Judges urge referee position to ease rising felony caseloads; council asks for cost details

Grant County judges and council members discussed a proposal to add a referee and a probation officer to help process cases faster and reduce jail overcrowding, but the council took no formal action and requested additional cost information.

Judge remarks: Judge McVicker (identified in written materials as a key advocate) told the council that felony case filings rose from 766 in 2014 to 1,220 in 2023, and he said the county is on pace for about 1,350 felonies in 2024 — a roughly 73% increase over a decade. He said the county’s daily jail census was 374, with 274 inmates housed in the county jail and about 100 housed off-site. “This is a math problem,” McVicker said, arguing the courts need additional capacity to avoid a long-term mismatch between filings and bed capacity.

Judges’ proposal and metrics: The committee chair said his packet estimates costs to fund a referee, a part-time or full-time probation officer, and associated staff; Judge MacVicker wrote the referee’s outcomes should be measured primarily by changes in jail population and case-processing speed. Council members suggested outcome metrics such as the number of cases closed (clearance rate), average time to disposition and Monday jury-trial capacity.

Council direction: The council asked judges to secure a clear estimate of the information-technology and recording equipment costs required to run an additional courtroom (or to repurpose an alternative space such as the Gas City courthouse or another county room). A council member also suggested a longer pilot window than the judges’ optimistic estimate of 12–18 months, noting ongoing increases in filings might require a multi-year measure of success.

Context and concerns: Judges defended court operations after members raised concerns about locked courtrooms and perceived limited weekday public hours. Judge Spencer and Judge McVicker said courts are open five days a week, routinely handle both civil and criminal dockets, and that courtroom doors are sometimes locked for security or because hearings resolved or were continued. Judges described a 98% clearance rate for one court and noted the county’s courts are among the busiest in Indiana on a per-judge caseload basis.

Next steps: The council requested that (1) the judiciary provide an IT/equipment estimate for a referee courtroom; (2) the judiciary clarify staffing needs and exact cost figures; and (3) council and judges consider possible alternative spaces if the courthouse lacks an available courtroom. No vote was taken on funding or creating a referee position during the meeting.

Ending: The discussion will continue once judges supply the requested technology and space cost estimates and more precise staffing budgets.