Committee examines "clean slate" proposals, automation costs for criminal record sealing

Sarah Barron, staff attorney for the State Court Administrator’s Office, reviewed North Dakota’s current record‑sealing law and national efforts to automate sealing, often called “clean slate” laws. Barron said North Dakota currently allows a person to petition a court to seal records under North Dakota Century Code §12‑60.102 if certain waiting periods have passed (three years for most misdemeanors, five years for many felonies) and other statutory conditions are met. “North Dakota is among 26 states that require an individual to file a petition for proposed criminal record sealing,” Barron said, noting other states have adopted automatic sealing for specified low‑level convictions. Committee members sought to understand the operational costs and timeline to implement an automated process. Barron cited multiple states that have experienced delayed implementation because of complex IT and data‑integration requirements. “Implementation of clean slate often requires two to three years of extensive planning, programming, modifications of multiple complex agency case‑management systems, upgrades in technology, and changes in business practice and workflow,” she quoted from a 2023 study. Barron offered available cost estimates from other states to illustrate scale: Connecticut reported several million dollars in multi‑year costs; Delaware’s fiscal notes anticipated double‑digit staff increases and initial IT costs; New Jersey’s early estimates were in the range of $10–25 million for upgrades and implementation. Committee members asked whether a narrower, targeted model (for example, only misdemeanors or only non‑violent offenses) would limit costs and complexity; Barron said eligibility rules, agency access lists and required data matching drive complexity and that policy choices can narrow scope. IT staff told the committee the state is transitioning from an older Tyler/Odyssey public access portal to a new platform later in the year; that vendor has announced end of life for the previous public‑portal product, and the new product will not include an out‑of‑the‑box capability to hide certain records without additional custom work that likely requires an appropriation. Committee members asked Barron and IT staff to produce options and cost estimates for (a) limited automatic sealing, (b) petitionless full automation, and (c) a “do‑nothing” baseline combining current petition processing data. Committee staff said they would bring comparative metrics and a fiscal picture to the next meeting. No final policy decisions were made.