Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Case Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Justice committee approves extension to county court case‑management project
Summary
The McLean County Justice Committee approved change order No. 2 with Mission Critical Partners to extend project management services for a staggered court case‑management implementation delayed into early 2026; funds come from the court automation fee fund.
The McLean County Justice Committee on Aug. 6 approved change order No. 2 with Mission Critical Partners to extend project management for the county's new case‑management implementation, citing delays that pushed final modules into early 2026. The committee voted to accept the extension during its regular meeting.
The extension covers ongoing project management tied to a staggered rollout that includes a records management system for law enforcement, the jail management system for the McLean County Jail and the juvenile detention center, and the county’s new case‑management system used by the circuit clerk’s office, circuit court, public defender, state’s attorney and court services. “These funds are all, out of the court automation fee fund. And so they do not have a general fund, impact,” said Mister Scanlon, a county staff member, during the discussion.
Committee members were told the implementation timetable has slid multiple times; the memo to the committee dated July 23, from Director of IT Craig Nelson, states the case‑management pieces now look likely to finish in early 2026 rather than October 2025. Scanlon said Mission Critical Partners provides project management and is not the developer responsible for software delays.
The committee approved the motion to accept change order No. 2 (motion by Member Roseman; second by Member Strauss). No roll‑call vote totals were recorded in the minutes; the chair announced that the ayes had it.
The extension will obligate additional funds from the court automation fee fund; committee members were told there is no direct impact to the county general fund. Staff did not present any proposed vendor penalties or offsets tied to the delay during the public discussion, and any contract recourse against the software developer was described as limited and contingent on the progress of the other systems.
The Justice Committee did not take additional directions or requests for study on this item at the meeting.
