Post by Harold J Adams on Nov 17, 2009 16:29:16 GMT -5
Changes could reshape the face of Indiana's courts
Strategic plan offers recommendations
City and town courts in Indiana would be eliminated, circuit and superior court judges would be appointed rather than elected and county clerks would no longer process and hold court records under a broad plan intended to improve how Indiana courts operate.
The changes outlined by the Indiana Judicial Conference in a 27-page, long-term strategic plan also hinge largely on another fundamental revision: switching how courts are funded from counties to the state.
“Because the state currently pays for some salaries and court programs and county councils pay for other salaries and programs, court funding varies from county to county,” according to the plan approved in September by the conference's board of directors. The result is that some services and expertise are available only in counties that are better off financially.
The plan, intended to improve the ability of courts to resolve legal matters “in a fair, impartial, equally accessible, prompt, professional, and efficient manner,” is likely to take considerable time to implement.
“Court structure, the funding, clerk issues and judicial selection — that's all going to involve many other players,” said Elkhart Circuit Judge Terry Shewmaker, co-chairman of the conference's nine-member strategic planning committee.
While parts of the plan may face stiff opposition in the General Assembly, particularly the idea of creating a statewide merit system for judicial selection, other parts will be resisted by some clerks and municipal court judges whose jobs would be reduced or eliminated.
The recommendations have drawn a mostly enthusiastic reaction from Rep. Linda Lawson, D-Hammond, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, but a more mixed response from her Senate counterpart, Richard Bray, R-Martinsville. The two differ sharply, for example, on the idea of having merit selection of judges, who would then face straight yes-or-no votes in retention elections to extend their terms.
Lawson unsuccessfully sponsored a bill last year that would have created an all-merit-selection system in Lake County, her home county, which has 17 judges. She said that number of judges makes it hard for voters to be informed about candidates.
Other supporters of merit judicial selection say partisan elections, the way judges are chosen in the vast majority of Indiana's 92 counties, create the potential for conflicts of interest, or at least the appearance of conflicts, because of the money factor.
“You can accept donations from attorneys, from individuals, from groups — and what's the perception there?” said Floyd Circuit Judge J. Terrence Cody, a member of the conference planning committee. “That you might be beholden to those who have given to you if a case comes up there.”
But Bray, whose Morgan County home has four judges, opposes merit selection.
“In the small counties I think the people can choose the judge,” Bray said. “The judge is well-known. I think that the people can have some evaluation as to how a judge is.”
As of now, there is no uniform state system of judicial selection. Lake and St. Joseph counties have a mix of merit and partisan selection. Marion County, with 37 judgeships, lets each political party put up a slate in half of the races on the ballot, almost assuring that each party-slated candidate will win.
As for how to fund courts, Lawson and Bray favor the idea of a state takeover.
The state now pays the salaries of judges and prosecutors. But other court staff — court reporters, bailiffs and probation officers — are paid by counties.
“If that's what the judges want, that's fine with me,” Lawson said of state funding.
“I think I probably would agree with that,” Bray said.
Both, however, oppose the idea of eliminating city and town courts and folding their caseloads into an expanded superior court system.
There are 75 city and town court judges in Indiana, including four in Clark County. Floyd County has none.
“I think the system's working pretty well the way it is,” said Sam Gwin, the Clarksville Town Court judge who served as Clark County Court judge in the 1970s and ‘80s before that court was converted to Clark Superior Court 3. “… That's quite a traumatic change to have the state take over everything.”
Cody conceded that many of the issues in the conference proposal would require broad community support to implement.
“There would have to be citizens groups that would take this and run with it as well as other groups that would be interested in how the courts operate and in the administration of justice.” he said.
Part of the plan hinges on creating a new system of judicial districts in which multiple counties would organize to share resources, civil case jurisdiction and governance.
The current system has counties organized into 14 districts. But most acknowledge, as Cody said, that “the current districts have no particular meaning.”
Proponents argue that state-funded districts would allow courts to share resources across county lines.
Cody said that some counties have programs such as drug and alcohol services, drug courts and re-entry programs while others do not.
“And it would be nice if those programs were available to all counties,” he said.
Each district would have a chief judge and would appoint an administrator to help individual courts take over paperwork now handled by the elected clerk of each county.
Clark, Floyd and Scott counties are now in a district that also includes Harrison, Crawford, Orange and Washington counties. The preferred option drawn up by the committee would split those groupings into two smaller districts.
Washington County Clerk Shirley Batt said she opposes the court administrator idea.
“You're looking to pick someone that really doesn't have any accountability to the voters,” she said. “And that gives a lot of power on a higher level just to one person.”
Shewmaker said the judges are continuing to refine the plan.
“The jury's still out” on when legislative support will be sought, he said.
Strategic plan offers recommendations
City and town courts in Indiana would be eliminated, circuit and superior court judges would be appointed rather than elected and county clerks would no longer process and hold court records under a broad plan intended to improve how Indiana courts operate.
The changes outlined by the Indiana Judicial Conference in a 27-page, long-term strategic plan also hinge largely on another fundamental revision: switching how courts are funded from counties to the state.
“Because the state currently pays for some salaries and court programs and county councils pay for other salaries and programs, court funding varies from county to county,” according to the plan approved in September by the conference's board of directors. The result is that some services and expertise are available only in counties that are better off financially.
The plan, intended to improve the ability of courts to resolve legal matters “in a fair, impartial, equally accessible, prompt, professional, and efficient manner,” is likely to take considerable time to implement.
“Court structure, the funding, clerk issues and judicial selection — that's all going to involve many other players,” said Elkhart Circuit Judge Terry Shewmaker, co-chairman of the conference's nine-member strategic planning committee.
While parts of the plan may face stiff opposition in the General Assembly, particularly the idea of creating a statewide merit system for judicial selection, other parts will be resisted by some clerks and municipal court judges whose jobs would be reduced or eliminated.
The recommendations have drawn a mostly enthusiastic reaction from Rep. Linda Lawson, D-Hammond, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, but a more mixed response from her Senate counterpart, Richard Bray, R-Martinsville. The two differ sharply, for example, on the idea of having merit selection of judges, who would then face straight yes-or-no votes in retention elections to extend their terms.
Lawson unsuccessfully sponsored a bill last year that would have created an all-merit-selection system in Lake County, her home county, which has 17 judges. She said that number of judges makes it hard for voters to be informed about candidates.
Other supporters of merit judicial selection say partisan elections, the way judges are chosen in the vast majority of Indiana's 92 counties, create the potential for conflicts of interest, or at least the appearance of conflicts, because of the money factor.
“You can accept donations from attorneys, from individuals, from groups — and what's the perception there?” said Floyd Circuit Judge J. Terrence Cody, a member of the conference planning committee. “That you might be beholden to those who have given to you if a case comes up there.”
But Bray, whose Morgan County home has four judges, opposes merit selection.
“In the small counties I think the people can choose the judge,” Bray said. “The judge is well-known. I think that the people can have some evaluation as to how a judge is.”
As of now, there is no uniform state system of judicial selection. Lake and St. Joseph counties have a mix of merit and partisan selection. Marion County, with 37 judgeships, lets each political party put up a slate in half of the races on the ballot, almost assuring that each party-slated candidate will win.
As for how to fund courts, Lawson and Bray favor the idea of a state takeover.
The state now pays the salaries of judges and prosecutors. But other court staff — court reporters, bailiffs and probation officers — are paid by counties.
“If that's what the judges want, that's fine with me,” Lawson said of state funding.
“I think I probably would agree with that,” Bray said.
Both, however, oppose the idea of eliminating city and town courts and folding their caseloads into an expanded superior court system.
There are 75 city and town court judges in Indiana, including four in Clark County. Floyd County has none.
“I think the system's working pretty well the way it is,” said Sam Gwin, the Clarksville Town Court judge who served as Clark County Court judge in the 1970s and ‘80s before that court was converted to Clark Superior Court 3. “… That's quite a traumatic change to have the state take over everything.”
Cody conceded that many of the issues in the conference proposal would require broad community support to implement.
“There would have to be citizens groups that would take this and run with it as well as other groups that would be interested in how the courts operate and in the administration of justice.” he said.
Part of the plan hinges on creating a new system of judicial districts in which multiple counties would organize to share resources, civil case jurisdiction and governance.
The current system has counties organized into 14 districts. But most acknowledge, as Cody said, that “the current districts have no particular meaning.”
Proponents argue that state-funded districts would allow courts to share resources across county lines.
Cody said that some counties have programs such as drug and alcohol services, drug courts and re-entry programs while others do not.
“And it would be nice if those programs were available to all counties,” he said.
Each district would have a chief judge and would appoint an administrator to help individual courts take over paperwork now handled by the elected clerk of each county.
Clark, Floyd and Scott counties are now in a district that also includes Harrison, Crawford, Orange and Washington counties. The preferred option drawn up by the committee would split those groupings into two smaller districts.
Washington County Clerk Shirley Batt said she opposes the court administrator idea.
“You're looking to pick someone that really doesn't have any accountability to the voters,” she said. “And that gives a lot of power on a higher level just to one person.”
Shewmaker said the judges are continuing to refine the plan.
“The jury's still out” on when legislative support will be sought, he said.