Senators debate municipal court recording and phased approach to making courts of record; study proposed

Senators discussed proposed amendments to a municipal-court bill that would require or phase in recording of municipal-court proceedings and study whether municipal courts should become courts of record. The committee debated whether to mandate recording immediately for larger cities and to add a Supreme Court-led study for the next interim.

Senator Merdahl and others described concerns from municipal stakeholders about costs and implementation of recording requirements. She said some smaller municipalities lack capacity and asked for time to phase in changes. Senator Cory favored requiring recording in municipalities above a population threshold (cities such as Bismarck, Grand Forks, Minot and Dickinson were cited as examples) and argued recording is a fairness issue for defendants who may later seek de novo review in district court.

Senator Paulson said committee members had not received some testimony (for example, Attorney General and governor's office testimony) into the system and asked that those materials be submitted so members can review them. Senator Merdahl and others said the proposed amendment from the Supreme Court and League of Cities included a study provision; several senators supported adding a study of municipal courts to the bill so smaller cities could prepare and the Supreme Court could recommend implementation steps in the next interim.

Committee members agreed to continue working on amendments. Senator Cory indicated she would offer population-threshold language; other senators urged a study approach and additional stakeholder engagement.

Ending — The committee did not vote on the municipal-court changes. Members asked for a combined approach: immediate recording requirements for larger municipalities and a Supreme Court study and report for broader reform during the next interim. The bill remained pending while sponsors and stakeholders refine amendments.