes that the court providers statewide. should take a leading role in supporting The Commission is also interested in community mediation services, largely be- recognizing outstanding work in commu- cause of their potential to prevent conflicts nity mediation from reaching a level at which court inter- A community is like a ship, everyone ought and, in addition vention is necessary. The Commission also to other promo- sees community mediation as a vital re- to be prepared to take the helm. tional efforts, will source for the courts in cases that involve —Henrik Ibsen work with the community-based disputes that concern Community Me- ongoing relationships, such as criminal diation Association to provide “Ozzie charges brought by citizens against their Bermant” awards to deserving community friends or neighbors. These cases often lead mediation practitioners. to repeated lawsuits because the adversarial process and win-lose verdicts rarely serve to Funding address underlying issues and meet every- The Commission’s survey of community one’s needs. Community mediation ser- mediation programs found that insuffi- vices can bring parties together to reach cient funding is their major concern. The mutually acceptable resolutions, which are Commission proposes using state, local more likely to prevent recurring disputes and private funding sources to support and subsequent court interventions. the provision of community mediation services across the state. Evaluate An Existing Community One option the Commission is consider- Mediation Center ing is drafting enabling legislation to se- The Commission plans to work with a cure state funding, such as the New York university research unit to conduct an in- statute that enables the court system to dependent evaluation of a community provide partial funding for New York’s 62 mediation center. The evaluation will use community-based conflict resolution appropriate and consistent measures to centers. The Commission would work identify any potential improvements, with the Community Mediation Associa- document the programs’ benefits, if any, tion to develop proposed eligibility per- and, if and when appropriate, be used to formance and accountability standards to encourage the creation of new programs ensure that services are provided in a and justify increased funding for current manner that is cost effective and that is and future programs. The evaluation will consistent with the “Community Media- be methodologically sound and have tion—What is it?” description in this sec- quantitative and qualitative components, including case studies. The Commission

M A R Y L N D C O I S tion. State funds would be distributed

38 anticipates working closely with the pro- another succeed, by collectively raising posed community mediation association public awareness of ADR and its benefits, to ensure that the evaluation reflects the as well as by referring cases and other program’s goals and objectives. work to one another. Develop New Programs Results: As community media- The Commission will work with commu- tion thrives in Maryland, we expect to nity groups and the community media- see improvements in the handling of tion association to develop new centers in community-based disputes. The Com- counties that do not yet have community mission anticipates that community me- mediation services and that want help to diation service providers will strengthen start grassroots programs with built-in their relationships with courts and other evaluation components. As community criminal justice programs to mediate a mediation gains statewide momentum, greater number of minor criminal and ju- the Commission envisions an increased venile cases, and other kinds of local number of courts, community groups, community-based disputes. As active ad- government agencies, private ADR practi- vocates for ADR, these programs recruit, tioners and other organizations establish- train and empower community members, ing partnerships with community media- enabling them to address community- tion programs. The Commission also based disputes and to help transform the believes that community mediation pro- way in which our communities respond grams and private sector ADR service to conflict situations. providers are well-positioned to help one M A R Y L N D C O I S

39 Mediation is beneficial for restoring damaged relationships in minor criminal and civil disputes. District Court

he Commission is very • help communities and families im- interested in seeing prove relationships ADR advance in Mary- • help courts serve the public land’s District Court. • improve the use of judicial resources Mediation, in particu- • offer lasting solutions for people’s lar, is especially benefi- problems cial for restoring dam- aged relationships and Thus, the Commission plans to work with Dis- addressing the underlying issues in many trict Court judges , court personnel, ADR practitioners and Tminor criminal and civil disputes that are other interested groups to: filed in the District Court. • Evaluate already-established District Court ADR programs The Honorable Martha F. Rasin, Chief • Assist pilot projects with built-in evaluation components Judge of the Maryland District Court and a member of the ADR Commission, • Promote use of ADR in appropriate cases resulting from recent formed the Commission’s District Court “peace order” legislation Subcommittee to develop and implement • Promote educating judges, court personnel, attorneys and liti- plans to advance the appropriate use of gants about the benefits and use of ADR in other appropriate ADR in the Maryland District Court. District Court cases Based on this group’s work, the Commis- sion will begin its focus on ADR in the • Create a network of judges and court personnel who manage District Court by assisting with evalua- district court ADR programs tion and implementation of the Court’s • Co-host a conference on court-related ADR misdemeanor criminal mediation pilot programs. The ADR Commission sup- ports the District Court’s goals for its Program Evaluations ADR efforts, which will seek to: Chief Judge Rasin surveyed Maryland’s • offer people choices and better ways District Court to assess the extent to to solve problems which each was already using ADR. The • offer prompt resolutions result of this review indicated that the Dis- • offer people an opportunity to par- trict Court currently offers a number of ticipate in the outcome of their innovative ADR services in some jurisdic- disputes tions. These include a Baltimore City civil • create a dispute resolution structure, case mediation program operated in part- but not a new “legal structure” nership with the University of Maryland • improve peoples’ satisfaction through School of Law’s clinical program and the win/win solutions Community Mediation Program, a num- ber of partnerships that provide for crimi- M A R Y L N D C O I S

41 The Courts Administration Com- nal and civil case referrals be effectively and permanently resolved mittee examined a variety of court- to community mediation in mediation. The District Court is based ADR programs in Maryland centers and private practi- working on a pilot criminal mediation and elsewhere. The Committee also tioners, a well-established project in Montgomery County and will surveyed judges and court person- criminal mediation pro- identify another pilot program to work nel to assess the state of ADR at the gram operated by the with the Commission. Court of Special Appeals, in county Anne Arundel County circuit court, in the District Court The District Court also plans to begin re- and at the Office of Administrative State’s Attorney’s Office, vising case processing forms and modify- Hearings, and prepared reports on and a volunteer mediator ing court processes to encourage the use ADR in each area. program in Montgomery of ADR statewide. Eventually, the Com- Chief Judge Rasin produced a re- County. mission envisions the District Court con- port on ADR in the District Courts While each of these pro- vening stakeholder groups in every juris- which found that ADR exists grams appears successful, diction to establish local ADR planning largely in the courts with the most there have been little or teams of judges, court personnel, prose- crowded dockets, and is used in no formal attempts to cutors, public defenders, police officers, criminal cases more frequently than in civil cases. The University of document their results and, where available, community media- Maryland Law School Clinic, most and evaluate their effec- tors and private practitioners to develop community mediation programs, tiveness. Thus, the Com- new ADR programs and to effectuate re- and volunteers throughout the state mission plans to work ferrals to mediation early in the case re- mediate District Court criminal with a university research view process. and civil cases at no charge to the unit to conduct indepen- During the Commission’s public forums, parties. Some State’s Attorneys Of- dent evaluations of at least it was apparent that each region has fices also have formal mediation two of the above men- unique needs and priorities. For exam- programs primarily for criminal tioned District Court ple, participants in Western Maryland cases that stem from ongoing inter- programs. The evalua- personal disputes. Most District expressed interest in making ADR work tions will use appropriate in civil cases before attempting to use it Courts also hold pretrial confer- and consistent measures ences to assess settlement options in the criminal arena. The Commission to identify any potential in complex civil cases, and many recognizes the importance of making are poised to expand their use of improvements, document sure that programs respond to local mediation. the programs’ benefits, if needs and concerns. As a result, the any, and, if and when ap- Commission strongly supports using Reports developed and collected by the propriate, be used to en- Commission and each of its working com- consensus building processes and public mittees are included in a separate Appendix. courage the creation of participation in efforts to establish new To receive a copy, please call the Commis- new programs and justify programs at the local level. sion’s office at (410) 321-2398. increased funding for cur- rent and future programs. Because District Court litigants are often Baseline The evaluations will be of limited means, the Commission be- Research methodologically sound lieves that ADR services should be pro- and have quantitative and vided to them at little or no cost. Thus, qualitative components, the Commission believes that efforts to including case studies. increase the use of mediation in the Dis- trict Court will open opportunities for Pilot Projects community mediators and other volun- To meet these objectives and to help teer mediators, as well as law school and curb violence in our communities, the college student mediators under supervi- District Court will focus one of its pilot sion and others who are seeking practical projects on criminal cases that involve experience. inter-personal disputes, which can often M A R Y L N D C O I S

42 Peace Orders trict Court in its efforts to educate people During the 1999 Maryland General As- as needed to advance the use of ADR in sembly session, legislation was enacted to the District Court. enable individuals in certain situations or disputes to apply for a “peace order” as a The Commission is also interested in rec- form of civil relief intended to keep an- ognizing outstanding work in the District other person away. If granted by the Dis- Court and, in addition to other promo- trict Court after a hearing, a peace order tional efforts, will incorporate its work may include specific restrictions or prohi- into the planned “Ozzie Bermant” awards bitions on future contact between the program outlined in the public awareness parties involved. section of this document.

The District Court anticipates receiving District Court ADR Network and a high volume of peace order cases, many Court-Related ADR Conference of which could be suitable for ADR. The ADR Commission plans to encourage With the likelihood being that most peace the formation of a network of judges, court order cases will re- commissioners, sult from inter- and other court personal disputes personnel who are and damaged re- already involved lationships, many in ADR programs people who par- at the District ticipated in the Court level. This Commission’s re- network will pro- gional public fo- vide a forum for rums recommen- sharing informa- ded building a tion and resources mediation com- to strengthen ex- ponent into the isting programs, peace order process, using early case screen- and offer technical support to new District ing and mediation referrals when appropri- Court programs. The network will be ate. The Commission supports this ap- asked to assist the ADR commission and proach and will work with the District the circuit court network in designing Court as it gears up for implementing the and sponsoring a conference on court- new legislation. related ADR. ADR Education Results: These efforts will ex- As noted in this document’s “Targeted pand the use of ADR in the District ADR Education” section, providing qual- Court in a manner that will improve the ity court-related ADR services requires quality of services it provides. They will educating judges, court personnel, attor- also lay the groundwork for future civil neys and litigants about ADR. Each and criminal District Court ADR pro- needs to understand what ADR is, when grams across the state. The District Court it is appropriate, what services the court pilot programs are expected to reduce offers, what the benefits are, and their conflicts that would otherwise result in own roles in the process. Accordingly, the repeated District Court cases, and to con- ADR Commission plans to assist the Dis- tribute to efforts to build more civil and peaceful communities in Maryland. M A R Y L N D C O I S

43 Mediation is extremely valuable in most child custody disputes and family-based conflicts as well as other civil matters. Circuit Courts

rior to the effective for any circuit court ADR program; and date of the new cir- (8) many jurisdictions reported growing cuit court ADR interest in expanding the use of ADR in Rules, the Commis- their circuit courts. sion surveyed Mary- The use of ADR has been growing rapidly Circuit court ADR land’s circuit courts, around the country and, although at a programs save time reviewed the 1998 slower pace, it is growing within the Mary- and money for litigants, Maryland Court land circuit courts. Although there have Services Survey, and followed up with been no independent evaluations, the Com- decrease court delays, Pjudges, court administrators and other mission has collected anecdotal reports that and increase litigants’ court officials to get an accurate picture of existing circuit court programs save time Maryland circuit court ADR programs. In and money for litigants, decrease court de- satisfaction. summary (details will be provided in a lays, and increase litigants’ satisfaction. separate Appendix to the Commission’s fi- Thus, the ADR Commission nal Action Plan), the Commission found recommends the following actions that, as of Fall 1998, in Maryland’s circuit to encourage expanding and creating new courts: (1) larger jurisdictions used ADR ADR programs in Maryland’s circuit courts: more frequently than smaller jurisdic- tions; (2) almost every jurisdiction had • Expand the use of mediation in appropriate family-related cases formal court-ordered child custody and visitation mediation programs, although • Evaluate at least two existing circuit court ADR programs procedures varied considerably from one • Adapt Ohio’s successful “circuit rider” model to create civil jurisdiction to the next; (3) Baltimore mediation pilot projects in three jurisdictions City and Montgomery County had for- mal, well-established, attorney-facilitated • Assist in implementation of a civil ADR program in the Circuit settlement programs for civil cases; (4) a Court for Baltimore City handful of other jurisdictions had civil • Work with the Maryland Judicial Commission on pro bono, the mediation programs, all of which were Maryland Legal Services Corporation and the Maryland State relatively new; (5) Prince George’s County Bar Association to establish a pilot ADR project to incorporate had a court-ordered non-binding arbitra- tion program; (6) most other jurisdictions ADR into pro bono legal services had judges, retired judges and/or attor- • Launch targeted education initiatives for judges and court neys conducting settlement conferences personnel and/or occasional arbitration sessions in selected civil cases; (7) although most pro- • Create a network of judges and court-personnel who manage grams had certain data on hand, no inde- court-based ADR programs pendent evaluations had been conducted • Co-host a conference on court-related ADR M A R Y L N D C O I S

45 The Courts Administration Com- Family Mediation pants and their attorneys about the benefits mittee examined a variety of court- Circuit Court Rule 9-205 of mediation. In the interest of reaching based ADR programs in Maryland requires judges to order timely child custody and visitation agree- and elsewhere. The Committee also mediation in child cus- ments that meet everyone’s needs, attorneys surveyed judges and court person- tody and visitation cases, ex- should be encouraged not to raise unneces- nel to assess the state of ADR at cept under certain circum- sary objections to mediated agreements. the Court of Special Appeals, in county circuit court, in the District stances. Significant limita- Maryland Rule 9-205, which addresses Court and at the Office of Admin- tions to this, however, have child custody and visitation mediation, is istrative Hearings, and prepared included a shortage of me- currently being interpreted in two ways: reports on ADR in each area. diators in some jurisdictions (1) that pro se (unrepresented by counsel) Virtually all circuit court juris- and, until recently, a lack of parties may not be ordered into media- dictions have court-ordered child administrative support in tion and (2) that pro se parties may be or- custody and visitation mediation, some courts. As a result, un- dered into mediation. The Commission but procedures vary considerably der Chief Judge Bell’s lead- has been informed that experiences in from one jurisdiction to the next. ership, each jurisdiction has child custody and visitation mediation A survey of the circuit courts indi- hired (or is hiring) a Family cated that Allegany, Anne Arundel, programs across the state indicate that Services Coordinator to mediation works well for pro se parties, Baltimore, Frederick, Kent, Mont- help build local capabilities gomery and Prince George’s even when one party to the mediation is for such cases to be referred Counties all have court-ordered represented and the other is not. For ex- civil mediation programs. Prince to mediation, to improve ample, approximately 40 percent of the George’s also has a court-ordered case management, and to take other steps that will in- non-binding arbitration program, Harmony may be difficult to obtain in and most jurisdictions report that crease the use of mediation. judges, retired judges and/or attor- Based on information gath- our adversarial system and our heteroge- neys conduct settlement confer- ered from well-established neous society. . . . We as lawyers must ences and/or arbitration in se- family mediation programs lected civil cases. The Committee in Maryland and feedback embrace our role as peacemakers as encourages efforts to move up early settlement conferences to received during regional vigorously as our roles as advocates. increase the effectiveness and the public forums, the Com- —Roberta Cooper Ramo mission believes that medi- President, American Bar Association, benefits of this valuable ADR tool. December 1995 ation is extremely valuable Reports developed and collected by the in most child custody and Commission and each of its working com- mittees are included in a separate Appen- visitation disputes as well as cases handled by the well-established dix. To receive a copy, please call the Com- in many other family-based Prince George’s County child custody mission’s office at (410) 321-2398. conflicts. Because of often and visitation mediation program involve deep-seated emotions and pro se parties. Thus, the Commission is Baseline the importance of develop- proposing an amendment to Rule 9-205 Research ing future working rela- to make it clear that judges may refer pro tionships, there is a broad se parties to mediation. (Please see the and growing sentiment “ADR Practitioners and Trainers” section that the courts should refrain from issuing of this report for further information.) custody and visitation orders until reason- The Commission will also offer assistance able attempts at facilitated consensus-based to the Family Divisions in the larger juris- decision making have been exhausted. Fur- dictions and to Family Services Coordi- ther, the Commission believes that the nators and others who are interested in court should support parties’ ability to expanding the use of mediation and other make “good faith” efforts during media- settlement processes in custody and visi- tion, which may require educating partici- M A R Y L N D C O I S

46 tation disputes, as well as in other appro- Pilot Programs priate family related disputes. The Com- The ADR Commission intends to adapt mission will also participate in efforts to a successful Ohio court ADR initiative, promote dialogue on ADR among family dubbed the “circuit rider pilot project.” services coordinators, so they can learn Under this initiative, the Ohio court sys- from one another, get information on tem hired a part-time staff person to successful mediation programs, deter- work with all interested stakeholders in mine their individual training needs, and three jurisdictions for the purpose of de- begin building relationships with ADR veloping pilot ADR programs. A consen- practitioners and other family service sus building process was used to develop providers. ADR program models that would meet Mediation can also be a powerful tool to the local needs of each court. The “pilot” resolve issues in divorces and in other ap- programs have now been operating for 12 propriate family cases, without incurring years and have led to the creation of the heightened emotional damage that many other court programs. Due to the often results from using the adversarial benefits these programs provide, the process. To help expand this field in a re- Ohio court system recently allocated five sponsible manner, the Commission is million dollars to establish ADR coordi- proposing an additional 20 hours of di- nator positions in every courthouse in the vorce mediation training for practition- state within the next two years. ers. (Please see the “ADR Practitioners Consistent with the Ohio approach, the and Trainers” section of this report for Commission will recruit a part-time staff further information.) person to work with local judges and other stakeholders in three counties (at least one Program Evaluations rural) that do not have civil ADR pro- The Commission plans to work with a grams, in an effort to develop and imple- university research unit to conduct inde- ment civil ADR pilot projects. By working pendent evaluations of at least two circuit collaboratively with local judges, court per- court ADR programs. The evaluations sonnel, Bar Associations, ADR practition- will use appropriate and consistent mea- ers and community programs, and with sures to identify any potential improve- guidance from the ADR Commission, ments, document the programs’ benefits, the pilot project if any, and, if and when appropriate, be facilitator or ADR will thrive in used to encourage the creation of new “circuit rider” Maryland’s courts when programs and justify increased funding will help create for current and future programs. The three programs there is a widespread evaluations will be methodologically that meet local sound and have quantitative and qualita- needs, draw on understanding of what area resources, tive components, including case studies. ADR is, when its use Candidates for evaluation include: produce mea- surable results, is appropriate, what • circuit court civil ADR program in test different Montgomery County; and ADR models services the courts • child custody and visitation media- and techniques, tion programs in Baltimore and and have built- offer and what benefits Prince George’s Counties. in evaluation components. ADR creates. M A R Y L N D C O I S

47 In developing pilot projects in jurisdic- focus is on the judiciary’s role in enhanc- tions that have not yet developed any for- ing the extent and efficiency of the bar’s mal ADR programs, and based on very posi- pro bono efforts and those factors that tive feedback received during regional public affect the bar’s ability to provide effec- forums, the Commission anticipates that the tive pro bono legal services. The ADR “circuit rider” pilot program will create op- commission is interested in working portunities to assess the benefits of ap- with the Pro Bono Commission, the proaches not yet examined in Maryland. Maryland Legal Services Corporation These may include making ADR mandatory and the Maryland State Bar Association for particular cases, building a cadre of on a project that will increase pro bono trained and skilled mediators in rural areas, mediation services for legal services re- determining what kinds of cases are best cipients. handled through ADR processes, establish- ing procedures for enforcing mediated agree- ADR Education ments, and examining ADR as a case man- Providing quality court-related ADR ser- agement tool. vices requires educating judges, masters, The Commis- clerks, court per- sion will also sonnel, family ser- work with Bal- vices coordinators, timore City attorneys and liti- judges and an gants. As in other existing ad hoc states, ADR will ADR committee thrive in Mary- on a civil medi- land’s courts when ation program there is a wide- planned for the spread under- Circuit Court standing of what for Baltimore ADR is, when its City. The Com- use is appropri- mission will work with this group to build ate, what services the courts offer, what ben- in an evaluation component to help the efits ADR creates, what the court’s expanded court monitor and adjust the program as goals for ADR are beyond simple docket needed to optimize its success. Again, the control, and what roles various groups have Commission will use collaborative in the process. Accordingly, the ADR Com- processes to assist this program in a man- mission plans to assist the circuit courts in ner that serves the interests of all stake- their ADR educational efforts. holders. The Commission is also interested in recog- Finally, the Commission plans to partic- nizing outstanding work in circuit court ipate in a pilot program with the Mary- ADR and, in addition to other promotional land Judicial Commission on Pro Bono, efforts, will incorporate circuit court initia- which was recently established by Chief tives into the planned “Ozzie Bermant” Judge Bell. The mission of that Com- awards program outlined in the public mission is to promote and encourage awareness section of this document. pro bono legal work for those unable to afford legal assistance and to increase ac- Circuit Courts ADR Network and cess to the civil justice system for low to Court-Related ADR Conference moderate income individuals in Mary- The ADR Commission plans to encour-

M A R Y L N D C O I S land. The Pro Bono Commission’s initial age the formation of a network of judges, 48 Differentiated Case Management Coor- in a manner that will improve the quality dinators, Family Services Coordinators of services they provide. The evaluation and other court ADR program coordina- projects and pilot programs will be de- tors who are already involved in ADR signed to help other circuit courts repli- programs at the circuit court level. This cate similar ADR programs and adapt network will provide a forum for sharing them to serve local needs. The Commis- information and resources to strengthen sion believes that increasing the use of existing programs, and offer technical civil and family ADR services in the cir- support to new circuit court programs. cuit courts will promote more coopera- The network will be asked to assist the tive business, legal and family practices, ADR Commission and the District produce higher levels of public apprecia- Court groups in designing and sponsor- tion of the courts and improve the courts’ ing a conference on court-related ADR. operating efficiency. This will contribute to efforts to build more civil and peaceful Results: These efforts will ex- communities in Maryland. pand the use of ADR in the circuit courts M A R Y L N D C O I S

49 Office of Administrative Hearings

he Office of Adminis- • Assist in evaluating an established trative Hearings (OAH) ADR program is an independent agen- • Assist and promote an OAH pilot cy within the execu- program to expand mediation services tive branch that is responsible for adjudi- Evaluation cation and resolution Consistent with the evaluations planned of disputes in which a for circuit and District Court programs, state agency is a party, unless an exemp- the Commission plans to work with a uni- Ttion is provided by state law. In calendar versity research unit to conduct an inde- year 1997, OAH’s docket included ap- pendent evaluations of one of OAH’s ADR proximately 42,000 cases, of which ap- programs. The evaluation will use appro- proximately 27,000 resulted in hearings. priate and consistent measures to identify The remaining cases were mediated, any potential improvements, document settled, or other- the program’s bene- wise resolved prior OAH operates a formal fits, if any, and, if to an adjudicatory and when appro- hearing. mediation program priate, be used to encourage the cre- OAH provides al- for special education ation of new pro- ternatives to adju- grams and justify dicatory hearings, cases and has formal increased funding at no cost to the for current and parties, in certain settlement conference future programs. cases. OAH oper- The evaluation will ates a formal medi- programs. be methodologi- ation program for cally sound and have quantitative and special education cases and has formal qualitative components, including case settlement conference programs for studies. Home Improvement Commission dis- putes and Boat Excise Tax appeals. To The Commission is also interested in rec- help advance OAH’s ADR efforts, the ognizing outstanding work dispute reso- Commission plans to: lution at OAH and, in addition to other promotional efforts, will incorporate its M A R Y L N D C O I S

50 work into the planned “Ozzie Bermant” awards program outlined in the public The Courts Administration Commit- awareness section of this document. tee examined a variety of court-based ADR programs in Maryland and Pilot Project elsewhere. The Committee also sur- The ADR Commission will work with veyed judges and court personnel to OAH to expand its menu of ADR ser- assess the state of ADR at the Court of Special Appeals, in county circuit vices to a new class of cases. Possible pi- court, in the District Court and at lot projects under consideration include the Office of Administrative Hear- developing mediation programs for ings, and prepared reports on ADR Child Support Enforcement Admin- in each area. istration cases and/or Patients’ Bill of The Committee reported that Rights cases. Consistent with other Administrative Law Judges and other Commission efforts, OAH’s pilot pro- OAH staff provide mediation ser- jects will be developed using collabora- vices and/or conduct settlement con- tive processes, bringing in stakeholders ferences—at no cost to parties—as including administrative law judges, alternatives to holding a full hearing. local Bar Association members, ADR Formal programs are also in place to practitioners, community programs, mediate special education cases and court personnel and other individuals as to handle both Home Improvement Commission disputes and Boat appropriate. All pilots will have built-in Excise Tax appeals in settlement con- evaluation components. ferences. OAH’s ADR providers are The ADR Commission assigned particular cases on the basis Results: Expanding OAH’s ADR of subject matter expertise. Their programs is expected to save time and will work with OAH ADR programs are operating suc- money for OAH and for those involved in to help expand its cessfully and OAH is poised to OAH cases, while increasing the parties’ expand its use of ADR. overall satisfaction with the process and menu of ADR services the outcomes of their cases. Because OAH Reports developed and collected by the Com- mission and each of its working committees resolves disputes that involve government are included in a separate Appendix. To re- agencies, efforts to increase OAH’s use of ceive a copy, please call the Commission’s of- ADR will help more state agency man- fice at (410) 321-2398. agers realize ADR’s benefits, will improve relationships among state agencies and Baseline their constituencies, and will contribute Research to ongoing efforts aimed at advancing ADR in the executive branch. M A R Y L N D C O I S

51 State and Local Government

undamental roles of tation, to develop public policy through government include multi-party consensus building, to ad- providing for the effi- dress land-use and environmental con- cient and equitable dis- flicts, and to mediate inter-jurisdictional tribution of public disputes involving multiple agencies or goods, enforcing laws government bodies (detailed findings and regulations to safe- will be described in the Appendix to the guard our quality of ADR Commission’s final Action Plan Flife, and protecting and preserving public Report). The Commission’s research in- safety. Meeting these obligations requires dicates that ADR use is expanding in Conflict resolution in difficult decision-making processes and government and that agency managers the government and trade-offs among diverse interests, often re- who have used ADR effectively are inter- public policy arena sulting in burdensome and prolonged dis- putes. Conflict resolution in the govern- promotes the use of ment and public policy arena promotes the consensus building and use of consensus building and collaborative processes “upstream” as policy is developed collaborative processes and “downstream” as it is implemented. “upstream” as policy Mediation, negotiated rule making, con- sensus building, partnering and similar is developed and processes are increasingly used to prevent “downstream” as it and resolve public policy disputes. is implemented. The ADR Commission was pleased to learn that many of Maryland’s state, county and municipal agencies have de- veloped innovative conflict resolution programs. The Commission conducted an extensive review of ADR in Mary- land’s state and local government agen- cies and found ADR efforts at all levels of Maryland government. ADR is being used to mediate some employment- related disputes, to partner with business and others for state contract implemen- M A R Y L N D C O I S

52 ested in advancing its use throughout programs. The evaluations will be government. methodologically sound and have quanti- Despite some promising ADR initiatives, tative and qualitative components, in- the Commission believes that consider- cluding case studies. ably more can be done. The Commis- Pilot Programs sion’s research indicates that few agencies The Commission will establish and fund have an ongoing emphasis on ADR, that selected pilot ADR programs within in- most people surveyed were unfamiliar terested state and local government agen- with ADR, and that there is no systemic cies. Pilot programs will be developed effort in place to encourage continued through collaborative processes that bring ADR advancements in government. The in all appropriate stakeholders. All pilots Commission recommends: will have built-in evaluation components. • Evaluating existing state and local government ADR programs The Commission is es- pecially interested in • Launching pilot ADR programs within interested state and local working on pilot pro- government agencies and a full-scale ADR demonstration project grams that involve inter- with an interested government agency actions between govern- ment and business, and • Assisting state and local government agencies in their efforts pilots that involve inter- to increase the use of ADR consistent with their needs jurisdictional disputes. • Supporting the expanded use of ADR in the Office of the Attor- The Commission is ney General by obtaining funding for training, staff and other working with the Uni- resources the Attorney General determines are appropriate for versity of Maryland Law the task School Clinic and the Maryland Legal Services • Launching targeted education initiatives for selected agency Corporation on a possi- The Commission is managers and key personnel in state and local government ble pilot program with especially interested • Networking those already working on government ADR programs the state office on aging. The pilot will estab- in working on pilot • Co-hosting a conference on ADR in government lish an alternative to programs that involve • Working with the Governor on an Executive Order to encour- guardianship litigation age ADR in state government in cases where consent interactions between to medical treatment is government and Program Evaluations needed for incompetent patients who do The Commission plans to work with a not have surrogate decision makers. The business, and pilots university research unit to conduct inde- pilot consists of creating a three-member that involve inter- pendent evaluations of established state arbitration panel made up of volunteer jurisdictional disputes. and local government ADR programs. health care providers, attorneys and pa- The evaluations will use appropriate and tient advocates. This effort would be pat- consistent measures to identify any po- terned after a successful New York pro- tential improvements, document the pro- gram that has increased access to medical grams’ benefits, if any, and, if and when treatment for nursing and group home appropriate, be used to encourage the residents while decreasing the number of creation of new programs and justify cases in litigation. increased funding for current and future M A R Y L N D C O I S

53 The Commission’s Community Additionally, the Com- delaying their implementation. In a Reg Issues Committee worked in three mission plans to work on Neg framework, representatives of the distinct subcommittees to conduct a full-scale ADR demon- different stakeholder groups are brought in-depth reviews of ADR as it is stration project with a into the process at the very beginning to used in government and public pol- government agency that participate in reviewing options, con- icy, criminal and juvenile justice, interacts with businesses ducting needed research, and drafting and community mediation. The and other interest groups the regulations. Using consensus build- Committee conducted survey re- search and reviewed literature on where complex disputes ing techniques to get everyone’s best state and national efforts to pro- frequently occur. The thinking and to find creative ways of duce detailed reports on ADR Commission envisions meeting the variety of needs around the in each of these three areas. using an ADR “systems table, minimizes the likelihood of hav- With assistance from the Univer- design” approach, which ing lawsuits filed to challenge new regu- sity of Maryland’s Institute for has become popular lations. Governmental Service, the Govern- among major corpora- The planned demonstration project ment Subcommittee interviewed tions. An ADR systems could also involve assessing the potential state, county and municipal govern- design analyzes repetitive roles that community mediation pro- ment officials on their use of ADR. conflicts in an agency The Committee found many suc- grams and private practitioners can play and creates customized in government ADR efforts. It will in- cess stories and considerable inter- conflict prevention and est within the public sector, but clude a substantial evaluation compo- conflict management only a few well-established pro- nent, which we hope will be highlighted grams. Based on this research, the mechanisms to handle to help expand the use of ADR in state Committee determined that condi- these repeated conflicts and local government agencies. tions within Maryland government in the most productive circles appear conducive to expand- manner for the agency State and Local Government ing ADR programs and raising and its constituencies. Projects awareness of ADR’s applications Agency management and The Commission is interested in work- in the public policy arena. staff will be trained to use ing with state and local agencies as they Reports developed and collected by the ADR to resolve both in- strengthen their existing ADR programs Commission and each of its working com- ternal and external dis- and consider developing new conflict mittees are included in a separate Appendix. putes and to use collabo- management programs. The Commis- To receive a copy, please call the Commis- rative processes and/or sion’s office at (410) 321-2398. sion will also help interested agencies regulatory negotiation handle multi-party public policy issues Baseline programs that involve by instituting facilitated consensus build- businesses and other in- ing processes. The Commission can pro- Research terested groups in public vide technical assistance, may be able to policy development. help identify funding sources, and can Regulatory Negotiation help identify how individual projects Programs, often referred to as “Reg might relate to ongoing ADR efforts Neg,” give stakeholders a more partici- around the state. patory role in the regulatory develop- During regional public forums, the Com- ment process. Currently, many agencies mission heard from many people who are draft regulations and then send them interested in seeing state and local govern- out for public comment as required by ment move forward in this area. There was applicable statutes. Once the regulations particular support for using ADR to re- are promulgated, aggrieved parties may solve local zoning disputes, conflicts be- take legal action challenging them and M A R Y L N D C O I S

54 tween parents and local boards of educa- AAGs will need to understand the different tion, agricultural disputes, natural resource ADR processes and their benefits, includ- issues, regulatory negotiations, regulatory ing consensus building and negotiated rule enforcement, inter-jurisdictional disputes making. They need to know whether and and many other local government projects. when to advise using ADR, and they must The Commission will work with the Gov- understand the constructive roles they can ernor’s Office, the play in the different Attorney General’s Utilizing Alternative Dispute Resolution ADR processes. Like Office, the Maryland their federal counter- Association of Coun- within Maryland’s judiciary and state parts, AAGs can lead ties, the Maryland agencies will enable cases to be solved the way for innova- Municipal League tive government uses and other appropri- earlier with less cost and, more important, of ADR. ate groups to stress without the animosity that litigation so ADR’s potential in The Attorney Gen- often produces. this area and to iden- eral supports the ex- —Governor Parris N. Glendening tify shared priorities. panded use of ADR The Commission has in state government. made contact with a number of ADR lead- The Commission will work with the Office ers in the federal sector—where ADR has of the Attorney General in the development become a high priority in recent years— of a comprehensive ADR program in that and can serve as a conduit between federal, office. The Commission will also seek fund- state and local ADR proponents. ing for the Attorney General’s Office to pro- vide an ADR training program for AAGs, to The Commission is also interested in rec- help develop case screening policies, and to ognizing outstanding work in public sec- hire personnel necessary to establish and im- tor dispute resolution and, in addition to plement a wide range of innovative ADR other promotional efforts, will incorpo- initiatives. rate the work of government agencies into the planned “Ozzie Bermant” awards Targeted Educational Initiatives program outlined in the Public Aware- The Commission recommends training ness section of this document. appropriate staff in state and local agen- cies. Ideally, conflict management training Attorney General’s Office should be provided for human resources The Commission commends the Attorney managers, regulatory personnel, and staff General’s Office for its successful health who have regular contact with citizens care advocacy and consumer protection and community groups, as well as agency ADR programs. The Commission believes managers and department heads, if possi- that Assistant Attorneys General (AAGs) ble. Additionally, during the Commis- are key players needed to advance the use sion’s regional public forums, some partic- of ADR in state government. AAGs repre- ipants suggested that agencies that have sent government agencies in disputes and an interest in contracting with ADR prac- also serve as legal advisors in a multitude of titioners might consider providing train- contexts. To advise their government ing for procurement officers and budget clients about ADR in regulatory and trans- personnel. actional activities as well as in disputes, M A R Y L N D C O I S

55 Government ADR Network and ADR efforts, outlining the benefits of Government ADR Conference using ADR to resolve disputes and to The ADR Commission plans to create improve public policy initiatives, sup- a network of those already actively involved porting the ADR Commission’s work, in government and encouraging state agencies to take The Commission believes ADR programs. advantage of ADR resources offered by This network will the ADR Commission. that Assistant Attorneys share information and resources to Results: These initiatives are General (AAGs) are help strengthen designed to help highlight current state key players needed to existing programs, and local government ADR efforts, create and offer techni- new state and local government pilot pro- advance the use of ADR cal support to grams and expand the use of ADR new ADR pro- throughout government. The Commis- in state government. grams in govern- sion expects that increased government ment. The net- ADR efforts will improve relationships work will also work with the ADR between the government and the business Commission to promote government uses community, improve agencies’ relation- of ADR and to design a conference on state ships with one another and with other and local government ADR. groups, and expand citizen participation in government. Advancing the use of Governor’s Executive Order ADR in government will also save the To help highlight and encourage govern- government time and money, and pro- ment ADR, the Commission will work mote creative win/win solutions to many with the Governor on an Executive Or- of the complicated matters that govern- der commending current government ment must address. M A R Y L N D C O I S

56

Maryland’s commitment to restorative justice has resulted in an increased number of community-based programs Criminal and Juvenile Justice

aryland’s current to make decisions about how individual crime control and criminal cases should be handled and, as prevention strategy such, are uniquely positioned for early is centered on prin- screening of criminal cases and decision ciples of balanced making about which cases should be restorative justice, referred to mediation or other ADR which emphasize processes. holding offenders The State’s Attorneys in Anne Arundel, Maccountable for their actions, improving Carroll and Montgomery Counties, have public safety, and bringing victims, com- established criminal mediation programs. munities and offenders together to deter- Typically, these and other criminal and mine appropriate restitution and repara- juvenile justice programs identify dis- tions. Restorative justice also emphasizes putes appropriate for mediation, some of Several State’s Attorneys efforts to reintegrate offenders into the which have resulted in multiple or recur- recognize ADR’s benefits, community, balancing the needs of com- ring charges and involve ongoing rela- munities, victims and offenders in the tionships. These cases are referred to me- especially in misde- process. diation sessions only if the victim and the meanor criminal cases Many of the state’s restorative justice ini- alleged offender agree to participate. As tiatives are funded and/or coordinated by “gatekeepers” for the criminal court, that involve ongoing the Governor’s Office of Crime Control State’s Attorneys can also play a pivotal inter-personal disputes. and Prevention, an office which also sup- role in getting parties to the mediation ports the Commission’s efforts to move table. Based on the State’s Attorney’s best Maryland forward in the use of ADR. judgment, cases that are resolved in using The Commission will work with this of- ADR may be closed or placed on a stet fice on projects of mutual interest which docket so that they can be reopened if an may include incorporating mediation alleged offender fails to comply with the into the HotSpot Communities Initia- mediated agreement. Potential ways of tive, community conferencing projects, handling a pending case may be subject after-school programs, and other restora- to discussion during mediation. tive juvenile and criminal justice efforts. Like some State’s Attorneys, the state De- State’s Attorneys are central to the opera- partment of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) has tions of Maryland’s criminal and juvenile been using “alternative” programs for justice systems and several State’s Attor- many years. DJJ’s “intake” process serves neys recognize ADR’s benefits, especially to divert more than half of Maryland’s ju- in misdemeanor criminal cases that in- venile cases into informal programs volve ongoing inter-personal disputes. As rather than relying exclusively on juvenile elected officials, they have the discretion court interventions. In recent years, M A R Y L N D C O I S

59 The Commission’s Community Issues Committee to use ADR in appropriate cases. As such, worked in three distinct subcommittees to conduct in- the Commission will work with agencies depth reviews of ADR as it is used in government and in the criminal and juvenile justice sys- public policy, criminal and juvenile justice, and com- tems to determine the extent to which munity mediation. The Committee conducted survey mediation and other consensual ADR research and reviewed literature on state and national initiatives can be integrated into the efforts to produce detailed reports on ADR in each of state’s continuum of restorative justice these three areas. In its review of ADR in the criminal and juvenile jus- programs. The Commission believes that tice arenas, the Criminal Justice Subcommittee exam- its efforts to enhance the use of mediation ined public and private programs that mediate criminal in criminal and juvenile justice systems misdemeanor cases, juvenile and criminal court diver- should be integrated into other statewide sion programs, institutional Alternatives to Violence crime control and prevention initiatives programs, as well as state and county funded restorative wherever possible. justice programs that include anti-truancy initiatives, The Commission anticipates that its rec- teen courts, community conferences and neighborhood ommendations to advance ADR in state youth panels. The Subcommittee also determined that Maryland’s juvenile justice system’s entire “intake” government will have positive effects on system reflects ADR processes, since many cases are the Department of Public Safety and resolved informally without juvenile court involvement. Correctional Services, the Department of The Subcommittee found anecdotal information about Juvenile Justice, the Maryland State Po- the success of criminal and juvenile justice ADR pro- lice and other crime control and preven- grams, particularly those that involve early case screen- tion agencies. Recommended actions to ing and a concerted effort to identify cases where increase the use of ADR in Maryland’s ongoing relationships need to be addressed in order to circuit and District Courts should further prevent continued conflict. contribute to increased use of ADR in ap- Reports developed and collected by the Commission and each of its propriate criminal and juvenile justice working committees are included in a separate Appendix. To receive cases, as should the network, the planned a copy, please call the Commission’s office at (410) 321-2398. educational conference and the criminal and juvenile justice system training as de- Baseline Research tailed below. Additionally, the Commission plans to work with criminal and ju- Maryland’s commitment to restorative venile authorities and other interested justice has resulted in an increased num- groups to: ber of community-based programs, in- • Evaluate established criminal and juve- cluding neighborhood youth panels, teen courts, drug courts, victim service pro- nile justice ADR programs grams, anti-truancy initiatives, and • Establish criminal and juvenile justice school-based juvenile justice programs. pilot projects with built-in evaluation While many such programs have created components new forums for addressing crime and delinquency, some are highly adversarial • Launch targeted education and training and do not reflect the consensus-based initiatives within the criminal and juve- decision-making model that is inherent nile justice systems in most ADR processes. • Educate the public about the benefits of The ADR Commission supports the ADR in appropriate criminal and juve- state’s commitment to balanced restora- nile justice cases tive justice as well as prosecutorial efforts M A R Y L N D C O I S

60 • Create a criminal and juvenile justice are appropriate for ADR and improve ADR network their use of conflict management tech- niques. These programs will be developed • Co-host a conference on criminal and in cooperation with interested State’s At- juvenile justice ADR torneys, DJJ, and appropriate police • Promote a “no retaliation” principle to training units. We will also help coordi- avoid stigmatizing victims and criminal nate training for HotSpots community defendants who decline to participate in prosecutors and other members of the HotSpots law enforcement and victim criminal and juvenile justice mediation services teams.

Program Evaluations Public Awareness Initiative The Commission plans to work with a A critical component of the ADR Com- university research unit to conduct an in- mission’s marketing and public awareness dependent evaluation of a juvenile ADR plans will be to highlight the benefits of program and the Anne Arundel County mediation or other ADR processes in ap- State’s Attorney’s Office’s criminal media- propriate criminal and juvenile cases. The tion program. The evaluations will use Commission believes that ADR can bring appropriate and consistent measures to tremendous benefits to criminal and juve- identify any potential improvements, nile justice systems and that mediation, in document the programs’ benefits, if any, particular, should be promoted in appro- and, if and when appropriate, be used to priate cases. The general public under- encourage the creation of new programs stands the concept of “crime and punish- and justify increased funding for current ment” but has little experience with and future programs. The evaluations will mediation or other ADR processes in the be methodologically sound and have criminal and juvenile justice arenas and quantitative and qualitative components, will need to be educated about ADR’s po- including case studies. tential to resolve conflicts, some of which could easily erupt into violence. To help Pilot Programs build public support for ADR in criminal The Commission plans to help establish an and juvenile cases, the Commission plans ADR pilot program with an interested to partner with people involved in the State’s Attorney who is not currently partic- HotSpots Communities Initiative and ipating in such a program. The Commis- other ongoing community-based crime sion also plans to help establish a juvenile control and prevention efforts. mediation program in an interested The Commis- The Commission plans jurisdiction, focusing particularly on those sion is also inter- cases that involve ongoing relationships ested in recogniz- to partner with people which could be repaired in mediation. All ing outstanding pilot programs will be developed through work in criminal involved in the collaborative processes and will have built- and juvenile jus- in evaluation components. tice ADR and, in HotSpots Communities Targeted Education and Training addition to other Initiative and other promotional ef- The Commission will work to deliver forts, will incor- ongoing community-based ADR awareness training programs for porate it into the State’s Attorney’s Offices, juvenile justice planned “Ozzie crime control and intake workers and law enforcement per- Bermant” awards

sonnel to help them recognize cases that prevention efforts. M A R Y L N D C O I S 61 program outlined in the public awareness declines to participate in a criminal or ju- section of this document. venile justice mediation session or other ADR process. Criminal defendants, who Criminal and Juvenile Justice are presumed innocent, have a right to an ADR Network and Conference unbiased adjudication, and their unwill- The ADR Commission plans to bring to- ingness to participate in a voluntary ADR gether a network of people already in- program should never be used to abrogate volved in criminal and juvenile justice that right. An individual’s decision not to ADR. The Commission will work with participate should not be reported to the this network to strengthen existing ADR court or raised in any court proceeding. programs and to provide technical assis- tance to new programs. Results: These planned actions will advance the state’s use of ADR and The Commission also plans to work with restorative justice in the criminal and ju- this network to design an educational venile justice systems. They will build conference for State’s Attorneys, public new partnerships among criminal and defenders, district court judges, juvenile juvenile authorities, ADR proponents, court judges, community mediators and community mediators, and other ADR other stakeholders in the criminal and ju- practitioners. They will also help de- venile justice systems. The conference escalate hostilities and prevent violence in would highlight effective ADR applica- our communities, and will contribute to tions in criminal and juvenile justice Maryland’s ongoing efforts to build a cases, would be geared toward helping lo- smooth continuum of services and sanc- cal jurisdictions develop effective crimi- tions for juvenile and adult offenders. nal ADR programs, and would hopefully The Commission believes that incorpo- lead to an increase in the use of ADR in rating ADR into Maryland’s criminal and criminal and juvenile justice contexts. juvenile justice systems will help trans- No Retaliation Principle form the way in which we as a society manage crime, especially in difficult, As a basic principle, no stigma should be

M A R Y L N D C O I S highly emotional settings. attached to any victim or defendant who 62 Business Applications

The ADR Commis- affect businesses. Given the broad goal of sion believes that mak- improving Maryland’s economic compet- ing Maryland a more itiveness, the Commission recommends ADR friendly state can encouraging and promoting appropriate improve the state’s uses of ADR in the business community business climate. Re- and in government. As such, the Com- search conducted and mission will promote voluntary reforms compiled by the Com- and strategies for Maryland businesses, as mission indicates that business and in- well as for state government disputes and Tdustry increasingly report using ADR in public policy deliberations that affect appropriate cases because it saves time business and industry. Specifically, the and money, and helps preserve relation- Commission plans to work ships with employees, consumers, ven- with members of the business commu- dors, subcontractors, competitors and nity, government agencies, and other in- others. The Commission also believes terested groups to: that ADR can be an economic develop- ment incentive for the state as a whole if • Create a business ADR network we develop a national reputation as a • Establish a Speakers’ Bureau state where government and business • Promote ADR in targeted industry sectors work together productively. Making Maryland a national leader in govern- • Co-host a conference on business ADR ment and business ADR, should enhance • Establish a Maryland Corporate ADR Pledge program the state’s ability to attract new businesses and to retain in-state companies. Further- • Establish government-business ADR partnerships more ADR does not risk undercutting revenues or creating public dangers as some economic development incentives do. Moreover, mediation and many forms of arbitration help the proverbial little guy who may find himself in a dispute with a corporation that could clearly out- spend him in a legal battle. Further, the Commission recognizes the business community’s interest in making sure that state government stands as a model for businesses by using ADR more often in appropriate disputes with busi- nesses and in some regulatory actions that M A R Y L N D C O I S 63 The Commission’s Business Applications Committee help the Commission plan and hold an im- took a systematic approach to gathering information pressive conference on business uses of about ADR practices in various business sectors, find- ADR. The conference will be co-hosted by ing considerable ADR use within Maryland’s real estate, groups such as the Maryland Chamber of construction, insurance, and health care industries. The Commerce and will highlight Maryland Committee examined pre-suit mediation programs and corporations that use ADR, bring in na- ADR Pledge programs, both of which highlight compa- tional speakers, and work with other orga- nies that agree to use ADR in appropriate cases prior to taking legal action. With help from research statisti- nizations and businesses to sponsor the con- cians at the University of Baltimore and GEICO, the ference. Committee also conducted a detailed survey assessing the use of ADR in Maryland’s business community. Promoting ADR—Business Sector The Committee’s research supported national claims Approach that ADR is on the rise in the business community. During its fact-finding stage, the Commis- Businesses repeatedly report using ADR because it saves sion took a systematic approach to gather- time and money, and it enables them to resolve disputes ing information about ADR in major busi- without destroying business relationships. The business ness sectors and identified promising—but community also strongly supports efforts to advance widely varied—ADR efforts within the util- the use of regulatory negotiation and other processes ities, insurance, real estate, health care, and that provide them an opportunity to participate in public policy development. The Committee prepared reports summarizing its research, identifying ways that ADR can be an businesses can use ADR effectively, and documenting economic development its survey results. Reports developed and collected by the Commission and each of its incentive for the working committees are included in a separate Appendix. To receive a copy, please call the Commission’s office at (410) 321-2398. state as a whole if we Baseline Research develop a national reputation as a state where government Business ADR Network and Conference and business work As is detailed under the “Networks and Ed- together productively. ucational Conferences” section of this doc- ument, the ADR Commission will organize a network of ADR leaders in Maryland’s construction industries, as well as in the hu- business community to help highlight busi- man resources area. The Commission’s re- nesses currently using ADR and promote search also indicated that small businesses ADR within the business community. The were typically unfamiliar with ADR. Thus, network could also recruit professionals in the Commission will continue working to the public, private and academic sectors promote and encourage the growth of ADR who provide services to businesses, as well in these industries and will work with other as academicians who lead Masters of Busi- industry sectors that express interest. The ness Administration programs at Maryland Commission will promote outreach to universities, community college representa- trade associations, industry groups, and tives who work with business, and other ap- other business-related organizations. propriate interest groups. The network will Additionally, because most information on ADR in the business community focuses M A R Y L N D C O I S

64 on efforts made by larger corporations, the forts to advance the appropriate use Commission will make a special thrust to of ADR statewide will include creating involve small busi- an ADR informa- nesses in its efforts. tion clearinghouse The Commission be- for businesses, pro- lieves that ADR can moting use of ADR be instrumental in to resolve govern- the small business ment-business dis- community, espe- putes, emphasizing cially among firms the importance of that may not be able having ADR clauses to survive the costs of in government con- extended litigation. tracts, encouraging Thus, there will be a government agen- concerted effort to reach small businesses cies to incorporate consensus building and to educate them about ADR and its into their policy and regulatory develop- benefits. ment efforts.

Maryland Corporate ADR The Commission will also work to Pledge Program develop at least one pilot project in co- The Commission will work with the operation with a government agency that Department of Business and Economic works in close proximity with the busi- Development, the Maryland Chamber of ness community. Possible pilot projects Commerce, the members of the planned include developing a regulatory negotia- business ADR network, and other business tion program at an interested agency, es- groups to create a program where Mary- tablishing a program at a community land companies pledge that they will at- college that provides services to business tempt ADR prior to litigation in all appro- and government, developing a commu- priate cases. Participating businesses would nity/economic development initiative us- be listed on the Commission’s website and ing ADR and the Department of Busi- promoted for having good business prac- ness and Economic Development and/or tices. The Commission anticipates kicking the Community Development Block off the program at the Business ADR Con- Grant Program, or creating an ADR pro- ference and using it as part of an ongoing gram that could substitute for regulatory effort to market ADR to the business com- enforcement actions in certain cases. munity. Truly outstanding business ADR efforts could also be recognized under the Results: The Commission be- planned “Ozzie Bermant” ADR Excellence lieves that these planned actions will sig- Awards program. nificantly advance ADR in the business community, will help enhance Mary- Government-Business land’s economic competitiveness, and will Partnerships/Pilots improve relationships between govern- The Commission anticipates that the ment and business. These actions will business community will also work with also benefit consumers, contractors, em- state agencies that are interested in devel- ployees, and other groups which may find oping ongoing ADR programs. Addi- themselves in disputes with businesses. tionally, the Commission’s ongoing ef- M A R Y L N D C O I S

65 Maryland State Dispute Resolution Office

he Commission be- ADR networks discussed throughout this lieves that a statewide document. dispute resolution of- To promote ADR education and raise public fice should be created and funded to support awareness, a State Dispute Resolution Office and continue the ADR should . . . initiatives that the • continue a professional, statewide Commission begins, as public awareness campaign well as to encourage continued ADR ad- • continue targeted ADR educational Tvancements in Maryland’s courts, com- initiatives munities, schools, businesses, government • promote conflict resolution educa- agencies, criminal and juvenile justice sys- tion and peer mediation programs tems and other organizations. The Com- with evaluation components in all mission supports current and planned ef- Maryland schools forts to hire ADR staff and to build ADR • support ADR networks and ADR capacity in the Judiciary and in the Execu- educational conferences tive branch. The planned dispute resolu- • build a “theory-practice” linkage tion office would complement such initia- within Maryland colleges and uni- tives and would not duplicate efforts. versities, perhaps in the form of an The Commission conducted a national academic ADR consortium review of statewide dispute resolution of- To advance ADR in the courts, a State fices, identifying 31 states that have offices with diverse mis- Dispute Resolution Office should . . . The best way to predict the future is to sions and structures • promote and assist court ADR ef- designed to advance forts create it. ADR both inside • offer support services for local court —Peter Drucker and outside the ADR Coordinators and programs court system. Al- • help develop new ADR programs in though the Commission has not deter- the courts by offering assistance to mined how such an entity should be judges and other local stakeholder structured in Maryland, specific groups, such as local Bar Associa- functions for a state tions, community mediation pro- office have been iden- grams and private practitioners tified. The Commission plans to • assist courts with ADR program minimize staffing and other costs associ- evaluations • produce informational brochures and ated with the planned office, to the great- market court programs and services est extent possible, by working with the M A R Y L N D C O I S

66 • encourage state and local govern- • promote dispute prevention, part- ment, and other funding sources, to nering, and public policy dispute support ADR programs in the resolution courts • use federal government ADR poli- • promote ADR in the criminal and cies and programs (including Presi- juvenile justice systems dential/Attorney General orders and shared neutrals) as models To advance ADR in communities, a State • propose policy changes and initia- Dispute Resolution Office should . . . tives that demonstrate ADR’s poten- • convince state, local and private tial and increase interest in this area funding sources to support existing • promote business-government col- community mediation programs laborative processes and to create new programs • raise ADR as a possibility in appro- • develop an ongoing funding support priate facility siting disputes, envi- system for community mediation ronmental approval processes, and other issues of community concern To advance ADR in government and business, • initiate Maryland Corporate ADR a State Dispute Resolution Office should . . . Pledge program and coordinate • promote, support and advance gov- other efforts to encourage increased ernment/public policy uses of ADR, business use of ADR especially emphasizing the use of To maintain a high quality cadre of ADR collaborative processes in appropri- practitioners and trainers and to promote ate rule-making initiatives, public policy development and implemen- professionalism in the ADR field, a State tation, and other forms of ADR to Dispute Resolution Office should . . . prevent and resolve appropriate • recommend voluntary minimum or multi-party disputes, intra-agency baseline standards for ADR trainers and inter-agency disputes, disputes and practitioners with citizens, businesses and other • adopt and promote training and interest groups practice guidelines • propose creating a revolving fund • approve training programs consis- for unanticipated government and tent with the circuit court ADR public policy consensus building Rules processes • continue efforts to build consensus • help state and local agencies expand about quality assurance measures for and create ADR programs trainers, training courses and practi- • serve as an ADR resource center or tioners clearinghouse • serve as an ADR information clear- • promote ADR training for state and inghouse and keep a roster of practi- local government employees tioners who self-certify that they fol- • support building ADR capacity low the Commission’s ethical code within government agencies and and practice standards within the Attorney General’s Office • improve the credibility of the ADR • work with institutions that have ex- field perience with ADR, government, re- • receive complaints about ADR search, and evaluation professionals/practices and explore processes to handle complaints and address concerns M A R Y L N D C O I S

67 • recognize/encourage the evolving Although no decisions have been made nature of the ADR field about the structure or placement of • encourage development of mentor- this office, there is a growing consensus ing, co-mediation and apprentice- among Commission members that the ship opportunities office should be governed by a multi- • recommend a process to review cre- disciplinary board with balanced repre- dentials to determine if out-of-state sentation from the executive, judicial, practitioners qualifications meet re- and legislative branches of government as quirements outlined in the MD well as a representative from the practi- Rules tioner community, the legal community, • provide an ongoing review of ADR community mediation programs, the Rule implementation and legisla- business community, local government tion, and propose rule amendments and the field of education. and new legislation as needed M A R Y L N D C O I S

68 Maryland ADR Commission Action Plan at a Glance

Evaluations Pilot Targeted ADR Educational Other Projects Education Networks Conferences Actions

Public Conduct multi-media campaign Awareness Hold Ozzie Bermant ADR Awards

School Promote ADR in core curricula for future Initiatives teachers, lawyers and others

Definitions Create variety of ADR brochures to aid and Dispute self-screening Screening Propose amending ADR rules

Create ethical code and practice standards ADR Codify confidentiality Practitioner Propose amending ADR rules and Trainer Create guidelines for ADR trainers/training Issues Encourage mentoring, co-mediation and apprenticeships for new practitioners

Obtain stable funding for community Community mediation services Mediation Create non-profit Community Mediation Association Develop new programs

Promote ADR in appropriate “peace order” District Court cases, and other civil and criminal cases

Expand use of ADR in appropriate family- Circuit Court related cases and other cases

OAH

Expand government use of ADR State and Obtain funding for Attorney General’s Office Local ADR training, staff and other ADR Government resources Work on Governor’s Executive Order

Educate public about benefits of criminal Criminal and and juvenile mediation Juvenile Promote “no retaliation” principal for Justice victim witnesses and criminal defendants who refuse mediation

Business Create Maryland Corporate Pledge Program Promote Business/Government partnerships M A R Y L N D C O I S

69 Maryland Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission Members

The Hon. Robert M. Bell - Chair Lorig Charkoudian Chief Judge, Maryland Court of Appeals Mediator, Trainer, Executive Director, Community Mediation Program Donald G. Gifford - Vice Chair Professor of Law/Former Dean The Hon. J. Joseph Curran, Jr. University of Maryland School of Law Maryland Attorney General The Hon. Paul A. Dorf Committee Chairs Adelberg, Rudow, Dorf, Hendler & Sameth Ramona Buck - Chair, ADR Definitions and The Hon. Joan Bossman Gordon Dispute Screening Committee President, Women’s Bar Association President, Maryland Council for Dispute Resolution The Hon. Leo Green Senator, 23rd District of Maryland Marvin E. Johnson, J.D. - Chair, Education Committee The Hon. Stephen E. Harris Professor and Director, Public Defender Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution, The Hon. Sue Hecht Bowie State University Delegate, 3rd District of Maryland Mary Louise Preis, Esq. - Chair, Suzanne K. Henley, Esq. Business Applications Committee Litigation Section, Commissioner of Financial Regulations Maryland State Bar Association Charles “Mike” Preston, Esq. - Chair, Nancy Hirshman Courts Administration Committee Director, Mediation Center, Immediate Past President, Office of the State’s Attorney Maryland State Bar Association for Anne Arundel County Robert J. Rhudy, Esq. - Chair, The Hon. Vivian Jenkins Community Issues Committee Clerk, Executive Director, Circuit Court for Prince George’s County Maryland Legal Services Corporation Marvin E. Johnson, J.D. Roger C. Wolf, Esq. - Chair, Professor and Director, Professional Responsibilities Committee Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution Professor and Director, ADR Clinic Bowie State University University of Maryland School of Law Martin Kranitz, M.S. Members Director, National Institute for Conflict Resolution and The Hon. Lynne A. Battaglia National Center for Mediation Education U. S. Attorney for the District of MD The Hon. Victor H. Laws, Sr. George Beall, Esq. Wicomico County Councilman Managing Partner, Hogan & Hartson, L.L.P. Lynn Linde, Ed.D. Chief, Pupil Services Branch Ramona Buck Maryland State Department of Education President, MD Council for Dispute Resolution J. Michael McWilliams, Esq. M A R Y L N D C O I S President, 70 Charles G. Byrd, Jr., Esq. McWilliams Dispute Resolution, Inc. Alston & Byrd Patricia A. Miller, Esq. The Hon. Paul H. Weinstein President, Circuit and County Administrative Judge, National Institute for Conflict Resolution Circuit Court for Montgomery County Ackneil M. Muldrow, II The Hon. Alan M. Wilner President & CEO, Judge, Maryland Court of Appeals Development Credit Fund, Inc. Roger C. Wolf, Esq. The Hon. Joseph F. Murphy, Jr. Professor and Director, ADR Clinic Chief Judge, University of Maryland School of Law Maryland Court of Special Appeals Robert C. Park, Jr., Esq. Designees Managing Partner, Kaye Allison, Esq. Linowes & Blocher, LLP (Designee for Hon. Lynne Battaglia) Patricia L. Platt Assistant United States Attorney Chief Clerk, Samuel W. Bogley, Esq. District Court of Maryland (Designee for Hon. Leo Green) Mary Louise Preis, Esq. Karen Johnson, Esq. Commissioner of Financial Regulation (Designee for Major F. Riddick, Jr.) Charles “Mike” Preston, Esq. Assistant Chief of Staff, Immediate Past President, Office of the Governor Maryland State Bar Association Susan M. Kalil, Esq. The Hon. Martha F. Rasin (Designee for Hon. Paul H. Weinstein) Chief Judge, District Court of Maryland Differentiated Case Management/ ADR Coordinator Rev. Dr. Frank M. Reid, III Circuit Court for Montgomery County Senior Pastor, Bethel A.M.E. Church Ronald A. Karasic, Esq. (Designee for Hon. Stephen E. Harris) Robert J. Rhudy, Esq. Deputy Public Defender Executive Director, Maryland Legal Services Corporation Sherie B. Libber, Esq. (Designee for Hon. Joseph F. Murphy, Jr.) Major F. Riddick, Jr. Assistant Reporter Chief of Staff, Standing Committee on Rules of Practice Office of the Governor and Procedure George W. Rogers Hon. Beverly Nash Vice President of Claims, (Designee for Hon. Joan Bossman Gordon) Chief Claims Officer, Administrative Law Judge GEICO Corporation Donna Hill Staton, Esq. Sheila K. Sachs, Esq. (Designee for Hon. J. Joseph Curran, Jr.) Gordon, Fienblatt, Rothman, Hoffberger Deputy Attorney General & Hollander, L.L.C. Louise Phipps Senft, Esq. Administrative Office of the Founder & Principal, Courts Participants: Baltimore Mediation Center Associate Professor, George B. Riggin, Jr., Esq. University of Maryland School of Law Former State Court Administrator John Shatto Frank Broccolina Court Administrator, Acting State Court Administrator Circuit Court for Howard County Michael V. O’Malley The Hon. Melanie A. Vaughn Assistant State Court Administrator Professor and ADR Practitioner, Sally Rankin Former Administrative Law Judge

Court Information Officer M A R Y L N D C O I S Melanie A. Vaughn Dispute Resolution Services 71 Staff: Special appreciation to the Rachel A. Wohl, Esq. co-hosts of our regional public Executive Director forums: Louis G. Gieszl The Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin Assistant Director U.S. Representative Gary S. Pinsky The Hon. Norman H. Conway Executive Administrator Delegate Maryland General Assembly Volunteer Staff: The Hon. Wayne T. Gilchrest John T. Dailey, Esq. U.S. Representative Consultant The Hon. Steny H. Hoyer Maura DeMuoy, Esq. U.S. Representative Volunteer Counsel Luis Luna Brooke Carey Director Intern Greater Salisbury Committee Karen Harvey The Hon. Casper R. Taylor, Jr. Intern Speaker of the House of Delegates Maryland General Assembly Deborah Wyda, PHR Intern The Hon. John Frank Slade, III Delegate Maryland General Assembly Grateful acknowledgement of the outstanding contributions Special thanks to Administrative Office of made by the members of the the Courts employees and other court staff ADR Commission’s: who provided invaluable assistance and support to the Commission. Central Maryland Regional Advisory Board Eastern Shore Regional Advisory Board Southern Maryland Regional Advisory Board Western Maryland Regional Advisory Board (membership lists available from the Commission) M A R Y L N D C O I S

72 National Advisory Board Members

David Batson Melinda Ostermeyer ADR Liaison, Conflict Management and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Organizational Consultant John Bickerman, Esq. Elizabeth Plapinger, Esq. Bickerman Dispute Resolution Group Vice President and Director, CPR Judicial Project and ADR Ethics Project Chris Carlson CPR Institute For Dispute Resolution Co-Executive Director, Policy Consensus Initiative William Potapchuk President, Cathy A. Costantino Community Building Institute Counsel, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Sharon Press Director, Charles Craver Dispute Resolution Center Professor, Florida Supreme Court George Washington University Law School Nancy Hardin Rogers Duke Fisher Professor and Vice Provost Board Member, Ohio State University College of Law New York Office of ADR Professionals Kathleen M. Severens Jack Hanna Director of Community Dispute Resolution, Director, U.S. Department of Justice American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution Margaret L. Shaw Mediator and Facilitator, James Henry Wittenberg, Shaw & Ross, L.L.C. President, CPR Institute For Dispute Resolution Linda Singer Executive Director, Michael K. Lewis Center for Dispute Settlement President, ADR Associates, Inc. Peter R. Steenland, Jr. Senior Counsel, Barbara McAdoo U.S. Department of Justice Professor and Director of Advanced Studies, University of Missouri-Columbia Donna Steinstra School of Law Senior Researcher, Federal Judicial Center Craig A. McEwen Professor and ADR Researcher, Andrew Thomas Department of Sociology and Anthropology Executive Director, Bowdoin College Rochester Center for Dispute Settlement M A R Y L N D C O I S

73 ADR Definitions & Dispute Screening Committee

Ramona Buck - Chair Sherie B. Libber, Esq. President, Assistant Reporter MD Council for Dispute Resolution Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure Members The Hon. Joseph F. Murphy, Jr. Charles G. Byrd, Jr., Esq. Chief Judge, Alston & Byrd Maryland Court of Special Appeals The Hon. James C. Cawood, Jr. The Hon. Steven I. Platt Judge, Judge, Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County Circuit Court for Prince George’s County Guy G. Cherry Hon. Patricia S. Pytash Policy Analyst, Judge, Department of Legislative Services District Court for Baltimore County Catherine G. Crockett, Esq. Carole N. Roche, Esq. Mediator Mediator, Office of Administrative Hearings The Hon. Paul A. Dorf Adelberg, Rudow, Dorf, Hendler & Sameth Stanley Rodbell, Esq. Mediator Charles Feigenbaum Arbitrator Christine A. Satterwhite Mediator The Hon. Suzanne Fox Director of Quality Assurance, Wendy S. Swire, MA Office of Administrative Hearings Principal Swire Mediation Services(SMS) Suzanne K. Henley, Esq. Litigation Section, Fatima Wilson Maryland State Bar Association Mediator, Community Mediation Program The Hon. Joseph H.H. Kaplan Judge, Michael J. Winkelman, Esq. Circuit Court for Baltimore City Volunteer Staff M A R Y L N D C O I S

74 Business Applications Committee Members

Mary Louise Preis, Esq. - Chair Robert J. Mathias, Esq. Commissioner of Financial Regulation Partner, Piper & Marbury, L.L.P. J. Michael McWilliams, Esq. Members President, Carol A. Baumerich, Esq. McWilliams Dispute Resolution, Inc. Mediator and Arbitrator Joyce A. Mitchell, Esq. Paul D. Bekman, Esq. Joyce A. Mitchell & Associates, P.C. Israelson, Salsbury, Clements & Bekman Ackneil M. Muldrow, II Douglas Brookman President & CEO, President, Development Credit Fund, Inc. Brookman-King Brian Nockleby, CPCU William J. Byrnes Claims Attorney, Senior Vice President, GEICO Direct O’Conor, Piper & Flynn/ERA, Realtors Robert C. Park, Jr., Esq. The Hon. J. Joseph Curran, Jr. Managing Partner, Maryland Attorney General Linowes & Blocher, LLP William L. “Bill” Dunson Frank Pugh, Esq. President, Baltimore Mediation Center Chesapeake Human Resource Assoc. George W. Rogers Barbara G. Enders Vice President of Claims, Director of Dispute Resolution, Chief Claims Officer, Better Business Bureau of Greater MD, Inc. GEICO Corporation Robert S. Fleishman, Esq. George B. Rose Vice President of Corporate Affairs, Division Chief, General Counsel, Division of Consumer Affairs Baltimore Gas & Electric Company for Montgomery County Arlene J. M. Grant, Esq. Susan Rudy, P.E. Arlene J. M. Grant, L.L.C. Mediator Edward J. Johnson, III Gail R. Smith, Esq. President and CEO, Arbitration and Mediation Services Better Business Bureau of Washington, DC Donna Hill Staton, Esq. Steve Kalinsky Deputy Attorney General Vice President, Kimberly Warren, Esq. GEICO Corporation Mediator Elizabeth M. “Liz” Kameen, Esq. Gwendolyn Whipp, Esq. Assistant Attorney General Claims Attorney, Arthur Kaufman, MD GEICO Corporation Medical Director, Birch & Davis Associates, Inc. M A R Y L N D C O I S

75 Community Issues Committee

Robert J. Rhudy, Esq. - Chair Henry B. Ford, Esq. Executive Director, Executive Director, Maryland Legal Services Corporation MD Commission on Human Relations The Hon. Leo Green Members Senator, 23rd District of Maryland Kaye Allison, Esq. Garrick Greenblatt, Esq. Assistant United States Attorney The House of Ruth Richard S. Alper, Esq. Jay Gullo, Esq. Mediator Mayor, New Windsor, MD The Hon. Lynne A. Battaglia Nancy Hirshman U.S. Attorney, District of Maryland Director, Mediation Center, Susan Campbell Birch, Esq. Office of the State’s Attorney Mediator, Mediation Trainer, for Anne Arundel County Center for ADR at Bowie State Univ. Elizabeth L. Homer and Howard County Mediation Center Deputy Administrator, Martin Blumsack Maryland State Highway Administration Extramural Science Administrator, Ayn Hoyt National Institute of Health Judicial Information Service Samuel W. Bogley, Esq. Linda C. Janey, J.D. Designee for Hon. Leo Green Manager, Dario Broccolino, Esq. State Clearinghouse Plan Review, Assistant State’s Attorney Maryland Office of Planning for Howard County Karen Johnson, Esq. Lorig Charkoudian Assistant Chief of Staff, Mediator, Trainer, Executive Director, Office of the Governor Community Mediation Program Wilhelm H. Joseph, Jr., Esq. Ernest A. Crofoot, Esq. Executive Director, Associate County Attorney Legal Aid Bureau, Inc. for Montgomery County Leronia Josey, Esq. Ara M. Crowe, Jr. Bethel A.M.E. Church Coordinator, Jerome M. Levine, Esq. State’s Attorneys’ Association Assistant Public Defender Philip Favero Timothy J. Longo Institute for Governmental Service, Major, University of Maryland at College Park Baltimore City Police Department Brent Flickinger Beverly A. Lowe Community Planner, Executive Director, Baltimore County Office of Planning Anne Arundel Conflict Resolution Center M A R Y L N D C O I S

76 The Hon. Beverly Nash Susan Rudy, P.E. Administrative Law Judge Mediator Amanda Owens Tim Scully, Esq. Governor’s Office of Crime Control Chief Attorney, Juvenile Division, and Prevention Office of the Public Defender Deborah A. Photiadis Sandra Shin Executive Director, Volunteer Staff Governor’s Council on Management Hon. Kathleen M. Sweeney and Productivity Judge, District Court for Baltimore City Rev. Dr. Frank M. Reid, III Andrea C. Terry Senior Pastor, Program Coordinator, Bethel A.M.E. Church Harford County Community Tom Reynolds Mediation Program Research Staff, Brian Tregaskis Institute for Governmental Services Volunteer Staff Major F. Riddick, Jr. Barbara Williams Chief of Staff, Former Director, Office of the Governor Howard County Community Marvin N. Robbins Mediation Center Executive Director, Inmate Grievance Office Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services M A R Y L N D C O I S

77 Courts Administration Committee

Charles “Mike” Preston, Esq. - Chair Nancy E. Mueller Immediate Past President, Administrative Clerk, District Ten, Maryland State Bar Association District Court of Maryland The Hon. Joseph F. Murphy, Jr. Members Chief Judge, Charles A. Bethel, Esq. Maryland Court of Special Appeals President, The Hon. James T. Murray ADRS Director of Operations, Frank Broccolina Office of Administrative Hearings Acting State Court Administrator The Hon. Martha F. Rasin The Hon. Edward A. DeWaters, Jr. Chief Judge, District Court of Maryland Administrative Judge, Ronald E. Richardson, Esq. Circuit Court for Baltimore County President, The Hon. James R. Eyler Monumental City Bar Association Judge, Arnold H. Sampson Court of Special Appeals Mediator, Theresa A. Furnari, Esq. Community Mediation Program Attorney John Shatto The Hon. Ellen M. Heller Court Administrator, Administrative Judge, Circuit Court for Howard County Circuit Court for Baltimore City The Hon. Cornelius J. Vaughey Susan M. Kalil, Esq. Administrative Judge, Differentiated Case Mgmt. Coordinator, District Court for Montgomery County Circuit Court for Montgomery County The Hon. Melanie A. Vaughn Martin Kranitz, M.S. Professor and ADR Practitioner, Director, Former Administrative Law Judge National Institute for Conflict Resolution & Melanie A. Vaughn Dispute Resolution Services National Center for Mediation Education Maxine J. Victor Sandra E. Lally Housing Advisor, Mediator, Assistant Chief Clerk of Operations, Community Mediation Program District Court of Maryland The Hon. Paul H. Weinstein The Hon. Victor H. Laws, Sr. Circuit and County Administrative Judge, Wicomico County Councilman Circuit Court for Montgomery County Lee Miller, Esq. The Hon. Alan M. Wilner Volunteer Staff Judge, Maryland Court of Appeals The Hon. Frederick C. Wright, III Circuit and County Administrative Judge, Circuit Court for Washington County M A R Y L N D C O I S

78 Education Committee

Marvin E. Johnson, J.D. - Chair Ellery M. “Rick” Miller Professor and Director, Executive Director, Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution, Citizenship Law-Related Education Bowie State University Program for Schools of Maryland Michael V. O’Malley Members Assistant State Court Administrator Yvette Cuffie Ryan Preston Palmer, J.D. Secretary-Treasurer, Executive Director, MCGEO UFCW LOCAL 1994 Youth Imagery Company Marian D’Anna Patricia L. Platt Associate Director, Chief Clerk, MD Institute For Continuing District Court of Maryland Education of Lawyers (MICPEL) Sally W. Rankin Judith Filner, Esq. Court Information Officer Consultant, Mediator Terri Robinson The Hon. Joan Bossman Gordon Mediator, Consultant President, Women’s Bar Association Claire Salkowski The Hon. Vivian Jenkins Educator, Mediator Clerk, Circuit Court for Prince George’s County Marie T. Sciscione ADR Coordinator, Michele A. LaMay U.S. Equal Employment Mediator, Opportunity Commission Community Mediation Program Sue Small, Ed.D. Lynn Linde, Ed.D. Educator, Mediator Chief, Pupil Services Branch, Maryland State Department of Education Frederick C. Williams Administrator, Judicial Institute of Maryland M A R Y L N D C O I S

79 Professional Responsibilities Committee

Roger C. Wolf, Esq. - Chair Peter J. Lally Professor and Director, ADR Clinic Court Administrator, University of Maryland School of Law Circuit Court for Baltimore County CeCe Anna Lee Members Mediator, George Beall, Esq. Community Mediation Program Managing Partner, Patricia A. Miller, Esq. Hogan & Hartson, L.L.P. President, Aza Howard Butler National Institute for Conflict Resolution Director, James H. Morrison, Jr. Custody & Mediation Division Human Resources Consultant Circuit Court for Baltimore County Jane K. Powers Rupert Friday Mediator Maryland Office of Planning C. Raheema Raheem Karen “Chaya” Friedman, Esq. Case Manager, Mediator Community Mediation Program Sarah Childs Grebe Sheila C. Russian, Esq. Mediator Mediator The Hon. Stephen E. Harris Sheila K. Sachs, Esq. Public Defender Gordon, Feinblatt, Rothman, The Hon. Robert H. Heller, Jr. Hoffberger & Hollander, L.L.C. Judge, Louise Phipps Senft, Esq. Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County Founder & Principal, Ronald A. Karasic, Esq. Baltimore Mediation Center Deputy Public Defender Associate Professor, University of Maryland School of Law John Adam Kerns, Jr., Esq. Arbitrator/Mediator/Special Master/Referee Mary Truchly, MPA, MSW Volunteer Staff M A R Y L N D C O I S

80 Maryland Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission 113 Towsontown Blvd. Suite C • Towson, Maryland 21286-5352 Phone: 410-321-2398 • Fax: 410-321-2399 E-mail: [email protected] www.courts.state.md.us/adr.html