Minnesota District Judges Association outlines four priorities: pay, pensions, safety and compensation timing

Representatives of the Minnesota District Judges Association (MDJA) testified before the Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee about four legislative priorities for the 2025 session: judicial-branch compensation, pension funding, judicial safety and changes to the compensation-council statute and timeline.

Judge Mary Mahler, MDJA president and a district-court judge from Stearns County, described the association's mission and said the group represents more than 300 district court judges statewide. She and Judge Richard Kyle (Ramsey County) emphasized that MDJA supports the Judicial Branch's compensation request and urged the committee to consider pay adjustments to recruit and retain experienced jurists. Mahler said judges have not always received steady increases; she described prior stretches without increases and noted competition from private-sector counsel and some public-sector positions.

Judge Mahler summarized pension concerns and noted a baseline $6 million contribution previously included in the branch budget. She described prior trade-offs used to shore up the fund, including temporarily reduced COLA assumptions and adjustments to pension formulas, and she said continued contributions are part of MDJA's request.

Judge Kyle discussed judicial safety after enactment last year of a statute intended to shield judges'personal information online. He said work remains on a "real-estate fix" to address county recorders'ability to serve legitimate public searches while protecting judges'private data; he described work-group discussions to shift the initial redaction/research burden to the judge or judicial employee so recorders are not overwhelmed.

Both judges urged changing the compensation-council timing so the council's report is available earlier in the budget cycle (suggested August 1 rather than the current April 1) and asked to remove restrictions that currently bar direct ex-parte communication between judges and the compensation council so judges can provide data directly to the council.

Committee members asked questions about access to justice and court security, including concerns about Immigration and Customs Enforcement presence at courthouses and its potential chilling effect on witnesses. Mahler said state court administration is engaged and working on the courthouse access issue. Members also asked about judicial selection and contested elections; the judges described the merit-selection/appointment process, noted there are occasional contested elections and defended the vetting process that produces nominees for gubernatorial appointment.

The presentation included data comparisons on judicial compensation versus other professions and a request for additional briefings and ride-alongs to illustrate courtroom duties and pressures.