Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Circuit Court seeks courtroom technology upgrades, interpreter budget and clarifies jury postage funding
Summary
The circuit court judge told commissioners the courtroom recording and computer systems are failing, interpreter costs are rising and she plans to pursue a reimbursement grant for courtroom technology; jury-postage funding usage requires confirmation.
The circuit court judge told county commissioners the courtroom's electronic systems and office computers are at the end of their useful life, and she is pursuing a court-technology reimbursement grant to pay for upgrades. "The grant is a reimbursement grant," the judge said, and added she will seek council approval if the county is awarded funds.
Why it matters: Court technology failures can delay hearings, affect records and require emergency vendor support. Interpreters and jury administration are recurring costs in the court budget and must be funded from the correct statutory account.
The judge said certified court interpreters are costly but mandatory for proceedings: "We have to use certified interpreters for hearings, and unfortunately, they don't come cheap." The court increased the interpreter line and has been using Zoom to accommodate remote interpreters where acceptable to attorneys. She said some interpreters can charge several hundred dollars depending on hearing length.
Court staff reported recurring computer and recording failures that have forced cancellations and vendor support visits. The judge said the current recording vendor and system are expensive and that alternative transcription systems (FTR and others) may offer comparable services at lower cost. She added recent computer crashes required borrowing hard drives and temporarily reallocating office equipment to keep the courtroom operational.
The judge also raised a budget accounting question about jury-related postage. The court has been using jury-user fee balances and a jury fund for mailing juror questionnaires and related expenses. Commissioners asked finance staff to confirm whether jury postage may be charged to the jury/user-fee fund or whether it must be budgeted in the general fund; the judge said the jury-user-fee fund carried about $84,000–$88,000 in mid‑year balance and that prior years showed significant jury-related expenditures.
On grants and other lines: the judge said the family court grant has ended and been replaced with the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) fund; ADR revenue comes from filing fees. The judge said she will apply for a court-technology grant that opens in September and expressed hope it would help replace failing courtroom electronics and reduce ongoing vendor costs. "I'm looking to get an update on the courtroom as far as electronics... the acoustics are so bad in there," she said.
The judge said CASA volunteers continue to report and assist in children's‑services hearings and described them as essential to case work. No formal budget actions were taken; commissioners asked for verification of user-fee fund rules and requested details about the proposed grant and equipment replacement costs.
