Court Manager In This Issue Social Media and the Ethical Court Employee Today’s Version of Yesterday’s Vision of Tomorrow’s Courthouse Fines and Restitution: Collecting by Investing

A Publication of the National Association for Court TheM aCournat Managergement Volume 26 Issue 1 1 Volume 26 Number 1 Spring 2011 contents

p. 6 p. 22 p. 30 features 5 Social Media and the Ethical Court Employee departments By Norman H. Meyer, Jr. 3 President’s Message 20 Today’s Version of Yesterday’s Vision of 4 editor’s Notes Tomorrow’s Courthouse 35 Washington Review By Marcus W. Reinkensmeyer and Chuck Oraftik 39 Jury News 42 technology FACTs 28 Fines and Restitution: Collecting by Investing By Paul B. Litschewski 44 a Question of Ethics 47 New Members 50 sustaining Members 51 2010–2011 Board of Directors

E ditor Andra Motyka Superior Court Administrator, Pierce County Superior Court 930 Tacoma Avenue S., Room 334, Tacoma, WA 98402 (253) 798-3963, Fax: (253) 798-7214, [email protected]

Managing Editor Lorie J. Gómez Publications Manager, National Center for State Courts 300 Newport Ave., Williamsburg, VA 23185 (757) 259-1532, Fax: (757) 564-2114, [email protected]

A Publication of the National Association for Court Management Court Manager Volume 26 Number 1 Spring 2011

©2011, National Association for Court Management; printed in the United States. Court Manager is published quarterly by the National Association for Court Management. Opinions expressed and procedures explained in the articles are not necessarily those of NACM or of the National Center for State Courts. Publication of advertising in the Court Manager does not imply NACM or NCSC endorsement or approval of the product or service. The association encourages submission of material that will or benefit its members. Address correspondence to either the editor or the managing editor; inquiries about advertising should be directed ® to the managing editor. All rights are reserved to reject, condense, or edit any article or advertisement submitted for publication. 2 www.nacmnet.org President’s Message Jude Del Preore

THE POWER OF PARTNERSHIPS • American Institute for Architects’ (AIA) Academy of Architecture for Justice (AAJ) are organizations that promote and foster the exchange of information and knowledge Partnership is often defined as a collaborative between members, professional organizations, and the public agreement between two complementary organizations for high-quality planning, design, and delivery of justice system architecture. in which participants agree to work together to achieve • Justice At Stake (JAS) is a campaign of national partners working a common purpose. The National Association for to keep state and federal courts fair and impartial. Court Management has viewed the pursuit of carefully • American Bar Association’s (ABA) Task Force on Preservation chosen partnerships as integral to strategy. In short, of the Justice System is dedicated to addressing the critical issues meaningful partnerships have become the foundation of severe under-funding of our judicial system, depletion of resources, and the courts’ struggle to render their constitutional of our success, allowing us to achieve more than function and provide access to justice for countless Americans. would otherwise have been possible. The power of our • International Association for Court Administration (IACA) is partnerships resonates throughout NACM’s rich legacy dedicated to facilitate networks of court administration related professionals with a goal of the achievement of a more global over the past 25 years. harmonization of standards for the administration of justice.

It would be helpful to describe some of our key (but We are continuing to cultivate our partnerships with the not all) partnerships: Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) and American Judges • National Center for State Courts (NCSC) is an organization Association (AJA). We are exploring new partnerships committed to improving the administration of justice through with the Association of Legal Administrators (ALA), leadership and service to state courts and courts around the world. the National Association of Counties (NACo), and the • Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) is an Council of State Governments. organization that provides a national forum to state court administrators in the development of a more just, effective, and This year we feature another strong partnership – that of efficient system of justice. NACM and NASJE. NASJE is the National Association of • Forum for the Advancement of Court Technology (FACT) is an State Judicial Educators, a non-profit organization that organization formed to improve the quality of justice through communication between those who develop and provide strives to improve the justice system through judicial technology and services and those who manage the nation’s courts. branch education. This year, NACM and NASJE partner to deliver our annual conference. The theme is: Pushing • Joint Technology Committee (JTC) was established by NACM, COSCA, and NCSC to develop and promote technology the Boundaries: Coming together to strengthen and standards for courts, improve business processes, and ensure support the administration of justice. The conference adequate technology training for court leaders. will be at the Red Rock Resort in Las Vegas, Nevada, July • Conference of Court Public Information Officers (CCPIO) is an organization dedicated to the role of the court public 10–14, 2011. Mark your calendars now. Come witness information officers in the United States and worldwide. firsthand the true synergy of partnerships. • National Judicial College (NJC) is an organization dedicated to advancing justice through judicial education. NACM has become stronger, improved, and more

• Justice Management Institute (JMI) is dedicated to improving expansive as a result of the power of our partnerships. the overall administration of justice by helping courts and other Effective partnerships take work; but they are well worth justice system institutions and agencies achieve excellence in leadership, operations, and management. the effort. When partnerships work, they can build a substantive, well-managed, and efficient system of • Urban Court Managers Network was founded by NACM and JMI to strengthen the leadership and information sharing in justice. In short, they can be transformational. large urban trial courts across the nation. This is the power of partnerships.

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 3 Editor’s Notes Andra Motyka “It is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be.”

— Isaac Asimov

As you read Vol. 26/No. 1, note that the articles/columns As we all look for more money, the third article shares how mention one of the partnerships President Del Preore talks Colorado has gone about adding to its coffers. This is an about in his message. excellent primer on where to begin collection efforts and/or expand them. Even though not all state courts are unified, The lead article in this issue is about social media and the there are many tools that can be employed on smaller scales. court employee. NACM recently published a mini guide devoted to this topic; clearly this is a subject that not only Washington Review lists the nine CCJ/COSCA national has invaded our personal lives (more than 50 percent of priorities and provides a chart showing how federal funding Americans are on Facebook) but is impacting our work lives as may impact those priorities. Note that both Paul Litschewski well. The article focuses on appropriate restrictions, or at least and Kay Farley mention legislation to authorize the intercept considerations that need to be discussed, regarding the court of federal tax returns as a source for the collection of court employee and use of social media outside the courthouse. This fines, fees, and restitution. Kay also includes information on is another, potentially thorny, area of employee relations that the Department of Health and Human Services budget. we as managers need to be aware of. The example included at Jury News is devoted to a discussion of non-responding jurors the end of the article provides a starting point in developing a — why jurors don’t respond and the effective and not-so- court policy. effective follow-up programs. The second article captures a conference session on the future Technology Facts explains the court technology framework, a of justice facility programming, planning, and design. New new roadmap for aligning tech capabilities with business goals courthouses represent significant financial expenditures to efficiently manage IT projects. during a time of shrinking budgets. Not only must brick and mortar changes for the future be considered, but perhaps the A Question of Ethics tackles the issue of online education and more daunting changes are those of process reengineering! what might be appropriate for you or one of your staff. You’ll The article touches on important design development, note that social media plays a part in this column as well. which includes eco-friendly advancements, as well as noting The NACM annual conference is right around the corner — some system challenges. Even if you are not building a new July 10–14, 2011 — at the Red Rock Resort in Las Vegas, NV. courthouse, this piece should stimulate thinking about how Hope to see you there! your court will operate in the future and the changes it is likely to undergo.

4 www.nacmnet.org . . . a common thread running through all definitions of social media is a blending of technology and social interaction for the co-creation of value.

Social Media and the Ethical Court Employee By Norman H. Meyer, Jr.1

What would you do if this happened in your court? The trial is going along fine when the prosecutor is informed by the police that the judge’s courtroom deputy is blogging about the court case (before work, during work, and after work); making references to the alleged state of mind of the defendant; stating personal views of how the case is proceeding; and naming other court employees and their actions, views, and opinions about the case. The prosecutor notifies the presiding judge, who then notifies you, the court administrator.2

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 5 Assuming the judge will manage social nets is a no-brainer,”6 and “...a and community outreach, digital media/ any legal issues that arise in the whopping 89% of respondents...say Web 1.0 (websites), and social media/ trial, what are the ethics and human their companies are using some type of Web 2.0. The report highlights how the resources issues that you, the court social networking...”7 new media raise important cultural and administrator, might have to address Twitter now has more than two operational issues for courts that help with this employee? What could you billion tweets a month, and Facebook put into context the ethical challenges have done to prevent any ethical has more than 500 million active users posed by the use of social media by problems from happening in the first — about one for every 14 persons in court employees: place? How big a problem is employee the world. The average United States There are three characteristics of use of social media anyway? 13- to 17-year-old sends and receives new media that contrast sharply 3,339 text messages on cell phones with basic characteristics of the 8 But what is meant a month. Chillingly, a recent survey . These characteristics found that 20 percent of organizations by “social media?” help to explain why the new media report the loss of sensitive or environment presents the judicial confidential information through Social media and social computing system with both challenges and employee use of social networks, and refer to the wide array of Internet- opportunities that are unique to similarly, 20 percent have also “... based tools and platforms that the courts as compared to both disciplined employees for violating increase and enhance the sharing the private sector and the other company policies on social networking, of information. The common goal branches of government. They are: while seven percent have terminated of these media is to maximize user people for their actions on social nets.”9 1. New media are decentralized and accessibility and self-publication Like the private sector, the use multidirectional, while the courts through a variety of different of social media in the public sector, are institutional and unidirectional. formats...a common thread running including courts, is also growing. 2. New media are personal and through all definitions of social Courts are using social media in intimate, while the courts are media is a blending of technology such official applications as juror separate and, by definition, and social interaction for the communication, public outreach, and independent. co-creation of value.3 emergency notifications. A 2010 survey 3. New media are multimedia, found that about 40 percent of non- Social media can take many forms, incorporating video and still federal court judges in the United States including: social and professional images, audio and text, while the use social media sites.10 As courts hire networking (e.g., Facebook & courts are highly textual. new and younger staff who have grown LinkedIn), blogging (short for “Web Decentralized and Multidirectional... accustomed to routinely using social log”), micro-blogging (e.g., Twitter), New media are described as the media in their personal and professional wikis (e.g., Wikipedia), social third and most recent of what lives, employee social media use and the bookmarking (e.g., Digg), video are essentially only three possible potential for many ethical problems will sharing (e.g., YouTube), and threaded communications media: grow even larger. This high usage level discussions (chronological message (I) interpersonal media as one- means that court administrators who exchanges in a hosted online to-one, (ii) mass media as one-to- ignore the ethical challenges of social discussion group).4 many, and finally, (iii) new media media use do so at their peril. The questions raised by the or many-to-many... Contrast this The Conference of Court Public blogging courtroom deputy in the with the traditional institutional Information Officers (CCPIO) recently scenario above are just a few of the and unidirectional judicial culture published an excellent report, “New many issues that now confront court and the way courts have operated... Media and the Courts: The Current managers in a world where the use of The essence of their fundamental Status and A Look at the Future.”11 social media and other communication mission, resolving disputes, As the CCPIO defines new media, its links is exploding.5 In the private sector, requires that courts very often landscape encompasses legacy media “… for things like recruiting, marketing, communicate one way. Courts issue (newspapers, magazines, radio, and and customer service, using public orders, and parties comply. One of television), traditional public relations

6 www.nacmnet.org The NACM Model Code of Conduct provides a sound basis to outline the major ethical areas that may become issues for court staff when they blog, tweet, post, and otherwise share information.

the challenges of courts responding audio and text, while the courts are are the context within which court to the reality of new media highly textual... More than anything leaders must address social media will be resolving this inherent else, the digital revolution allows use by court staff. How do social incompatibility between the for the sharing of information media and codes of conduct intersect two cultures. and knowledge and the telling within this context? The decentralized New media are personal and of stories through multimedia and multidirectional nature of social intimate while the courts are separate methods. With more and more media opens up a wide range of and distant. Another inherent of the public consuming more opportunities for employees to violate characteristic of new media news and information online, ethical standards. These opportunities is that they facilitate personal the new media environment now are difficult to monitor and control. 13 communication and intimacy of includes a substantial proportion The NACM Model Code of Conduct communication that previously of the citizenry that approaches provides a sound basis to outline the were possible only through one- institutions with the strongly held major ethical areas that may become on-one channels... Mores and expectation that communication issues for court staff when they blog, standards about sharing personal will include video and audio tweet, post, and otherwise share information are changing in the clips, text and still images wound information. A full copy of the NACM broader culture in ways that will into a matrix of information Model Code of Conduct is at the end of not be understood for some time. and knowledge that tells this article; here is a summary of its key compelling stories. provisions: This stands in sharp contrast to the way courts communicate. Courts have, in varying degrees, Canon 1 The bar that separates attorneys begun to experiment with Avoiding Impropriety and the and judges on one side and the multimedia techniques. From Appearance of Impropriety in public on the other — the elevated video arraignments to televised oral All Activities bench, the black robe, the practice arguments and online instructional Court professionals shall faithfully of formal address (“your honor”) videos, courts have found ways and diligently perform duties, — all of these are practices that to use multiple media platforms avoid improper influences, avoid have evolved for centuries in effectively. But there is a certain activities that would impugn the the judicial culture and play an incompatibility here, too. The law dignity of the court, work without important role in symbolizing is an inherently verbal enterprise. bias or prejudice, show respect and reinforcing the independence It is concerned with precise toward all, disclose involvement in necessary to achieve impartiality. definition of terms, interpretation any action before the court, avoid Maintaining that independence of statutory and judicial language, misuse of their position, and assist as human beings part of a larger and the precise parsing of speech. litigants without giving legal advice. community requires that judges be The multimedia nature of new media challenges courts to tell their Canon 2 particularly deliberate and careful Performing the Duties of Position in their personal and professional inherently textual stories through 12 Impartially and Diligently communications... multimedia techniques. Court staff shall avoid relationships New media are multimedia, These opposing modes of that would impair impartiality incorporating video and still images, communication and cultural traditions and independent judgment

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 7 or cause a conflict of interest, (such as by posting geotagged photos There is no rule in the Ohio Code report misconduct by others or or carrying GPS-enabled devices, like of Judicial Conduct that prohibits attempts to have oneself violate smartphones14). Information technology a judge from being friends, online these canons, properly maintain systems and data security can also be or otherwise, with lawyers — court records, maintain the severely imperiled. even those who appear before confidentiality of information, “A lot of users share everything on the judge. Social interaction use proper discretion with court these sites without realizing the risks or between a judge and a lawyer information, and appropriately use potential damage they are introducing is not prohibited. Yet, a judge’s court resources. to their environment. Some information actions and interactions must at that people disclose can be easily used all times promote confidence in Canon 3 against an organization, whether in a the judiciary. A judge must avoid Conducting Outside Activities to directed spear phishing attack or some impropriety or the appearance Minimize the Risk of Conflict with kind of directed malware attack; the of impropriety, must not engage Official Position most popular threat vector for attacking in ex parte communication, must Court staff shall disclose and avoid users is through social networking not investigate matters before the conflicting outside sites. Everyone assumes that everything judge, must not make improper or activities, avoid conflicting on these social networking sites is public statements on pending outside compensation, avoid gifts/ completely secure. Everyone assumes or impending cases, and must favors/ that raise conflict of that Facebook has made sure it is disqualify from cases when interest issues, and comply with all secure. That is completely false.”15 the judge has personal bias or financial disclosure requirements. Another obvious ethical violation prejudice concerning a party or a Canon 4 would be if an employee commented party’s lawyer or when the judge Refraining from Inappropriate on the competence of a law firm and has personal knowledge of facts Political Activity its lawyers on a legal blog or on the in dispute. Court staff shall comply with all employee’s Facebook page where the laws, rules, and other authorities employee’s profile shows that he or she On the other hand, in 2009 the that may restrict political activity, is a court employee. Canons 1 and 2 Florida ’s Judicial Ethics and ensure that court resources prohibit this sort of activity, as such Advisory Committee (JEAC) issued are not misused. posts demonstrate potential favoritism an opinion that a judge should refrain and special access while impugning the from adding lawyers who are likely to It is easy to see how a court integrity of the court. appear in front of the judge in court as 17 employee might use social media Other situations, however, are not “friends” on a social networking site. in a way that violates these ethical so easy to define as being violations of A further question was asked about requirements. For instance, Canon the canons. What may be acceptable whether the judge’s judicial assistant 2 might be violated by the improper conduct in one court may not be in should also refrain from such activity. disclosure of information on a personal another, depending on the position held The JEAC wrote that judicial assistants Facebook page (e.g., confidential by the employee, the applicable code of could participate in social networking criminal arrest warrant details or conduct, and that code’s interpretation. sites, with the following explanation: organizational data). A case can also For instance, is it acceptable for judges The concern presented in this be made that even the seemingly and court staff to “friend” an attorney inquiry is whether a judicial innocuous use of social media in Facebook? Two court systems have assistant adding a lawyer as a constitutes a threat to court security differed in answering this question. “friend” on a social networking and thus is a violation of Canon 2. The Board of Commissioners on site indirectly conveys the message Security can be compromised in Grievances and Discipline of the Ohio that the attorney, who may appear several ways. The physical security Supreme Court recently issued an before the judge, has a special of the court, judges, and staff may be opinion that judges (and apparently position to influence the judge. jeopardized if sensitive details about staff, too) could — with care — “friend” The mere fact that personal buildings, security systems, or even the attorneys who appear before them information is being disseminated 16 whereabouts of judges are disclosed in court: between the judicial assistant and

8 www.nacmnet.org Consideration must also be given to the fundamental question of whether employees have unfettered constitutional rights, such as freedom of expression or protection from unwarranted search and seizures, when they use social media at work or in their personal life.

a lawyer on the social networking Thus, these two states have forfeit their Constitutional rights site does not adversely impact the differing directives vis à vis judges by virtue of their employment. public perception nor compromise “friending” attorneys, but staff members Pickering v. Bd. of Educ., 391 U.S. the integrity of the court system. are allowed to do so in both instances. 563, 568 (1968). However, Prohibiting the judicial assistant These opinions reach conclusions that government employment does from expressing himself/herself may not be universally accepted. As require some restrictions that outside the courthouse infringes more judicial systems and individual might not be applicable to private upon his/her First Amendment courts address the issue of employees citizens. The government, as an freedoms. This form of expression “friending” attorneys, it is almost employer, must have wide latitude by judicial assistants is not inevitable there will be different to manage the work to promote contemplated in our Canons and conclusions due to differing ethical the efficiency of the public service therefore not a violation of Canon codes, etc. In contrast with Florida and it performs through its employees. 2B... As long as a judicial assistant Ohio, another point of view is that the Id. A balancing of of utilizes the social networking site mere fact of an employee “friending” government employees as citizens outside of the judicial assistant’s a lawyer who practices before the and of the government as an administrative responsibilities and employee’s judge likely does create an employer accomplishing its independent of the judge, thereby appearance of favoritism to members of mission must be achieved.19 making no reference to the judge or the public. If so, such employees should the judge’s office, this Committee not “friend” such an attorney. Each court Since the Pickering decision, believes that there is no prohibition should ensure that its social media there have been several other related for a judicial assistant to add policy addresses this issue. decisions. In particular, United States lawyers who may appear before Consideration must also be v. National Treasury Employees Union, the judge as “friends” on a social given to the fundamental question of 115 S. Ct. 1003 (1995), City of San networking site. whether employees have unfettered Diego v. Roe, 125 S. Ct. 521 (2004), and However, a judge would continue constitutional rights, such as freedom Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006) to have the responsibility under of expression or protection from stand out. In these cases, the court Canon 3C(2) to “require staff, court unwarranted search and seizures, when has continued to refine thePickering officials, and others subject to the they use social media at work or in balancing test, making distinctions judge’s direction and control to their personal life. This issue has been about purely governmental speech, observe the standards of fidelity addressed by the United States purely private speech, and speech that and diligence that apply to the Supreme Court: arguably is both at the same time. The judge...” Therefore, in the unlikely In applying these canons to use trend has been to be more restrictive event that a lawyer attempts an ex- of social media after-hours, do toward employee rights in favor of parte communication through the judicial employees retain freedom the government’s ability to discipline social networking site, the judge of expression, privacy rights, and employees. “Until recent cases, the should direct the judicial assistant other rights of citizens? The answer Pickering balancing test was used as a to immediately “de-friend” the is yes. The law is well-established good-faith attempt to protect public lawyer and to immediately report that government employees do not employees’ free speech rights. In the it to the judge.18

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 9 application and interpretation of the analysis with the Chief Judge, “censors”) such postings, the employee balancing test, however, recent cases and he agreed. We instructed the may raise the freedom of speech issue reveal a proclivity for favoring the employee to remove these links (see above regarding constitutional employer’s operational efficiency over from her Facebook page (as well as rights). It may be very hard to pull back employee free speech rights.”20 It seems any references that she is employed from liberal access, so the employer clear that government employers can by the Court) and advised her that, should be careful to be clear about restrict employee speech, particularly in if she wanted to follow political usage rights in advance. regard to speech that has a nexus with events, she could use a more Below are some more scenarios employment. private means to receive that may pose ethical problems. As you Political activity can be a significant these updates.21 read them, think for yourself whether issue for many court employees. Canon you agree or disagree that an ethical 4, Refraining from Inappropriate Political Situations are also arising where violation has occurred and why. Activity, can be difficult to adhere to in employees are refusing to stop making 1. A court employee is a member those court systems that have elected politically oriented posts, etc. on of LinkedIn, a professional officials (judges, clerk of court, etc.). social media sites when directed to networking site. In her profile, she Even where there are no elected officials do so (this assumes such activity is identifies her court employment. and such a Canon is in place, questions appropriately prohibited). Employees Another LinkedIn member in a arise. Here is an example: may cite freedom of speech or say they group with which she has affiliated We recently had a social media are simply adhering to the organization’s (alumni of the college from which issue. We had a new employee commitment to open and honest she graduated) starts a discussion join the court. As part of our communication. Performance issues item for group members about the orientation program, our Budget such as this must be anticipated. merits of arguments made by Tea and Human Resources Officer Human resources policies and practices Party supporters regarding “activist discussed the Code of Conduct, to handle these scenarios should judges.” The court employee posts in particular Canon 5 (A Judicial proactively be put in place. a comment that she thinks the Tea Employee Should Refrain from Another variable to consider is Party position is right and that she Inappropriate Political Activity). the use of social media applications wishes judges would better adhere The new employee was active that are deployed internally within the to the Constitution in their actions. court or court system. For instance, a in a political party, and she used 2. A court employee posts on his statewide court system might deploy Facebook to keep track of various Facebook page photos from a human resources blog to discuss political events, gatherings, and his vacation to Cancun that issues and solicit employee input. Just fundraisers as well as to endorse include pictures with him posing because such activity is inside the court, certain candidates. She inquired provocatively with very scantily that does not mean the potential for whether this Facebook activity clad women on the beach. Does it unethical behavior does not exist. For was appropriate in light of Canon make any difference if the photos example, using the blog to post positive 5. We researched the issue and are on a personal page that in no comments about a particular partisan inquired with the human resources way identifies him with his court political candidate running for governor department, and we decided it was employment? What if the page does who supports increased funding for not. We understood that posting show him to be a court employee? the state employee retirement system a political sign in a front yard or What if he is wearing a t-shirt might be prohibited by that employee’s placing a political bumper sticker with the court name in big letters code of conduct (e.g., it would be on a vehicle was inconsistent with across his chest? Does it make any prohibited in the U.S. federal courts in Canon 5. Applying these same difference what job the employee regard to a congressional candidate). If principles, we concluded that using has with the court? Facebook to endorse or support an employee has been allowed to make 3. A court employee circulates a candidates or a political party was unfettered posts to an internal social pledge appeal for a charity walk-a- akin to displaying a political sign media application and the employer thon to all of her contacts on her or bumper sticker. We shared this subsequently restricts (some would say

10 www.nacmnet.org judgment? Does the post reflect negatively on the judicial branch and on the employee’s professionalism, maintaining a clear distinction between court work and personal interests? Did the post constitute improper participation in political activity? NHM — The answer to these questions would probably be no, except for the fact that the employee’s profile identifies her court employment. This ties anything she posts to the court, at least tangentially. Thus, social networking site, including to be challenged in the employee’s the employee should not have lawyers who practice before court? What if it is not likely to expressed her opinion without the court. come before that court? removing her job identification, or at least she should have included 4. A court employee affiliates himself a disclaimer that her views were on his personal Facebook page These scenarios show the potential personal and did not represent the as a “fan” of an organization that diversity of employee social media position of the court in any fashion. frequently is a party in cases in the use. Using the NACM Model Code of 22 employee’s court. Conduct as the reference point, what CG — Many of these scenarios ethical problems might we find in each reflect errors of judgment that 5. A court employee supervisor is scenario? In order to provide a range could count against an employee in a social networking “friend” of of commentary, Cynthia Gray, director an evaluation and/or consideration a manager in her office. They of the Center for Judicial Ethics at the for advancement, particularly the usually exchange recipes, movie American Judicature Society (CG), and more experienced the employee reviews, and so on, but one day Andrea Henson-Armstrong, education is and the more responsibility the the employee asks the manager via attorney and social media expert at employee has. But that does not the social networking site to write the Federal Judicial Center (AH-A) — make them unethical. The first a job recommendation, since the please note that Andrea’s comments scenario is a problem because the employee is applying for a new come more from the reference point of employee is identified with the job at another court in town. The the U.S. federal courts code of conduct court in her profile. manager does so, and then tells — have graciously provided their AH-A — There are two issues another employee in the office, comments to supplement mine (NHM). again via the social networking site, here. The first is that the that the supervisor might be leaving Scenario 1 employee mentions that he/she and the employee would make (LinkedIn post regarding “activist is an employee of the court. The a good candidate to replace the judges”): The employee’s post second issue is the comment in the supervisor. All of this information might have problems under LinkedIn group. Many courts have quickly leaks out and the whole Canons 1.2 (avoid impropriety), social media policies prohibiting office becomes aware of what 2.1 (independent judgment), court employees from mentioning has happened. 3.1 (outside business), and 4.1 that they work for the court. Many (refrain from inappropriate political court employees have disputed this 6. A court employee circulates an activity). Did the post impugn the policy because of “professional” online petition on a social media dignity of the court? Did the post websites like LinkedIn. Ethically, networking site supporting a impair the employee’s or court’s I do not believe it is a violation to controversial state ballot measure. impartiality and independent merely mention that you work for What if the ballot measure is likely

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 11 a court. However courts may enact it might greatly diminishes the mentioned that she worked for the a policy that prohibits employees possible impact, depending on the court on her FB profile, the clerk from associating themselves with scale and scope of the employee’s asked the employee to take the the court on “any” social media Facebook friends. For now, assume topless photo down. The employee websites because of the issues the employee’s Facebook profile is was very angry because she that may arise from creating that public and makes no mention of argued that the FB profile picture association. Courts in this case his court employment. If so, the was taken on her own personal have written memorandums of simple posting of the photos is time and would be considered understanding (MOUs) to explain probably not an ethical problem, her private . However, why the policy is in place. I know although that may depend on how a few weeks later the employee of no court that has changed its “provocative” the photos are — for apologized to the clerk because policy because the employees example, are they pornographic? her friend, who works in private complained that it was unfair If, however, the employee is industry and had a similar photo or unreasonable. wearing a shirt that clearly connects as her profile picture, was fired on In terms of the second issue him to the court, then there the spot when her employer was regarding the comment, this speaks probably is an ethical problem, notified about the profile picture. directly to what can happen once especially if the employee has a job Maybe this is not an ethics issues individuals post their employment that is more publicly visible (such but an HR issue. I am not sure, status with the court. First, the as clerk of court or courtroom but I know that clerks are very court administrator would have to deputy). The position the employee uncomfortable with any of their ask whether a Tea Party case could holds does make a difference. employees having provocative and/ come before the court. If so, could CG — Scenario two is only or nude pictures posted online. At a litigant who files a case against a problem if the employee is some point, ethics committees may the Tea Party in that court believe identified as a court employee in have to define what “provocative” that the court employee would be the pictures or in his profile. means. It is a very fine line. Maybe fair and not biased because of their another issue is how public is the AH-A — I also would mention photograph? Who is able to see it? political position? Sometimes the whether the employee left his most important issue is whether Facebook (FB) page (and therefore Scenario 3 we, as court employees, appear the pictures and content) open to (Pledge appeal for charity): The fair and unbiased to those who “everyone” on FB or if he set his appeal for funds might have stand before our courts. That is, privacy setting to “only friends” problems under Canons 1.2 (avoid [we] cannot be involved in partisan ...that always comes up as an issue. impropriety), 1.6 (avoid privilege), politics when we are a part of an Who has the ability to view the 3.1 (outside business), and 3.3 independent judiciary. photos? But, as you mention, these (avoid gifts). Does the solicitation Scenario 2 may just be provocative and not impugn the dignity of the court (Vacation photos on Facebook): pornographic pictures. However, I (appearance of impropriety) or The employee’s post might have disagree with whether his position improperly exploit the employee’s problems under Canons 1.2 (avoid determines whether this is an ethics official position? Does the appeal impropriety) and 3.1 (outside violation. I disagree only because reflect negatively upon the court? business). Did the employee’s I have seen similar situations Will the appeal unduly influence activities impugn the dignity of the where court employees (not clerks the employee’s court performance court or reflect negatively upon the or court executives) have posted (e.g., quid pro quo)? court or his own professionalism? provocative and/or nude photos. NHM — To answer these NHM — A prime question the For example, one court employee questions, one first should address scenario doesn’t answer is whether went to the clerk to report that what the charity is that the walk- the Facebook page is public or another female employee posted a a-thon will benefit. If the charity private (private = only his friends topless photo as her profile picture is one that is consonant with the can see the content). If the latter, on FB. While the employee never mission of the court (such as

12 www.nacmnet.org providing funds for a pro bono Scenario 4 actions based on demonstrated legal clinic for the indigent) or is (The organizational “fan”): An knowledge-skills-abilities? Have otherwise not in conflict with the employee who affiliates himself the actions shown respect for the dignity of the court, then there as a “fan” of an organization that personal lives of employees without is likely no problem. Yet, one frequently is a party before his disclosing confidential information? must still consider the issue of court might have problems under NHM — In an earlier section, this soliciting funds from the lawyers Canons 1.2 (avoid impropriety), article dealt with the propriety of who practice before the court. 2.1 (independent judgment), and judges and court staff “friending” Generally, soliciting funds from 3.1 (outside business). Does the persons outside of the court (in lawyers is an ethically bad idea affiliation create a relationship that particular, attorneys). Here we and should not be done. This is impugns the integrity of the court? have “friending” going on between particularly true if the employee is Does it impair the employee’s fellow court employees who are in in a management-level position, as impartiality and independent supervisory relationships, followed this heightens the coercive aspect judgment, creating a conflict of by the sharing of employee- of the solicitation. The standard is interest? Does this outside activity specific personnel information. much higher for a manager versus reflect negatively on the court and At the least, the manager in this a regular employee. At a minimum, the employee’s professionalism, scenario has demonstrated a lack of such activity creates an appearance compromising an appropriate discretion and given the appearance that if a lawyer contributes, then boundary between court work and of bias (which may or may not be some favorable treatment at the personal interests? true) toward the third employee court will ensue, even if such NHM — This employee’s action is (potential candidate for supervisor). favorable treatment would not a violation of the canons. Whether CG — Scenario five is not actually happen (and if favoritism the relationship with the outside unethical, although it is does occur, there suddenly is a organization-litigant actually 23 bad judgment. much bigger ethical problem). affects the employee’s work or not AH-A — I agree with NHM’s CG — Absent a specific prohibition (e.g., it skews his judgment or assessment. on personal solicitation of results in improper favoritism), the contributions, scenario three is affiliation creates an appearance of Scenario 6 not a problem unless the appeal impropriety that reflects negatively (Ballot measure petition): The act specifically refers to the court or the upon the integrity of the court as of circulating a state ballot petition employee’s position. an independent arbiter of disputes. might violate Canons 3.1 (outside business) and 4.1 (refrain from AH-A — I know this is an issue CG — Scenario four is only a inappropriate political activity). for any court manager who has problem if the employee’s Facebook Does this action reflect negatively subordinates as Facebook “friends.” page identifies him as a court on the court or the employee’s Managers, from what I understand employee. professionalism? Is this the sort of from code of conduct training, AH-A — I agree that this is an political activity that is prohibited? should never solicit anything from ethical violation. subordinates. Thus, a manager NHM — As long as there is no Scenario 5 cannot ask for contributions in identification of the court employee (Office “friends” and personnel the office because they do not with the court (either due to information): The manager in this want to appear coercive. As such, specific designation on the social court may have violated Canons they should not solicit funds for a media site or inherently due to the 1.3 (fairness), 2.2 (personal walk-a-thon or ask subordinates position the employee holds, like relationships), and 2.7 (discretion). to buy Girl Scout cookies, etc. court administrator), on its face Does the activity between “friends” on Facebook or any other social there probably is no violation here. within Facebook constitute bias or networking site where their But if the ballot measure is likely to prejudice by the manager? Does subordinates are a part of be litigated in the employee’s court the manager’s actions show an their network. (such as, if the employee works indifference to making personnel in the state’s supreme court), then

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 13 the employee should refrain from may nevertheless be unacceptable of the U.S. District Court for the taking a public position on the performance). On the other hand, some District of Rhode Island is reprinted ballot measure.24 types of conduct would be unethical at the end of this article as a good CG — Scenario six is not a in any court. Essentially, there is a example to follow. problem if the employee circulates continuum of conduct ranging from 3. Orient all new employees to the the petition without reference to clearly ethical at one end to clearly importance of the court’s code of her court position; even judges can unethical at the other. As one moves conduct and social media policy, be active on some “controversial” from one end of the continuum to the then regularly train existing ballot issues, such as how judges other, acceptable employee conduct personnel on these topics. first becomes unacceptable performance are chosen. 4. Have a mechanism for staff to that may or may not be unethical, then get ethical questions promptly AH-A — I agree with NHM’s further on is deemed to be unacceptable answered. assessment. and unethical. The challenge for court managers is to properly apply applicable 5. Hire ethical staff members and What about the situation involving standards (personnel rules and policies appropriately monitor staff the courtroom deputy blogging about as well as one’s local code of conduct) to behaviors (e.g., as part of doing an ongoing trial presented at the the conduct being evaluated. This can reference checks on new hires, beginning of this article? The disclosure be quite difficult. review social media sites for of information about the trial and the The scenarios presented above content that is relevant to the hiring opinions of the courtroom deputy are helpful to understand the type decision and disclose to applicants and other staff in a public blog forum of analysis court managers need to that your court does this form of violates Canons 1 and 2, impugning conduct and questions they need to reference checking in your job the integrity of the court as an impartial ask when figuring out whether ethical announcements).26 forum and showing a severe lack of violations have occurred. Clearly a 6. Promptly follow through on any discretion with court information. It is plethora of opportunities exist for substantiated ethics violations. highly likely that a mistrial would be ethical problems to arise, and whether declared. An employee who commits 7. Enact appropriate information an ethical violation has happened is this level of ethical violation should be technology (IT) controls, whether not always clear. Given the widespread severely disciplined. or not you allow staff to access social media activity in society and by social media at work; policy It is apparent that in many court employees, what can a court do to breaches will almost certainly situations there can be differing avoid ethical problems in the first place? interpretations of the same set of facts, occur. Consider using tools that leading to varying judgments about 1. Have a robust code of conduct limit what can be done from your whether there has been an ethical in place for court employees computers/network, sandboxing violation. Within just the United States, that clearly delineates the ethical Web browsers,27 blocking the courts vary not only by state or federal boundaries they must follow. downloading of applications within jurisdiction, but also by level or type Surprisingly, although most courts Facebook, blocking confidential of court (state, county, municipal, have a code of conduct for judges, content, not allowing executable tribal, appellate, trial, general, limited/ some courts do not have a code of code to be allowed into your specialized, etc.). Courts also differ by conduct for court staff. It is hard network, and perhaps monitoring whether judges (or other court officials) to hold employees accountable of your network (although such are appointed (with or without a merit- without first having a clear set of monitoring must be done very based system), are elected (partisan ethical standards in place. carefully not to transgress privacy or not), and by the length of tenure. 2. Promulgate a social media use rights, etc.). For these and other reasons, there is policy for all court staff and 8. Have a media relations policy; plan no uniformity of ethical codes among keep it up to date. There are to deal with public scrutiny of any our courts. Therefore, it is apparent great resources available to help problems that might arise if an 25 that actions that might be unethical you create your court’s policy. ethical violation occurs. in one court may be quite acceptable See below for some key areas to in another (although the conduct consider. In addition, the policy

14 www.nacmnet.org Key areas to consider including in a • Disclose if technological controls, great opportunities and challenges. This court social media policy are as follows: such as site blocking or content article has examined how pervasive • What is the scope of your policy? filtering, will be used. social media use really is and how such What does the policy cover in the • Disclose if the court will monitor use by court employees intersects with way of access rights, media types, employee use of social media, and ethics standards. If courts proactively behaviors (e.g., identification of if so, under what circumstances. take the steps recommended here and court employment, use of court Will there be a possibility of create an environment of responsible seal, whether or not “friending” disciplinary action if a violation of social media use, the chances of or “recommending” is acceptable, the policy occurs? ethical and other problems will be greatly reduced. Indeed, when such an prohibiting use of court email • If your court is unionized, you environment exists, courts can embrace addresses, use of government must take extra care to adhere to social media and use them to great property, etc.), and whom does labor laws and the union . advantage to enhance internal and it cover? You may need to have In the U.S. federal government, the external communication. different provisions for different General Services Administration types of staff members, such as law has clashed with its unions over its Acknowledgments: clerks, management employees, social media policy.29 court reporters, etc. The following people greatly helped • Emphasize that court security is with the writing of this article: Peter • Address responsibility. Make sure to important. Outline acceptable Kiefer, Paul DeLosh, Cynthia Gray, cover what conduct is permissible conduct in this area, and Andrea Henson-Armstrong, Hilarie and what is prohibited in both contemplate prohibiting the posting Gaylin, and my colleagues who personal and professional areas and geotagging of text, photos, submitted real-world fact situations. of activity. Be specific in citing sound recordings, or videos that Thanks a lot! adherence to a code of conduct. would compromise security, if not ______Honor privacy.28 otherwise be an ethical violation. About the author • Require that intellectual property Norman Meyer is clerk of court for laws be followed. With the advent of social media the United States Court, District of New Mexico, and a past in society, today’s court leaders have president of NACM. Contact him at [email protected].

United States District Court District of Rhode Island Social Media Policy/Guidelines2

The birth and advance of “Web 2.0” change is centered, chiefly, on the ways through wikis; share their perspective technologies and applications in recent individuals use the Internet. Before Web through blogs and microblogs; years has the potential to revolutionize 2.0, most Internet users were mainly upload still and video images through how individuals, corporations, consumers of information; now, these videosharing and photosharing sites; government agencies, and non-profit new technologies and applications broadcast via podcasts and vodcasts; organizations interact and communicate allow users to be both producers and and stay connected via RSS feeds with one another. Web 2.0 refers to the consumers of information and shift beamed to email inboxes or displayed second generation of Web design and easily between those roles. on smartphones. software development, which places For many individuals, Web 2.0 As Web 2.0 has made heavy emphasis on communication, applications (often called “social communication instantaneous and collaboration, and sharing among media”) are central to their daily allowed for greater collaboration Internet users. Unlike the first computer usage. Users connect and information sharing, there has generation of Internet (Web 1.0), and communicate through social been some downside. Many users this change is not grounded in major networking Internet sites; collaborate adopting Web 2.0 seem less concerned, technical transformations; instead, this on, refine, and disseminate knowledge or at least mindful, of privacy and

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 15 confidentiality as they navigate social do, Court employees should carefully procedures, whether they are of a non- media sites such as Facebook. Recent evaluate whether the listing of their confidential or confidential nature. news stories illustrate the privacy and place of employment on a social 4. Remember the Guide. Any confidentiality concerns generated by networking website poses a security public postings are governed by the expansion of social media Internet risk. Also, remember that you are the Judiciary’s Guide to Policies and usage: employment opportunities lost a representative of the Court and Procedures. As Judiciary employees, because of Facebook profiles; scandal should conduct yourself in a way we are expected to avoid precipitated by YouTube or Flickr that avoids bringing embarrassment impropriety and conduct ourselves postings, and judicial proceedings upon yourself and/or the Court. in a manner that does not detract compromised by jurors’ Twitter In the age of Facebook, YouTube from the dignity and independence postings. and Twitter, many often do not of the judicial system. As such, The challenges and risks of such think through the implications of Judiciary employees are restricted social media, though, are particularly what they post. Users often believe from engaging in partisan political acute for government employees who that their postings are private activity and fundraising activities work in positions where discretion because of a social networking that could compromise judicial and confidentiality are imperative. website’s privacy features or that independence. Please keep these Court employees work in such an their comments are untraceable policies and procedures in mind environment. Court personnel are because they were made under a as you participate on social expected to keep sensitive information screen name, but this information media sites. confidential, exercise discretion to may not be private and could cause 5. Observe security protocol. avoid embarrassment to the Court, and damage to your reputation and Court employees must also take take precautions to avoid unnecessary the Court’s if it becomes public. care to avoid doing things that security risks for court personnel, As such, Court employees should would compromise the security especially the judges they serve. abide by a simple rule: if you are not of the courthouse and personnel. The Court has set down a series speaking to someone directly or over a To maintain security, do not post of broad guidelines for employees secure landline, you must assume that pictures of the courthouse, inside or to follow as they navigate these new, anything you say or write is available outside; do not post pictures of court and ever-changing, technologies and for public consumption. events and do not post pictures of applications. 3. Keep secrets secret. Make the Court’s judicial officers. Also, 1. Think before you post. Internet sure to abide by all of the court’s be careful when disclosing your postings — whether they be text, confidentiality and disclosure place of employment: social media photos, videos, or audio — remain provisions. Court employees sites are notoriously unsecure accessible long after they are handle confidential and sensitive environments and knowledge of forgotten by the user. Beyond that, information and the restrictions your place of employment could remember that nothing is “private” that employees normally observe in place employees in situations where on the Internet despite people’s best the performance of their day-to-day pressure could be applied on them efforts to keep things private. Do duties should also apply to their to corrupt the integrity of the not post anything on the Internet that use of social media. Just as court judicial process. you would not want to read on the employees are prohibited from

front page of the Providence Journal. disclosing sensitive, non-public notes 2. Speak for yourself, not your information to the media and Law Clerks and Interns of this Court general public in person or over the are also bound by the First Circuit Judicial institution. On social networking Council Interim Policy — Use of Social Networking sites, many individuals list their phone, the same applies to social Sites by Law Clerks. They should consult the First Circuit’s policy in addition to this policy. occupations and/or places of media. Furthermore, Court employees employment. Considering the should refrain from discussing any sensitive nature of the work that we of the Court’s internal processes and

16 www.nacmnet.org Resources available to help court leaders • NACM’s Social Media Policy, July 2010: http://nacmnet.org/conferences/past-conferences.html • “Managing the Message: The NACM Media Guide for Today‘s Courts,” 2010: http://nacmnet.org • NACM’s Model Code of Conduct: http://www.ncsconline.org/Nacmethics/ • NCSC’s “Social Media and the Courts Resource Guide”: http://www.ncsc.org/topics/media-relations/social-media-and-the-courts/resource-guide.aspx • The Conference of Court Public Information Officers report, “New Media and the Courts: The Current Status and a Look to the Future,” August, 2010: http://ccpionewmedia.ning.com/ • U.S. federal courts’ “Resource Packet for Developing Guidelines on Use of Social Media by Judicial Employees,” April 2010; a link to the PDF document can be found on this website: http://www.uscourts.gov/RulesAndPolicies/CodesOfConduct.aspx • American Judicature Society’s Model Code of Conduct for Nonjudicial Court Employees: http://www.ajs.org/ethics/eth_non-judic-employ.asp • CourtEthics.org: http://www.courtethics.org/ • “The Ethics Fieldbook: Tools for Trainers,” 1996, American Judicature Society (although a bit out of date, still has useful material): http://www.courtethics.org/Notes%20%26%20Downloads.htm • GSA Social Media Handbook & Policy (2009): http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/105232 and http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/staffoffices/socialmediapolicy.pdf • GSA site to help government agencies build social media platforms: http://www.citizen.apps.gov/ • IBM Social Media Guidelines: http://www.ibm.com/blogs/zz/en/guidelines.html • Intel Social Media Guidelines: http://www.intel.com/sites/sitewide/en_US/social-media.htm • Social Media and Web 2.0 in Government: http://www.usa.gov/webcontent/technology/other_tech.shtml • Web 2.0 Governance Policies and Best Practices: http://govsocmed.pbworks.com/Web-2-0-Governance-Policies- and-Best-Practices • Guidelines for Secure Use of Social Media by Federal Departments and Agencies: http://www.cio.gov/Documents/Guidelines_for_Secure_Use_Social_Media_v01-0.pdf • “Designing social media policy for government: Eight essential elements,” Center for Technology in Government, University at Albany, May 2010: http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/guides/social_media_policy • U.S. Army’s Social Media Program: http://www.slideshare.net/USArmySocialMedia • Other great resources on specific topics can be found in the endnotes.

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 17 18 www.nacmnet.org Endnotes 1. This article does not necessarily reflect adding “a judicial employee should uphold the • NCSC’s Social Media and the Courts the position of the United States Bankruptcy integrity and independence of the judiciary and of Resource Guide: www.ncsc.org Court for the District of New Mexico, the United the judicial employee’s office;” otherwise, the two • NACM’s Social Media Policy: States federal judicial system, or the National codes are very similar. www.nacmnet.org Association for Court Management; the views 14. An excellent resource on this subject • City of Seattle Social Media Use expressed are solely those of the author. is the U.S. Army’s “Geotags and Location-Based Policy: http://www.seattle.gov/pan/ 2. Some examples used in this article are Social Networking,” http://www.slideshare. SocialMediaPolicy.htm taken from actual court events; care has been net/USArmySocialMedia/social-media- taken to not reveal the courts or persons involved. roundupgeotagging-safety. • Delaware Department of Technology and The author thanks the court managers who 15. Government Computer News, Oct. 4, Information Social Media Policy: http://dti. submitted these fact situations to use in 2010, “Social Media Has its Place; Keep it There,” delaware.gov/pdfs/pp/SocialMediaPolicy.pdf this article. page 30. http://gcn.com/articles/2010/10/04/ • Wake County, North Carolina’s “Guidelines 3. http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/ interview-amsler-social-media.aspx. for Wake County’s use of Facebook, Twitter, entry/m_en_us1443359#m_en_us1443359 16. The , Board of YouTube and Granicus web video, and http://nacmnet.org/conferences/past- Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, blogs”: http://www.wakeemployees.com/ conferences.html Opinion #2010-7, Dec. 3, 2010; http://www. support/documents/web20_dept_ guidelines.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Media supremecourt.ohio.gov/PIO/news/2010/ BOCadvisoryOp_120810.asp. • “Web 2.0 Governance Policies and Best 4. “Resource Packet for Developing Practices”: http://govsocmed.pbworks.com/ Guidelines on Use of Social Media by Judicial 17. Florida Supreme Court Judicial Ethics Web-2-0-Governance-Policies-and- Employees,” Committee on Codes of Conduct Advisory Committee, Opinion Number 2009- Best-Practices Judicial Conference of the United States, 20, issued Nov. 17, 2009. http://www.jud6. Administrative Office of the United States Courts, org/LegalCommunity/LegalPractice/opinions/ • “Designing social media policy for pages –12, April 2010. jeacopinions/2009/2009-20.html. government: Eight essential elements,” Center for Technology in Government, 5. An excellent video highlighting the 18. Florida Supreme Court Judicial Ethics University at Albany, May 2010: http:// rapid pace of change and the use of new media Advisory Committee, Opinion Number 2010- www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/guides/ can be found at: http://vimeo.com/11551721. 04, issued March 19, 2010; http://www.jud6. org/LegalCommunity/LegalPractice/opinions/ social_media_policy 6. Infoworld, “How to tame the social jeacopinions/2010/2010-04.html. network at work: What you don’t know — or • “Drafting Social Media Policies,” by refuse to learn — about social networking could 19. FCCA Journal, Summer/Fall 2010, James Wong, Legal Technology at Law. undermine your business,” Dan Tynan, Oct. 18, “From the Editor” (Pat McNutt), page 4; http:// com, June 2009: http://www.law.com/ 2010. http://www.infoworld.com/d/applications/ www.fcca.ws/. jsp/lawtechnologynews/PubArticleLTN. how-tame-the-social-network-work-361. 20. 19 University of Florida. Journal of Law jsp?id=1202431410095. 7. Information Week, “Socially Challenged & Public Policy 429 (2008). 26. One must be very careful in reference- (IT’s under pressure to deliver Facebook-like 21. Fact situation submitted to the author check reviews of social media sites for relevant social networking in-house)” Sept. 27, 2010, page from a colleague, October 2010. information. If one does so, it is a good idea to separate this function from the hiring function 14. http://www.internetevolution.com/document. 22. Of course, using a different code of asp?doc_id=197424. (e.g., a hiring committee and the hiring conduct may result in differing results; always authority), and only refer relevant information 8. Information taken from “Y U Luv Texts, use your applicable local code. For example, the to the persons involved in making the hiring H8 Calls,” by Katherine Rosman, The Wall Street author’s court is governed by the U.S. Courts decision. This insulates the court from problems Journal, October 14, 2010, page D1, and from Code of Conduct for Employees, and it is more involving misuse of inappropriate and irrelevant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook. restrictive than the NACM Model Code of information, such as litigation over discrimination 9. Infoworld, “How to tame the social Conduct. against a protected class of applicants. network at work: What you don’t know — or 23. Additional comment from Peter 27. “Sandboxing” in information technology refuse to learn — about social networking could Kiefer: “Arizona’s ethics committee is far more (IT) terms refers to isolating a computer software undermine your business,” Dan Tynan, Oct. 18, conservative. Even if never specifically identified (in this instance, the Web browser) from the 2010. as a court employee, supervisors and managers rest of the environment to keep malware from 10. Conference of Court Public Information are ethically forbidden from participating in just spreading or to create a safe test environment. Officers survey conducted in June, 2010. Details the kind of charity events described.” See this Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/ found at “New Media and the Courts: The Current 24. This is another example of how the wiki/Sandbox_%28computer_security%29. Status and a Look at the Future,” CCPIO, August same fact situation may be interpreted differently, 28. For an examination of this issue, see 2010, page 65; http://ccpionewmedia.ning.com/. depending on the court’s code of conduct. In “Social Media: Where Privacy Comes Last,” Federal 11. “New Media and the Courts: the the U.S. federal courts, the Code of Conduct Computer Week, Aug. 9, 2010: http://fcw.com/ Current Status and a Look at the Future,” CCPIO, for Judicial Employees generally allows for Articles/2010/08/09/HOME-PAGE-Gov-2dot0- August 2010: http://ccpionewmedia.ning.com/. participation in nonpartisan electoral activities but social-media-privacy.aspx. severely restricts partisan activities. 12. ibid, pp. 20–22. 29. “GSA, Labor Group at Odds Over Social 25. Helpful tips and examples can be Media,” Federal Times, vol. 26 no.18, July 26, 13. The NACM Model Code of Conduct found in: 2010. is found at http://nacmnet.org/ethics/index. html. Most court ethical codes contain similar • “Resource Packet for Developing Guidelines provisions. For example, the Code of Conduct on Use of Social Media by Judicial for Judicial Employees of the United States Employees,” pages 27–42 (including policies federal courts (http://www.uscourts.gov/ from the U.S. District Court for the District RulesAndPolicies/CodesOfConduct.aspx) has of Rhode Island and the Federal Judicial five canons (instead of NACM’s four), essentially Center)

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 19 When it comes to courthouse planning and design, a major revolution is brewing.

Today’s Version of Yesterday’s Vision of Tomorrow’s Courthouse By Marcus W. Reinkensmeyer and Chuck Oraftik

When it comes to courthouse as “yesterday’s” obsolete courthouses. recently entered the picture. Predictably, planning and design, a major revolution Many of the critical factors that the pace of change has only continued is brewing. Tomorrow, the courthouses drove design of today’s generation of to accelerate, conditioned by our global that we are building today (the ones courthouses remain. These factors are economy. we currently refer to as the “courthouse still evolving, mutating, and growing In response to these tidal forces, of tomorrow”) may well be viewed while several new dynamics have the Academy of Architecture for

20 www.nacmnet.org Figure 1 Courthouse Evolution

Justice (AAJ) of the American Institute with the National Association for Court immense changes in society, technology, of Architects (AIA) recently held a Management (NACM). The panel was and economics have yet again totally conference on the future of justice organized and moderated by AIA/AAJ transformed operations and facilities facility programming, planning, and member Chuck Oraftik and included for major private/public sector design. One noteworthy presentation AAJ/AIA members Rob Fisch, Michael institutions such as education, banking, was entitled, “Today’s Version of Griebel, Duncan Broyd, Clifford Ham, travel, retail, and healthcare. These Yesterday’s Vision of Tomorrow’s Alan Bright, and NACM past president transformational changes are now at Courthouse.” It was a relatively fast- Marcus W. Reinkensmeyer.1 the courts’ doorstep. Still just “tips of paced, audience-involved, round-robin The presentation recognized how icebergs,” over the next five to 30 years, discussion on various change agents the visionary and exciting “Courthouse this inevitable tsunami of change will by seven deeply committed and long- of Tomorrow” (as viewed 25+ years have profound and lasting impact on experienced court specialists. This ago) has indeed become today’s reality court operations and supporting court session was presented in collaboration and baseline. Since then, however, facilities (Figure 1).

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 21 Here are a few of the intriguing (Figure 3). What court services will be Figure 2 ideas discussed by the panel: going online next? What does this mean Payment kiosk for future courthouse design? Is today’s Expanded Online Court Services: high-volume courthouse destined to Increasingly, just as in the private sector, become tomorrow’s medium-volume a vast amount of court business will be courthouse? conducted online via the Internet and wireless networks (Figure 2). Already, Tele-presence: The ready availability it is common to have traffic safety of high-definition, life-size, and school, case filing, and records retrieval interactive video images is rapidly conducted online with the attendant transforming the way private industry reduction in operational and facility conducts business by reducing travel requirements. In Travis County, Texas, time and expense. Will this someday juror selection is now conducted online, mean that expert witness, legal and juror panels show up in specific representation, witness testimony, courtrooms for voir dire. This model etc. will be conducted remotely? Just eliminates virtually all juror assembly as electronic signatures are the legal areas and associated staffing costs equivalent of hard signatures, are we

Figure 3 juror selection

22 www.nacmnet.org Figure 4 UNBUNDLED MODEL: ONLINE ACCESS/REMOTE PARTICIPATION

a few legal decisions away from an of anti-social behavior. Hence, we continuing movement toward problem- electronic presence equal to that of an are just beginning to see courthouses solving courts such as substance actual presence in dispositive court that incorporate — indeed totally abuse, domestic violence, and family hearings? Are we perhaps a decade or integrate — related social services courts. Just as with medicine and law, so away from in-custody defendants such as substance abuse and mental the courts seem to be acknowledging “attending” substantive proceedings health screening, welfare, education, that in today’s world, specialized from a “courtroom” in a detention job training and placement, and life knowledge and individualized litigant center, greatly reducing the need for a skills, and related justice agencies such experiences are necessary for the separate circulation path for in-custody as prosecution, defense, and probation, effective administration of justice. So defendants (Figure 4)? with traditional court services. In this what does this mean for the design possible future scenario, the courthouse of future courtrooms? How might Holistic Justice: Traditionally, the remains as the central in-person forum, new court facilities accommodate primary role of courts has been serving as one component of a larger more case management/multi-faceted adjudication — win or lose, guilty or and more comprehensive justice courtroom proceedings? How do not guilty. Today, many jurisdictions services complex. we strike a balance between highly are fusing the adjudicative role with specialized courtrooms versus more community-based social services to Specialty Courts: Closely related flexible courtrooms and convertible systematically address the root causes to the “holistic justice” trend is a support space? As its fundamental

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 23 Today we are beginning to see some shapes and outlines of the courthouse of tomorrow. Working in collaboration, NACM and the AAJ have raised key plan issues and identified those key dynamics, principles, and business requirements defining today’s vision of “Tomorrow’s Courthouse.”

building block, how would a possible Ten- or even 16-hour operational days anticipate a series of follow-up sessions change in courtroom design impact (e.g., night courts)? True courtroom and white papers with more specifics the organization/stacking/design of the sharing? Multi-use court, meeting, guiding court services and functional modern courthouse? and program space? Unbundling of courthouse design. The Limits of Sustainable Design: services to offsite/online venues? Off- ______Over the next 20 years, we will loading of some cases to non-judicial ABOUT THE AUTHORS probably see unimagined changes in court officers? Privatization of some Marcus W. Reinkensmeyer is court administrator for the Superior Court in energy management. Today’s Leadership operational components? Centralization Maricopa County (Arizona) and past in Energy and Environmental Design of operations with fewer, but larger and president of the National Association for Court Management. Contact him at (LEED) certification categories (silver, more efficient, courthouse buildings? [email protected]. gold, etc.) may — sooner rather than Finally, in addressing these questions, Chuck Oraftik, FAIA, LEED, is justice director later — appear to be quaint and overly court planners must consider ongoing for the San Francisco office of HOK simplistic. What will zero-carbon lifecycle costs along with one-time and serves as the American Institute of Architects’ official liaison to AN CM. Contact emission courthouses look like when construction costs. Chuck at [email protected]. we switch from “playing checkers to Typically, this results in Rube playing chess?” Might sun shielding Goldberg-type temporary operational Sources www.maricopa.gov/courttower of windows disappear as technology and facility “fixes.” But eventually the LEED newsletter, April 2009 (http://www. allows traditional windows to turn into pent up demand for a new court facility reallifeleed.com/2009_04_01_archive.html) energy generators? How might this can no longer be ignored and both court Retrospective of Courthouse Design 2001–2010, affect the iconography of two centuries managers and architects lurch forward. National Center for State Courts (NCSC) of courthouse aesthetics? And then, too often, court managers Future Trends in State Courts 2010, NCSC and architects respond only with what Reinkensmeyer, Marcus. “Court Stewardship and Business Process Re-engineering: An Urban Court Resource Challenges of a New Era: we know today. Unfortunately, we Perspective,” 4th National Symposium on Court Today, all levels of government are are often so preoccupied dealing with Management (October 2010) financially stretched, if not already today’s challenges that we rarely pause Jessica Funkhouser, special counsel, Superior Court of Arizona — Maricopa County deeply in . Few predict a public to look over the horizon to anticipate sector recovery to full economic challenges that might be just around NOTES strength anytime soon, if ever. The the corner. 1. NACM and the AIA/AAJ have a nation has already changed course, Today we are beginning to see some memorandum of understanding to collaborate on issues of mutual professional interest. In the adopting a much more frugal shapes and outlines of the courthouse future we anticipate additional co-sponsored approach to public sector operations, of tomorrow. Working in collaboration, presentations — at AAJ conferences as well as at NACM conferences. In fact, a joint presentation facility design, and construction. NACM and the AAJ have raised key was held at the NACM midyear conference, The U.S. Postal Service, for example, planning issues and identified those Colorado Springs, Colorado, on “The Greening of the Courthouse.” contemplates service reductions to five, key dynamics, principles, and business four, or even three days per week. What requirements defining today’s vision might this mean for the judicial system? of “Tomorrow’s Courthouse.” We

24 www.nacmnet.org Planning for a 100-Year Courthouse: An Urban Court Perspective

Many of the planning dynamics Figure 5 considered at the AAJ/AIA Maricopa County Criminal Tower Mock-up conference are addressed in the programmatic and architectural design of the Maricopa County Superior Court’s Criminal Court Tower, Phoenix, Arizona, targeted to open in February 2012. The 695,000 square foot Criminal Tower will serve as an anchor for the downtown Phoenix court complex, providing the city both a center and a centerpiece. An open, desert-scaped mall with sculpted seating areas spans the two blocks north of the north-facing courthouse entryway. Winding south from the historic Orpheum Theatre past the City of Phoenix administrative offices, across the street and past the Old Courthouse building, and across another street to the existing court buildings, the path ends at the doors of the newest addition to the downtown court complex: the Criminal Court Tower. Literally, one will walk through history to arrive at the Criminal Court Tower entryway. The distinctive copper façade of Figure 6 the Criminal Court Tower ties in with Maricopa County Criminal Tower Floor Plan the first of the “Five C” foundations of Arizona’s history (copper, cattle, cotton, citrus, and climate), as well as downtown Phoenix’s designation: Copper Square.

Expanded Online Court Services and Tele-presence E-courtrooms will be equipped with state-of-the-art technology, including improved microphones and enhanced systems to allow the creation of DVD-quality video recordings, electronic exhibit display for jurors to view exhibits simultaneously, video/telephonic communications for court appearances, and assisted hearing devices. Expansion of the court’s cost-saving Remote Interpreter

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 25 Program means that access will be Figure 7 available in all courtrooms via video Criminal Court Tower schematic communications.

Holistic Justice The Criminal Court Tower provides, in the words of its designers, an “onsite presence for human interface.” Designed with victims in mind, but with ideas that carry over to the needs of the general public facing a potentially emotion-laden event, the Criminal Court Tower is — in the vernacular — very “user-friendly.” A place that is safer for a victim is safer for everyone — insulating victims and their families from the possibility of confrontation serves to create a safer environment for defendants and their families — and the benefits flow to the others who share the court space, staff and public alike.

The calming, therapeutic environment incorporates daylight and outside views along with natural materials throughout the building, creating a “more humane State-of-the-art, secure holding The Limits of Sustainable Design environment for everyone visiting.” cells will accommodate up to 1,000 The court tower is built to meet Entrances are both visible and incarcerated individuals attending or exceed the certified Silver identifiable, making the initial court sessions at the downtown court Leadership in Energy and contact less overwhelming. Victims complex, decreasing transportation Environmental Design (LEED) Green have viewing rooms in every costs during trial, and they will ensure Building System measures: courtroom and secure waiting separation of men, women, juveniles, rooms in the lobby. and gang members in accordance Energy efficiency: with applicable mandates. • Significant decrease of HVAC In addition to serving victims, loads by connecting into the witnesses, and defendants, the Specialty Courts Northwind District cooling system Criminal Court Tower offices court The court tower design maintains (chilled and circulated water) and legal professionals. Co-locating “sufficient functional flexibility to • High-performance glazing these agencies and court users ensure that courtroom space • High-efficiency lighting (lawyers - prosecutors, indigent can accommodate a continually complemented with daylight defense counsel, as well as judges changing mix of proceeding types, • Proper installation & calibration and staff, adult probation with the while avoiding over-specialization…,” of energy-related systems Treatment Assessment Screening which would limit the particular • Energy reduction of more Center (TASC) diversion program, uses of a specific area. Initially, than 12 percent of clerks, interpreters, and court the Criminal Court Tower will open accepted standard reporters among them) onsite with 22 courtrooms, with build- promotes early case resolution and out capacity for 10 additional Material selection: operational synergies for all system courtrooms and supporting • More than 90 percent of stakeholders. Timely case disposition, office space to accommodate demolition waste diverted in turn, reduces jail costs for in- future growth. from landfill custody defendants and creates • Diversion of 50 percent of efficiencies in use of time construction & demolition and resources. debris from disposal; redirect

26 www.nacmnet.org recoverable and reusable restricting the amount of room, a law enforcement waiting resources to appropriate sites harmful chemicals released area, food services, conference/ • Total of 10 percent of building into air breathed in by users training rooms equipped with has recycled content (fly ash, video communications, media carpet, insulation) Sustainable site development: accommodations, and collegial • Utilize regional materials so that • Minimize pollution from judicial chambers. 10 percent of total material construction activities cost extracted, processed, and • Building located on previously To maximize the use of specific- manufactured within 500 miles developed site use fixed resources, secure judicial of the site • Nearby access to public chambers are housed on floors transportation separate from the courtroom floors. Water savings: • Reserved parking for fuel- Termed “collegial chambers,” the • Use of low-water-use plants efficient cars and carpools co-location of chambers not only and drip irrigation to reduce • Heat island reduced by locating encourages interaction among landscape water by 50 percent parking underground judges and staff, but it also provides • Use of ultra-efficient plumbing for efficiencies in scheduling materials saves 20 percent water Resource Challenges courtrooms to support large (e.g., of a New Era dual jury trials or high-profile cases) Indoor environmental quality: Resources shared throughout the or small matters. Courtrooms are • Installed CO2 monitoring system downtown Phoenix court campus assigned to cases rather than to to ensure adequate fresh air include: a jury assembly area judges. A judge may be assigned a • Lighting controlled by users, for the entire complex, extensive “regular” courtroom for a low-level coupled with daylight-sensitive use of kiosk and docket display felony trial one week and then be dimmers/sensors to dim lights technologies, secure judicial parking, assigned to a larger courtroom when daylight available sallyport and in-custody holding for a capital case or a case with • Products used meet standards area, specially designated victim significant media interest for the waiting areas, a secure exhibits next several weeks.

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 27 One area of judicial operations that reveals an abundance of opportunity when viewed through this type of lens is the collection and enforcement of court-ordered fines and restitution.

Fines and Restitution Collecting by Investing By Paul B. Litschewski

Warren Buffett once said, “It is not investment is of time, skills, dollars, or victims and society. The importance necessary to do extraordinary things to get other resources. One area of judicial of enforcing compliance with these extraordinary results.” Buffett has found operations that reveals an abundance monetary sanctions is well established, remarkable success by combining his of opportunity when viewed through with most agreeing that neglecting to do understanding of business with his this type of lens is the collection and so erodes the credibility and integrity wisdom in recognizing opportunities enforcement of court-ordered fines of the criminal justice system. Despite that have the potential to yield superior and restitution. these acknowledgments, there is often returns. Just about any endeavor, not Much has been written about a lack of inertia and follow-through by just those related to the mood on criminal fines and estitutionr and policymakers and managers to capitalize Wall Street, can be looked at through the roles they play in deterrence, on time-tested practices and other an “investment lens,” whether the punishment, and the restoration of opportunities to strengthen collections.

28 www.nacmnet.org Courts throughout the United States permission to spread out payment of collection staff. From a cost-benefit ponder the unending streams of their court obligations over a period standpoint, this model fairs very well. offenders who, for one reason or of weeks, months, or years (or simply As positions were added over the years, another, avoid paying their fines and allege an inability to pay anything at they unfailingly brought in new revenue restitution. Other countries share the all). The collections investigators meet that greatly exceeded the cost of the frustration. For example, a recent face-to-face with these individuals to: employees (as high as 10 times greater article in a news publication out of a) Problem solve and discuss in some instances). London stated, “Chances are the people any resources and options the who don’t pay their fines are repeat offender has that would allow for Investing in offenders. One can only conclude that immediate, full payment; those who don’t pay also don’t learn or Collaboration don’t feel compelled to follow the rules b) Gather financial and other personal and Bringing data to obtain a complete picture of most of us abide by in our daily lives.” Players Together The State of Colorado continues the offender’s ability to pay; to forge ahead in its commitment to c) Limit the duration of any payment Collaboration among the various holding offenders accountable for their plan to the shortest, reasonable players and stakeholders is critical to court-ordered financial obligations. A time frame. adopting thoughtful processes that will 1991 Court Manager article, “Getting a meet a variety of needs. In Colorado, Grip on Court Collections,” described Experience has shown that many the investment in a proactive collection the Colorado Judicial Department’s offenders pay, in full, simply to avoid process began in the 1980s when collections program, its initial disclosing their financial information people at various levels in the system results, and its designs for the future. and the associated interview by the united to address the exploding volume The passage of 20 years allows the collections investigator. Those who of unpaid fines and restitution. Not opportunity to review how the program do receive payment plans are given a surprisingly, skepticism and a certain has matured, as well as to visit how very clear message that compliance amount of resistance to change crept investments in people, collaboration, is expected and, possibly even more in, but these concerns quickly and tools have paid solid dividends. impactful, that someone will notice if a dissolved as pilot programs began to payment is missed. show promise and, ultimately, yielded Investing in People Colorado’s collections investigator increased compliance. staffing level is currently 83 full-time Over the years, the collections and Capitalizing on equivalents (FTE), allocated across program has become highly integrated Their Impact all 22 of the state’s judicial districts into local court and probation and serving the county and district operations. At its most basic level, the A common thread emerges courts as well as the county probation strategy employed can be summed up when one conducts national research departments. The costs associated with as follows: into court systems that are enjoying these employees are covered by specific sustained increases in payment Full payment from offenders is assessments paid by offenders and expected upon sentencing unless compliance. They have often invested in earmarked for this purpose. Staffing employees who are specifically assigned there are extenuating circumstances. has grown incrementally over the last Offenders are not automatically and accountable for the monitoring 20 years, enabling the program to and collection of fines and restitution. granted payment plans. Instead, keep pace with increased case volume, there must be a demonstrated need It takes a person, not a form or a implement a broader range of tools, procedure, to challenge and work determined through a financial and expand coverage beyond traffic and investigation. A range of procedures with an offender in order to find misdemeanor cases to felony matters, payment solutions. and mechanisms are in place to which bring higher balances and greater monitor and expedite collections. In Colorado, collections degrees of complexity. investigator positions fill this need, Studies along the way have Support and investment in the managing the approximate 200,000 demonstrated the significant gains to be offenders per year who request process has also come from district achieved by incorporating specialized attorneys and victim advocates.

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 29 S uccess in collecting fines and restitution is driven, in large part, by the availability and use of offender-specific information, which can provide a roadmap to the offender’s unique avenues for payment.

Prosecutors now have increased offenders expecting the court to allow Information Gathering Tools confidence that penalties and sanctions them to pay later, even though they very Success in collecting fines and will be enforced when there are possibly have the ability to pay now. restitution is driven, in large part, by convictions, and the prospects that An inventory of ideas can be the availability and use of offender- restitution will be recovered are higher assembled by looking at other specific information, which can than ever. Crime victims have been jurisdictions, researching other provide a roadmap to the offender’s major beneficiaries of the enhanced governmental operations facing similar unique avenues for payment. Of collection efforts, with nearly 50 percent collection challenges (e.g., child support paramount importance is a written, of the total dollars paid by offenders enforcement), or borrowing ideas financial disclosure that requires the going toward restitution or local from private industry. In addition, the offender to detail and certify his or her programs that offer aid and assistance National Center for State Courts offers a personal financial status in order to to victims. wide range of information and demonstrate eligibility for a payment Investment in this process has also excellent advice concerning plan. Examination of the disclosure, been reflected in the general assembly’s this topic. Colorado has tapped into with any necessary verification of the actions, writing into law numerous these resources over the years and statements made by the applicant, effective tools and ensuring that adopted an array of tools that have either ends in denial of the request or collection efforts are funded. Executive coalesced into a multi-faceted approach, in the granting of a payment plan that branch agencies have also played an which is able to accommodate a variety reflects the offender’s financial ability. integral role, partnering with the courts of case circumstances. Colorado courts use both basic as well to implement processes such as tax Certainly, the “staples” of any as highly in-depth disclosure forms, refund intercepts that have captured effective collections protocol — past with the latter typically being used in millions in recoveries from offenders. due notices, phone calls, etc. — are large balance restitution cases. a good starting point with proven Research and verification of results. The following tools require a Investing in Tools and information such as addresses, , more serious investment of time and and property and vehicle ownership is Making Life Easier resources but have proven track records facilitated by intergovernmental data in Colorado’s system: Generally, the implementation sharing. While many of us bemoan of some very basic tools will go far • Information Gathering Tools the diminishing level of privacy in in expediting the collection of fines • Attachments of Earnings today’s world, from the point of view of and restitution. Oftentimes, the most locating offenders who are dodging their • Intercepts effective tool (if one can call it that) is obligations, Internet-based investigation simply telling the offender that he or • Driver’s License Suspensions tools have left them with far fewer ways she is expected to pay immediately. • Private Collection Agencies to hide. A growing number of no-cost “Your total balance is due today. Please sites often provide sufficient data and • Online Payments pay the cashier.” These simple words leads. Although, for more complex can serve as an effective first line of • Automated Tracking searches, it is often worth the relatively defense in reducing the throngs of Each of these is discussed below. small fee charged.

30 www.nacmnet.org For the collections investigators, identified four areas in which dollars Of course, there is not determining if an offender has multiple are to be intercepted: lottery winnings, transferability of an intercept system obligations or a history of court activity unclaimed property, state income tax such as this to states that do not have throughout the state requires only a refunds, and gambling winnings. (The a state level income tax … yet. This few keystrokes. Colorado is fortunate latter is currently under development.) could change under proposed federal to have a single, statewide computer Lottery and unclaimed property legislation that is gaining widespread system for court case processing intercepts number about 100 per year, support. Congress may consider and management, which provides bringing in $60,000 annually. However, establishing a federal income tax refund interconnectivity from one county the state tax refund intercepts have intercept program to assist the states to the next. yielded, by far, the biggest dividends. in the enforcement of local level fines During 2005, the program’s first and restitution. The idea of taking the year, the Colorado courts recovered intercept tool to the federal level holds Attachments of Earnings $3 million through this enforcement an enormous amount of promise and, While property liens and mechanism. In 2010, more than if implemented, would tremendously account have certainly $6 million came in. The practical bolster local efforts. found their place in the enforcement impacts of this are far reaching. Near- of fines and restitution, Colorado’s forgotten cases are suddenly being statutory “attachment of earnings” paid, new revenue is available for a Driver’s License Suspensions (AOE) is turned to most frequently due range of statutory purposes, and most Not many things can get a person’s to its simplicity and effectiveness. The importantly, crime victims who have attention like a notice from the state general assembly passed legislation in been patiently awaiting restitution warning that their driver’s license is 1996 creating the AOE, which is similar are being paid. In the last year alone, being suspended. Colorado, like many to the administrative assignment 40,000 court cases received payments states, has employed this time-tested commonly issued by child support from a tax refund intercept. Much to the method, in cooperation with the enforcement units. Up to 50 percent relief of court accounting personnel, the division of motor vehicles, to enforce of an offender’s earnings are subject high volume of payment transactions is payments in traffic matters. Even if to attachment, although collections managed through an automated posting the offender has moved to another investigators often set the percentage process at the state court administrator’s state, interstate data sharing of driver’s lower based on the specific case office, which creates a receipt record in license actions keeps them honest. One circumstances. Approximately each offender’s case. analysis showed that 55 percent of 25,000 AOEs are issued annually, As one would expect, intercepts defaulted traffic infraction cases were with the return being an estimated can and do generate a certain number of subsequently paid within the 90-day- $3 to $5 million. inquiries from the responsible parties, period following the . The license particularly in those instances in which suspension notification is credited with the unpaid violation occurred a number resolving many of these cases. Intercepts of years ago. The use of a centralized Like several other states, Colorado hotline has provided an effective means has invested in the development and to track and promptly respond to these Private Collection Agencies adoption of several “intercept programs” inquiries. Only about 10 percent of the While the majority of accounts can to recover dollars owed to crime people whose refunds are intercepted be collected through internal efforts, victims and the courts. Essentially, these call with questions. Typically these the use of private collection services programs operate under the premise matters are quickly resolved by still has its place in criminal collections, that money should not be given over refreshing the caller’s memory about and Colorado has benefited from such to an offender with one hand while the citation he or she forgot to pay. partnerships. However, it is important the other hand is attempting to collect While there is the occasional error or that offenders be given the opportunity money owed by that same offender … discrepancy, this program’s track record to resolve their court-ordered financial simple, common sense! Over the last for accuracy has been excellent. several years, the general assembly has

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 31 Online Payments Without question, making it convenient to pay can’t help but further collection efforts; hence, society has witnessed the advent of online payment systems for nearly any type of bill one can imagine. Recognizing the potential benefits, the Colorado Judicial Branch recently implemented such a process, which has been wildly embraced by the public. Online payments are skyrocketing while the traditional paper methods of check and money order represent half the volume they did five years ago. In today’s world, the Internet can obligations directly with the court only after the courts had exhausted be accessed from just about anywhere. before introducing a third party to the their internal remedies. The ability of a person to log in and mix. Placing the account with a private The pilot projects demonstrated enter a card transaction wherever agency adds another layer of complexity the viability of outsourcing as a way to he or she might be removes a number to the case, as well as drives up costs augment existing efforts, and by 2001 of obstacles that could have prevented to both the offender and the court. An this practice was adopted in every timely payment. For those who still arrangement, such as the one existing in judicial district. Approximately $5 prefer to make a payment in person, Colorado, that provides for the agency’s million per year is now being recovered the line to the cashier has now become fees to be added to the debt, instead through with private firms. significantly shorter. of being deducted from the proceeds, Eighty thousand placements were made helps to minimize the impact on the by the Colorado courts and probation A utomated Tracking court and allows victims to receive full offices last fiscal year, and to-date, restitution (as opposed to restitution payments have been generated on Investing in an automated less the agency’s commission). 15 percent of those accounts. While collections tracking system pays Until the late 1990s, the Colorado this represents a small percentage, it enormous dividends, not only in courts had never contracted with is important to note that many, if not terms of dollars collected, but also in private firms for fine andestitution r most, of the placements stemmed from managing time and compiling data. The collections and were always hesitant to highly elusive offenders with patterns of Colorado state courts and probation consider it. However, some means to avoiding their obligations. departments share a proprietary system address “stagnant” accounts receivable Currently, there are seven collection (developed in-house) that offers a range needed to be developed. In 1997, a agencies on the Colorado Judicial of advanced capabilities related to case three-year pilot project was launched, Department’s eligible provider list, management, offender supervision, in cooperation with several of the state’s which was recently reestablished case financial processing, as well judicial districts, in which placements through the issuance of a request for as collections. were made to five collection agencies. proposals (RFP). Each district has the The use of automation in fine and Functional studies were conducted to option to select one or more agencies restitution collections paves the way for determine how best to utilize the private from the list and may later modify their accountability and uniformity. Under sector services and what aspects of the selections if they are not pleased with Colorado’s system, every balance owed overall collection process should be the performance. This model promotes is entered into the case financial record, retained by the collections investigators. competition amongst the providers, which makes it easy to identify any case What emerged as the most practical and as such, has increased their that needs collection action. Offender approach was for accounts to be placed responsiveness to the courts’ needs. payment plans are stored online, as

32 www.nacmnet.org are collector notes and a full history of response-ability.” With the investment in misinterpretation can often result, any action taken. All cash registers are collection personnel combined with a leading to misperceptions about the integrated into the system, automatically strong process and wide range of tools, general level of compliance. importing receipt data to the payment the judicial system enjoys newly created Here is an example, based on plan and distributing the proceeds accountability, which in turn allows Colorado’s Fiscal Year 2009–10 to the appropriate statutory funds for a much more effective response restitution orders, illustrating the (victim fees, court costs, surcharges, — at many levels — to the challenges impact that a small group of cases can supervision fees, etc.) A variety of letters that come with enforcing monetary have on the statewide, total amount and forms can be generated in addition sanctions. owed victims: to reports for workflow management This accountability takes $40 million of the $85 million and performance analysis. Vast amounts several forms: in restitution ordered is owed by of information are stored, which • Employees who take responsibility only 52 offenders. The average facilitates the data matching programs for the collection of each account; obligation in these 52 cases is previously discussed, other interagency • Managers who are better able to $769,000. Most of these offenders file transfers, and online public access. committed crimes serious enough With all of the system’s track collections performance and implement necessary changes; that they are serving lengthy terms sophistication, there is still yearning for of incarceration, making collection • A judicial system in which court even more features and functionality. highly unlikely. To this end, user groups are currently orders more effectively accomplish brainstorming and specifications are what they are expected to; The other $45 million is owed by being prepared for the next generation • Probably most importantly, approximately 11,500 offenders of software! offenders who are being held truly whose average obligation is $3,900. accountable to the courts, to their The likelihood of victims receiving victims, and to society. Reaping the Dividends restitution in these cases is and Appreciating quite high. the Rewards Fulfillment of The Colorado courts are seeing 50 Restitution Obligations When it comes to developing and percent of restitution cases being paid investing in a comprehensive collections In some circles, there is a pervasive in full within two to three years and program, expectations and desired sentiment that the criminal justice another 20 percent being partially paid results will vary considerably depending system is failing victims in the area of during that timeframe. Over a five to upon people’s unique perspectives and restitution and that few victims ever six year period, 65 percent are being roles. The challenge is to forge a system receive payment. Many view restitution paid in full and another 15 percent are that is sufficiently dynamic to answer a as mostly symbolic. This, however, receiving partial payments. This tells us wide range of needs on multiple levels. may be a result of overgeneralizing the that 80 percent of all restitution cases Colorado has found this can be done, difficulties encountered in recovering are either fully paid or at least partially but that it happens over a period of time restitution in a minority of cases that paid within five to six years. and takes the sustained commitment of make up the vast majority of the unpaid We cannot discuss restitution everyone involved. Below are examples dollars. In other words, a relatively without mentioning a recent and of the benefits that have been realized small number of restitution cases with very important initiative in Colorado. and the range of needs being addressed. unusually high outstanding balances Innovative approaches have been will skew the data and leave the adopted with regard to the supervision impression that all restitution of economic crime offenders — those Heightened Accountability have extremely low collection rates. convicted of crimes involving fraud, It is important to use caution when A quote from Stephen Covey rings embezzlement, investment scams, reviewing or conveying restitution data quite true when applying it to our and the like. These offenders often and recovery rates. Without careful discussion about the collection of fines leave large numbers of victims in analysis and explanation of the data, and restitution: “Accountability breeds their wake, and the monetary losses

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 33 can be staggering. Economic crime about $350. Generally, statutory fine • Opting for low-cost, intermediate units (ECUs) within local probation and cost assessments provide enough sanctions for non-payment, such departments have been launched in consistency that doing a straightforward as wage attachments, avoids the a number of jurisdictions, and there calculation of the overall percentage more costly enforcement methods, now exist new, statewide supervision of dollars paid gives a fairly accurate such as probation revocation or guidelines and special “terms and representation of performance. incarceration. conditions” targeted toward persons Through its investment in a • Collecting outstanding balances who have committed such crimes. comprehensive collections program, through intercepts saves the entire Substantial payments are coming in on Colorado is seeing the vast majority system the costs of lengthier large balance cases where, previously, of these obligations being paid. An and more complex collection there was little hope of recovering analysis was recently conducted proceedings. restitution. Probation officers and that reviewed the collection status collections investigators are making of all cases in Colorado’s county and • Using an in-house collections a difference by creatively responding district courts in which fines and costs model resolves the majority of to trends such as the increase in the had been ordered over the last 10 cases and reduces the number (and frequency and severity of economic years. (This analysis included the full the associated costs) in which a crimes, and putting solutions spectrum of offenses: minor infractions collection agency is needed. into action. to felonies.) The data yielded 2.7 million cases, and of those, 79 percent Conclusion were paid in full. The total dollars paid An advantage that the collections Payment of Court- represented 70 percent of the $717 arena enjoys within the judicial system ordered Fines million imposed. is that, for the most part, progress “We have too many outstanding Data concerning a subset of the and results can be measured with tickets, and people are thumbing their above, traffic-related cases (the highest relative ease. Collections investigators noses at us and never paying their volume case class), reflected that 85 appreciate having a role in which they fines.” This recent statement by a percent of all cases were paid in full. In can readily observe the fruits of their mayor in Oregon is just one example terms of dollars, 82 percent of the $377 labor. The satisfaction of seeing victims of the frustration that is fueling a wider million imposed had been paid. receive long-awaited restitution extends perception that fines, in general, are to most other professionals in the typically ignored by offenders. In turn, system, who very likely played at least questions are raised concerning the true Cost Reduction some part in the fact that those dollars practicality of using such sanctions for and Avoidance were recovered. Our ability to measure punishment and deterrence. Furthering A benefit not to be overlooked and appreciate progress also shines the debate, some argue that fines have is that a wide variety of costs can be light on where we need to focus future become too “expensive,” and therefore, reduced or avoided by incorporating efforts. How, for example, can we do a low collection rates are simply a specialized collections staff and better job with that 20 percent of cases reflection of that. A range of factors equipping them with solid tools. Below in which victims have yet to receive any weigh into the efficacy of fines in the are some examples: restitution? Solutions are out there, no criminal justice system, but one that • Preventing unnecessary payment doubt, waiting for those who will sense should be at the core of the discussion plans reduces the volume of cases an opportunity, make an investment, is the extent to which jurisdictions in which the courts must expend and collect the dividends! are proactive in the enforcement resources to monitor compliance. of payment. Admirably, the mayor ______• Leaving payment negotiations mentioned above was actively seeking About the author and discussions to the collections new methods to tackle the problem in Paul Litschewski is the financial services his community, including a tax refund office saves time in the courtroom, manager for the Colorado Judicial probation department, and Department and oversees the planning, intercept program! development, and administration of other offices. the statewide fine and restitution Fines (including associated costs) in collections program. Contact him at the Colorado state courts now average [email protected].

34 www.nacmnet.org Washington Review by Kay Farley

CCJ/COSCA National Policy Priorities for 2011 Court Administration

The national policy priorities for the Conference of • Collection of Court Fines, Fees, and Victim Chief Justices (CCJ) and the Conference of State Court Restitution — Support legislation to authorize the Administrators (COSCA) were finalized March 7. The nine interception of federal tax returns to collect court fines, priorities are as follows. fees, and restitution so that court orders are enforced and criminal defendants are held accountable. Access to Justice • State Justice Institute (SJI) — Support full funding for • Court Interpretation Services — Support legislation to SJI at the current authorized level of $7 million. authorize a federal grant program to assist state courts to comply with the requirements of Civil Rights Act of Criminal Justice 1964 related to providing court interpretation services to • Drug Courts and Substance Abuse and Mental Health persons with limited English proficiency (LEP); support Treatment — Support increased federal funding for appropriations for the authorized program. drug courts, mental health courts, other problem-solving • Legal Services Corporation (LSC) — Support increased courts, and other diversion strategies to assist state courts federal funding for Legal Services Corporation (LSC) to to address the underlying factors that have an impact on insure access to justice for low income individuals. criminal activity; support distribution methodology that allows for coordination with state court leaders to insure Children and Families that funds are leveraged to the maximum extent. • Court Improvement Program (CIP) — Support Federalism reauthorization of the three CIP grant programs to assist state courts to strengthen oversight and management • Preemption of State Law — Support adherence to the of child welfare cases, strengthen data collection and principles of federalism and separation of powers to performance measurement, and provide training for ensure the proper balance in federal policy. judges, court personnel, attorneys, and others involved in the child welfare system.

• Elder Abuse and Guardianship — Support federal resources to assist state courts to effectively address elder abuse and guardianship cases.

• Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) — Support

reauthorization of VAWA to provide a framework for * Combined into Drug, Mental Health, and Problem Solving Courts program preventing and responding to domestic violence; support ($57M Obama request for FY 2012). ** New program proposed by Obama administration. increased collaboration at the state level regarding *** Indian Country/Tribal Courts grants are eliminated, but creates a set-aside distribution of the funds and increased state court access of discretionary and formula funds across OJP for a flexible tribal criminal justice assistance program. to these funds so that state courts can effectively address **** To replace the Weed and Seed Program, the administration proposes domestic violence cases. this program, which will provide demonstration grants to state local tribal governments to support innovative, evidence-based approaches to fight crime and improve public safety.

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 35 FY 2010 Federal Funding Compared to FY 2012 Federal Funding (in millions) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

PROGRAM FY OBAMA Continuing 2010 FY 2012 Resolution ACTUAL FY 2011 DOJ Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) $519.0 $519.0 $519.0 Byrne Discretionary $185.0 $185.0 $ 0 Byrne Innovation Program N/A N/A $ 30.0**** Drug Courts $ 45.0 $ 45.0 $ 0* Drug, Mental Health Problem-Solving Courts N/A N/A $ 57.0 Community Oriented Policing (COPS) $791.6 $791.6 $670.0 Criminal Records Upgrade (NCHIP) $ 12.0 $ 12.0 $ 12.0 Mentally Ill Offender Treatment And Crime Reduction Act (MIOTCRA) $ 12.0 $ 12.0 $ 0* Crime DNA Analysis Backlog/Initiative $161.0 $161.0 $110.0 Capital Litigation Improvement Grants $ 6.0 $ 6.0 $ 6.0 Indian Country Assistance $ 50.0 $ 50.0 $ 0*** Juvenile Accountability Block Grant $ 55.0 $ 55.0 $ 0 Juvenile Justice Programs $ 424 $424.0 $280.0 JJDP Part B State Formula Grants $ 75.0 $ 75.0 $ 0 JJDP Part V Delinquency $ 65.0 $ 65.0 $ 62.0 Prevention Block Grant – Gang Prevention <$10.0> <$10.0> <$12.0> – Underage Drinking <$25.0> <$25.0> N/A JJDP Part E Demonstration Project $ 91.0 $ 91.0 $ 0 JJDP Part G Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP) $100.0 $100.0 $ 45.0 Project Safe Child $ 5.0 $ 5.0 $ 0 Victims of Child Abuse Act $ 23.0 $ 23.0 $ 25.0 Juvenile Delinquency CIP** N/A N/A $ 0 Legal Services Corporation $420.0 $420.0 $450.0 NICS Improvements Act $ 20.0 $ 20.0 $ 12.0 State Criminal Alien Assistance $330.0 $330.0 $136.0 State Justice Institute $5.131 $5.131 $5.131 Tribal Courts $ 25.0 $ 25.0 $ 0 Victims Notification System (new) $ 12.0 $ 12.0 $ 0*** Violence Against Women Act (VAWA — General) $419.0 $419.0 $432.0 STOP Grants $210.0 $210.0 $182.0 Safe Start Program $ 5.0 $ 5.0 $ 0 Rural Domestic Violence $ 41.0 $ 41.0 $ 38.0 Legal Assistance for Victims $ 41.0 $ 41.0 $ 50.0 VAWA Encouraging Arrest Policies $ 60.0 $ 60.0 $ 48.0 Victims of Child Abuse – CASA Programs $ 15.0 $ 15.0 $ 0 – Training for Judicial Personnel $ 3.0 $ 3.0 $ 0 Elder Abuse & Disabled Women $ 4.0 $ 4.0 $ 4.0 Safe Haven for Kids Program $ 14.0 $ 14.0 $ 11.0 Education/Training for Disabled Female Victims $ 7.0 $ 7.0 $ 6.0 Televised Testimony Grants $ 1.0 $ 1.0 $ 0 Training Programs for Probation/Parole Officers $ 4.0 $ 4.0 $ 0 Second Chance Act (Reentry) Program $ 100 $100.0 $100.0 Ensure Fairness in Justice System** N/A N/A $ 8.0

36 www.nacmnet.org Department of Justice — FY 2012 child-welfare related funding reflect the shift to emphasizing Budget Proposal adoption and kinship/guardianship as permanency options for children who are not able to return home and providing President Barack Obama submitted his fiscal year (FY) increased transition support for older youth. 2012 budget proposal February 14. For the Department of Justice, the numbers represent no major changes to prior year The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) eliminated requests. The Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) request the practice of allowing state child support agencies to use is $519 million (M), the same amount the program received their federal incentive payments as state match to draw down in FY 2010. The request for the State Justice Institute (SJI) additional federal administrative reimbursement dollars. is the same amount — $5.131M — as requested by the Congress approved short-term repeals of the prohibition to administration last time. The Legal Services Corporation allow the practice to continue, but the most recent repeal would enjoy an increase to $450M. The Violence Against expired and the provision of P.L. 109-171 went into effect Women Act STOP grants would suffer a decline to $182M October 1, 2010. The administration’s budget proposal for (versus $210M in FY 2010). As in prior years, President the Office ofC hild Support Enforcement (OCSE) does not Obama requested that drug court funding and the Mentally include the match for state-earned federal incentive dollars, for Ill Offender grant program be consolidated into a problem- which authority was lost in the Deficit Deduction Act of 2005 solving court grant program at $57M. The chart provides (P.L. 109-171). The administration’s proposal, however, does more detail. include an increase in the overall incentive pool to, at least partially, offset lost revenue to states that will be impacted by the lost match dollars. Department of Health and Human Services — The proposed funding for the Substance Abuse and Mental FY 2012 Budget Proposal Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) includes Of particular interest to courts, in the Children’s Bureau’s requests for increased funding for the state block grants. The budget proposal the administration included continued level proposed increases are offset by reductions in the discretionary funding for all three court improvement program grants: programs. Proposed funding for the Criminal and Juvenile $12M for the basic grant, $10M for the training/education Justice Programs and Treatment Drug Courts remain at the grant, and $10M for the data/automation grant. FY 2011 funding levels.

For the most part, the Children’s Bureau’s programs we track The administration’s budget proposal for the Agency on received level or increased funding in the administration’s Aging includes $17 million (M) for Adult Protective Services proposal. Funding for three programs, however, would be demonstration grants, which were authorized under the Elder reduced to offset the increases in other programs and as a Justice Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-148). The grant funding would result of the reduction/elimination of discretionary dollars. support the design and implementation of better approaches to protect older adults from abuse. Of the $17M, $2M is • Community Services Block Grant (reduced from designated for addressing elder abuse in tribal settings. $700M to $350M) The chart below provides more detail on the administration’s • Social Services and Income Maintenance Research Health and Human Services (HHS) proposal. (reduced from $20M to $3M) ______• Promoting Safe and Stable Families (reduced from About the author $408M to $388M) Kay Farley is executive director of Government Relations for the National Center for State Courts. The reduction in the proposed funding for Promoting Safe and Stable Families is a result of the elimination of $20M in discretionary dollars. The administration’s proposals for

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 37 FY 2010 Federal Funding Compared to FY 2012 Federal Funding (in millions) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

FY Continuing OBAMA 2010 Resolution FY 2012 ACTUAL FY 2011 Child Welfare Abandoned Infants $ 12.0 $ 12.0 $ 12.0 Adoption Incentives $ 40.0 $ 40.0 $ 50.0 Adoption Opportunities $ 26.0 $ 26.0 $ 39.0 CAPTA State Grants $ 27.0 $ 27.0 $ 27.0 CAPTA Discretionary $ 29.0 $ 29.0 $ 29.0 CAPTA Community-Based Prevention $ 41.0 $ 41.0 $ 41.0 Child Welfare Research, Training, and Demonstration $ 27.0 $ 27.0 $ 27.0 Community Services Block Grant $ 700.0 $ 700.0 $ 350.0 Family Connection Grants $ 15.0 $ 15.0 $ 15.0 Family Violence Prevention /Battered Women’s Shelters $ 130.0 $ 130.0 $ 135.0 Independent Living $ 140.0 $ 140.0 $ 140.0 Independent Living Education/Training $ 45.0 $ 45.0 $ 45.0 Kinship/Guardianship (Fostering Connections) $ 11.0 $ 32.0 $ 80.0 Mentoring Children of Prisoners $ 49.0 $ 49.0 $ 25.0 Social Services and Income Maintenance Research $ 20.0 $ 20.0 $ 3.0 Title IV-B(1) - Child Welfare Services $ 282.0 $ 282.0 $ 282.0 Title IV-B(2) - Promoting Safe and Stable Families* $ 408.0 $ 408.0 $ 388.0 Court Improvement Program - Basic* $ 12.0 $ 12.0 $ 12.0 Court Improvement Program - Training* $ 10.0 $ 10.0 $ 10.0 Court Improvement Program - Data* $ 10.0 $ 10.0 $ 10.0 Title IV-E Foster Care * $4,603.0 $3,967.0 $4,288.0 Title IV-E Adoption* Assistance* $2,438.0 $2,480.0 $2,495.0 Title XX Social Services Block Grant $1,700.0 $1,700.0 $1,700.0

Child Support Enforcement Child Support Enforcement* $4,480.0 $3,908.0 $3,142.0 Federal Incentive Payments $ 504.0 $ 513.0 $ 519.0 Access and Visitation $ 10.0 $ 10.0 $ 10.0

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Children’s Mental Health Services $ 121.0 $ 121.0 $ 121.0 Mental Health Block Grant $ 400.0 $ 400.0 $ 414.0 Protection and Advocacy for Individuals (PAMI) $ 37.0 $ 37.0 $ 36.0 State Prevention Grants $ 480.0 $ 481.0 $ 485.0 Substance Abuse Treatment Block Grant $1,376.0 $1,376.0 $1,420.0

*Entitlement Programs (mandatory funding)

1. Mandatory funds in the amount of $345 million are provided annually. Additional discretionary funds can be appropriated annually. 2. Mandatory funding of $10 million is provided annually. If discretionary funds are appropriated for Promoting Safe and Stable Families in a given year, 3.3 percent of that discretionary amount is added to the CIP-Basic pool of funds.

38 www.nacmnet.org Jury News By Paula Hannaford-Agor

Follow-Up on Non-Response and FTA Another key finding of the AJS study was that non-responders Jurors is Essential for Effective Jury were significantly less knowledgeable about court procedures, System Management especially about how to request to be excused or to defer jury service to a more convenient date. Rather than ask for some It is every jury manager’s ongoing nightmare: what to do type of accommodation, non-responders simply didn’t appear about jurors who fail to respond to a jury summons. It would for jury service. be so much simpler just to ignore them. They obviously don’t want to be there, and it is so much trouble to follow The most significant factor contributing to non-response rates, up. Unfortunately, like so many other problems, ignoring however, was jurors’ expectations about what would happen non-responders and failure-to-appear (FTA) jurors only makes to them if they failed to respond. Jurors who believed that the problem worse over time. In contemporary jury system nothing would happen to them were significantly more likely management, follow-up is absolutely essential. It is necessary to fail to respond than jurors who believed that they would be not only for reasons of overall efficiency, but also to secure punished in some way (e.g., fines, fees, arrest warrants, etc.). a representative jury pool and to preserve the integrity and One additional finding from the AJS study was that a legitimacy of the jury system. Fortunately, we now know a significant number of non-responders — up to one-third great deal about why some jurors fail to respond to a jury — ultimately could not be located at that address. Their summons and what types of follow-up are most effective. It jury summons should have been returned to the court only now requires sufficient willpower to implement effective marked “undeliverable as addressed,” although this did not follow-up practices. happen. Since that time, anecdotal evidence from courts around the country suggests that the current economic crisis, especially unemployment and mortgage foreclosures, has only Why Some Jurors Don’t Respond exacerbated this problem. In St. Louis, Missouri, for example, to a Jury Summons the jury manager found that 83 percent of order-to-show- Many of you no doubt remember the seminal study of non- cause notices sent to FTA jurors could not be served by the response published by the American Judicature Society (AJS) local sheriff because the individuals could not be found. in 1998. That study focused on demographic and attitudinal differences between responders and non-responders to a jury summons. One key finding was that socioeconomic factors, Effective Follow-Up Programs especially income and education, were strongly correlated The single most effective follow-up that courts can do is to with non-response, but after controlling for these factors, race simply issue a second summons or a second notice to non- and ethnicity completely disappeared as a significant factor. In responders within a short time after the juror fails to appear. other words, a lower-income white person was just as likely to In the National Center for State Courts State-of-the-States fail to respond to a jury summons as a lower-income black or Survey of Jury Improvement Efforts, courts that employed a Hispanic person. Because socioeconomic status and minority second summons or second notice program reported non- status are so closely related, however, the most observable response/FTA rates that were 24 percent to 46 percent lower impact of non-response in jury operations is disproportionate than courts that had no follow-up program in place. The key underrepresentation of minorities in the jury pool. to an effective second summons/second notice program is

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 39 In contemporary jury system management, follow-up is absolutely essential. It is necessary not only for reasons of overall efficiency, but also to secure a representative jury pool and to preserve the integrity and legitimacy of the jury system.

timeliness and consistency. There is a relatively small window takes steps to enforce its jury summons, it changes public of time — usually no more than three weeks — in which perceptions about the likelihood of consequences for failure to send a second notice to jurors. Timely follow-up lets to appear. prospective jurors know the court really is paying attention to In addition to effective follow-up, the findings from the AJS juror response rates and is prepared to enforce the summons study suggest other efforts courts can employ to improve aggressively, if necessary. Order-to-show-cause hearings, response rates. For example, the jury summons should include fines and fees, and capias warrants are much more aggressive information for jurors about excusal and deferral criteria and programs but also are more time- and labor-intensive to a strong warning that jurors should contact the court if they manage. Consequently, many courts employ these types of have questions about these procedures. Jurors who believe the programs only on a sporadic basis, primarily for the public court will attempt to accommodate their legitimate scheduling education impact that results from media coverage of these needs are more likely to respond. A liberal deferral policy in types of proceedings. which jurors can select a more convenient date for jury service Numerous studies document the impact of these program is a welcome opportunity for many jurors. Finally, effective types. A 1997 pilot program in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, for master jury list management, including use of National example, found that increasingly aggressive steps to follow- Change of Address (NCOA) updates for jury summonses, can up on non-responders reduced the non-response rate from dramatically reduce the percentage of summonses and other 11 percent on the first mailing to 5 percent after the second jury-related mailings that would otherwise be undeliverable. mailing, and to less than 1 percent after issuing order-to- show cause notices and capias warrants. The Los Angeles County Superior Court had equally impressive results from So How Effective Are These Programs, Really? its Summons Sanction Program. The failure-to-appear rate We’ve seen how these types of follow-up programs can for jury summonses on the first mailing was 41 percent, but dramatically reduce non-response and FTA rates, but do these follow-up efforts reduced the final non-response rate to 2.7 actually translate into higher jury yields? The short answer is percent. All of these studies provide concrete support for no; non-responders are not always qualified for jury service. the AJS findings concerning non-response. When the court

40 www.nacmnet.org Perhaps the greatest impact involves the public legitimacy of the jury system — and by extension, the entire justice system. Is the court prepared to enforce its jury summons as it would any other court order?

Typically courts experience increasingly lower returns on his bench were responsible parents who would find a way to investment for subsequent follow-up efforts such as order to share amicably in the upbringing and financial support of their show cause (OSC) hearings. Nor are they a guaranteed cure children, even if he didn’t issue a child custody and support for underrepresentation of minorities in the jury pool. But they order in their cases. He also explained that approximately certainly help a great deal in that regard. In Kankakee County, 10 percent of the litigants would not obey a court order no Illinois, for example, persistent follow-up on non-responders matter what enforcement mechanisms he had at his disposal. decreased the non-response rate from 30 percent to 7 percent, The importance of effective enforcement of child custody and resulting in an increase in African American participation from support orders, he explained, was to affect the behavior of 9 percent to 11 percent of the jury pool, a 24 percent increase. the middle 50 percent of litigants who could be persuaded to In terms of fair cross-section challenges, a good faith effort is a either obey or not obey a court order depending on the court’s lot more defensible than doing nothing at all. own ability and willingness to enforce those orders. I think the judge’s analogy is equally appropriate to effective jury Perhaps the greatest impact involves the public legitimacy of summons enforcement. the jury system — and by extension, the entire justice system. Is the court prepared to enforce its jury summons as it would ______any other court order? Or is the jury summons not worth the About the author paper it’s written on? I recall a rather profound observation by Paula Hannaford-Agor is director of the Center for Jury Studies at the National Center for State Courts. a trial judge in Ventura County, California, who spoke to me Contact her at [email protected]. about child custody and support orders. He explained that approximately 40 percent of the litigants who came before

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 41 Technology FACTs By Marlene Martineau

Failure is not an option This year’s results represent the highest failure rate in over a decade.” Five reasons to know and love the Court Technology Framework So, why are IT projects struggling? Since the release of this report, there has been a lot of chatter throughout the IT world Rapidly changing technology and almost nonexistent budgets asking why projects are experiencing the “highest failure rate have made it seem impossible to integrate technology into in over a decade.” Most agree that today’s projects are more today’s courts. Yet technology is everywhere. One of the complex, yet are expected to be implemented in a shorter greatest continual changes in courts is the use and availability timeframe. In addition to the increased complexity and of technology. It is difficult to witness a court in action and not decreased timeframe, poor team communication, separation see some type of technology infused in the daily activities. The of business and technology, insufficient or non-existent questions are: is it the right technology, and is it fulfilling all governance structure, poorly defined project scope and the court’s needs? objectives, and scope creep (objectives changing during the In today’s climate, using the correct technology can boost a project) all contribute to project failures. court’s efficiency — helping you do more with much, much The Joint Technology Committee (a joint committee of the less. However, implementing the wrong technology or not Conference of State Court Administrators, the National implementing it correctly can have devastating effects. Time Association for Court Management, and the National Center and time again we see information technology (IT) projects for State Courts) realized that courts could eliminate much within the court community fail. Courts are left with a of an IT project’s risk through having a framework on which technology product that doesn’t fit their needs and a large to plan their projects. This idea led to creation of the Court expense on their already bleak balance sheets. While many Technology Framework. advanced technologies have become core competencies in private business, they are new, difficult, and not easily embraced by many courts. Introducing the CTF

The Court Technology Framework (CTF) helps stakeholders Why IT projects fail understand business needs, the technology to meet those needs, and their interrelationship. The CTF provides a In 2009, the Standish Group released its CHAOS report, roadmap outlining key components of court business and a survey of IT projects and their success and failure rates. technology. The framework helps integrate and unify court It states that 32 percent of all IT projects are successful, technology from the business level down to the technical 44 percent are challenged (meaning they are implemented level. It can help courts align their technological capabilities late, over budget, and/or with fewer features or functions with their business goals and efficiently manage court than required), while 24 percent fail (are cancelled prior to technology projects across different organizational units over completion or delivered and never used). “These numbers time. Organized into four layers (business, applications, represent a downtick in the success rates from the previous data management, and technology infrastructure) that are study, as well as a significant increase in the number of divided further into categories, the framework instigates failures,” says Jim Crear, Standish Group chief information conversations on vital elements that otherwise may not have officer. “They are a low point in the last five study periods. been considered.

42 www.nacmnet.org Five reasons to embrace the Court Technology Framework

1. The framework defines a standard set of components, planning, implementing technology, or just discussing interfaces, and dependencies that constitute a how to improve your business processes. comprehensive court IT environment. Stakeholders from 5. The Court Technology Framework has been vetted and is all parts of a court can see the big picture and discuss all endorsed by national organizations, including: Conference the elements required to successfully use technology of State Court Administrators, National Association in courts. for Court Management, Court Information Technology 2. Using the framework to fully define a technology Officers Consortium, and the National Center for implementation, projects will be better defined, include State Courts. a government structure, and merge business processes For more information about the Court Technology with the technology. Risks can be identified early; all Framework, go to http://www.ncsconline.org/wikis/ctf/index. stakeholders will understand the implications of a single php?title=Main_Page. change; and projects will, ultimately, have a greater chance of success. ______

3. The framework helps courts more readily identify About the author opportunities to reengineer court processes or to identify Marlene Martineau is marketing director at New Dawn Technologies, offering case management, e-payment, and portal solutions to improved efficiencies and/or cost savings through using courts, justice agencies, and other government organizations. She is technology in existing processes. also FACT chair. Technology FACTs is a regular column written by industry members of 4. The Court Technology Framework is not just another FACT, Forum on the Advancement of Court Technology. An archive standard or initiative you need to “try to work in” to of past articles may be found on the newsletter page of the FACT website at http://FACT.ncsc.dni.us. your current projects. It is a tool to help you plan your current projects — whether those plans include strategic

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 43 A Question of Ethics by Peter Kiefer

Online Education The Scenario

One clear indicator of our changing society is how we now Mark manages the pretrial unit of the local court’s adult embrace online education. Fifteen years ago it virtually didn’t probation department and is constantly on both his computer exist except as a technological adjunct to a correspondence and PDA keeping in touch with probation officers and pretrial course; now it is an accepted course method in many release officers. He routinely brings work home, sometimes colleges. Although not quite a staple of court training yet, spending more than an hour after dinner emailing staff while the online locomotive is in sight and headed toward us he and his wife, Mary, sit in front of a recent or long past Law all. I recently conducted an interesting (albeit unscientific) and Order episode. sampling of National Association for Court Management Mark also teaches an online introduction to criminal justice (NACM) members concerning both their experience with class at a local community college. He only communicates and future vision of online education. More than 40 members electronically with his students, sending out reading responded from 22 states and the District of Columbia. assignments and electronic lectures. Students email questions The results: and comments to the entire class, as well as to Mark, in a sort • Nearly 60 percent of the respondents (26) have taught of electronic roundtable blog. At the end of the class, students a class, and of that number, more than 80 percent write a 15-page paper, which they submit (electronically of (21) have taught a class outside of work, meaning course) to Mark. not specifically connected to their court or a state Lately, the chief of probation notices how distracted Mark has administrative office of the courts. become and suspects it is due to his online class. The chief • Only 34 percent (15) have ever enrolled in an online has the technology bureau run a log of Mark’s emails; the class, and a mere 15 percent (4) have taught an bureau finds nothing suspicious, and in fact notes the large online class. number of emails sent after five o’clock. The chief then asks the bureau to track Mark’s personal account usage. The bureau • Two-thirds of the respondents (29) would consider finds that Mark spends up to five hours a business day logged teaching an online class in the future. onto Gmail and Facebook, however, it cannot log emails sent Ethically speaking, online education provides an opportunity to employees’ personal accounts, so it cannot tell the chief to blend work with “outside-of-work” activities, particularly exactly what Mark is doing online during those five hours. if “outside-of-work” involves facilitating a justice-related The chief confronts Mark, who does not specifically admit or (although not specifically court-sponsored) class. Online deny that he emails and texts his students at work. The chief, email and the social network allow one to answer court- in a moment of candor, tells Mark that if he had just asked related emails on one account then migrate seamlessly to a permission this wouldn’t have been such a problem. Mark different account in order to respond to questions about class replies that the chief would have just refused Mark’s request, subject matter. and mutters under his breath something about it being better to ask forgiveness than permission.

Mark contends that his communications are valid, business- related, and relevant to local criminal justice system policies and procedures. In fact, Mark’s students are most likely the

44 www.nacmnet.org faces of the county’s next generation of probation officers. Scott Crampton was less sanguine toward Mark, noting that This class should be considered part of the county’s long- he is clearly trying to cover up both his teaching and the term recruitment efforts bringing the best and the brightest resulting use of court equipment and time. “At a minimum, into adult probation. The chief remains unconvinced. he should have discussed this class with his administrative Despite lacking solid evidence, the chief decides that Mark is authority before he accepted the role and clearly established spending way too much time on his class. The class is neither the parameters of probation officer vs. teacher roles. This sponsored nor specifically sanctioned by the court. Time spent should have included the use of court equipment for non- communicating to his students is not work time. court business.”

What do you think of the probation chief’s need to exert proper management control over his workforce by The Respondents limiting Mark’s teaching duties? To comment on the ethical implications of online education Jeff reiterated that the probation chief should have a written and work responsibilities, I asked Wendy Lyford with the moonlighting policy in place. If he does not, he should write Alaska Administrative Office of the Courts; Jeffrey Amram, one now and (if necessary) integrate it into union contracts or court administrator for the Clark County Superior Court in work agreements where appropriate. “Mark’s second job has to Vancouver, Washington; and Scott Crampton, chief deputy have an impact on his primary job, even if at the fringes, and clerk for the United States District Court, Middle District the chief is obligated to respond to the situation and its impact of North Carolina, to respond to some questions about on other workers.” the scenario. Wendy affirmed that Mark was hired to work as a probation officer, not teach a course. Presumably, being a probation Questions officer requires his full attention during regular working hours, and she wondered if Mark would have to answer work What do you think of Mark’s position that even though emails in the evening if he was fully focusing on his job during the class is not specifically assigned work, it should the regular work day. be considered part of the probation department’s broader mission? In Alaska, court employees must notify administration if they plan on taking a second job. Wendy noted that one Wendy Lyford agreed with Mark that the course likely consideration in deciding on the compatibility of a second benefitted the court and was related to his job, however, both job is the second job’s time demand on the regular work day. Mark’s motivation and compensation is a huge question. “If Mark had been required to have his outside employment “Mark is a public servant. Unlike a private business that approved in advance, he and his chief could have discussed can opt to ‘donate’ an employee’s time to an outside activity, reasonable limits on the amount of time he would devote to a court has a duty to monitor the use of its staff and other his course work during the regular work day. In addition, resources to ensure they are appropriately dedicated to its they could have considered whether there is any risk Mark’s public mission.” students might think they have an advantage in future hiring Jeff Amram also could see how Mark’s class “could” be by the department because they had studied with him, or considered part of the probation department’s broader mission whether Mark should disclose his prior teaching relationship if of community participation and training future employees. a student applies for work with the department.” On the other hand, teaching jobs (online or at a local college) Scott pointed out that, in any event, Mark’s teaching are great résumé enhancers and sometimes pay decent money. needed to be fully disclosed and discussed in advance. “The “For me, the first question is whether a written moonlighting courts should assume a narrow view of the propriety of policy exists. If there is a policy, does it exempt certain work outside employment, as their paramount duty is to remain such as Mark’s teaching? I assume for the sake of this problem neutral, both within and outside of the traditional court that there is no policy. While Mark is doing good work, it has environment. It is possible that Mark may make personal not been approved and may be taking away time from his representations during his classes that could be construed primary work responsibilities.” as official court positions. Given the nexus between his court

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 45 responsibilities and the criminal justice community, Mark managers charged with writing and enforcing policy in this must tread lightly in both the type of work he assumes and area is to create a balance that benefits the organization how he conducts himself during the teaching assignment.” and the employee without diminishing the organization’s core mission.” As Mark never specifically admitted to communicating with his students, what recourse does the probation Wendy agreed that teaching can be a valuable learning chief have? experience as much for the “professor” as for the students. “Preparing and presenting course materials may be very Wendy pointed out that the chief must first assess whether helpful in honing the training skills of a supervisory employee. Mark’s workload can reasonably be handled within normal As Mark notes, a course may be a good recruiting tool. It business hours. Assuming it is, step two is discuss his concern might be a positive public relations effort for a court. For all of that the class (or other non-work activities) is keeping Mark these reasons, I think we should approach opportunities like from performing his job duties as required. “[The chief] Mark’s with an open mind.” can lay out his expectation that Mark will limit his activities related to teaching to after work hours unless they agree that Clearly online education is here. We court professionals need the experience has enough value for the department to justify to take full advantage of its benefits and guard against its Mark devoting a reasonable amount of work time to the possible pitfalls. I want to thank Jeff Amram, Wendy Lyford, program. Finally, if there is no work-related reason for Mark to and Scott Crampton for their thoughts on how we can have Facebook and Gmail open for hours during the regular handle at least one aspect of this ever-growing area of online work day, the chief should discuss his concern that Mark is education. If you have a comment on this or any previous spending too much of his time on non-work activities and column, or if you have an issue you would like to share, please that the department can monitor Internet use and respond if it feel free to email me at [email protected]. appears that his use is unreasonable.” ______

Scott believed the fundamental burden remains on Mark to About the author demonstrate that he has acted professionally. “He shouldn’t be Peter Kiefer is the southeast regional court administrator for Maricopa Superior Court in Phoenix, Arizona. He has been questioning ethics for logged onto social network for non-core work-related reasons, Court Manager since 1994. except perhaps for de minimus use during non-paid time.”

Jeff was unsure what was meant by the chief noticing that Mark was ‘distracted,’ however there was obvious evidence that Mark was communicating, if not with students, then with someone on either private email or social network sites. “The chief can direct Mark to limit such contact to other than work time and reevaluate the ‘other job’ at the end of the semester.”

Should courts take a narrow or broad view of local education programs as being work-related?

Scott’s position was that Mark should be forced to give up his teaching position, be disciplined for his actions, and be prohibited from future outside employment. “Not only didn’t he discuss the prospect of teaching in advance and receive approval, more importantly, his actions when confronted by his administrative authority were deceptive and highly unprofessional.”

Jeff thought courts should take a broad view regarding Mark’s teaching since such activities could broaden workers and benefit the overall court. “Unfortunately, such activities can also negatively impact the productivity of employees and be perceived as doing more harm than good. The goal for

46 www.nacmnet.org NACM New Members December 2010 — February 2011

Stephanie A. Beyersdorf A Circuit Court Supervisor C 10th Circuit Court Karen P. Adams Hon. Mark S. Cady 111 S. Michigan Ave. IT Coordinator Saginaw, MI 48602 Clayton County Superior & State Courts (989) 790-5471 9151 Tara Blvd., Ste. 3CA01 1111 E. Court Ave. Fax: (989) 793-8180 Jonesboro, GA 30236 Des Moines, IA 50319 [email protected] (770) 477-3413 (515) 576-6843 Fax: (515) 281-3952 Marilynn M. Bland Nancy J. Allard [email protected] Clerk of the Circuit Court Director of Trial Court Services Prince George’s County Circuit Court Unified Judicial System - State Ct. Admin. Hon. Tani Cantil-Sakauye 14735 Main St. Office Chief Justice Upper Marlboro, MD 20772 500 E. Capitol Ave. Supreme Court of California (301) 952-4762 Pierre, SD 57501 350 McAllister St. Fax: (301) 952-3768 (605) 773-4897 San Francisco, CA 94102 [email protected] Fax: (605) 773-5627 (415) 865-7060 [email protected] Fax: (415) 865-7181 Jennifer Boswell [email protected] Human Resources Manager Sylvia Bernadette Argento Maryland Judiciary Tuscarawas County Juvenile Court Hon. F. Philip Carbullido 580 Taylor Ave., Bldg A-1 101 E. High Ave. Chief Justice Annapolis, MD 21401 New Philadelphia, OH 44663 Supreme Court of (410) 260-1276 (330) 365-3253 Guam Judicial Center Fax: (410) 974-2849 [email protected] 120 West O’Brien Dr., Ste. 300 [email protected] Hagatna, GU 96910-5174 (671) 475-3413 Glenn S. Bozzacco B Fax: (671) 475-3164 Deputy Court Administrator [email protected] Yvonne D. Barnett-Greene First Judicial District of Pennsylvania 1801 Vine St. Assigned Counsel Services Manager Russell Carlino Philadelphia, PA 19107 3rd Circuit Court of Michigan Administrator, Juvenile Court (215) 686-2570 1441 St. Antoine, Rm. 909 Fifth Judicial District [email protected] Detroit, MI 48226 550 Fifth Ave., 2nd Floor (313) 224-7706 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Hon. George Grant Brantley Fax: (313) 224-8451 (412) 350-0211 Senior Judge [email protected] Fax: (412) 350-0230 Superior Courts of Georgia [email protected] Hon. Lance S. Baxter 1463 Winterfield Ct., NW Kennesaw, GA 30152 Judge Crystal Collins (404) 402-1298 Collin County Court at Law No. 3 P.O. Box 10536 Fax: (770) 528-8103 1800 N. Graves, Ste. 145 Lubbock, TX 79408 [email protected] McKinney, TX 75069 (806) 775-1720 (972) 548-3830 [email protected] Fax: (972) 548-3838 Andrew Philip Brown Drug Court Coordinator [email protected] Lucille Cortez 20th Circuit Court Court Manager 414 Washington St. Audrey Beckham Los Angeles Superior Court Grand Haven, MI 49417 Court Coordinator 23525 Civic Center Way (616) 846-8352 137th District Court Malibu, CA 90265 Fax: (616) 846-8179 P.O. Box 10536 (310) 317-1350 [email protected] Lubbock, TX 79408 [email protected] (806) 775-1022 Bill Bullard Jr. Fax: (806) 775-7996 George R. Coxen Jr. County Clerk [email protected] Executive Assistant Oakland County Clerk’s Office 21st Judicial District Court 1200 N. Telegraph, Dept. 415 Hon. Michael L. Bender P.O. Box 788 Pontiac, MI 48341 Chief Justice Amite, LA 70422 (248) 858-9922 Supreme Court of Colorado (985) 748-9445 Fax: (248) 858-1943 101 W. Colfax Ave., Ste. 800 Fax: (985) 310-9750 [email protected] Denver, CO 80202-5315 [email protected] (303) 837-3741 Fax: (303) 864-4538 [email protected]

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 47 Elnora Gibson Cecelia A Herring D County Clerk Supervisor II District Court Maryland State Judiciary Hon. Linda Stewart Dalianis 301 Commerce St. 100 W. Patrick St. Chief Justice Snow Hill, MD 21863 Frederick, MD 21701 Supreme Court of New Hampshire (410) 219-7841 (301) 600-2034 One Charles Doe Dr. [email protected] Fax: (301) 695-5954 Concord, NH 03301 [email protected] (603) 271-3751 Kerri Griffin Fax: (603) 513-5475 Court Director Jennifer Howden [email protected] Franklin Co. DR/Juvenile Court Chief Deputy County Clerk 373 S. High St., 6th Floor Oakland County Clerk’s Office Hon. Michael L. Douglas Columbus, OH 43215 1200 N Telegraph Chief Justice (614) 525-3377 Pontiac, MI 48341 Fax: (614) 525-2118 (248) 858-2944 200 Lewis Ave., 17th Floor [email protected] [email protected] Las Vegas, NV 89101 (702) 486-3225 Fax: (702) 486-3231 H I [email protected] Christopher Hale Hon. Roderick L. Ireland Court Administrator Chief Justice E Tucson City Court Supreme Judicial Court 103 E. Alameda St., Ste. 201 John Adams Courthouse Julie L. Ensor P.O. Box 27210 One Pemberton Sq., Ste. 2200 Clerk of Court Tucson, AZ 85701 Boston, MA 02108-1735 Baltimore County Clerk’s Office (520) 791-4189 (617) 557-1080 County Courts Bldg. M.S. 3201 Fax: (520) 791-5692 Fax: (617) 557-1091 401 Bosley Ave. [email protected] [email protected] Towson, MD 21204 (410) 887-2998 Steven Hanley Fax: (410) 887-3062 Court Administrator J [email protected] 111 Court St. Charleston, WV 25301 Hon. Arlene Johnson F (304) 357-0369 Presiding Judge [email protected] Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals State Capitol Bldg., Room 230 Hon. Lynn Fazz Oklahoma City, OK 73105 Clerk of Superior Court Christine Elythe Henderson (405) 521-2157 Yuma County Clerk’s Office 4320 29th Ave. W Fax: (405) 521-4980 250 W. 2nd St., Ste. B Seattle, WA 98199 [email protected] Yuma, AZ 85364 (253) 973-1441 (928) 817-4222 [email protected] Shannon Johnson Fax: (928) 817-4211 Court Administrator [email protected] Lisa M. Herbert Deputy Court Administrator Billings Municipal Court Fifth Judicial District P.O. Box 1178 G 300 Frick Building Billings, MT 59103 437 Grant St. (406) 247-8643 Ann Beall Galletta Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Fax: (406) 657-3075 Deputy Court Administrator (412) 350-4044 [email protected] State Court of Chatham County Fax: (412) 350-3930 P.O. Box 9927 [email protected] Arlene Junior Savannah, GA 31412 Manager (912) 652-7377 Gloria R. Hernandez Tarrant County Fax: (912) 652-7229 Court Coordinator/Criminal 100 W. Weatherford St. [email protected] 111th District Court Fort Worth, TX 76196 1110 Victoria St., Ste. 301 (817) 884-1070 Gracie V. Garcia Laredo, TX 78040 Fax: (817) 884-3295 Court Administrator (956) 523-4230 [email protected] 111th District Court Fax: (956) 523-5088 1110 Victoria St., Ste. 301 [email protected] Laredo, TX 78040 (956) 523-4230 Fax: (956) 523-5088 [email protected]

48 www.nacmnet.org Hon. Donna Jo McDaniel K President Judge O 5th Judicial District of PA, Co. of Allegheny Hon. Eileen A. Kato Hon. Maureen O’Connor 300 Frick Building Judge Chief Justice 437 Grant St. King County District Court Supreme Court of Ohio Pittsburgh, PA 15219 516 3rd Ave., E 301 65 S. Front St. (412) 350-5434 Seattle, WA 98104-3273 Columbus, OH 43215-3431 Fax: (412) 350-6373 (206) 296-3615 (614) 387-9060 [email protected] [email protected] Fax: (614) 387-9069 Brian McKenrick [email protected] CCJCC Coordinator Carolyn Ann Kitchen Clinton County County Clerk I P 612 N. Second St., Ste. 103 District Court of Maryland #4-I Clinton, IA 52732 200 Duke St., Rm. 2200 Kelly Laura Parks (562) 212-5405 Prince Frederick, MD 20678 County Clerk [email protected] (443) 550-6700 District Court of MD for Howard County Fax: (443) 550-6701 3451 Courthouse Dr. Anne Meister [email protected] Ellicott City, MD 21043 Register of Wills (410) 480-7703 DC Superior Court Fax: (410) 480-7701 L Probate Division [email protected] 515 5th St., NW, 3rd Floor Annetta C. Lamonica Washington, DC 20001 Jessica Pitts Administrative Commissioner (202) 879-9425 Emergency Preparedness District Court of Maryland Fax: (202) 879-9462 Maryland Judiciary 123 S. Liberty St. [email protected] 580 Taylor Ave. Cumberland, MD 21502 Annapolis, MD 21401 (301) 723-3150 Carol Hurlock Miller (410) 260-3515 Fax: (301) 723-3152 Chief Deputy Clerk [email protected] [email protected] Circuit Court for Baltimore County 401 Bosley Ave. Bill Proctor Maria Livingston Esq. P.O. Box 6754 Practice Group Lead Unit Manager - Self Help Serv. Towson, MD 21285-6754 Parsons Services Company Orange County Superior County (410) 887-2616 2495 Natomas Park Dr., Ste. 600 Self Help Services Fax: (410) 887-3062 Sacramento, CA 95833 341 The City Dr., S. [email protected] (916) 952-8521 Orange, CA 92628 Fax: (916) 576-2771 (657) 622-5085 Kim Morrison [email protected] Fax: (714) 564-4524 Chelan County Clerk [email protected] Washington State P.O. Box 3025 Q Patrick Loveless Wenatchee, WA 98807-3025 Administrative Commissioner (509) 667-6470 P atrick W. Quinn District Court of Maryland Fax: (509) 667-6611 Administrator, Adult Family 11 Washington Ave. [email protected] Fifth Judicial District La Plata, MD 20646 440 Ross St. (301) 659-7737 Terri Mumma Pittsburgh, PA 15219 [email protected] County Clerk (412) 350-6930 District Court for Wicomico County Fax: (412) 350-5599 201 Baptist St. [email protected] M Salisbury, MD 21801 (410) 713-3510 Mindy K. Quint Donna L. Mazzanti Fax: (410) 713-3501 Court Coordinator Administrative Specialist IV [email protected] Collin County Court at Law No. 3 Superior Court of New Jersey - Burlington 1800 N. Graves, Ste. 145 Vicinage McKinney, TX 75069 49 Rancocas Rd. N (972) 548-3830 Mount Holly, NJ 08060 Fax: (972) 548-3830 (609) 518-2518 Angela E. Naylor [email protected] Fax: (609) 518-2539 General Manager [email protected] District Court of Maryland 2020 Industrial Dr. Operations Annapolis, MD 21401 (410) 260-1680 Fax: (410) 260-1993 [email protected]

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 49 Jennifer J. Stout R Court Manager Y Hendricks Superior Court 3 Laurie Rice Berneda L. Young One Courthouse Sq., Ste 108 Clerk of Courts Division Chief Danville, IN 46122 P.O. Box 209 District Court of Maryland (317) 745-9811 Titusville, FL 32781 700 E. Patapsco Ave. Fax: (317) 745-9407 (321) 637-2017 Baltimore, MD 21225 [email protected] [email protected] (410) 878-8306 Fax: (410) 878-8301 Oksana Sudoma Dominic J. Rossi [email protected] Appalachian State University Deputy Court Administrator 369 Madison Ave, Apt. E-205 1st Judicial District of PA Hon. Robert P. Young Jr. Boone, NC 28607 371 City Hall Chief Justice (828) 719-8455 Philadelphia, PA 19107 Supreme Court of Michigan [email protected] (215) 686-3745 3034 W. Grand Blvd., Ste. 8-500 Fax: (215) 686-3782 Detroit, MI 48202 [email protected] T (313) 972-3250 Fax: (313) 875-9329 Theresa M. Russell Hon. Steven W. Taylor [email protected] Clerk of Circuit Court Chief Justice Washington County Supreme Court of Oklahoma 432 E. Washington St. State Capitol Building, Room 245 West Bend, WI 53095 2300 N. Lincoln Blvd. (262) 335-4354 Oklahoma City, OK 73105 Fax: (262) 335-4776 (405) 521-3844 [email protected] Fax: (405) 528-1607 [email protected] Sustaning Members S V Alliance One, Inc. Melanie B. Salyer Deputy Clerk Kristina Velez AmCad Wise County Circuit Court Court Operations Manager 206 E. Main St., Rm. 245 Eighth Judicial Circuit of Florida AnyTrax P.O. Box 1248 Criminal Justice Center Wise, VA 24293 220 S. Main St., A335 D&B (Dun & Bradstreet) (276) 328-6111 Gainesville, FL 32601 DPK Consulting Fax: (276) 328-0039 (352) 264-7084 [email protected] Fax: (352) 264-7088 FTR Limited Abel Soliz Court Coordinator/Civil W Global Connect 111th District Court Harris & Harris 1110 Victoria St., Ste. 301 Aimee Noelle Wickman Laredo, TX 78040 Project Associate High Court of Hong Kong (956) 523-4230 Justice Management Institute Fax: (956) 523-5088 P.O. Box 60 Infocom Systems Services Inc. [email protected] Manistique, MI 49854 (617) 304-8410 ISD Corporation Angharad Stock [email protected] Administrator Justice Systems Pittsburgh Municipal Court Hon. Margaret L. Workman Fifth Judicial District Chief Justice McCreary, Veselka, Bragg & Allen, P.C. 660 First Ave. West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Capitol Complex, Room E-306 MSI Consulting Group, LLC (412) 350-6708 1900 Kanawha Blvd., E. Fax: (412) 350-6733 Charleston, WV 25305 Municipal Services Bureau [email protected] (304) 558-2606 Fax: (304) 558-8281 Record Solutions Thomas R. Stoehr [email protected] Deputy Court Administrator RevQ Bucks Co. Court of Common Pleas 55 E. Court St. Tyler Technologies, Inc. Doylestown, PA 18901 (215) 348-6039 VistaSG Fax: (215) 348-6503 [email protected]

50 www.nacmnet.org National Association for Court Management National 2010–11 Board of Directors officers Association PRESIDENT SECRETARY/TREASURER Jude Del Preore David W. Slayton T rial Court Administrator Court Administrator Superior Court of New Jersey, Lubbock County District Courts & for Court Burlington Vicinage Co. Courts at Law P.O. Box 6555, 7th Floor P.O. Box 10536 Mount Holly, NJ 08060 Lubbock, TX 79408 (609) 518-2510 Fax: (609) 518-2539 (806) 775-1020 Fax: (806) 775-7996 Management [email protected] [email protected]

The National Association for Court PRESIDENT ELECT IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT Conference Development Committee Chair Nominations Committee Chair Management is a nonprofit organization K evin J. Bowling Suzanne H. Stinson Court Administrator Court Administrator dedicated to improving the quality of judicial 20th Judicial Circuit Court 26th Judicial District Court administration at all levels of courts nationwide. Ottawa County Fillmore Complex P.O. Box 310 12120 Fillmore Street Benton, LA 71006 In carrying out its purpose, the association West Olive, MI 49460-8985 (318) 965-3739 Fax: (318) 965-3765 (616) 786-4100 Fax: (616) 786-4154 [email protected] strives to provide its members with professional [email protected] education and to encourage the exchange of useful information among them; encourages VICE PRESIDENT Pamela Q. Harris the application of modern management Court Administrator techniques to courts; and, through the work Montgomery County Circuit Court 50 Maryland Avenue of its committees, supports research and Rockville, MD 20850 (240) 777-9103 (Fax): (240) 777-9104 development in the field of court management, [email protected] the independence of the judicial branch, and the impartial administration of the courts. DIRECTORS

Large Court Director 2009–12 Rural Director 2010–13 Website Committee Chair Kelly C. Steele William Simmons Policy and Fiscal Analyst Membership District Court Administrator Administrative Office of the Courts Sixth Judicial District 244 Washington St., Ste. 300 1220 Pennsylvania Avenue Atlanta, GA 30334 McDonough, GA 30253 (404) 656-6404 Fax: (770) 342-4783 The National Association for Court (770) 898-7623 [email protected] Management needs your help to reach our [email protected] membership goal this year. Help us reach out General Jusridiction 2008–11 Director to the next generation of court leaders and Small Court Director 2009–12 Membership Services Committee Chair Planning Committee Chair Michele Oken staying true to our goal of “Excellence in Court Stephanie Hess Administrator II Manager Interpreter Services Administration.” Let’s sponsor new members! Supreme Court of Ohio Los Angeles Superior Court Several categories of membership are 65 South Front Street, 6th floor 210 West Temple St., Rm. 6-520 Columbus, OH 43215 Los Angeles, CA 90012 offered in the National Association for Court (614) 387-9414 Fax: (614) 387-9419 (213) 974-8742 Fax: (213) 625-7822 [email protected] [email protected] Management: Regular, any person serving as clerk of court, court administrator, or in any Appointed Director 2008–11 Limited Jurisdiction 2010–13 Director court management, court education, court Publications Committee Chair research, or court consulting capacity ($125); Peter Coolsen Phillip Knox Court Administrator General Jurisdiction Court Administration Retired ($95); Associate, any person interested Circuit Court of Cook County Superior Court of Arizona 2600 S. California, Ste. #101 125 W. Washington, 5th Floor in the improvement of the administration of Chicago, IL 60608 Phoenix, AZ 85003 justice ($125); Student, any person enrolled (773) 869-3385 Fax: (773) 869-3093 (602) 506-6019 Fax: (603) 506-0186 [email protected] [email protected] full time in a degree program related to the field of court administration ($95); Sustaining, any Clerk of Court Director 2010–13 At Large (1) Director 2008–11 person, group of persons, firm, or corporation Duane Delaney Carla Smith Clerk of Court Chief Deputy Judicial Administrator interested in furthering the goals of the DC Superior Court Orleans Criminal District Court 500 Indiana Avenue, NW 2700 Tulane Avenue, Room 200 organization ($350). Room 2500 New Orleans, LA 70119 For more information about NACM or Washington, DC 20001 (504) 658-9100 Fax: (504) 827-3381 (202) 879-1400 Fax: (202) 879-7831 [email protected] about joining the organization, please write to [email protected] the president or the National Center for State At Large (2) Director 2009–12 Courts, 300 Newport Avenue, Williamsburg, Va. Urban Director 2010–13 Ethics Committee Chair Raymond L. Billotte Paul DeLosh 23185, or call (757) 259-1841. District Court Administrator Director of Judicial Services Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Supreme Court of Virginia 300 Frick Building 100 North 9th Street 437 Grant Street Richmond, VA 23219 Pittsburgh, PA 15219-6000 (804) 786-1730 Fax: (804) 371-5034 (412) 350-6939 Fax: (412) 350-5429 [email protected] [email protected]

The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 51 52 www.nacmnet.org The Court Manager Volume 26 Issue 1 53