Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Domestic Violence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsor asks for $30,000 to compile domestic‑violence case statistics; opponents question need
Summary
A bill to authorize $30,000 for a contractor to manually review paper domestic‑violence and stalking case files for statistical analysis was introduced; judicial-branch counsel said paper files require manual extraction and that the scope depends on the legislature’s questions.
Representative Linda Haskins, speaking for prime sponsor Representative Zoe Manos, introduced House Bill 762, a request to appropriate $30,000 to allow the judicial branch to hire an independent contractor to perform a manual review of paper-based domestic violence, stalking, and related criminal case files so the branch can compile aggregate statistical data. Haskins said the data would be de‑identified and used to inform resource needs and to support services to victims and programs addressing perpetrators.
Attorney Aaron Cregan, general counsel for the judicial branch, said most of the information needed resides in paper files and that a manual review is the only reliable way to extract certain case-level details. He told the committee costs and the number of years covered would depend on the questions the legislature wanted answered and that the sponsor planned to submit a list of focused questions to guide the review.
Public commenters and other witnesses urged caution. Anthony Kinney, who identified himself as a resident, opposed the bill and urged lawmakers to use existing case dockets to investigate alleged misconduct by specific judicial actors instead of spending $30,000 to start a new study. Dana Albrecht, a commenter who provided materials to the committee, said Justice Marconi and the judicial branch have already undertaken extensive work and training on domestic violence and suggested legislative study might be redirected or coordinated with existing efforts.
Committee members discussed logistics, including whether faxed documents count as electronic records and whether federal grant funds could be used; the judicial branch said some federal funding avenues might exist but that the appropriation language could be adjusted. The committee did not vote on HB 762 at the hearing; members signaled they expected sponsor amendments to clarify the scope and to reconcile state/federal funding rules.
