Judicial Branch requests judges, cites court‑technology upgrades and ARPA investments

The Judicial Branch briefed the Joint Finance Preparation Committee on Jan. 23 on Court Operations funding needs, the rollout of a statewide court technology modernization and a set of requests for additional judicial resources. Keith Bybee, division manager for budget and policy analysis, presented the budget overview; Sarah Omanson, administrative director of the courts, answered operational questions and described county rollout of cybersecurity and cloud‑based services.

Bybee said the courts operate as a unified system administered by the Idaho Supreme Court and that Court Operations is organized across several programs including Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, District Court, Magistrate Division, Water Adjudication, Community Based Substance Abuse Treatment and Senior Judges. He reported an average authorized workforce of about 372 positions over five years and annual personnel costs averaging approximately $57.1 million.

Court technology and ARPA funding

Bybee and Omanson described a multi‑year program to modernize court infrastructure that was funded in part by the ARPA State Fiscal Recovery Fund. The presentation said the Supreme Court requested approximately $19.9 million in ARPA funds earlier to upgrade infrastructure and that the courts expect to spend down those one‑time appropriations across recent and coming fiscal years. The Court Technology Fund (primarily filing fees) increased collections by about 29% from FY2023 to FY2024, driven largely by increased filings in district court; the branch expects to draw down part of an $18.8 million working fund balance as technology work continues.

Omanson told the committee the project focuses on cybersecurity and centralized infrastructure, including multi‑factor authentication, a state court network in county courthouses and migration to Office 365 for court business. She said, "we are telling the counties we're going to come into your court houses and we're going to install our network," and described options given to counties for using state‑managed computers or accessing a court desktop hosted in the cloud to separate county and court work while maintaining protections for court data.

Judicial compensation and judge requests

The judiciary has signaled a multi‑million dollar request for judicial compensation; the governor’s budget included a 5% placeholder CEC increase. Bybee said the judiciary’s own request for judicial compensation is about $10.2 million; the governor’s recommended placeholder for judicial compensation is smaller and included in the executive recommendation.

The Judicial Branch also requested additional judges to respond to population growth and caseloads: the presentation listed requests for a district judge (and court reporter) in the First Judicial District (Coeur d'Alene) and a district judge (and court reporter) in the Seventh Judicial District (Idaho Falls), plus two magistrate judges (one in Twin Falls, one in Bonneville/Idaho Falls). Bybee said the full package of judicial resources and two court reporters was a multi‑line request; he noted statutory or policy changes would be required for judicial compensation and for adding certain judges, and that those items are being discussed in policy committees.

Caseload detail and district needs

Omanson and Bybee explained that Twin Falls magistrates are carrying heavy magistrate caseloads — the presentation cited about 1,773 case openings per magistrate per year in Twin Falls — and that magistrates sometimes handle up to 24 hearings in a week. The court said Twin Falls has not been allotted a new magistrate in 35 years and that the district needs an additional magistrate to reduce reliance on visiting judges from other counties. For Bonneville County and the Seventh District, the presentation noted there are 1,539 case openings per magistrate and that the district spans roughly 20,000 square miles; Omanson said judges lose about 67.5 work days a year to travel when judges must come from outlying counties.

Vendor and case management system planning

On case management and court software, Omanson said Idaho currently uses the Tyler system (Odyssey) and that the court will publish a Request for Information to survey current market options before deciding whether to change systems at the end of the current contract window. She reported that the court’s attorney portal (attorney access to case records) will be rolled out to licensed attorneys within roughly 30 days.

Follow‑up and hiring issues

Omanson said some funded administrative and IT positions were filled at lower pay grades than requested and that several IT positions remain open; she agreed to provide the committee with estimates of what it would take to close the hiring gap. Committee members asked for additional detail on ARPA obligations and timing; Omanson said about $16 million of ARPA‑funded work remains in contracts and that most ARPA funds are obligated to specific contracts and projects.

Ending: Omanson closed by summarizing that magistrate requests originate in district evaluations and are prioritized through the administrative conference and that district letters of support accompany judge requests. She urged attention to judicial staffing and to sustaining the court technology investments.