Ron Morgan briefed the JBCC advisory board on Oct. 10, 2025, on the Office of Court Administration’s work plan and the study of digital court recording required by House Bill 16.

Morgan told members the study will evaluate current use of digital recording across Texas courts — including cost, access, accuracy and effectiveness — compare Texas practice with other jurisdictions and produce recommendations on statutory or rule changes. “The bill directs the Office of Court Administration to conduct a study on digital court recording, including evaluating current use of recording in the state of Texas to include cost, access, accuracy, and effectiveness, to analyze similar practices in other states and in other jurisdictions, and then to make recommendations on any changes needed regarding digital court recording in Texas,” Morgan said.

Why it matters: The study could shape how courts, counties and vendors handle courtroom records, affect court-reporter workloads and inform legislative or Supreme Court rule changes.

Key numbers and trends

Morgan presented current workforce and enforcement figures for court reporters in Texas: 2,364 certified shorthand reporters at the end of the last fiscal year (an increase of about 130 year over year), 243 core reporting firms, 216 written exams administered and 125 oral exams administered in partnership with TCRA. He said 53 complaints were filed in the last fiscal year, up from 32 the year before; “more than half” of those involved late records, and about half of the late-record cases involve courts of appeals, Morgan said.

Study design, partners and schedule

Morgan said OCA intends to contract with a Texas university through an intergovernmental agreement to design and execute the study and to help convene and structure a stakeholder work group. The statutory stakeholder list his office must include covers judges of courts of record, shorthand reporter organizations that serve as officials, deposition specialists, digital service providers, attorneys and members of the public.

Morgan described the high-level timeline: identify and contract with a university partner in 2025, have the university develop study methodology and begin data collection with stakeholders, aim for primary data collection in 2026 (January–March was given as a broad target window), and finalize and deliver the report to the Legislature by Sept. 30, 2026.

Morgan said OCA will convene the stakeholder group and seek the university’s advice on how to ensure the group’s input is representative and constructive; OCA will remain the convening and reporting authority and will draft any legislative recommendations that follow from the research.

Public comment and stakeholder preferences

Renee White, president of TEXDRA, told the board TEXDRA appreciated Morgan and staff’s presentation at a recent seminar and offered two suggestions for the study: exclude universities that operate court-reporting or digital-recording training programs because of potential conflicts of interest, and allow each stakeholder organization to name two to three representatives in case scheduling conflicts limit attendance. “TEXDRA is ready and and looking forward to working with the group on that,” White said.

Other OCA priorities

Morgan also described ancillary OCA work for the coming year: proposed rules amendments (which would be opened for public comment and, if approved by the commission, sent to the Supreme Court of Texas), education and engagement with reporting associations, a planned refresh of the licensing system with the current vendor, and incremental website updates ahead of a larger OCA web refresh.

Administrative notes

Morgan said a complaint review committee meeting was scheduled for 1:00 p.m. the same day to consider several complaints recommended for action. The board approved the previous meeting’s minutes (Sept. 27, 2024) by voice vote and later voted to adjourn; the transcript records voice “Aye” responses but individual roll-call vote names are not in the record.

Ending

Morgan closed by asking for questions from the board on the study and the work plan before turning the meeting to the next agenda item.


Votes at a glance

- Approval of minutes (09/27/2024): voice vote recorded as unanimous “Aye”; mover and seconder not named in transcript. Outcome: approved.
- Adjournment: voice vote recorded as unanimous “Aye”; mover and seconder not named in transcript. Outcome: approved.