Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Justice Court reports 12 staff, contends with caseload shifts; recent workforce reductions cut budget by ~12–14%
Summary
Sandy Justice Court Judge Farr presented court staffing and caseload trends and described personnel reductions that lowered the court’s tentative 2025–26 budget by roughly 12–14%. The judge said the court will pursue efficiency measures but may return if additional staff are needed.
Judge Farr and Justice Court staff presented court workload trends and staffing changes to Sandy City Council on May 20, 2025. The judge said the court has seen a long‑term decline in filings from about 26,000 annual filings in 2010 to roughly half that level by 2020 and more recent stabilization in the low‑teens, a trend that informed staffing decisions.
Judge Farr said that staffing and personnel account for the bulk of the court’s budget (well over 80%) and that the tentative 2025–26 budget includes staff reductions that total a 12–14% net decrease due to the elimination of two full‑ or part‑time positions and the voluntary conversion of another full‑time position to half‑time. He said the reductions were implemented early in the process in order to provide departing employees limited severance and an opportunity to seek other employment while receiving pay and benefits for a short period.
The judge emphasized the court adjusted some services and has undertaken efficiency projects, including increased virtual hearings and the use of Webex for many routine calendars. He explained that certain hearings (jury trials, initial domestic‑violence hearings requiring victim safety planning, and cases requiring interpreters) are still prioritized for in‑person appearances and that court staff have increased foreign‑language interpreter in‑person days to improve efficiency for non‑English‑speaking defendants.
Council members asked whether the cut plan was sustainable; Judge Farr said the court could manage the reductions for a year but would return to the council if workload or public‑safety needs required re‑staffing. The court also requested a reclassification adjustment for the court administrator role to align pay bands with comparable positions in the city and to retain experienced staff.
