Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Juvenile Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves extra juvenile judgeship after debate over caseloads and cost
Summary
The Utah Senate on Jan. 27 passed Substitute Senate Bill 73 to add a juvenile court judgeship in the Fourth District and adopted an amendment adding another judge for an adjacent district; senators debated caseload statistics and fiscal impact before approving the amendment and final bill.
The Utah Senate on Jan. 27 approved Substitute Senate Bill 73 to add juvenile court judgeships, citing rapidly rising juvenile caseloads in several districts.
Senator Ellen Money, who sponsored the measure, said the bill would "put a new new new juvenile judge in, the Fourth District," citing increases in workload that she described as "an increase of capacity load a 48%" and later saying another figure had "increased a 96%." She said the new judge is needed to address the local backlog and impacts in Utah County.
Senator Barrett moved a floor amendment to change the bill’s tally from five to six judges, which would provide an additional judge for the Third Judiciary District. Barrett argued the state “does not have enough juvenile court judges” and proposed the extra post as part of addressing gang and juvenile problems. The amendment sponsor framed the change as a priority tied to recent gang activity and court arrearages.
Opponents and cautious supporters pressed for data. Several senators urged deferral until more precise caseload statistics and facility space were available. Senator Hillier warned that adding judges without targeting the clearest need could jeopardize the single judge the judiciary had identified as the state’s top priority in Utah County. Senator Black said earlier intervention through quick judicial processing could keep youngsters out of the adult system.
Fiscal implications were discussed on the floor. One senator said the additional judge would raise the fiscal note by about $237,000, a number cited during debate when weighing prevention programs against hiring additional judges.
After debate the amendment to increase the count to six passed by voice vote. The Senate then called the question on the amended bill; the clerk announced the final result as "25 ayes, no nays," and the bill passed to the next stage.
The bill’s next steps are the formal transmittal procedures to the House for further action and any appropriation work that may be required in conference with the House and appropriations committees.
